Should Private Schools be Closed?

Del.Monte · 03-12-2016 10:49PM

It sounds strange that nobody saw what was going on and in a school like KH I would have thought that the prefects would be in control. I wonder if they still have a system of prefects or has it been replaced by something more PC? I know in the school I was at the prefects ran the place (in terms of discipline) and were answerable to their respective House Masters and the 'Warden' - a tight ship.

byhookorbycrook · 03-12-2016 10:58PM

http://www.kingshospital.ie/sites/go2kingshossite/files/Child%20protection%20policy_0.pdf
Pretty clear they didn't even follow their own policy.

"The School aims to create an atmosphere that encourages pupils to disclose and discuss incidents of bullying behaviour, sexual harassment or racism. "

4ensic15 · 04-12-2016 03:57PM

It seems now that all that happened was his arse was touched with a hockey stick. You would think he was gang-raped with all the fuss.

IvyTheTerrible · 04-12-2016 04:17PM

4ensic15 wrote: »

It seems now that all that happened was his arse was touched with a hockey stick. You would think he was gang-raped with all the fuss.

Source?

4ensic15 · 04-12-2016 04:20PM

IvyTheTerrible wrote: »

Source?

Newspaper.

IvyTheTerrible · 04-12-2016 04:23PM

4ensic15 wrote: »

Newspaper.

This is like pulling teeth. Which newspaper, in case in of us might like, I don't know, to read the article too?

maudgonner · 04-12-2016 05:19PM

There are more details here in the Indo. Which, to be honest, I'm not sure I needed to read - there's a fine line between informing the public and publishing unnecessary details.

Suffice to say that it was not 'just touching his arse with a hockey stick'. Poor kid, I hope he's doing ok.

seamus · 05-12-2016 09:48AM

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Sorry what?

Where on earth are you getting information that the school is not obliged to report such an incident?

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

"Where there is a child protection concern, the designated liaison person should be notified immediately and Túsla should be contacted without delay. Any delay would not be in the best interests of the child or children involved," he said.
Thats why I am completely confused at the suggestion above that they don't.

So, I was just parroting what had been said in an interview. And the words used there are interesting. He doesn't state that a Tusla must be notified immediately, but that they should. Child protection guidelines and the law don't necessarily match up. My understanding is that the law doesn't oblige the institution to report the incident, unless they believe it is not being reported by another authority (parents in this case).

I'm really confused here. Are you saying it is reasonable the school or another childs parents tried to get this covered up?

I'm saying that context is key. We have no evidence really that anyone tried to cover anything up beyond a 4-day delay in reporting. That something having been reported to the school authorities or the child's parents on Friday morning not being reported until the Tuesday has several explanations that don't require an intentional cover up to be taking place. Or even incompetence.

Which, given that this would now be a matter of aggravated assault and not sexual assault, would be even more understandable why someone might take some time to consider what they wanted to do about it.

It's a tough line to walk; if this had just been a scrap in the dorm between two pupils, the Gardai probably wouldn't have been called. This has a more sinister aspect to it, but thankfully with no actual harm done to the child.

I'm not saying it's reasonable; we don't have enough information to say that. I'm saying it is understandable if we take the reported facts at face value.

josha1 · 05-12-2016 10:28AM

seamus wrote: »

So, I was just parroting what had been said in an interview. And the words used there are interesting. He doesn't state that a Tusla must be notified immediately, but that they should. Child protection guidelines and the law don't necessarily match up. My understanding is that the law doesn't oblige the institution to report the incident, unless they believe it is not being reported by another authority (parents in this case). I'm saying that context is key. We have no evidence really that anyone tried to cover anything up beyond a 4-day delay in reporting. That something having been reported to the school authorities or the child's parents on Friday morning not being reported until the Tuesday has several explanations that don't require an intentional cover up to be taking place. Or even incompetence.

Which, given that this would now be a matter of aggravated assault and not sexual assault, would be even more understandable why someone might take some time to consider what they wanted to do about it.

It's a tough line to walk; if this had just been a scrap in the dorm between two pupils, the Gardai probably wouldn't have been called. This has a more sinister aspect to it, but thankfully with no actual harm done to the child.

I'm not saying it's reasonable; we don't have enough information to say that. I'm saying it is understandable if we take the reported facts at face value.

