Science teacher Peter Harvey arrested over 'attempted murder' of schoolboy

OpenMind · Post by **OpenMind** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 12:09 am

Science teacher Peter Harvey arrested over 'attempted murder' of schoolboy - Telegraph

A science teacher, Peter Harvey, has been arrested on suspicion of attempted murder after a schoolboy was left with serious head injuries following an alleged assault at a school in Mansfield.

Mr Harvey is also being questioned about alleged assaults on two other pupils during the same incident at All Saints' Roman Catholic School on Wednesday.

Detective Superintendent Adrian Pearson, of Nottinghamshire Police, revealed details of the allegations at a press conference outside the school.

He said the two other pupils were allegedly assaulted during the same incident in which the 14-year-old was hurt, though less seriously.

The boy - identified by police as Jack Waterhouse - was taken to King's Mill Hospital in the town but his condition deteriorated during the afternoon and he was transferred to a specialist unit at the Queen's Medical Centre in Nottingham.

Nottinghamshire County Council, the local education authority, said the boy's condition "slightly improved" overnight.

Mr Pearson said the teacher was being questioned about an alleged assault on two further pupils, a boy and a girl believed to be aged 14.

He said: "As you know, an ambulance was called at just after 11am yesterday morning. Subsequently, a 14-year-old boy was taken to hospital having sustained serious head injuries.

"A 49-year-old local man is in custody at the moment and it is appropriate to say he has also been arrested on suspicion of assaulting two further children at the time of the incident.

"He will be questioned about that in the next few hours."

Parents at the school gates on Thursday morning expressed shock. One father said: "It's a massive shock and very sad."

Claire Tonks, 23, was dropping her nephew at the school today. She said: "It's a good school and I can't believe it as it could have been my nephew."

The school is located in a rundown area of Mansfield and boarded-up houses line the street around it.

Senior teachers and police officers stood outside the gates ushering pupils in this morning.

Chris Holmes, 19, a former pupil at the school, said: "I'm shocked. He was an all right teacher and a decent guy."

He added: "He was not one of those guys where you would go 'Oh no, I've got him next'."

Tom Blythe, also 19 and a former pupil at the school, said: "I didn't think the pupils would give him stick. He was actually a decent bloke and got involved in school plays."

He described the teacher as "a bit of a legend".

"It must have been serious," he said.

Tony Egginton, the Mayor of Mansfield, sent his daughter to the school.

He said: "It's exceedingly sad that this happened. We don't know the full details but it does seem bizarre that this has happened.

"It's very concerning."

He added: "All Saints is a very reputable school and it has performed extremely well. For this to happen is a bitter blow to their reputation, and the headteacher and the rest of the team have a massive job to build back their name."

OpenMind · Post by **OpenMind** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 12:15 am

Peter Harvey has done an inexcusable thing here and I've no doubt he will lose his job and career as a result of this. But notice the comments made by former pupils.

There isn't a person alive who doesn't have a limit to what they can put up with. Children can be the most unforgiving tormentors.

I admit that I am being presumptuous here. Nothing has been said about what lead to this horrific crime.

Post by **spot** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 12:27 am

Impossible to guess really. It doesn't sound like a mere loss of career though, does it.

Victoria · Post by **Victoria** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 2:25 am

I must admit when I first heard this yesterday the first thing that popped into my mind was 'the poor sod finally lost it'..

Im not saying any child deserves this but I understand that kids esp teenagers can be the most awful tormenting creatures on earth.

I do think teacher are under valued and given rubbish support esp when it comes to difficult kids.

G#Gill · Post by **G#Gill** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 2:44 am

My brother used to be a maths. teacher at a Grantham school. There was an element of youngsters who were most disruptive. Teachers hands are tied, there is no 'ultimate deterrent' (cane) any more, and the youngsters mostly couldn't care less about so-called detention. Those pupils who would naturally any way stick fingers up at authority, the cane would have no deterrent, but most others would take note of 'the cane threat'. This has bred an 'up yours' and 'make me then' kind of attitude towards teachers from some of the pupils. In my brother's case, he would have to devise devious ways of 'accidentally' manufacturing physical pain to a disruptive pupil e.g. at the end of the lesson, he would time his walk to the door to coincide with the miscreant and an 'accidental' collision would take place and the miscreant would slam against the door jamb - ' Oh heck, I'm terribly sorry Smith (or Brown, or Jones), I overbalanced, are you alright?' The incident would appear accidental to any onlookers, but the 'victim' would know that it was contrived, and my brother would know that the 'victim' knew this, but nothing could be done about it. He always thought it a terrible shame that devious things like that had to be done, because there was no other way of dealing with certain pupils. My brother adopted these certain tactics when pupils were abusive towards him during a lesson. One day, my brother was writing something on the board and had his back to the class, one of the habitual 'toe-rags' picked up a chair and threw it hard at my brother. This knocked my brother out, and he was taken to hospital with concussion. The perpetrator was known. He was suspended. My brother told the head teacher that he would not return to the school until that boy had been expelled. However, the boy (youth) was not expelled. My brother took sick leave for some time thus avoiding a return to that school until his retirement was due and that particular youth had naturally left the school.

