Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Should schools be made accountable for bullying?
Options
Comments
-
Deleted User wrote: »I might be wrong about this but surely for all practical purposes and outside of extreme cases they effectively are?
Again, personal experience, one of my children had an issue with one particular child who had a habit of hitting people. This is in primary school. The teachers are sympathetic and do everything within their power to discipline him, but ultimately he's got problems, he's got a right to an education, and the 'case' ends there.
I think anyone who suggested involving the guards would have been laughed at.
This is one of those cases btw where I can't really see what the school or indeed anyone else is supposed to do. That's why I don't like the idea of fines etc.
Teenagers are different they need to accept responsibility for their own behaviour , and if a child has extra need and has a know diagnosed condition it is different and the school needs to manage it. Noting might come of going to the garda, but it might give the bully enough of a fright/pause for thought.0 -
BrianBoru00 wrote: »Chatting to principal aquaintance about this very topic and her stance is in general - if a child comes and says hes being bullied he generally isn't. Child is told to ask his parents to make an appointment to see them ASAP - and in the vast vast majority of cases - she doens't hear again about the "bullying" .
Well your principal friend sounds like she doesn't understand bullying and probably isn't very approachable. She has it in her mind from the word go that the child probably isn't being bullied.0 -
Sexual assault? I hardly think you're trying to say a school would have no option or obligation to remove the assaulter?
You didn't answer my question though - would the processes to be followed be quite different or 'not dissimilar' as you claimed.
I've given other examples of behaviour also, such as wedgies, or getting covered in flour or eggs at the end of the school year, and we can even look at things like theft of pens and pencils if you like.
Clearly (very clearly, in my opinion) schools do not (and can not) hold the students to the same standards that a business would hold its employees to.
Therefore, in my opinion, it isn't logical to suggest that schools themselves should be held to the same standards that businesses are held to.0 -
You didn't answer my question though - would the processes to be followed be quite different or 'not dissimilar' as you claimed.
I've given other examples of behaviour also, such as wedgies, or getting covered in flour or eggs at the end of the school year, and we can even look at things like theft of pens and pencils if you like.
Clearly (very clearly, in my opinion) schools do not (and can not) hold the students to the same standards that a business would hold its employees to.
Therefore, in my opinion, it isn't logical to suggest that schools themselves should be held to the same standards that businesses are held to.
I think what you're saying is that, at present, schools cannot legally be held liable in the same way that businesses are, and very well, I agree that they can't at the moment. But children have no fewer basic human rights than adults do, and certainly a school should be able to do anything necessary to protect abuse, harassment, and assault victims. This is a reasonable point of view unless you think that children have fewer human rights than adults do. I know that many people actually think this (you may be such a person) but I don't understand why. Children are among those we class as "the vulnerable" and vulnerable people need more protection, not less.0 -
You didn't answer my question though - would the processes to be followed be quite different or 'not dissimilar' as you claimed.
I've given other examples of behaviour also, such as wedgies, or getting covered in flour or eggs at the end of the school year, and we can even look at things like theft of pens and pencils if you like.
Clearly (very clearly, in my opinion) schools do not (and can not) hold the students to the same standards that a business would hold its employees to.
Therefore, in my opinion, it isn't logical to suggest that schools themselves should be held to the same standards that businesses are held to.
BTW I can't claim first hand knowledge of what goes on in schools nowadays but my suspicion would be that tearing off someone's skirt would be very unlikely to lead to a permanent exclusion that stuck. I may well we wrong about that though.
There is a fundamental difference in that the state has an obligation to educate a child, so the default position is that the child stays in the school. Even if excluded they have to be found a place elsewhere. What does a principal do when told 'you have to take this child, and by the way your school will be fined if they bully someone'?0 -
Advertisement
-
I think what you're saying is that, at present, schools cannot legally be held liable in the same way that businesses are, and very well, I agree that they can't at the moment. But children have no fewer basic human rights than adults do, and certainly a school should be able to do anything necessary to protect abuse, harassment, and assault victims. This is a reasonable point of view unless you think that children have fewer human rights than adults do. I know that many people actually think this (you may be such a person) but I don't understand why. Children are among those we class as "the vulnerable" and vulnerable people need more protection, not less.
We are getting closer to agreement.
Should a school be entitled to refuse admission to a child based on their behaviour? Same as a bar or restaurant, for example?0 -
I think what you're saying is that, at present, schools cannot legally be held liable in the same way that businesses are, and very well, I agree that they can't at the moment. But children have no fewer basic human rights than adults do, and certainly a school should be able to do anything necessary to protect abuse, harassment, and assault victims.