This is exactly what I was trying to get at. There are so many other considerations and things that we don't yet know/will never know. It's clearly not simple with regards to the guidelines in place.

The only thing that took away from your post was this "but thankfully with no actual harm done to the child." I think being bear hugged, stripped to being naked, touched by 3 people with a hockey stick while exposed, and then forced to fight in front of 15 classmates would be very hard to deal with.

seamus · 05-12-2016 10:33AM

josha1 wrote: »

The only thing that took away from your post was this "but thankfully with no actual harm done to the child." I think being bear hugged, stripped to being naked, touched by 3 people with a hockey stick while exposed, and then forced to fight in front of 15 classmates would be very hard to deal with.

Yep, but a lot less so than if he'd been sexually assaulted.

In another school he would have been held down and told that if he doesn't fight, then all 15 of them are going to beat the crap out of him.

It is certainly not OK that he was subject to serious threats and intimidation in this way. But the fact that it was just that - a nasty, menacing threat, and not an actual assault - changes the context of the whole incident from what occurred to how it was dealt with.

steddyeddy · 05-12-2016 10:50AM

seamus wrote: »

Yep, but a lot less so than if he'd been sexually assaulted.

In another school he would have been held down and told that if he doesn't fight, then all 15 of them are going to beat the crap out of him.

It is certainly not OK that he was subject to serious threats and intimidation in this way. But the fact that it was just that - a nasty, menacing threat, and not an actual assault - changes the context of the whole incident from what occurred to how it was dealt with.

Seamus I went to a kip of a school most of the time and I'm still shocked by that behaviour. It's a nasty experience and we don't know how the child reacted to it.

The Draugan · 05-12-2016 10:54AM

steddyeddy wrote: »

This is what winds people up. Children from all backgrounds care about education. Even if their parents don't. It's not confined to a class.

Some kids do , in my experience allot of this has do with their upbringing and the level of interest their parents have. If kids are sent to private school with their parents paying for it that's a good indication that their parents are pretty interested in their education.

I would only be interested in all schools being community schools if streaming was involved to ensure weaker or disruptive kids were filtered out and didn't affect the stronger , better behaved kids negatively.

seamus · 05-12-2016 11:11AM

steddyeddy wrote: »

Seamus I went to a kip of a school most of the time and I'm still shocked by that behaviour. It's a nasty experience and we don't know how the child reacted to it.

Ultimately how the child reacted to it isn't relevant in terms of how, where & when the incident should be reported. What will have one kid seeing a psychologist for 20 years might be shrugged off by another kid.

That means the seriousness of the incident shouldn't be understated nor overstated, but just dealt with appropriately.

I would say I'm less shocked about the incident with this new information. I've never seen anything like this, but I have seen how vicious and crazy children can get in groups. All it takes is one influential little sh1thead to come up with an "idea" and group psychology to make the rest of the group go with the flow. It's rare things go this extreme, but every now and again a properly vicious little sh1t gets themselves into this position.

We can't forget that the perpetrators are children themselves, incapable of properly understanding both the seriousness of what they're doing, but also the full meaning of what they're doing.
We all did incredibly stupid things as teenagers, which we thought seemed like harmless or appropriate ideas at the time.

Anyway, all that aside the issue here is the timeliness of reporting (or not) of the incident. Which is directly informed by the seriousness of the incident and the appropriateness of reporting it. Now that we know no actual physical sexual assault took place, that changes context quite a bit.

Glenster · 05-12-2016 11:41AM

maudgonner wrote: »

There are more details here in the Indo. Which, to be honest, I'm not sure I needed to read - there's a fine line between informing the public and publishing unnecessary details.

Suffice to say that it was not 'just touching his arse with a hockey stick'. Poor kid, I hope he's doing ok.

Article says
"King's Hospital, one of Dublin's most prestigious boarding schools"
so I wouldn't put too much credence in it.

thebaz · 05-12-2016 12:32PM

seamus wrote: »

But the fact that it was just that - a nasty, menacing threat, and not an actual assault - changes the context of the whole incident from what occurred to how it was dealt with.

that was my understating of events after weekend , that it was just a threat, and not a sexual assault - don't think the media did any favours by playing it all out in public , particuly when the facts were sketchy at best , more importantly don't think this did victim any favour , whom will be trying to build his confidence back as a normal teenager - in fact the media handled this thing horribly, trying to be the moral police without the full facts.

steddyeddy · 05-12-2016 12:48PM

thebaz wrote: »

that was my understating of events after weekend , that it was just a threat, and not a sexual assault - don't think the media did any favours by playing it all out in public , particuly when the facts were sketchy at best , more importantly don't think this did victim any favour , whom will be trying to build his confidence back as a normal teenager - in fact the media handled this thing horribly, trying to be the moral police without the full facts.