This sort of thing is now common-place in our schools, with abuse towards staff and often physical violence. Even the toughest teacher would find it difficult to cope with such constant behaviour, and the kids accept disruption in class as a norm. I hasten to add that there are schools where this sort of behaviour does not occur, but these are becoming fewer and fewer and this is why there is a lack of teaching staff coming out of the colleges. Potential teachers just don't want to risk the trauma and stress.

A young lady, who used to work part-time for me on our trip boat, got her teaching qualifications and started teaching in a city primary school (for under 10 year olds). She had been at this first school for 4 weeks when one of the boys in her class refused to do as she asked him. He swore and ranted at her, grabbed a glass bottle, smashed the bottom of it off and held the jagged remains to her throat ! This boy was 6 years old ffs. That happened about 15 years ago, and things have not got any better.

What I am trying to say here is that all human beings have a saturation point due to such abusive behaviour in schools. We all know how nasty youngsters can be these days - they know their rights etc. and because of that they know they can get away with all sorts of abuse - it doesn't bother them about detention, it doesn't bother them about extra work (they won't do it any way) after school.

It does not surprise me to hear that a teacher has totally 'lost it' under these circumstances. The stress level must be out of the roof.

Of course, I could be wrong about what lead up to this terrible incident, and the teacher's final breaking point. Yes I could be wrong, but I don't think I am. I believe that teacher has been systematically, over a period of time, been 'got at' by certain pupils, and something happened that day that was the 'last straw' and he just flipped. It is no excuse, I know, but it is understandable, he is a human being with human feelings and limits.

That teacher has lost his freedom, his job (which no doubt he mostly loved), quite likely lost any pension through his job, probably his home because I expect his family will have to move out of the area for their own protection etc. etc. That one failure to remain composed has cost that teacher dearly.

I dare say we will find out the truth of it all eventually.

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 4:12 am

Teacher questioned on suspicion of attempted murder - Telegraph

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 4:12 am

I do not believe that this teacher just 'lost it'. I know from my owm experiences with anti-social behaviour that went unchallenged by police for eight years, the misery you can endure before you finally reach that point where you have had enough.

Nobody knows at this stage weather the teacher was attacked first. Hopefully there will be some more details.

This government has systematically stripped schools of all rights to deal with problem children and youths. I just can not believe that anyone in his position just went berserk. There has to be a lot more to it.

chonsigirl · Post by **chonsigirl** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 4:16 am

Yes, it would be interesting to know what happened before the "assault."

I know from my personal experience, young teens do torment their teachers in a manner different then when we were students ourselves. I take TKD now, because I was asssaulted twice that year at school-and they students received no consequences. Very hard to walk the hallways with them still there, but they know to keep their distance. (the assaults-I attempted to stop the most violent fight I had ever witnessed-got hit numerous times, took 4 adult males to finally stop one 12 year old girl-consequence, 3 days suspension. The second one-a student threw a pretty big rock through the door, hit me in the face-consequence-a Saturday school was assigned, it was a holiday weekend, his mother came to the school and complained-he received no consequence)

From the article, I perceive the parents siding with the student first-probably because of the seriousness-but that is the trend nowdays. There is about a 50-50 positive response rate now, when contact is made with a parent about a problem at school. Imagine how you would feel, having a student who disrupts class on a daily basis, the adult in charge finally comes to school, then screams, cusses and yells at you for 20 minutes in front of your peers-everything from lawsuits threatened, what an easy shot you are when you leave the campus, your children will get the same fate as you will? And nothing happens to protect the teacher's safety! (and it always counts as a negative for the teacher, whether the problem is resolved or not?) That is how public schools here are.

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 4:24 am

G#Gill;1215334 wrote: One day, my brother was writing something on the board and had his back to the class, one of the habitual 'toe-rags' picked up a chair and threw it hard at my brother. This knocked my brother out, and he was taken to hospital with concussion. The perpetrator was known. He was suspended.

This sort of thing, IMO, ought to be subject to action in the courts - repercussions might not be severe, but they would be better than nothing.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 4:29 am

I agree Chonsi.

The favour is always in the kids court.

The teachers at the school next door to me were regually physycally attacked by kids and they could do nothing, not even physycally restrain them. When parents were called, all they did was make excuses for the little darling.

