I wish I had listened to my gut, but like so many parents, I placed my faith in the safeguarding systems at my daughter’s nursery. As the devastated parent of a child who was in the care of this man, I believe that some good must come from such horrendous crimes, and that no other family should ever have to endure this failure.

Following the conviction of Nathan Bennett, who worked at several nurseries before finally being caught on CCTV, this petition calls for immediate and meaningful reform of safeguarding practices within early years settings. His ability to move between nurseries undetected highlights a catastrophic failure in background checking, risk assessment, and sector-wide information sharing.

The system failed to identify and act on clear, compounding risk factors that should have triggered enhanced scrutiny.

Background and Risk Factors Ignored

Nathan Bennett should have been considered a high-risk individual based on well-established safeguarding statistics and professional guidance:

• He was a survivor of childhood abuse.
• He was abused by his grandfather, who had known child abuse convictions.
• He had been removed from the care of his mother and we so assume he was part of the care system.
• Research shows that individuals with complex childhood trauma or prolonged instability may require additional screening, supervision, and support when working in roles involving vulnerable children.

Despite this, background checks failed to meaningfully assess:

• Prior involvement in social care
• Previous exposure to abuse
• Indicators of self-neglect or inability to maintain personal stability, which are relevant safeguarding considerations when working with vulnerable children
• A basic DBS check alone is not sufficient when these wider indicators are present.

Required Reforms

We call for the following mandatory changes across all nurseries and early years settings:

Deeper background checks
Background screening must extend beyond criminal records to include:

• Previous involvement in social care
• Known history of abuse (as victim or perpetrator)
• Patterns that, taken together, elevate safeguarding risk

Improved information sharing across nurseries
Convictions or safeguarding concerns arising after employment at one nursery must be visible and accessible to prevent re-employment elsewhere.

Parents given a genuine platform to raise concerns
Parents must be able to voice safeguarding concerns about staff without being met with defensiveness, dismissal, or fear of retaliation.

CCTV as a legal requirement — and actively monitored
CCTV must be mandatory in nurseries and regularly reviewed, not simply installed and ignored.

Strict enforcement of the two-person rule
No adult should ever be left alone with a child under any circumstances.

Stricter hiring processes, including psychological assessments
Psychometric and psychological screening should be standard for those working with vulnerable children.

Higher qualification requirements
Caring for young children demands advanced training, safeguarding knowledge, and professional accountability.

Independent evaluations of staffing decisions
Nurseries must not be allowed to compromise safeguarding due to staff shortages. Independent oversight is essential to prevent risk-based decisions driven by desperation.

Better funding for early years settings
Chronic underfunding directly undermines safeguarding. Proper protection of children requires proper resources.

Home visits as part of enhanced safeguarding checks
Where multiple risk indicators are present, a home visit can provide critical safeguarding insight. In this case, observable signs of self-neglect — including poor personal presentation, ill-fitting or damaged clothing, and an apparent inability to maintain basic self-care — suggested a troubled and unstable lifestyle that warranted further investigation and should not have been ignored.

This was not a single failure, it was a systemic breakdown. Safeguarding must be proactive, evidence-based, and uncompromising. Children’s safety cannot depend on minimal checks, overworked staff, or institutions protecting themselves from criticism.

Please sign and share.