absolutely not sure why it is already not being done!!??

Pointless really. What is a fingerprint going to prove? That a person was at a particular location? Most molestations happen at a place the perpetrator already frequents, so in essence, the fingerprint will only put them at a place they already go. If the person looks at child pornography, are they going to test the persons own personal computer to make sure they used it?
Once the fingerprint is checked into the FBI national crime computer, what happens to the print next?
I hate to go into conspiracy theories here but this is more likely to build the FBI's fingerprint database.

If you've got nothing to hide, why are you worried? It's like drug testing-which should also be done. If you have a concern, then don't apply for these types of jobs.

Sounds like descrimination or profiling to me! Why stop there? Anyone in contact with children should be printed. Doctors, Lawyers, Police, Priests, Soial workers,Rabiis, Ministers, Governors, State Legislators, YMCA/YWCA workers - the list is endless !!!

I wish more people would take their personal liberty more seriously. Do you want the FBI to have tabs on you - voluntarily???

Definitely! Still can't believe it wasn't being done already like other neighboring States!

Anyone who is bonded and many who work for a bank, financial company, serves in the military, etc, etc are fingerprinted as a matter of course. Why are teachers, nannies or ninnies special?

I say, fingerprint implant RFID chips in everyone at birth, then let google index them and make an app that tracks and watches your every move. It's coming and its number is 666.

I see nothing wrong with building the FBI's fingerprint database myself, especially if it can help protect innocents from those with a criminal history. The fingerprint is not being taken to "prove" something, it appears it is being taken to be automatically checked (using sophisticated biometric software) to see if it matches fingerprints in a database somewhere, and, if there is a match, to whom. The match can prove that you are who you say you are...can also prove the opposite. The match can show that that the only reason the database has your fingerprints is because you provided them as part of a job (I've done so to get DOD security clearances)...or can show that you have been arrested and/or convicted for a crime relevant to the position you're seeking. If anything about a fingerprint match shows that you knowingly provided misinformation to the school/job/CORI checker, etc., should be a red flag, even if their is no crime conviction involved. FYI there are states that have at least one finger or thumb prrint on their drivers' licenses, e.g.Georgia, Texas, Indiana commercial driver licenses, etc.

Why do they need fingerprints? Just do an out of state/national background check instead of just Massachusetts....just another example of hitting a very small nail with an extremely large hammer....
I also agree with the "endless list" of people....

@ Vivian Merrill and others...

We can debate if teachers etc should be fingerprinted but please don't give me the "if your innocent (have nothing to hide, are not guilty) you have nothing to worry about" attitude.

I am sure when Hitler (yes I am bringing up Hitler to make a point..) was rounding up the communist in the early 1930's people had the same attitude.."if your not a communist don't worry" and look how that turned out.

With the Patriot act, warrantless searches/wiretaps, Fisa, NDAA, the proposed cyber security acts for the internet, the militarization of local police forces, Predator drones (the same ones that are used in Pakistan/Afghanistan but without the missiles) being bought by state and local police across the country, the NSA's massive data center (spy center) in Utah and The purchase of millions of rounds of ammunition by the government for agencies like the IRS, NOA etc.. and many more examples, we are moving toward a police state and most people don't even realize it.

It is an attitude of "if you are not guilty, don't worry" that allows it ... Please as Melissa said...take you liberty more seriously!!!

I work for a foster care agency and fingerprints are routinely done due to Adam Walsh Act. Prior to that, CORI only showed Mass info and we relied on people to honestly tell us other states they lived in to get checks. After fingerprint check is done, the cards are shredded. They aren't entering the fingerprints into their system, they are just cross checking information then reporting it. As for Burbine case, this probably wouldn't have helped as they were an unlicensed facility. I think there needs to be more oversight of daycare and educational/tutoring services to shut down if they aren't licensed and running the CORI checks. It is a step in the right direction.

They already CORI teachers. Any criminal record will show up there. "If you've got nothing to hide, why are you worried?" This is the United States of America not Europe!!! That is NOT how things are done here. It is a problem that people are giving up freedoms with out even knowing they are doing it or worse they know they are and are alright with it.

Sorry about the poor tense use, trying to use 2 computers at once. You get the gist...