The head teacher was attacked by an extremely disruptive child and she could do noting to restrain him. He broke her arm, wrist and left her battered and off work for 16 weeks. Nothing happened to the kid....... Absolutely bloody disgracefull.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 4:53 am

G#Gill;1215334 wrote:

This sort of thing is now common-place in our schools, with abuse towards staff and often physical violence. Even the toughest teacher would find it difficult to cope with such constant behaviour, and the kids accept disruption in class as a norm. I hasten to add that there are schools where this sort of behaviour does not occur, but these are becoming fewer and fewer and this is why there is a lack of teaching staff coming out of the colleges. Potential teachers just don't want to risk the trauma and stress.

. When i had my 'Little incident' with the yobs in our village, i spoke at length to their head teacher. He said to me 'you think you have problems...... You should try my job. They spit in my face, they punch and kick, they scream obsentities, they threaten, they disrupt and we can do nothing'.

Kathy Ellen · Post by **Kathy Ellen** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 4:56 am

chonsigirl;1215353 wrote: Yes, it would be interesting to know what happened before the "assault."

I know from my personal experience, young teens do torment their teachers in a manner different then when we were students ourselves. I take TKD now, because I was asssaulted twice that year at school-and they students received no consequences. Very hard to walk the hallways with them still there, but they know to keep their distance. (the assaults-I attempted to stop the most violent fight I had ever witnessed-got hit numerous times, took 4 adult males to finally stop one 12 year old girl-consequence, 3 days suspension. The second one-a student threw a pretty big rock through the door, hit me in the face-consequence-a Saturday school was assigned, it was a holiday weekend, his mother came to the school and complained-he received no consequence)

From the article, I perceive the parents siding with the student first-probably because of the seriousness-but that is the trend nowdays. There is about a 50-50 positive response rate now, when contact is made with a parent about a problem at school. Imagine how you would feel, having a student who disrupts class on a daily basis, the adult in charge finally comes to school, then screams, cusses and yells at you for 20 minutes in front of your peers-everything from lawsuits threatened, what an easy shot you are when you leave the campus, your children will get the same fate as you will? And nothing happens to protect the teacher's safety! (and it always counts as a negative for the teacher, whether the problem is resolved or not?) That is how public schools here are.

Oh Chonsi,

I'm so sorry that you were attacked...that's so awful.

I once taught in an extremely dangerous school in an inner city. There were 2 guards per floor and one guard at the front door. They had to walk you to your car which was parked in a gated area.

Yes, my tough girls threw desks at the wall and cursed up a storm. One older child told me that he would throw me down the stairs if I spoke to him one more time for telling him not to horseplay as he was running down the stairs.

He did come looking for me, but I had left that job for another one....just in time.

chonsigirl · Post by **chonsigirl** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 5:27 am

That's scarey, Kathy. Different states deal with this according to their guidelines: when in CA one girl threatened my children, the girl was escorted off campus-in handcuffs by a police officer, straight to the police car. That ended her stay at that school.

But here, they might be suspended and still roam the halls a day or two later.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 5:35 am

chonsigirl;1215374 wrote:

But here, they might be suspended and still roam the halls a day or two later.

This is the part that annoys me.

As in the case of the head teacher in the school next door to me, she was left with a broken arm, wrist and battered by a young boy. Nothing happened to him but she was left off sick for weeks. These kids should be charged with assault. If a teacher can be charged with assault, then the same should apply. What made it worse in this case was that the boy was expelled but they were unable to tell other schools what he had done as it was a breach of his human rights.

No wonder kids in this country are growing up believing they can batter some-one with no consequences.

The boy in this case unfortunately lives near to me. He is a teenager now and the police are having serious problems with him........ what a surprise !!!

chonsigirl · Post by **chonsigirl** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 5:38 am

Yes, they live all around us!

Just shopping at Walmart yesterday, a former student's mom was the cashier. Oh boy, she told me her daughter would be there for 6th grade, she was going to ask for her to be in my class! Her son kind of behaved for me, since I teach science-and can exclude them from labs, a big incentive for kids. But he would just get up out of his seat without permission, go roaming in the halls, goof off who knows where. I hope his sister is not like that, but I will wait and see.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 5:41 am

chonsigirl;1215383 wrote: Yes, they live all around us!

Just shopping at Walmart yesterday, a former student's mom was the cashier. Oh boy, she told me her daughter would be there for 6th grade, she was going to ask for her to be in my class! Her son kind of behaved for me, since I teach science-and can exclude them from labs, a big incentive for kids. But he would just get up out of his seat without permission, go roaming in the halls, goof off who knows where. I hope his sister is not like that, but I will wait and see. I'd like to see schools in this country be put back in the hands of the teachers and goveners without this petty interference by our government and Whitehall.

