Should Private Schools be Closed?

DEFTLEFTHAND · 05-12-2016 04:39PM

The Draugan wrote: »

+1 world of difference between saying i'm going to put my boot up your arse etc in a scrap or whatever to pinning a lad to his bed pulling down his kacks and putting a hocky stick to his hole like that is just beyond fcuked up ... the kids who did that need a serious serious fking lesson , expulsion , criminal charges simple as.

No ones going to loose it too much over two young lads getting in a scrap or expects kids to conform to the 1950's vision of the world outlined in the other post , but what those lads did to that other kid was next level disturbed.

You're right, this is incredibly serious, they sodomised a minor with a hockey stick.

Criminal charges are in order.

The Draugan · 05-12-2016 04:42PM

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

You're right, this is incredibly serious, they sodomised a minor with a hockey stick.

Criminal charges are in order.

It's way beyond the norm in terms of bullying or boys will be boys type stuff that goes on in all schools , its actually just disturbed and the individuals involved need a serious evaluation

Jawgap · 05-12-2016 04:53PM

FWIW, I don't think there should be criminal proceedings.

Yes, the perpetrators should be punished, and the school's management held to account (proper accountability, not Irish accountability), but criminal proceedings, even in the Children's Court will require the poor kid who suffered at the hands of those bullies to give evidence and be cross-examined.

OK, it will be well handled and managed by the judge, but likely it won't be pleasant for them - plus it'll be hanging over them for the next 18 months or so until it does come to court. No harm for it to hang over the perpetrators but maybe such a situation wouldn't be in the best interests of the victim?

....and plus, it mightn't be politic to suggest, but the bullies who did this also don't deserve to have the rest of their lives blighted by a few moments of stupidity. I doubt they conceived of the idea on their own and there could be a handed-down 'tradition' (if you want to call it that) of the peer groups in the school punishing their members using such barbaric threats - so while they should be made face up to the full consequences of their actions, those consequences shouldn't be life defining for them.

Personally, I'd prefer if justice was swift, definitive and conclusive - and handled in a way that doesn't prejudice the victim, and minimised any further harm on them.

The Draugan · 05-12-2016 05:03PM

Jawgap wrote: »

FWIW, I don't think there should be criminal proceedings.

Yes, the perpetrators should be punished, and the school's management held to account (proper accountability, not Irish accountability), but criminal proceedings, even in the Children's Court will require the poor kid who suffered at the hands of those bullies to give evidence and be cross-examined.

OK, it will be well handled and managed by the judge, but likely it won't be pleasant for them - plus it'll be hanging over them for the next 18 months or so until it does come to court. No harm for it to hang over the perpetrators but maybe such a situation wouldn't be in the best interests of the victim?

....and plus, it mightn't be politic to suggest, but the bullies who did this also don't deserve to have the rest of their lives blighted by a few moments of stupidity. I doubt they conceived of the idea on their own and there could be a handed-down 'tradition' (if you want to call it that) of the peer groups in the school punishing their members using such barbaric threats - so while they should be made face up to the full consequences of their actions, those consequences shouldn't be life defining for them.

Personally, I'd prefer if justice was swift, definitive and conclusive - and handled in a way that doesn't prejudice the victim, and minimised any further harm on them.

TBH i think a suspension is too mild as a final punishment in this instance , they should be expelled and to be honest if i was the boys parent i would be pressing criminal charges against the perpetrators as well as a civil suit against the school.

what those lads did is not normal or acceptable behavior in any way shape or form , unfortunately that kind of behavior can have life long impacts , what sort of message is sent if all they receive is some sort of suspension or other fudge punishment.

I'm not usually one for harsh punishments for kids but what happened in Kings Hospital as being reported , is so beyond the realms of what is socially acceptable or tolerable that it needs a proper punishment.

steddyeddy · 05-12-2016 05:56PM

Jawgap wrote: »

Disagree all you want, but as I said, the courts will decide, if it gets that far, not the internet on the basis of accounts published in the Irish Times.

My morality isn't defined by court judgement. Which is lucky considering some of the sexual assault judgement to come out of Ireland.

steddyeddy · 05-12-2016 05:57PM

I think the people minimising this need their head examined. I've never heard of anything like that when I was a teenager.

The Draugan · 05-12-2016 06:00PM

steddyeddy wrote: »

I think the people minimising this need their head examined. I've never heard of anything like that when I was a teenager.

100% it's totally beyond the bounds of anything that could be chalked down as Boys will be Boys , a bit of a scrap or name calling is one thing , not condoning either by any stretch but pinning a Young lad to his bed stripping him and threatening sodomy with a hockey stick is fcuking warped.

steddyeddy · 05-12-2016 08:09PM

The Draugan wrote: »

100% it's totally beyond the bounds of anything that could be chalked down as Boys will be Boys , a bit of a scrap or name calling is one thing , not condoning either by any stretch but pinning a Young lad to his bed stripping him and threatening sodomy with a hockey stick is fcuking warped.