I'm disagreeing with your argument that 'there is no reason - NONE -' that schools shouldn't be held accountable in the same way that businesses are.
I think the clear difference in the kind of behaviour that occurs, and the different limits on how it can be dealt with, makes that argument a bit of a non-runner. It's not just 'at the moment', I don't think they should be held liable in the same way business are, until they have the same options regarding misconduct as businesses have.
Schools should be doing everything they can certainly, and maybe they should be doing more than they are - there are teachers who will just ignore stuff. But in terms of legal responsibility, i don't think it's comparable with a business.0 -
Deleted User wrote: »We are getting closer to agreement.
Should a school be entitled to refuse admission to a child based on their behaviour? Same as a bar or restaurant, for example?
Absolutely. It may not even be the child's own fault (they could have a mental or behavioral issue because of congenital problems, neglect, mistreatment, or trauma, for example), but such children need special help that they would not get by being in a school's general population. If the school does not have the resources to properly help and supervise and support such a special needs child, the special needs child needs to be immediately referred to somewhere where they can get that help.
But yes, I think this is a complete no-brainer; I would separate a mistreated, vicious dog from other dogs and give it as much care and attention as possible, too, while not neglecting the needs of the vulnerable normal dogs I also care for.
The topical question is whether a school should be held liable for not following best practices to protect the vulnerable, and I absolutely agree that they should.0 -
I think the clear difference in the kind of behaviour that occurs, and the different limits on how it can be dealt with, makes that argument a bit of a non-runner. It's not just 'at the moment', I don't think they should be held liable in the same way business are, until they have the same options regarding misconduct as businesses have.
OK, I think you're arguing that schools shouldn't be held liable because the legal mechanisms are not currently in place to fully support a school's efforts to protect the vulnerable. And I'm arguing that because a school should be held liable for failure to protect the vulnerable, because that is part of the job of a custodial institution (particularly one that acts in loco parentis), every possible legal mechanism should be set in place to enable the school to do its job in that respect. Is that fair?0 -
OK, I think you're arguing that schools shouldn't be held liable because the legal mechanisms are not currently in place to fully support a school's efforts to protect the vulnerable. And I'm arguing that because a school should be held liable for failure to protect the vulnerable, every possible legal mechanism should be set in place to enable schools to do its job in that respect. Is that fair?
What you originally said makes a lot more sense to me, sure, but I think you do need to heed what Orinoco has said, which is to point out the state's responsibility to educate all children, which is completely different from any organisation's (lack of) responsibility to employ all adults. Children cannot currently be left outside education in the same way that adults can be left outside employment.
Even if we move away from the comparison with business and employee misconduct, I don't really know what 'every possible legal mechanism' would mean, and how and when these mechanisms would be implemented.
To take the most obvious example of a student who needs to be removed immediately and permanently from a school...what happens to them then?0 -
Advertisement
-
What you originally said makes a lot more sense to me, sure, but I think you do need to heed what Orinoco has said, which is to point out the state's responsibility to educate all children, which is completely different from any organisation's (lack of) responsibility to employ all adults. Children cannot currently be left outside education in the same way that adults can be left outside employment.
Even if we move away from the comparison with business and employee misconduct, I don't really know what 'every possible legal mechanism' would mean, and how and when these mechanisms would be implemented.
To take the most obvious example of a student who needs to be removed immediately and permanently from a school...what happens to them then?
Because the state has the responsibility to educate all children, clearly children (who are vulnerable) need to be protected in school so that the learning environment is not a hostile one. The bully needs to be removed from contact with the vulnerable and prevented from returning until they are no longer a threat. If the bully is a staff member, this clearly involves firing them and placing information in their record. If the bully is a child, then the state still has an obligation to appropriately educate them, I agree, but in such a way that others are not victimised. The bully has a right to an education of the same quality as that given to the victims, but has no right to be placed in an environment that facilitates their harassment.0 -
What you originally said makes a lot more sense to me, sure, but I think you do need to heed what Orinoco has said, which is to point out the state's responsibility to educate all children, which is completely different from any organisation's (lack of) responsibility to employ all adults. Children cannot currently be left outside education in the same way that adults can be left outside employment.
Even if we move away from the comparison with business and employee misconduct, I don't really know what 'every possible legal mechanism' would mean, and how and when these mechanisms would be implemented.