OpenMind · Post by **OpenMind** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 6:18 am

oscar;1215385 wrote: I'd like to see schools in this country be put back in the hands of the teachers and goveners without this petty interference by our government and Whitehall.

No, I agree that children should have rights as individuals. However, they must be taught basic law and personal responsibility. If they persistently conduct themselves criminally, then they should be prosecuted and taught at a detention centre for children only being allowed home if they achieve certain standards of personal responsibility and show a genuine attempt to study.

In the UK, verbal abuse is against the law just as much as physical abuse is.

Bill Sykes's link points out that it is not just the teacher that will suffer the consequences of his actions but also his wife and children.

Post by **spot** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 6:43 am

OpenMind;1215403 wrote: No, I agree that children should have rights as individuals. However, they must be taught basic law and personal responsibility. If they persistently conduct themselves criminally, then they should be prosecuted and taught at a detention centre for children only being allowed home if they achieve certain standards of personal responsibility and show a genuine attempt to study.

Or we could cull them mercilessly the way the Romans did with their own children, that would work equally effectively.

When you're having a bad day you're indistinguishable from Willie Whitelaw.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 7:10 am

spot;1215415 wrote: Or we could cull them mercilessly the way the Romans did with their own children, that would work equally effectively.

When you're having a bad day you're indistinguishable from Willie Whitelaw. So what is the solution then Spot?

New Labour have systematically destroyed the rights of teachers to protect themselves over the past ten years. Are you suggesting that it is acceptable for a child to attack a member of staff with no conseqence for their actions yet if the teacher raises a hand in self defence, they are charged by the police?

If that is your attitude, no wonder yob culture in this country is spiralling out of control.

OpenMind · Post by **OpenMind** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 10:12 am

spot;1215415 wrote: Or we could cull them mercilessly the way the Romans did with their own children, that would work equally effectively.

When you're having a bad day you're indistinguishable from Willie Whitelaw.

I'm not sure that the Romans actually culled their children. I'm aware that they used to dispose of unwanted babies but one argument I have come across is that they were placed at specific points where other Romans could pick them up. Admittedly, if no one else wanted them, they would be left to die.

Post by **spot** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 12:57 pm

oscar;1215423 wrote: New Labour have systematically destroyed the rights of teachers to protect themselves over the past ten years. Are you suggesting that it is acceptable for a child to attack a member of staff with no conseqence for their actions yet if the teacher raises a hand in self defence, they are charged by the police?.The thing is I don't believe what you're saying. My daughter's a teacher and she says it's not even slightly true.

OpenMind;1215514 wrote: I'm not sure that the Romans actually culled their children. I'm aware that they used to dispose of unwanted babies but one argument I have come across is that they were placed at specific points where other Romans could pick them up. Admittedly, if no one else wanted them, they would be left to die.

Pater familias - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

and also this:Nothing is more remarkable in the Roman laws than the extent of paternal power. It was unjust, and bears the image of a barbarous age. Moreover, it seems to have been coeval with the foundation of the city. A father could chastise his children by stripes, by imprisonment, by exile, by sending them to the country with chains on their feet. He was even armed with the power of life and death. "Neither age nor rank, nor the consular office, could exempt the most illustrious citizen from the bonds of filial subjection. Without fear, though not without danger of abuse, the Roman legislators had reposed unbounded confidence in the sentiments of paternal love, and the oppression was tempered by the assurance that each generation must succeed in its turn to the awful dignity of parent and master." [Footnote: Gibbon, c. xliv.] By an express law of the Twelve Tables a father could sell his children as slaves. But the abuse of paternal power was checked in the republic by the censors, and afterwards by emperors. Alexander Severus limited the right of the father to simple correction, and Constantine declared the father who should kill his son to be guilty of murder.

The Old Roman World: The Failure and Grandeur of Its Civilization - : ROMAN JURISPRUDENCE.

Constantine didn't do that until after 300 AD, that's a thousand years of fathers exercising the right to kill their children before their coming of age if they felt they were unworthy to become citizens of Rome.

OpenMind · Post by **OpenMind** » Fri Jul 10, 2009 11:34 pm

spot;1215540 wrote:

Pater familias - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

and also this:

Nothing is more remarkable in the Roman laws than the extent of paternal power. It was unjust, and bears the image of a barbarous age. Moreover, it seems to have been coeval with the foundation of the city. A father could chastise his children by stripes, by imprisonment, by exile, by sending them to the country with chains on their feet. He was even armed with the power of life and death. "Neither age nor rank, nor the consular office, could exempt the most illustrious citizen from the bonds of filial subjection. Without fear, though not without danger of abuse, the Roman legislators had reposed unbounded confidence in the sentiments of paternal love, and the oppression was tempered by the assurance that each generation must succeed in its turn to the awful dignity of parent and master." [Footnote: Gibbon, c. xliv.] By an express law of the Twelve Tables a father could sell his children as slaves. But the abuse of paternal power was checked in the republic by the censors, and afterwards by emperors. Alexander Severus limited the right of the father to simple correction, and Constantine declared the father who should kill his son to be guilty of murder.