Threathening people with sexual assault isn't OK either.

Glenster · 05-12-2016 12:54PM

steddyeddy wrote: »

Threathening people with sexual assault isn't OK either.

They were only nippers though.

Seems like a bit of a storm in a teacup, really.

The issue here isn't about sexual abuse, which didn't happen and wasn't likely to happen.

Its about unsupervised kids having a fight. Which I'm against, but not overly bothered about.

foggy_lad · 05-12-2016 01:08PM

seamus wrote: »

We have no evidence really that anyone tried to cover anything up beyond a 4-day delay in reporting.

Surely the School telling parents that they had been in contact with TUSLA was meant to reassure tham that the incident had been reported? If I had been the parent told this I would not be thinking "oh they rang anonymously to find out their own position and obligations", I would be thinking that they had reported the incident properly and had acted as proper teaching professionals!

By telling the parents they had been in contact with TUSLA they led them to believe that they had reported the incident when they had not! This was an attempt to defer any action and cover up a serious and sexual assault!

It's a tough line to walk; if this had just been a scrap in the dorm between two pupils, the Gardai probably wouldn't have been called. This has a more sinister aspect to it, but thankfully with no actual harm done to the child.

I'm not saying it's reasonable; we don't have enough information to say that. I'm saying it is understandable if we take the reported facts at face value.

This was a lot more than a scrap or "Horseplay"!

What happened was a serious sexual assault where a young boy who may well have been the target of those bastards before was stripped and threatened with anal rape using a hockey stick if he did not do whatever the baying mob of future doctors lawyers and politicians told him to do!

How do you know that there is no harm done to the boy who was assaulted? he may suffer for years over what has been done to him!

Trivialising a serious sexual assault by declaring that "thankfully with no actual harm done to the child" is exactly how the Catholic paedophile priests were able to get off with so many of their assaults and get moved around as they did not see any harm in what was done.

Jawgap · 05-12-2016 01:12PM

Glenster wrote: »

They were only nippers though.

Seems like a bit of a storm in a teacup, really.

The issue here isn't about sexual abuse, which didn't happen and wasn't likely to happen.

Its about unsupervised kids having a fight. Which I'm against, but not overly bothered about.

Reading the account in the Irish Times would suggest otherwise.

Subsequently, in an account given by the suspended boy, a hockey stick was taken out and three pupils separately touched the 13-year-old’s coccyx/tailbone with it before he was given a choice of having it inserted into his body or agreeing to fight another boy.

I know boys are going to fight and at that age a lot of us probably got into more scraps than we'd like to admit for reasons that were petty and trivial, but there does seem to be an 'edge' to this whole event that is disturbing.

EDIT: The para before the one quote above.....

According to one of the eight boys suspended from the school since the alleged incident, the 13-year-old was bear-hugged onto a bed by one boy and had his pants taken down by another.

foggy_lad · 05-12-2016 01:36PM

Jawgap wrote: »

Reading the account in the Irish Times would suggest otherwise.

I know boys are going to fight and at that age a lot of us probably got into more scraps than we'd like to admit for reasons that were petty and trivial, but there does seem to be an 'edge' to this whole event that is disturbing.

EDIT: The para before the one quote above.....

According to one of the eight boys suspended from the school since the alleged incident, the 13-year-old was bear-hugged onto a bed by one boy and had his pants taken down by another.

This "witness" was out to save his own skin so can't be relied upon to tell the truth about what happened!

It would be more believable to hear that the entire incident was recorded on a number of phones but that the delay in reporting to the Gardai and Tusla gave privileged assailants time to cover their tracks and delete the footage.

There may well be no expulsions or just one to appease the parents of the victim but I can see all those suspended back in school after the Christmas break, they will most likely even be allowed to attend for Christmas assessments or tests if required.

Just so there is no doubt this crowd of 15 boys/young men grabbed this 13 year old boy and held him down as they stripped his clothes off him, then they held a hockey stick to his anus and threatened to rape him with it unless he did what they wanted!