CORI checks are LOCAL ONLY, FINGERPRINTS are NATIONAL checks and a lot more info will show up if they are red flagged, anyone who was or is in the armed services, security clearances and has a firearms permit has been fingerprinted and is on file.!!!!!!!!

to Mr Lewis comment - "Sounds like descrimination or profiling to me! Why stop there? Anyone in contact with children should be printed. Doctors, Lawyers, Police, Priests, Soial workers,Rabiis, Ministers, Governors, State Legislators, YMCA/YWCA workers - the list is endless !!!" - sure I say check them ALL why not protect our children. It has nothing to do with liberty or freedom!!! Seriously?! You are going to say that over protecting our children?!

So what happens when you run prints on someone who HASN'T GOT CAUGHT yet (which would likely have been the case with Burbine)? I'll tell you what... he'd still do what he did. Make CORI national. CORI on SS#. Hell, make ID's Federal and then you can CORI till your heart's content. You don't need someone's personal fingerprint or DNA to do it.

Lots of jobs less important than teachers require fingerprinting. If you don't like it, get a job somewhere else.

And the finger printing database continues to grow. Welcome to the national surveillance state, teachers.

YOU BETCHA ! Lets go further and get DNA too.

Why not just fingerprint everyone, since we all come into contact with children at some point? (that's apparently where we're headed)

You are forgetting that you will not be allowed to fingerprint illegal aliens as it might interfere with their voting for Democrats.

Reverend E. Raleigh Pimperton III

Melissa,thats what the government wants. Mandatory DNA profiles, fingerprints and retina scans will become the norm in our lifetime. Watch for those RFID chips they put in pets to become available for babies.
I went to Disney a few years ago, and they took my thumbprint. I had to get my thumb scanned everytime I went from one park to another.
I'm not paranoid, these things are actually happening.

Everyone except teachers.

The Disney thumbprint has been in use for quite a while, and was designed, I'd heard, to ensure businesses/individuals don't buy a season pass or other multi-day pass and rent it out to others on a daily basis. Now i've heard Disney wants some kind of ID token in the chips to track where you are in the park.

For those so opposed to fingerprint checks for teachers, bus drivers, etc - how else can you really prove, even with nationwide checks, that someone is telling you the truth about who they are? Fake IDs and phony drivers licenses are in widespread use, and people can provide fake names when they are arrested. Look at all the identity theft that already occurs. The only truth these criminals cannot hide from you is the physiological evidence of who they really are, which can be measured and checked with one or more biometric identifiers, including fingerprints, retinal scans, hand geometry, facial recognition, voice recognition, etc., as well as (of course), DNA.

Tell you what, I wouldn't want a criminal watching over my children. And if finger printing is the only current way of checking on someones history outside the commonwealth than so be it.
Everyone else sounds as if they "paranoid" that their civil liberties are being abused. Really?? Over finger printing for applying for a child services job.

The same people who say "don't tell me about if you got nothing to hide" are the same one's who are saying "the government is out to get us all". Give me a break.
You don't know what freedom really is.

Fine we'll let all the criminals watch their children then but not mine

Just to be clear: the current CORI check is only for cases that were adjudicated in the Commonwealth, and the fingerprint samples would not be "stored" by the FBI, but rather checked by local law enforcement against the NCIS database for a match. Whether or not a match is found, the fingerprint samples taken by local law enforcement are not kept.

Personally, I think MA is behind the times on this one. I teach first grade, Sunday school, and am a girl scout leader. They ran on a CORI on me for all of these. Those CORI checks tell them nothing about what I may have done before 7 1/2 years ago when I moved here. I went to college in California I was fingerprinted every semester before I was allowed to start my volunteer hours in classrooms. I was fingerprinted again when I got my first job as a substitute teacher and again when I got my first full time teaching position. That was 10 years ago. California Highway Patrol and the federal government have my fingerprints on record and nothing bad has come of it. So while the whole "if you have nothing to hide then why care" my be a little too lax I think most of the people who think we are "giving away our freedoms too easily" are a bit over the top as well. If you don't want to submit to fingerprinting then don't go into a field of work that requires it and any field that puts alone with children should require it.

Since I work in a school , I fully believe everyone should be checked. What can it hurt.