To take the most obvious example of a student who needs to be removed immediately and permanently from a school...what happens to them then?
While the comparison to a business is not accurate, you are now getting to how may angles are dancing on the head of a pin. The vast majority of cases are not about someone who needs to be removed from the school immediately, if such a issued occurred they would be lots of parties involved such as possible social workers and so on. The might be offered home tuition or something.
The bottom line is that school have to be run properly with a purposeful safe atmosphere and the principle and board of management should be held to account for how they run the school.
I am amazed at what people don't seem to understand here, hitting kicking punching is assault, taking someones pens books uniform jumpers or coat with out permission is stealing.0 -
mariaalice wrote: »I am amazed at what people don't seem to understand here, hitting kicking punching is assault, taking someones pens books uniform jumpers or coat with out permission is stealing.
And shunning, teasing, ganging up on someone, spreading stories, playing manipulative games, and so forth, is abuse. Just so.
I have to mention that you can fall off the other side of the fence, too. I come from Houston, Texas, where so-called "zero-tolerance" policies have gotten way, way out of hand. They call the police on kids, and refer them to schools for criminal misbehavers, for things as trivial as offhand remarks, bringing plastic picnic tableware in their lunch to spread peanut butter on crackers, and mouthing off to teachers. You might remember the young engineer who was reported as a "terrorist" for making improvements to a clock... that was a Houston-area school. Not all of the "misbehavior" referred to the authorities rises to the level of what you or I would think of as misbehavior; much of the rest of it is the sort of ordinary thing that would be handled by a teacher within the classroom itself under normal circumstances.
And that's just it. It's the schools' mandate here to handle things in a best-practices sort of way, because children are children. There needs to be an uncompromising stance against bullying, but also a "zero-tolerance" attitude toward offending against the human rights of the students.0 -
Garda Court system Maybe ?? I hear also Internet witch-hunts are useful. You can get all manner of stuff shutdown with one of them. Also chuck in a dose of BLM and yer sorted.0
-
I would consider there needs to be an obligation on the school to take action.Deleted User wrote: »So if a child (who happens to go to a school) is bullied by another child (who also goes to a school) outside of school hours, it is the school's legal responsibility to do something about it?
How exactly would that work when a school has precisely zero powers over children outside school hours?
It is very easy to say 'schools' need to do this and do that. The reality is that to make that happen they need more resources and more powers. It would be absolutely outrageous to make schools and teachers legally responsible for bullying with the resources and powers they currently have.
If a co-worker assaulted you or even harrassed you outside of work hours, aside from the Gardai being involved, they would likely be fired.
I don't see why the same thing shouldn't apply in schools - the students would never come into conflict if they didn't share a school, so the school should do everything in its power to prevent them coming into conflict, up to and including expulsion of the aggressor.
Yes, even if the aggressor has never done anything inside school hours.
I shy away from saying "legally obliged", because logically how can a school do anything about things outside of school hours when they won't be in control of the kids. But if they've been alerted of an issue or an incident, they should be obliged to take necessary action. Even if that's as simple as moving the kids into separate classes.0 -
I would consider there needs to be an obligation on the school to take action.
If a co-worker assaulted you or even harrassed you outside of work hours, aside from the Gardai being involved, they would likely be fired.
I don't see why the same thing shouldn't apply in schools - the students would never come into conflict if they didn't share a school, so the school should do everything in its power to prevent them coming into conflict, up to and including expulsion of the aggressor.
Yes, even if the aggressor has never done anything inside school hours.
I shy away from saying "legally obliged", because logically how can a school do anything about things outside of school hours when they won't be in control of the kids. But if they've been alerted of an issue or an incident, they should be obliged to take necessary action. Even if that's as simple as moving the kids into separate classes.
But what obligation does the school have in dealing with subtle forms of bullying such as excluding after all you cant force friendship and teenagers are free to socialise or not socialise with who they want. As your answers are usually very level headed would you consider slagging a form of bullying, is slagging a quite 17 year old male about his supposed virginity by his peer group all fun and games or bullying?.0 -
And shunning, teasing, ganging up on someone, spreading stories, playing manipulative games, and so forth, is abuse. Just so.