How is that not a serious sexual assault?

josha1 · 05-12-2016 01:39PM

Glenster wrote: »

They were only nippers though.

Seems like a bit of a storm in a teacup, really.

The issue here isn't about sexual abuse, which didn't happen and wasn't likely to happen.

Its about unsupervised kids having a fight. Which I'm against, but not overly bothered about.

To be honest I think this is a lot more severe than what some people are making it out to be. We've gone full circle really on the severity of it. The perpetrators should be punished not for having a fight. Boys will be boys. But stripping a boy naked on its own is bad enough, especially in front of 15 classmates. To then touch him with a hockey stick and threaten 'inserting' it, is sadistic and deserves to be punished severely, and should have been dealt with.

I'll leave this here. http://img2.thejournal.ie/inline/1771832/original/?width=630&version=1771832

Jawgap · 05-12-2016 01:41PM

foggy_lad wrote: »

This "witness" was out to save his own skin so can't be relied upon to tell the truth about what happened!

It would be more believable to hear that the entire incident was recorded on a number of phones but that the delay in reporting to the Gardai and Tusla gave privileged assailants time to cover their tracks and delete the footage.

There may well be no expulsions or just one to appease the parents of the victim but I can see all those suspended back in school after the Christmas break, they will most likely even be allowed to attend for Christmas assessments or tests if required.

Just so there is no doubt this crowd of 15 boys/young men grabbed this 13 year old boy and held him down as they stripped his clothes off him, then they held a hockey stick to his anus and threatened to rape him with it unless he did what they wanted!

How is that not a serious sexual assault?

My reading of it is that there seems to have been an element to the assault that could be construed as sexual.....but that's really a matter for the courts to decide.

Saying that, I'm not sure it should go to court, which is not to say the victim shouldn't get the justice he deserves (or the perpetrators the punishment they deserve), only that some strong consideration should be given to initiating a process that results in kids having such a conviction logged against them - I'm sure it will be given a lot of consideration.

Del.Monte · 05-12-2016 02:09PM

foggy_lad wrote: »

Surely the School telling parents that they had been in contact with TUSLA was meant to reassure tham that the incident had been reported? If I had been the parent told this I would not be thinking "oh they rang anonymously to find out their own position and obligations", I would be thinking that they had reported the incident properly and had acted as proper teaching professionals!

By telling the parents they had been in contact with TUSLA they led them to believe that they had reported the incident when they had not! This was an attempt to defer any action and cover up a serious and sexual assault!

This was a lot more than a scrap or "Horseplay"!

What happened was a serious sexual assault where a young boy who may well have been the target of those bastards before was stripped and threatened with anal rape using a hockey stick if he did not do whatever the baying mob of future doctors lawyers and politicians told him to do!

How do you know that there is no harm done to the boy who was assaulted? he may suffer for years over what has been done to him!

Trivialising a serious sexual assault by declaring that "thankfully with no actual harm done to the child" is exactly how the Catholic paedophile priests were able to get off with so many of their assaults and get moved around as they did not see any harm in what was done.

Your entire posting in this thread from your OP onwards would have some credibility if you could only shed that enormous class chip that you have on your shoulder.

Regarding the incident in question, as thus far revealed, which seems to be no more than a very, very serious bullying incident in which the ring leaders should probably face expulsion. It doesn't seem that the Gardai should have been involved at all, but that is without knowing the exact details of the incident.

BoatMad · 05-12-2016 02:25PM

Just so there is no doubt this crowd of 15 boys/young men grabbed this 13 year old boy and held him down as they stripped his clothes off him, then they held a hockey stick to his anus and threatened to rape him with it unless he did what they wanted!

How is that not a serious sexual assault?

clearly its not sexual assault , its also clearly " threatening sexual assault ", however if we jailed teenage boys everytime they mentioned potential sexual assault " Do that jimmy, or you'll have a boot in your ar$e" etc, jails would be packed . The issue is one of bullying and from all accounts the schools aptly promptly and appropriately.

currants · 05-12-2016 02:28PM

Jawgap wrote: »

My reading of it is that there seems to have been an element to the assault that could be construed as sexual.....but that's really a matter for the courts to decide.