Considering a few of the posters who are minimising this have previously expressed some charming views on state schools I think an element of snobbery is at play.

ted1 · 05-12-2016 08:12PM

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.

They stripped him down , that's sexual assault. Using a hockey stick to touch genetials is sexual assault.

Telling someone that they have to fight or have a hockey club shoved up your ass is sexual assault.

The Talking Bread · 05-12-2016 08:37PM

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.

what about if the guy was a girl or even a woman??

The Talking Bread · 05-12-2016 08:40PM

And how the fk is a teenager a nipper!!!!They were adolescents.

byhookorbycrook · 05-12-2016 09:47PM

steddyeddy wrote: »

I think the people minimising this need their head examined. I've never heard of anything like that when I was a teenager.

For those trivializing this incident substitute teacher/clergyman for the pupils involved , now tell me how trivial you'd consider that?

Del.Monte · 05-12-2016 11:01PM

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

For those trivializing this incident substitute teacher/clergyman for the pupils involved , now tell me how trivial you'd consider that?

You're joking, right?

steddyeddy · 05-12-2016 11:34PM

Del.Monte wrote: »

You're joking, right?

No, personally I think religious schools are bull****.

Bridge93 · 06-12-2016 01:42AM

was there penetration or just the threat to? Because one is a serious sexual assault under duress. If god forbid there was penetration then I think that's statutory rape of a minor as the law is now

The Talking Bread · 06-12-2016 02:18AM

Bridge93 wrote: »

was there penetration or just the threat to? Because one is a serious sexual assault under duress. If god forbid there was penetration then I think that's statutory rape of a minor as the law is now

Someone has just been studying The Criminal Justice Act ðŸ˜‚

it was only a threat of penetration. Which still, in legal respect, is sexual assault.

JupiterKid · 06-12-2016 03:36AM

I went to a fee-paying secondary school and endured bullying for a couple of years. But I have to say the standard of teaching was superb. My parents made sacrifices to send me to one but if I had children Im not sure I'd send them to one. Certainly not to a school run by a religious order.

But this was 25 years ago and the idea of pupils sexually assaulting each other was utterly unthinkable. KH had a reputation as a pretty liberal school so this incident is all the more shocking. This 13 year old child - and he is only a child - must be deeply damaged as a result of this assault. Serious questions need to be answered. If it is shown that the school tried to cover up the assault then heads at the very top should roll.

What the hell makes a group of boys rape another boy with a hockey stick? Sick and vile beyond belief.

The Talking Bread · 06-12-2016 08:39AM

Re above, just to clarify, although it is sexual assault he wasn't actually raped this time and to be fair, whilst the boy had reasonable cause to believe that he may be in danger you also have to consider these lads were just threatening him with no actual intention to carry through.

I'm just giving that out as a few people seem to think penetrative did happen.

Ps, if you read back on my posts you will see I haven't in anyway downplayed this event, entirely the opposite. Just in case you think I am based on what I said above.
Just clarifying those facts.

The Talking Bread · 06-12-2016 08:43AM

And spare me from the "so that makes it ok" type replies as that's not what I am saying.
It's a clear example of sexual assault that is made using threats as it is clear the kid had reasonable cause to believe and did believe (as he chose to fight to prevent it) that the lads would follow through with their threat.

Oodoov · 06-12-2016 09:00AM

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

They are fully entitled to the same benefits by enrolling in a free school.

They want that, plus extra tuition and services, plus gatekeeping to keep out the poor and undesirables.

It is unfair, it perpetuates and worsens class differences, it ghettoizes the free system. It undermines the whole point of free tax-funded education.

I've always said i have no problem with private schools as long as they have no problem letting in kids from working class backgrounds. There should be a quota otherwise the private schools should expect not a single cent from the state.

The Talking Bread · 06-12-2016 09:18AM

Oodoov wrote: »

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

They are fully entitled to the same benefits by enrolling in a free school.

They want that, plus extra tuition and services, plus gatekeeping to keep out the poor and undesirables.

It is unfair, it perpetuates and worsens class differences, it ghettoizes the free system. It undermines the whole point of free tax-funded education.

I've always said i have no problem with private schools as long as they have no problem letting in kids from working class backgrounds. There should be a quota otherwise the private schools should expect not a single cent from the state.

Why should there be a quota though? I don't get the moral logic behind that to be honest. Who should be the chosen working class ones. There are scholarships, I missed out on one to Newbridge by a fraction myself but I don't feel aggrieved by the fact I missed out my education there as I understand that fees are fees and if you don't have them you shouldn't be let in because there is a somewhat class division ( very very tiny) between private and public schools.

It's like saying to someone who wants to enrol to a private school and there parents have worked hard to afford the funds "sorry, we can't admit you as Timmy down the road had to be enrolled without fees so we don't discriminate"

There are plenty of good non paying schools with great teachers out there. It's just the education syllabus and how the leaving cert works that is the problem for many.
These schools have the same syllabus, don't forget.

The Talking Bread · 06-12-2016 09:18AM

Oodoov wrote: »

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

They are fully entitled to the same benefits by enrolling in a free school.