I have to mention that you can fall off the other side of the fence, too. I come from Houston, Texas, where so-called "zero-tolerance" policies have gotten way, way out of hand. They call the police on kids, and refer them to schools for criminal misbehavers, for things as trivial as offhand remarks, bringing plastic picnic tableware in their lunch to spread peanut butter on crackers, and mouthing off to teachers. You might remember the young engineer who was reported as a "terrorist" for making improvements to a clock... that was a Houston-area school. Not all of the "misbehavior" referred to the authorities rises to the level of what you or I would think of as misbehavior; much of the rest of it is the sort of ordinary thing that would be handled by a teacher within the classroom itself under normal circumstances.
And that's just it. It's the schools' mandate here to handle things in a best-practices sort of way, because children are children. There needs to be an uncompromising stance against bullying, but also a "zero-tolerance" attitude toward offending against the human rights of the students.
But that is precisely what will happen if you start fining schools and punishing teachers for 'allowing' bullying to take place!
As always it is a question of balance. My objection is to the idea that we solve the problem of bullying by making schools (which primarily exist for education) the responsible and liable party.
That is certainly unfair with the powers they currently have, and the powers they would need to enjoy, and their approach to enforcement, would upset many people (just as you say in your post).
None of this is an excuse for schools that do not care or cannot be bothered - of course they need to improve. But it is dangerous to talk about fines and punishments without understanding the consequences.0 -
mariaalice wrote: »I am amazed at what people don't seem to understand here, hitting kicking punching is assault, taking someones pens books uniform jumpers or coat with out permission is stealing.
So what do you think should be done when one 12 year old assaults another in school? What should be done when the same thing happens outside school (but they both go to the same school)?0 -
Widdershins wrote: »Well your principal friend sounds like she doesn't understand bullying and probably isn't very approachable. She has it in her mind from the word go that the child probably isn't being bullied.
With respect, I think its yourself who doesn't understand bullying.
No, she just knows the spurious claims from the growing clamour of children and parents using it as a buzz word. A single incident does not constitute bullying. whether she's approachable or not is not relevant to the point.
You're either being facetious or simply didn't read all of the posts.
In case clarification is needed:
My opinion is schools should not be made accountable for bullying any more than for a child having an accident in school. i.e. outside their duty to protect all children in their care.
A LOT of children now use the phrase (that they've heard in media, from parents etc) "I'm being bullied" . This is not limited to schools - it happens in sports camps , training sessions etc.
Do I (as another poster asked) have statistics to back up my claim that this phrase is "in vogue"? No. For that would be stupid. I'm basing it on my own experiences and those of fellow teachers.
The friend I quoted does indeed take all claims of bullying seriously. But generally children who are being bullied do not go to a teacher or principal in a hallway during break time and claim "I'm being bullied" . Its far more succinct than that. We are getting off topic but the OP from the sounds of it has second hand information regarding this particular tragedy and so doesn't know what efforts were or were not made to stop the bullying or indeed if the victim or their parents had met the school authorities.
I'm not commenting from a high moral horse here - I have had way to much experience with suicide - and I would find it offensive to suggest that any of those deaths was because I or any teacher in any o her school was neglectful. I0 -
I would consider there needs to be an obligation on the school to take action.
If a co-worker assaulted you or even harrassed you outside of work hours, aside from the Gardai being involved, they would likely be fired.
I don't see why the same thing shouldn't apply in schools - the students would never come into conflict if they didn't share a school, so the school should do everything in its power to prevent them coming into conflict, up to and including expulsion of the aggressor.
Yes, even if the aggressor has never done anything inside school hours.
I shy away from saying "legally obliged", because logically how can a school do anything about things outside of school hours when they won't be in control of the kids. But if they've been alerted of an issue or an incident, they should be obliged to take necessary action. Even if that's as simple as moving the kids into separate classes.
As I said above I think this is fine, it's a consistent viewpoint and that's fair enough.
I think we all know however that the rate of expulsions would skyrocket and the airwaves would be full of parents telling Joe how their son only threw one punch at a boy who was annoying him, and now he's excluded Joe, etc etc.
There are no easy answers to this. Schools certainly need more support and yes they should take the issue seriously. But they have a lot of things to take seriously and this is a huge issue that can consume a huge amount of time.0 -
Advertisement
-
BrianBoru00 wrote: »With respect, I think its yourself who doesn't understand bullying.
No, she just knows the spurious claims from the growing clamour of children and parents using it as a buzz word. A single incident does not constitute bullying. whether she's approachable or not is not relevant to the point.
You're either being facetious or simply didn't read all of the posts.