Saying that, I'm not sure it should go to court, which is not to say the victim shouldn't get the justice he deserves (or the perpetrators the punishment they deserve), only that some strong consideration should be given to initiating a process that results in kids having such a conviction logged against them - I'm sure it will be given a lot of consideration.

I disagree, forcibly removing his clothes and then threatening him with rape with an object is definitely sexual assault, in fact going by the link below if what has been reported is correct then it would come under aggravated sexual assault. These are teenagers, not little children who cant comprehend what they're doing. Interestingly there's a maximum 14 year sentence for under 17s. Not that any of these bullies will ever see a cell.

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/justice/criminal_law/criminal_offences/law_on_sex_offences_in_ireland.html

A lot of schools try to minimise assaults on kids, especially when wealthy parents with easy access to big bucks barristers are involved. If that poor boy was my son I would have reported the incident to the Gardai, then Tusla. The ringleader (and there's always a ringleader)must be a right dangerous individual. That's a very disturbed child and this type of behaviour doesn't come from nowhere. If he was in the courts system at least he would be getting the treatment he needs, a teen who instigates this type of assault is clearly seriously mentally unwell. The rest of them should be expelled.

steddyeddy · 05-12-2016 02:34PM

If stripping someone naked and threaten to rape them with a foreign object isn't sexual assault what is?

The Draugan · 05-12-2016 02:43PM

steddyeddy wrote: »

If stripping someone naked and threaten to rape them with a foreign object isn't sexual assault what is?

I don't think anyone even the staunchest defenders of private schooling agree with what happened to that kid in Kings Hospital , it was disgusting and those who carried out the attack should be punished accordingly , expulsion for starters and criminal charges to come later would be my suggestion.

But what happened at Kings Hospital is no reason to suggest closing all private schools , bullying occurs in nearly all school environments , in this case it was extreme , but i believe it is very much an isolated case.

Glenster · 05-12-2016 03:11PM

josha1 wrote: »

To be honest I think this is a lot more severe than what some people are making it out to be. We've gone full circle really on the severity of it. The perpetrators should be punished not for having a fight. Boys will be boys. But stripping a boy naked on its own is bad enough, especially in front of 15 classmates. To then touch him with a hockey stick and threaten 'inserting' it, is sadistic and deserves to be punished severely, and should have been dealt with.

I'll leave this here. http://img2.thejournal.ie/inline/1771832/original/?width=630&version=1771832

I went to boarding school myself, and I think maybe some people are a bit naïve as to the kinds of things kids get up to.

Kids get into fights all the time, and there is a certain teenage boy predilection to threaten to shove things up each others holes in a fight situation. I've definitely heard it said before, to such a degree that I find it hard to believe that no-one else has. I've seen it said on TV too.

A fight is a fight and its wrong and they shouldn't be doing it, but the issue here is not that these kids are sickos or anything, its that they were so unsupervised that they were able to do this.

steddyeddy · 05-12-2016 03:15PM

The Draugan wrote: »

Some kids do , in my experience allot of this has do with their upbringing and the level of interest their parents have. If kids are sent to private school with their parents paying for it that's a good indication that their parents are pretty interested in their education.

Some parents do. We can more confidently assign that motive to those who struggle to send their kids to private school than those who are loaded and just see it as the done thing. Likewise we cannot assume that parents who cannot afford to pay for these schools care any less.

Then neither of those scenarios tell anything about the capability, intelligence or natural curiosity of the child. All children like to learn. I think the school the school the child is sent to largely determines how they'll learn.

I would only be interested in all schools being community schools if streaming was involved to ensure weaker or disruptive kids were filtered out and didn't affect the stronger , better behaved kids negatively.

Yes I agree with you. As I said the school a child's sent to will make a huge difference to his/her learning.

steddyeddy · 05-12-2016 03:16PM

Glenster wrote: »

I went to boarding school myself, and I think maybe some people are a bit naïve as to the kinds of things kids get up to.

Kids get into fights all the time, and there is a certain teenage boy predilection to threaten to shove things up each others holes in a fight situation. I've definitely heard it said before, to such a degree that I find it hard to believe that no-one else has. I've seen it said on TV too.

A fight is a fight and its wrong and they shouldn't be doing it, but the issue here is not that these kids are sickos or anything, its that they were so unsupervised that they were able to do this.

It might be a boarding school thing as I was never stripped and threatened with sexual assault.

Should Private Schools be Closed?

Comments