The Old Roman World: The Failure and Grandeur of Its Civilization - : ROMAN JURISPRUDENCE.

Constantine didn't do that until after 300 AD, that's a thousand years of fathers exercising the right to kill their children before their coming of age if they felt they were unworthy to become citizens of Rome.

As far as I can determine, apart from the statement taken Roman Jurisprudence (which I have highlighted in red), there is no indication that the Romans killed their children by an actual act of murder. In spite of the statement in Wikipedia, i.e. "If a child was deformed, under the laws of the Twelve Tables the pater familias was required to have the child put to death by exposure", which implies an actual act of murder of the child, as far as I can determine, the process only involved removing the child from the father's household and therefore his authority.

If I can find the forum where this is discussed by roman historians, I will link it to here.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sat Jul 11, 2009 7:12 am

spot;1215540 wrote: The thing is I don't believe what you're saying. My daughter's a teacher and she says it's not even slightly true.

.

Classroom violence | Education | guardian.co.uk

Thousands of violent children excluded from primary school - Times Online

If your daughter is a teacher and has never encountered any of this, then she is very lucky.

Post by **spot** » Sat Jul 11, 2009 7:24 am

oscar;1215722 wrote: Classroom violence | Education | guardian.co.uk

Thousands of violent children excluded from primary school - Times Online

If your daughter is a teacher and has never encountered any of this, then she is very lucky.

Those articles show the inaccuracy of the statements I was challenging -

New Labour have systematically destroyed the rights of teachers to protect themselves over the past ten yearsit is acceptable for a child to attack a member of staff with no conseqence for their actionsif the teacher raises a hand in self defence, they are charged by the policeNone of those are true.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sat Jul 11, 2009 7:27 am

spot;1215729 wrote: Those articles show the inaccuracy of the statements I was challenging -

New Labour have systematically destroyed the rights of teachers to protect themselves over the past ten yearsit is acceptable for a child to attack a member of staff with no conseqence for their actionsif the teacher raises a hand in self defence, they are charged by the police"None of those are true.
So prove they are not true with evidence.

Post by **spot** » Sat Jul 11, 2009 8:03 am

oscar;1215730 wrote: [QUOTE=spot;1215729]Those articles show the inaccuracy of the statements I was challenging -

New Labour have systematically destroyed the rights of teachers to protect themselves over the past ten yearsit is acceptable for a child to attack a member of staff with no conseqence for their actionsif the teacher raises a hand in self defence, they are charged by the policeNone of those are true.So prove they are not true with evidence.[/QUOTE]First oneIn 2008, one of the largest primary school studies ever conducted and based on classroom observation, concluded that standards of behaviour were higher than they had been for 20 years. It indicated a direct connection with the standards of teaching provided and commented on the very high level of pupil engagement with their work. (A Mass Observation Study of Student and Teacher Behaviour in British Primary Classrooms, Apter 2008.)

http://www.teachernet.gov.uk/_doc/13514 ... aviour.pdf

Second and third onesUse of force to control or restrain a pupil

Teachers and head teachers can use reasonable force to control or restrain a pupil if this proves necessary to stop a pupil committing a criminal offence (or for younger pupils what would be a criminal offence), causing injury or damage toproperty, or prejudicing good order and discipline – for example if a pupil refuses to leave a classroom when ordered to do so.

http://www.teachernet.gov.uk/_doc/13516 ... e%20DL.pdf

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sat Jul 11, 2009 8:28 am

spot;1215742 wrote: First oneIn 2008, one of the largest primary school studies ever conducted and based on classroom observation, concluded that standards of behaviour were higher than they had been for 20 years. It indicated a direct connection with the standards of teaching provided and commented on the very high level of pupil engagement with their work. (A Mass Observation Study of Student and Teacher Behaviour in British Primary Classrooms, Apter 2008.)

http://www.teachernet.gov.uk/_doc/13514 ... aviour.pdf

Second and third onesUse of force to control or restrain a pupil

Teachers and head teachers can use reasonable force to control or restrain a pupil if this proves necessary to stop a pupil committing a criminal offence (or for younger pupils what would be a criminal offence), causing injury or damage toproperty, or prejudicing good order and discipline â€“ for example if a pupil refuses to leave a classroom when ordered to do so.

http://www.teachernet.gov.uk/_doc/13516 ... e%20DL.pdf

I beg to differ again.