They want that, plus extra tuition and services, plus gatekeeping to keep out the poor and undesirables.

It is unfair, it perpetuates and worsens class differences, it ghettoizes the free system. It undermines the whole point of free tax-funded education.

I've always said i have no problem with private schools as long as they have no problem letting in kids from working class backgrounds. There should be a quota otherwise the private schools should expect not a single cent from the state.

Why should there be a quota though? I don't get the moral logic behind that to be honest. Who should be the chosen working class ones. There are scholarships, I missed out on one to Newbridge by a fraction myself but I don't feel aggrieved by the fact I missed out my education there as I understand that fees are fees and if you don't have them you shouldn't be let in because there is a somewhat class division ( very very tiny) between private and public schools.

It's like saying to someone who wants to enrol to a private school and there parents have worked hard to afford the funds "sorry, we can't admit you as Timmy down the road had to be enrolled without fees so we don't discriminate"

There are plenty of good non paying schools with great teachers out there. It's just the education syllabus and how the leaving cert works that is the problem for many.
These schools have the same syllabus, don't forget.

Jawgap · 06-12-2016 09:28AM

Oodoov wrote: »

I've always said i have no problem with private schools as long as they have no problem letting in kids from working class backgrounds. There should be a quota otherwise the private schools should expect not a single cent from the state.

Quotas are a bit artificial.

Personally, in answer to the question in the thread title, I don't think private schools should be closed, but they shouldn't be funded directly by the state.

Parents should have a wide choice on where and how they educate their kids and if they don't want to use the public school system, then fair enough. They should be able to get a 'voucher' equivalent to the nominal cost of a year's education which they can then take to the private school to offset against whatever fee they are charging.

Private schools getting funds from the state and substantial funds from parents is great for the kids, but not particularly fair in the context of equality of access to the best education.

ted1 · 06-12-2016 09:59AM

Oodoov wrote: »

I've always said i have no problem with private schools as long as they have no problem letting in kids from working class backgrounds. There should be a quota otherwise the private schools should expect not a single cent from the state.

As long as the patents pay the fees the they'll let 100% of their students be from working class families.
Should there be a quota so middle class families get medical cards, free travel, rent allowance. Where will your quota system end?

Oodoov · 06-12-2016 10:31AM

ted1 wrote: »

As long as the patents pay the fees the they'll let 100% of their students be from working class families.
Should there be a quota so middle class families get medical cards, free travel, rent allowance. Where will your quota system end?

If they want state funding they should except the quota. If not then fund the school themselves. God forbid their little angles rub shoulders with the great unwashed.

josha1 · 06-12-2016 10:37AM

Bridge93 wrote: »

was there penetration or just the threat to? Because one is a serious sexual assault under duress. If god forbid there was penetration then I think that's statutory rape of a minor as the law is now

You either have no clue what that is or else are a very sick individual.

ted1 · 06-12-2016 10:52AM

Oodoov wrote: »

If they want state funding they should except the quota. If not then fund the school themselves. God forbid their little angles rub shoulders with the great unwashed.

They revive less state funding than other schools and they let anyone in who pays the fees.

You havn't told me where the quota system ends. Should middle class get medical cards, rent allowance etc.

whoopsadoodles · 06-12-2016 10:56AM

Oodoov wrote: »

I've always said i have no problem with private schools as long as they have no problem letting in kids from working class backgrounds. There should be a quota otherwise the private schools should expect not a single cent from the state.

They do let people in from working class backgrounds though. They let anyone at all in, well the ones near me do, and there's a fair few of them. Anyone who is willing to cough up the fees can have access. It's really that simple.

Some also offer scholarships to anyone who is particularly smart, particularly good at sports, particularly good at music/singing. Makes zero odds where they're from, if they've a talent to offer the school they have the opportunity to get in for free or on reduced fees.

As I said on another thread, I know people who spend more on smoking each week than it costs to put a kid into some of these schools.

josha1 · 06-12-2016 10:58AM

Oodoov wrote: »

If they want state funding they should except the quota. If not then fund the school themselves. God forbid their little angles rub shoulders with the great unwashed.

You mean if they want even part of the taxes which they contribute, since private schools get about half the funding of public schools.

How many people should be let in on this quota system?

By the way, private schools aren't like they are in England here, if you have the money, you pretty much get in. If you don't get in to a particular one, then you can go to another.

So by extension you're saying that the quota system should simply allow people in for free (since everyone can get into a private school if they have the funds anyway), which is a system currently in place in many fee paying schools. My question is how many do you propose?

steddyeddy · 06-12-2016 11:27AM

ted1 wrote: »

As long as the patents pay the fees the they'll let 100% of their students be from working class families.
Should there be a quota so middle class families get medical cards, free travel, rent allowance. Where will your quota system end?

What gets me is the focus on parents. It should be focused on the child. What education does the child deserve. There shouldn't be a two tier education system when it comes to class, gender or race.

Should Private Schools be Closed?

Comments