In case clarification is needed:
My opinion is schools should not be made accountable for bullying any more than for a child having an accident in school. i.e. outside their duty to protect all children in their care.
A LOT of children now use the phrase (that they've heard in media, from parents etc) "I'm being bullied" . This is not limited to schools - it happens in sports camps , training sessions etc.
Do I (as another poster asked) have statistics to back up my claim that this phrase is "in vogue"? No. For that would be stupid. I'm basing it on my own experiences and those of fellow teachers.
The friend I quoted does indeed take all claims of bullying seriously. But generally children who are being bullied do not go to a teacher or principal in a hallway during break time and claim "I'm being bullied" . Its far more succinct than that. We are getting off topic but the OP from the sounds of it has second hand information regarding this particular tragedy and so doesn't know what efforts were or were not made to stop the bullying or indeed if the victim or their parents had met the school authorities.
I'm not commenting from a high moral horse here - I have had way to much experience with suicide - and I would find it offensive to suggest that any of those deaths was because I or any teacher in any o her school was neglectful. I
I understand it as well if not better than most. And without suggesting you are one, a disinterested or biased teacher/principal is a very common thing, whether you like that or not.0 -
Deleted User wrote: »So what do you think should be done when one 12 year old assaults another in school? What should be done when the same thing happens outside school (but they both go to the same school)?
I don't know about outside school, but if it occurred in school it should be explained to the child doing the assaulting in the presents of their parents what assault is( the school is not accusing them of assault that is an important point ) I would have it written down and a copy given to the parents and child it should be done by the principle who would have someone along as a witness. It should be explained to the parent that the other child parents are entitled to contact the garda if they wish. Then the child and parents should be give a copy of the school anti bullying policy outlying what may happen in the future. The school should leave no room for ambiguity but at the same time it might be a one off incident.0 -
Deleted User wrote: »The parents of bullies should be held accountable. The responsibility shouldn't just be the schools. The sad fact is that no matter what you do, bullies will always bully. So what should also be done is a lot more mental health classes being taught, which actively teach people to deal with bullying properly and to not let it affect them.
Also it's not all that clearcut - bullying happens Online as well as Offline. Should a school be held accountable for schoolyard bullying that occurs on social media?
Agree that parents should be held accountable, equally as much as schools though0 -
BrianBoru00 wrote: »Sure half the children in Ireland are being bullied now - The amount of children who go to a teacher / parent and say "I'm being bullied" is gone through the roof in recent years.
As already pointed out - a child may be oversensitive and take slagging hard where (with boys moreso) slagging is what you do every day with your pals. Supposing then a group are told not to slag a particular child - what do they do - they've been instructed to not slag him so you now have an issue where the child is being treated differently and therfore being bullied as he's being isolated.
What does a school principal do in that situation?
Supposing a parent complains that their child is being bullied through facebook because hes been "unfriended" by a classmate - what should the procedure be - principal contacts parents of the "accused" . The accused says - well I don't get on with him and don't really like him so I removed him from my friends list. Two classmates - two opinions on the situation - nothing a principal can do here absolutely nothing and shouldn't .
Chatting to principal aquaintance about this very topic and her stance is in general - if a child comes and says hes being bullied he generally isn't. Child is told to ask his parents to make an appointment to see them ASAP - and in the vast vast majority of cases - she doens't hear again about the "bullying" . She's also had parents come in and similar to the previous example its a case of two classmates who just don't like each other and both giving as good as they got but one feeling more "down" about it than the other.
If you're suggesting that several students have been expelled from a school in your locality then that's an extremely serious case and cannot happen without a (quite long) process. Not least because they are entitled to a fair and due process no matter what their actions.
I'm not suggesting that any student was expelled. There were suspensions. With online bullying the evidence is generally there for all to behold.0 -
How was it preventable?
His classmates could have only been slagging him and he took it to heart because he was mentally ill. People with depression and anxiety are hypersensitive to criticism and that's that. How were a bunch of kids to know he would take his own life?
The teachers are not mental health professionals. They are teachers and they have a job to do. They can give out to kids punish them and raise their behavior with their parents etc but they can't police kids every moment of the day. Kids will form groups and cliques and the odd kids will be left out and slagging and teasing and pushing and shoving and mean carry on like wrecking a kids books or whatever are just part of school.