Teachers demand right to discipline disruptive pupils - Education News, Education - The Independent

Post by **spot** » Sat Jul 11, 2009 8:36 am

oscar;1215752 wrote: I beg to differ again.

Teachers demand right to discipline disruptive pupils - Education News, Education - The Independent

Just read it, oscar. It doesn't say the rights don't yet exist, it says the teaching union wants the rights making more explicit and less undefined so as to protect teachers from going into territory which might bring them into a courtroom.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sat Jul 11, 2009 8:43 am

spot;1215757 wrote: Just read it, oscar. It doesn't say the rights don't yet exist, it says the teaching union wants the rights making more explicit and less undefined so as to protect teachers from going into territory which might bring them into a courtroom. My sister in law is also a teacher. I know many teachers and have spoken at length with the head teacher from our local school. There is a general fear that should they have to restrain a violent child, an allegation of assault will be made. Due to this government, the police will always take that allegation seriously and very possibly arrest. It is not something they can do lightly.

Again, we can end up going around in circles.

Post by **spot** » Sat Jul 11, 2009 8:53 am

oscar;1215760 wrote: My sister in law is also a teacher. I know many teachers and have spoken at length with the head teacher from our local school. There is a general fear that should they have to restrain a violent child, an allegation of assault will be made. Due to this government, the police will always take that allegation seriously and very possibly arrest. It is not something they can do lightly.

Again, we can end up going around in circles.

I'm not quite sure what we can do about that - you keep spouting opinion and I keep producing facts, you'd think the one would have more effect than the other but apparently not.

Here's the existing legislation, if that helps at all.

Education Act 1997 (1997 c 44) 550A Power of members of staff to restrain pupils(1) A member of the staff of a school may use, in relation to any pupil at the school, such force as is reasonable in the circumstances for the purpose of preventing the pupil from doing (or continuing to do) any of the following, namely—(a) committing any offence,

(b) causing personal injury to, or damage to the property of, any person (including the pupil himself), or

(c) engaging in any behaviour prejudicial to the maintenance of good order and discipline at the school or among any of its pupils, whether that behaviour occurs during a teaching session or otherwise.(2) Subsection (1) applies where a member of the staff of a school is—(a) on the premises of the school, or

(b) elsewhere at a time when, as a member of its staff, he has lawful control or charge of the pupil concerned;but it does not authorise anything to be done in relation to a pupil which constitutes the giving of corporal punishment within the meaning of section 548.

(3) Subsection (1) shall not be taken to prevent any person from relying on any defence available to him otherwise than by virtue of this section.

(4) In this section—“member of the staff”, in relation to a school, means any teacher who works at the school and any other person who, with the authority of the head teacher, has lawful control or charge of pupils at the school;

“offence” includes anything that would be an offence but for the operation of any presumption that a person under a particular age is incapable of committing an offence.”

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sat Jul 11, 2009 9:17 am

spot;1215763 wrote: I'm not quite sure what we can do about that - you keep spouting opinion and I keep producing facts, you'd think the one would have more effect than the other but apparently not.

Here's the existing legislation, if that helps at all.

Education Act 1997 (1997 c 44) 550A Power of members of staff to restrain pupils(1) A member of the staff of a school may use, in relation to any pupil at the school, such force as is reasonable in the circumstances for the purpose of preventing the pupil from doing (or continuing to do) any of the following, namelyâ€”(a) committing any offence,

(b) causing personal injury to, or damage to the property of, any person (including the pupil himself), or

(c) engaging in any behaviour prejudicial to the maintenance of good order and discipline at the school or among any of its pupils, whether that behaviour occurs during a teaching session or otherwise.(2) Subsection (1) applies where a member of the staff of a school isâ€”(a) on the premises of the school, or

(b) elsewhere at a time when, as a member of its staff, he has lawful control or charge of the pupil concerned;but it does not authorise anything to be done in relation to a pupil which constitutes the giving of corporal punishment within the meaning of section 548.

(3) Subsection (1) shall not be taken to prevent any person from relying on any defence available to him otherwise than by virtue of this section.

(4) In this sectionâ€”â€œmember of the staffâ€, in relation to a school, means any teacher who works at the school and any other person who, with the authority of the head teacher, has lawful control or charge of pupils at the school;

â€œoffenceâ€ includes anything that would be an offence but for the operation of any presumption that a person under a particular age is incapable of committing an offence.â€ I am not disputing your facts that you have linked. What i dispute is that should the child make an allegation of assault against the teacher, the police are duty bound to investigate. Police procedure is to arrest first and question later. No teacher wants to be put in that position so even if law is there that a teacher can restrain a violent child, the fact is they are still open to assault allegations which the police will investigate. Most teachers just won't take the risk of being accussed in the first place.