If it's good enough for teachers, it's good enough for everyone! Just in case! What's the problem if you're innocent!

I think that anyone whose primary job function is to work in close proximity with children, and whose job may require them to be alone with children at times, should be required to undergo a fingerprint check. It is a reasonable thing to ask.

I'm a daycare provider and already got CORI checked but whatever needs to be done to keep children safe, I'm all for it!

I have three kids, BRIAN. And even my kids are smart enough to know fingerprints, or trying to ban rifles or bullets isn't going to stop anyone motivated enough to do what they want to do. And what a dumb statement, saying "Sounds like PAUL doesn't mind if criminals watch his children" Only an idiot would say something like that. Congrats on your newfound status. Cake will be served momentarily.

To respond to Paul Surette who said I should be fingerprinted first - if he had read my posts, he would see that I have--was 1st fingerprinted in 25 years ago when I started my first job out of college as engineer @ Raytheon & needed Secret clearance. I was fingerprinted again in 2002 when I got a job dealing with secure technologies involved in helping produce counterfeit-resistant US currency and tamper-proof state and US identification docs such as drivers licenses (DLs). Because of this past job, I actually know quite a bit about how the govnt uses & cross checks all the info you provide to get your Mass DL including the outside private agencies that do the checking for them. 34 US states (including MA) perform facial recognition (a biometric identifier) on your drivers license picture & look for matches in other states, to see if you are applying under multiple names, etc., by looking for potential facial matches (a person is the final verifier). So, if you have a MA DL, you're already subject to the alleged "government conspiracy". Of course, no one is forcing you get a DL, or drive a car, or work at a school. None of these things are your "right", either. Doing anything of these things is optional and is, arguably, a privilege. If govt imposes certain standards/crime checks on those exercising that privilege, in interest of public safety, so be it.
Fingerprint checks won't completely stop a nut, but may help authorities know in advance what he/she's up to.

Like I said BEFORE....I'm not paranoid, but I won't relinquish the rest of my freedoms for everyone's whims....it ain't happening. M, I have friends that work for the Feds, and I know all about the practices of background checks. It doesn't mean I have to agree with them. I think the Patriot Act had good intentions, but wasn't thought through carefully enough. Yes, NONE of my freedoms have been infringed upon, but it doesn't mean I'm going to willingly bend over either. But, by all means....you first! I have nothing to hide, but by jesus, I'm not giving anyone ammunition to make me prove it, PERIOD!

Jesus, M....like a fingerprint is going to stop someone who is motivated enough to molest a kid. Wake up!

Paul, no one said it would stop them. Having laws doesn't stop folks from breaking those laws. Does it follow that we should have no laws?

If someone has a record and lies about it to an employer, gives a false name, etc., a fingerprint check could be the only way to find out about that record & hence at least limit that person's ability to access children in settings where fingerprint checks are done. Yes, if someone is motivated to harm children, that person will find a way to do, but why make it easier? It's like saying why lock your car, someone motivated enough can just break in anyway...I bet you still lock your car.

Bottom line:if you had the choice between sending your child to a 1st school where only CORI are done on candidates or a 2nd school where both CORI and fingerprints are done, which would you choose? Do you really think it makes no difference?

Ron, clearly now, you're playing both sides of the fence. That's MY job here, thank you very much!

I have no problem with fingerprinting possible teachers as opposed to Cori, but if we are doing it for the children it should be done across the board for all professions that have contact with children.

People also seem to be thinking "nationwide" as if that solves the problem. In my school career I can think of three teachers off the top of my head who were from other countries, are we going to start checking there too?

Also, the majority of child molestation issues have been perpetrated by family members, friends of the family, and clergy. Unless there is some undiscovered bubble ready to pop your kids are statistically safer at school than they are with your relatives or neighbors.

I taught in Arizona before coming to Massachusetts, FBI fingerprint clearance is required for teaching positions there. CORI seemed lax comparatively.

BDunn, you know your comments are outrageous, we're not advocating this solely "for the children." Laws exist prohibiting certain persons with certain past criminal histories from working in certain kinds of jobs where they are entrusted with possibly intimate contact with the child of another person. To verify with reasonable certainty the criminal history of employees, the law requires persons in these jobs provide information to authorities enabling authorities to check that history. Unfortunately, if we limit the information to that kind that is self-reported by individuals, it is too easily subject to fraud, even if it's a picture ID. Accordingly, the law is now expanding the authenticating information to check histories to information to information that a candidate cannot hide or tamper with - his/her fingerprints.