You can't save a kid from killing themselves as much as you imagine you can.You can counsel a kid you can give the kid on medication you can change schools you can encourage them to take up sports and try and teach them how to be assertive and make friends etc etc but you can't stop them from being hypersensitive due to their mental problems and killing themselves. You can't know the unpredictable and you can't stop it anymore than you can stop rain from falling.Bullying isn't right but bullying victims do attract it.BrianBoru00 wrote: »With respect, I think its yourself who doesn't understand bullying.
No, she just knows the spurious claims from the growing clamour of children and parents using it as a buzz word. A single incident does not constitute bullying. whether she's approachable or not is not relevant to the point.
You're either being facetious or simply didn't read all of the posts.
In case clarification is needed:
My opinion is schools should not be made accountable for bullying any more than for a child having an accident in school. i.e. outside their duty to protect all children in their care.
A LOT of children now use the phrase (that they've heard in media, from parents etc) "I'm being bullied" . This is not limited to schools - it happens in sports camps , training sessions etc.
Do I (as another poster asked) have statistics to back up my claim that this phrase is "in vogue"? No. For that would be stupid. I'm basing it on my own experiences and those of fellow teachers.
The friend I quoted does indeed take all claims of bullying seriously. But generally children who are being bullied do not go to a teacher or principal in a hallway during break time and claim "I'm being bullied" . Its far more succinct than that. We are getting off topic but the OP from the sounds of it has second hand information regarding this particular tragedy and so doesn't know what efforts were or were not made to stop the bullying or indeed if the victim or their parents had met the school authorities.
I'm not commenting from a high moral horse here - I have had way to much experience with suicide - and I would find it offensive to suggest that any of those deaths was because I or any teacher in any o her school was neglectful. I
The last experience I had of bullying in Irish school was around 2007/2008. I was consistently bullied(not some 'in vogue' experience). It basically occurred regularly for four years.
In my first year of secondary school, a student went as far as reading out a short story that was a not so subtle story about my skin(I had cystic acne), it was supposed to be funny. He regularly mocked and abused me with a gang for years. Teachers were not oblivious to this, he and others were intermittently suspended.
Teachers were aware that it was continuing regardless. My parents were virtually oblivious to all of this, I hid it from them but school never made an effort to make them aware of the situation. School never really made an effort to even check up how I was doing. I was pretty depressed and contemplated suicide. That was my first experience of depression...
Do I think that the school failed in their duty? Yep, they never made much more than a passing effort of dealing with it. They had feck all consideration for my well being. I think they very much had a duty of care which they failed to meet. Secondary school proved to be one of the worst experiences in my life to date as a result. Nobody's experience should be like that.
Discounting this as slagging etc is frankly insulting...0 -
The last experience I had of bullying in Irish school was around 2007/2008. I was consistently bullied(not some 'in vogue' experience). It basically occurred regularly for four years.
In my first year of secondary school, a student went as far as reading out a short story that was a not so subtle story about my skin(I had cystic acne), it was supposed to be funny. He regularly mocked and abused me with a gang for years. Teachers were not oblivious to this, he and others were intermittently suspended.
Teachers were aware that it was continuing regardless. My parents were virtually oblivious to all of this, I hid it from them but school never made an effort to make them aware of the situation. School never really made an effort to even check up how I was doing. I was pretty depressed and contemplated suicide. That was my first experience of depression...
Do I think that the school failed in their duty? Yep, they never made much more than a passing effort of dealing with it. They had feck all consideration for my well being. I think they very much had a duty of care which they failed to meet. Secondary school proved to be one of the worst experiences in my life to date as a result. Nobody's experience should be like that.
Discounting this as slagging etc is frankly insulting...
...But none of those you've quoted has discounted it as slagging.
I'm sorry that you had a hard time.0 -
The_Kew_Tour wrote: »Yes if they did nothing about it if they knew about it.
schools have plenty of days off now these days with strikes even though teachers are well paid, but they seem to think they are a law above everyone else
Such gack talk.0 -
BrianBoru00 wrote: »...But none of those you've quoted has discounted it as slagging.
I'm sorry that you had a hard time.
Rjpf did actually... He lay the fault on the victim throughout the response and literally said that they're probably just hyper sensitive and mentally ill.... Main reason for the quoting was to highlight dismissive attitudes towards bullying.0 -
-
Advertisement
-
The_Kew_Tour wrote: »the truth hurts
When was the last day schools had a day off due to strike action?
2 days in recent memory.
Does 2 mean "plenty" to you?
Striking is a last resort when a group of professionals are not being not listened to.0
![[Deleted User]](/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
Advertisement