Post by **spot** » Sat Jul 11, 2009 9:24 am

oscar;1215767 wrote: Police procedure is to arrest first and question later. That's absolute unadulterated bullshit. If there were a bullshit medal available you'd get at least two extra bars to your existing ones.

Public perception in this area can be compared with the total drivel spouted by incompetent jobsworths who say Oh I can't do that because of the Data Protection Act. It messes up any discussion of reality but it simply can't be avoided, people believe what they want to believe.

Barman · Post by **Barman** » Sat Jul 11, 2009 9:32 am

spot;1215771 wrote: That's absolute unadulterated bullshit. If there were a bullshit medal available you'd get at least two extra bars to your existing ones.

Public perception in this area can be compared with the total drivel spouted by incompetent jobsworths who say Oh I can't do that because of the Data Protection Act. It messes up any discussion of reality but it simply can't be avoided, people believe what they want to believe.

My daughter is a Deputy Head at a comprehensive school, at 26 years old quite an achievement.

You are correct in everything you say spot, good man.

Post by **spot** » Sat Jul 11, 2009 9:42 am

Barman;1215774 wrote: My daughter is a Deputy Head at a comprehensive school, at 26 years old quite an achievement.

You are correct in everything you say spot, good man.

What a wonderful chap, I always said you were. I can see where she got her obvious intelligence.

Barman · Post by **Barman** » Sat Jul 11, 2009 9:50 am

spot;1215776 wrote: What a wonderful chap, I always said you were. I can see where she got her obvious intelligence.

Yup, her Mum.:yh_rotfl Thanks anyhow mate.

flopstock · Post by **flopstock** » Sat Jul 11, 2009 10:32 am

We need to go back to spanking kids.. not beating them, spanking them as a consequence to repeated misbehavior.

OpenMind · Post by **OpenMind** » Sat Jul 11, 2009 10:51 am

flopstock;1215785 wrote: We need to go back to spanking kids.. not beating them, spanking them as a consequence to repeated misbehavior.

As far as I know, we still have the right to spank our kids in the UK as long as it is applied responsibly. I discovered this when checking out family law recently.

Post by **Betty Boop** » Sat Jul 11, 2009 11:44 am

flopstock;1215785 wrote: We need to go back to spanking kids.. not beating them, spanking them as a consequence to repeated misbehavior.

Spanking/Slapping/smacking is counter productive in my eyes. I slapped my children when they were younger, what I ended up with were two children that were happy to slap me back any time they were angry with me. By smacking, slapping or spanking your child you are teaching them that it's ok to hit others. IT'S NOT!

OpenMind · Post by **OpenMind** » Sat Jul 11, 2009 4:04 pm

Betty Boop;1215806 wrote: Spanking/Slapping/smacking is counter productive in my eyes. I slapped my children when they were younger, what I ended up with were two children that were happy to slap me back any time they were angry with me. By smacking, slapping or spanking your child you are teaching them that it's ok to hit others. IT'S NOT!

In spite of my early childhood circumstances, I was raised with spanking as an option if I misbehaved. My brothers and sisters were treated the same. My Mum taught me that there is a right and wrong way of spanking children. However, spanking has to be a part of an overall discipline scheme. If you do not show your children that you are the boss, then no amount of spanking will ever be effective. Ultimately, it didn't work with me but then they didn't know what I'd been through before they took me on and I was unable to tell them. On the other hand, there was no way I'd ever hit her back. There are also places where you smack a child which have the most effect and do the least damage.

Barman · Post by **Barman** » Sat Jul 11, 2009 4:19 pm

Its probably been said before but here we go. You do not need to hit kids, end of story.

OpenMind · Post by **OpenMind** » Sat Jul 11, 2009 4:24 pm

Barman;1215899 wrote: Its probably been said before but here we go. You do not need to hit kids, end of story.

In general, I would agree with you but perhaps you would care to qualify your statement.

Barman · Post by **Barman** » Sat Jul 11, 2009 4:26 pm

OpenMind;1215902 wrote: In general, I would agree with you but perhaps you would care to qualify your statement.

Simple, which part of you do not hit kids do you not understand?

OpenMind · Post by **OpenMind** » Sat Jul 11, 2009 4:32 pm

Barman;1215905 wrote: Simple, which part of you do not hit kids do you not understand?

By hitting, do you mean an uppercut to the jaw?

Barman · Post by **Barman** » Sat Jul 11, 2009 4:33 pm

OpenMind;1215908 wrote: By hitting, do you mean an uppercut to the jaw?

