Sons rights

Castlebridge46

A quick question please , does a secondary school have the right to punish a student for something they may or may not have been part of an incident which happened outside school not during school hours ie at the weekend ??
As my son was involved in something and the school have suspended him for 2 weeks and they are putting the incident on his record ??!

Little CuChulainn

Depends on their code of conduct. Most code of conducts allow for punishment for acts committed on the way to or from school, while in the school uniform or when the act is committed against another student.

robman60

If my school was in any way representative, the code of behavior was rarely followed closely and the teachers/principal just made up their own rules to deal with each incident as it arose. Of course if you feel your son hasn't been disciplined in line with the school's code of behavior, you should bring a complaint yourself.

easygoing1982

Castlebridge46 wrote: »

A quick question please , does a secondary school have the right to punish a student for something they may or may not have been part of an incident which happened outside school not during school hours ie at the weekend ??
As my son was involved in something and the school have suspended him for 2 weeks and they are putting the incident on his record ??!

Was he wearing his uniform at the time. Some schools class the student as a representative of the school when in uniform and same is probably written in T&Cs of enrolling in to the school.

Afroshack

Was it social media related? Schools take cyber bullying of students very seriously and usually have it written into the code of conduct.

goz83

Castlebridge46 wrote: »

A quick question please , does a secondary school have the right to punish a student for something they may or may not have been part of an incident which happened outside school not during school hours ie at the weekend ??
As my son was involved in something and the school have suspended him for 2 weeks and they are putting the incident on his record ??!

I find it interesting that you open your post stating that your son may, or may not have been involved in the incident, but then you close the post by stating that he was involved.

As it was the weekend, I would suggest it was unlikely while wearing the uniform, but it must have something to do with the school, or other students. I wouldn't see them interfering, were it not connected with the school.

You might applaud the school for taking such action if indeed your son was involved with what sounds to be of a serious enough nature. Care to clarify for clearer responses?

Castlebridge46

easygoing1982 wrote: »

Was he wearing his uniform at the time. Some schools class the student as a representative of the school when in uniform and same is probably written in T&Cs of enrolling in to the school.

No he was not wearing him uniform and it wasn't social media related

Castlebridge46

goz83 wrote: »

I find it interesting that you open your post stating that your son may, or may not have been involved in the incident, but then you close the post by stating that he was involved.

As it was the weekend, I would suggest it was unlikely while wearing the uniform, but it must have something to do with the school, or other students. I wouldn't see them interfering, were it not connected with the school.

You might applaud the school for taking such action if indeed your son was involved with what sounds to be of a serious enough nature. Care to clarify for clearer responses?

Yes I can see your point but to be honest he is been charged guilty by association as he was with the group . I don't want to explain further as u can appreciate but let's just say I have video proof he was not involved and the bom refused to accept it

Oryx

If you have video proof because your son filmed the incident (im assuming here?) then thats involvement.

Greenmachine

Oryx wrote: »

If you have video proof because your son filmed the incident (im assuming here?) then thats involvement.

More involved than a simple bystander.

goz83

Castlebridge46 wrote: »

Yes I can see your point but to be honest he is been charged guilty by association as he was with the group . I don't want to explain further as u can appreciate but let's just say I have video proof he was not involved and the bom refused to accept it

It's understandable you want to protect your son from any sort of injustice. But there is more to this than you are willing to say and that suggests that while he didn't have "contact" involvement, he was still very involved. If you remove yourself from the emotional attachment, you might then be able to ask if he deserves to be reprimanded for whatever indirect involvement he had.

If it was some sort of assault, bullying campaign, or something connected to the school, I would be writing up a pretty heavy chores list for the 2 weeks suspension and having a serious chat with him. I would also probably stop my son from associating with criminals in the making (depending on the actaul circumstances and video evidence you mentioned). This is a time to be a parent, not a friend.

Castlebridge46

Greenmachine wrote: »

More involved than a simple bystander.

No I got the video proof from a CCTV footage as it shows the incident on one side of the street while u can clearly see my son walking on the other side . Should he have been out then no of course not he has been grounded for a month with things to do etc . I in no way condone what happened but I just think it is very unfair to punish all the boys that were out on the night in question .

Greenmachine

Castlebridge46 wrote: »

No I got the video proof from a CCTV footage as it shows the incident on one side of the street while u can clearly see my son walking on the other side . Should he have been out then no of course not he has been grounded for a month with things to do etc . I in no way condone what happened but I just think it is very unfair to punish all the boys that were out on the night in question .

It would have been more correct for you to respond to oryx if you were offering a counter argument, as my response was directed to him. We really don't have a lot to go on. Was this CCTV footage taken on a public street, commercial premises, or someones home?

Oryx

As I said, I was guessing, and given the still scant information it is impossible to say if your son can be held to have been 'involved' or not. If he was with the troublesome people for the majority of what went on, to the point that you yourself are sanctioning him, its not hard to see why his school would include him among those punished.

The bigger question is whether the school have gone outside their own jurisdiction in punishing any of the students for this. And as you havent given any details of how this connects to the school, its impossible to say.

goz83

With the very limited information being made available, I don't think we should speculate, or comment further. If the OP feels he would loke to share some more detail, perhaps then, we would be able to comment. With the boy being punished inside the home, I would again lean toward something of a more serious nature and outside of reasonable hours when the boy should have been at home, sober and well.