Yes, parents are inherently entrusted with intimate contact with the children they bear, but we do not need fingerprints of a child's parents at the time of giving birth to verify that they are who they say they are--though I suppose doing so could verify that you're taking home the "right" baby, or are supposed to have that baby at all (when I gave birth me +baby had matching barcoded bracelets for that purpose). It is not against the law for a criminal, even with a violent/sex offender past, to give birth to a child, or to father a child, so fingerprinting would serve no legal purpose. The key here is being entrusted with child of another..

I sit on both sides....sure, go ahead and fingerprint new teachers/daycare/bus drivers, etc. But a couple questions....who pays for it? When my wife volunteered to assistant coach a small college sports team, she had to submit fingerprints. Guess what, she had to pay 25 or 50 bucks to do it. Is that going to be part of the application process, or will towns pick up the tab? There's actually a skill set involved in taking "good" fingerprints, so where does that professional labor come from?

THe other question is what "really" happens to the fingerprint when it's been checked and presumably cleared? In the military in the '90s, they took all our DNA (against a fair amount of privacy rights concern) with the caveat that it would only be used for identification purposes or for reasonable suspicion in military criminal matters. A fairly easy sell..."you'd want us to be able to identify your remains if your jet crashes and you burn, wouldn't you?" Low and behold, we found out years later that the DNA was kept in a national database along with our fingerprints and available for "law enforcement" use in the routine course of their duties. Huh...doesn't sound like what was originally sold to us. But whatever....my point is how do you guarantee that "records to be destroyed within x days" are actually destroyed.

But as I said, Yeah, I guess for the greater good, I'm for it...with some reservations.

Derek, I think your first mistake was expecting that your fingerprints would be removed from ANY database in the first place. In no way, would any law enforcement or intelligence agency willingly destroy useful information that help them gather helpful intelligence on anyone.

These people are already required to go through a CORI check before they can work in the school system. The problem is the CORI system is a joke. It is a piece of paper that you submit. People that have something to hide know they can beat the system. A fingerprint , if matched to the person applying for that job, links the paper to the print. Now you have another level of confidence in the system. Is it perfect? No. But it is alot better than a CORI check.

I think finger prints and DNA as well. Students as well. Not for any criminal reasons but for any crimes that would be committed on the child. Identification purposes and ancestory. I dont think the CORI checks work too good at least they haven't been.

Is WPS going to foot the bill at $55 per teacher x500 teachers every year? Good luck getting that approved and into the teachers contract, no way teachers are paying out of pocket

'Teacher who won't'.....I'm right there with you. This fingerprinting concept is just another 'flavor of the day' to get behind. NONE of these folks, I can guarantee, were anywhere to be found for any 'prior' outrage. This is just another Facebook cause on their part. In a few days, I'm sure, most of these knuckleheads will find something else to get fired up about! I call them 'part-time activists.'

I know his is old but it's still intriguing. I see the unlicensed day care could have been avoided, but it was illegal to begin with.

The other instances listed are not clear if they occurred recently or if they were in the past and would have been caught via fingerprinting.

I do however see a problem with cori checks not being thorough enough to accomplish their purpose, as such they are useless. There is no such thing as "clearing" a person half way. Many people think I am "Team Teacher," but really I'm an objective observer, and I think my opinion on this issue might differ from the Union and teachers on average.

I think it's a fair request. Considering the loopholes of cori checks and how they can be exploited, it's a resonable option imo.

However DNA for child, teacher etc is out. Anything that comes of the fingerprint test must be totally confidentail and destroyed immediately after the "pass or fail" results come in. We would be doing this to protect the kids and not put teachers on trial for something they did 20+ years ago. So long as it doesn't disqualify them under current cori guidelines a simple record of "pass" should be all that kept. You are asking teachers to give up a little of their privacy, the least you can do is make sure it will remain private by making it impossible to go public without severe legal penalties for a person who "said" something. As with no records kept, that is all you would have left.

These people have contact with our most precious people. Of Course they should be background checked!