:yh_rotfl:yh_rotflThat one got me.

Barman · Post by **Barman** » Sat Jul 11, 2009 4:34 pm

OpenMind;1215908 wrote: By hitting, do you mean an uppercut to the jaw?

I mean not at all. I have very good reason for saying so.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sat Jul 11, 2009 5:04 pm

spot;1215771 wrote: That's absolute unadulterated bullshit. If there were a bullshit medal available you'd get at least two extra bars to your existing ones.

.
You can link all the facts and cut and paste to your hearts desire. I do not believe for one moment that you have the upper hand on life experience over anyone else. It is actually quite insulting the way you seem to think you know everything there is to know about everything.

OpenMind · Post by **OpenMind** » Sat Jul 11, 2009 5:20 pm

Barman;1215911 wrote: I mean not at all. I have very good reason for saying so.

My dad once gave me an uppercut simply because I complained when he told me to stop playing my music. I was 16 and it was the afternoon.

I consider it a subjective topic. Very little is really known about it. Children are very varied and react to corporal punishment in different ways. For some, it is effective. For others, it is counter-effective. Then there are those who consider it a qualification to their hardness.

Smacking effects young children more than it does older children. Where you smack them also makes a difference. It is clear that corporal punishment has been viewed critically for the best part of the last century. In my late teens, I was discussing the subject with my mother and one of the things she told me was that smacking the legs doesnâ€™t look as bad as smacking the rump and the sting on the legs is sharper than on the rump and therefore more effective. If youâ€™re shocked by this, just remember that smacking has been utilised for centuries.

On the other hand, indiscriminate smacking is completely ineffective as the children just become hardened to it.

OpenMind · Post by **OpenMind** » Sat Jul 11, 2009 5:36 pm

spot;1215415 wrote: Or we could cull them mercilessly the way the Romans did with their own children, that would work equally effectively.

When you're having a bad day you're indistinguishable from Willie Whitelaw.

This is an interesting paper on the subject. In my mind, this shows that we have no hard and fast understanding of how unwanted children were actually treated by Romans but evidence of a range of treatments and attitudes.

http://www.wou.edu/las/socsci/history/t ... Thesis.pdf

flopstock · Post by **flopstock** » Sat Jul 11, 2009 5:41 pm

Betty Boop;1215806 wrote: Spanking/Slapping/smacking is counter productive in my eyes. I slapped my children when they were younger, what I ended up with were two children that were happy to slap me back any time they were angry with me. By smacking, slapping or spanking your child you are teaching them that it's ok to hit others. IT'S NOT!

The only slap my kids ever got was to a hand if they reached for something dangerous. My kids got spankings if they reached past the point where they had been told that if they didn't listen, they were being spanked. Also, if they were told that the next time they did something, they would be spanked. The consequence fit the crime and escalated if ignored. By time they were in school they knew what was tolerated and what wasn't.

But my kids didn't have tantrums in the store after the first one. I stopped what I was doing and spanked their ass rather then try and cajole them with a treat or hugs. Happens once and they all learn the lesson. mom means it.

My kids knew, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that if I got called from school, they'd have some explaining to do. and they knew that the harshest sentence was not for what you did, but for lying about it.

I didn't have many of the normal family rules with my kids. Respect each other and absolutely anyone in charge of you at the moment, no stealing from family or non family and no tortmenting each other for entertainment purposes.. and whatever else you may have done, don't ever make the mistake of compounding it by trying to BS mom. Probably a handful at most per kid. But they then knew, that if I said it, I meant it.

OpenMind · Post by **OpenMind** » Sat Jul 11, 2009 5:59 pm

flopstock;1215935 wrote: The only slap my kids ever got was to a hand if they reached for something dangerous. My kids got spankings if they reached past the point where they had been told that if they didn't listen, they were being spanked. Also, if they were told that the next time they did something, they would be spanked. The consequence fit the crime and escalated if ignored. By time they were in school they knew what was tolerated and what wasn't.

But my kids didn't have tantrums in the store after the first one. I stopped what I was doing and spanked their ass rather then try and cajole them with a treat or hugs. Happens once and they all learn the lesson. mom means it.

My kids knew, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that if I got called from school, they'd have some explaining to do. and they knew that the harshest sentence was not for what you did, but for lying about it.

I didn't have many of the normal family rules with my kids. Respect each other and absolutely anyone in charge of you at the moment, no stealing from family or non family and no tortmenting each other for entertainment purposes.. and whatever else you may have done, don't ever make the mistake of compounding it by trying to BS mom. Probably a handful at most per kid. But they then knew, that if I said it, I meant it.

This sounds just like my Mum.:-4:-4