Husband touched a kid to reprimand them on school trip

PS I’m not saying it’s abuse or that anything extreme should or will happen

I’m just saying it wasn’t appropriate and someone at the school should have a word. Which it sounds like is what’s going to happen.

Admittedly this school principal is in America, but someone needs to report him
High fiving principal

Who on earth was the training provider? What is this "national training that covers all schools in england" and who delivers it?

KCSIE 2025 defines physical abuse as "the intentional use of force that causes a child to suffer injury or trauma. This can include a range of actions, such as hitting, pinching, slapping, shaking, throwing, burning, poisoning, drowning, or suffocating a child. "
It is categorically untrue that anyone who touches a child for any reason is automatically guilty of abuse. Whoever delivered your safeguarding, if they honestly told you that, then they are not fit for purpose and it is very concerning.

No, I do not work directly with young people. I do however liaise with social services and child and adolescent mental health services. I am a consultant psychiatrist in the NHS and know about issues pertaining to mental health. Though I am always learning and guidelines are always changing.

I don’t pretend to be an expert in school safeguarding. I have however spent some time looking online at government guidelines, and cannot find the blanket national ban on touching children of which you speak so confidently. Perhaps it’s time for you to link to the national guidance.

Sometimes I think people on here hate children! Or just little girls perhaps?

No child needs a man sat behind them tapping them on the head.

Every single reception teacher would be fired then

You can't have a grey area in a school. You will be fired! There is no grey area!

I cant believe some people on here

Do you work with young people?

What is your training and expertise?

What a ‘me, me, me’, ridiculous overreaction!

You are a classic example of someone who has had a bit of knowledge and training and is acting like an expert. Generally some humility is useful. I find that the more experienced and educated people are, the more they will admit to doubt and grey areas.

You've forgotten about his passport. Confiscate it! Why should a criminal like this be allowed out of the country?

They may do if they're sitting behind the child in a vehicle and don't know their name by virtue that they're not the child's teacher or TA. In fact, I can picture it happening in that way in these circumstances. Which the op appears to have clarified was the case.

I have tried to research hugging in schools. There has never been any blanket England ban it seems. That poster is incorrectly extrapolating her school’s rules (if true) to the whole country.

Looks like there is some more guidance coming up about reasonable force and contact.

schoolsweek.co.uk/reasonable-force-reporting-requirement-what-schools-need-to-know/

Examples of where contact is “generally” appropriate include giving first aid, guiding or escorting pupils, comforting those in distress, praising them with a pat on the back or a handshake, demonstrating the use of musical instruments or exercises during PE.

It IS abuse.

Touching a child is abuse. And you are naiive to think it isnt

The training that i received is not school specific. I was sent on national training that covers schools in all of England

Thank GOD you said what we were all thinking!

😂😂😂

Bit late though!

There may be a no touch policy at their individual schools, but there is no such thing as a national statutory guideline stating that school staff must not make any physical contact with children.

I work with EYFS and primary age children and such a blanket policy would be completely unworkable in our settings. We have children who need assistance with all aspects of their personal care, children who need to be taken by the hand when moving around school or they will run off, not to mention children who constantly need help with buttons, zips, shoes, tying hair back etc. We also have children who become so emotionally dysregulated due to their additional needs that sometimes, as a last resort we have to use Team Teach 'postive handling' techniques in order to keep them safe. Safety considerations aside, our staff will absolutely accept a hug or a high 5 from a child who initiates it, as long as there is someone else in the room at the time. This is not even remotely unusual in early years and primary settings, and it does not contravene any guidance I have ever seen either from our LA or nationally.

What is not acceptable is any form of physical chastisement (physical contact used to reprimand the child or correct behaviour) even if it is just a "tap".

Yes I do but our schools didn’t allow holidays outside of term time and I see ( after checking) it is not generally accepted unless in exceptional circumstances.

I do see however that as schools are struggling to retain staff some can now do this.

Finance staff at our schools were the exception as they worked through the summer, for example

I'm sure he'll be totally heartbroken

I already wrote what my three colleagues were sacked for
Go and read the thread

Granted, others mentioned prosecution, but you did explicitly state "why else would the head call him in if it wasn't abuse". But it's not abuse, not even remotely close. It's not even a grey area. It wasn't necessarily a good idea, or perhaps even necessary, but to call it abuse is frankly, utterly Batshit.

I know you work in a school, and have done your course, as you've told us, but it's laughable that you think you can detect who hasn't had safeguarding training based on who agrees or disagrees with you. I can guarantee I have had more safeguarding training and direct experience with genuine abuse and safeguarding cases than you have, and I still think you're wrong.

And all your comments about being fired if you were to hug a distressed child are either hyperbole or reflective of a school/DSL writing policies to cover their own back rather than prioritising child safety. The primary aim of safeguarding is to protect children from harm, including psychological and emotional harm. Denying a distressed reception/KS1 child from a reassuring arm around the shoulder/side hug if that is their preference is going to do them far more harm than a measured, considered approach to physical contact, and such policy would only be written in such a way if the schools priority was protecting themselves. It's perfectly possible to write a "safe touch" policy, and indeed most schools I have come across have done so. Obviously physical comfort becomes less as they get older, as part of school education is learning what is and isn't appropriate in professional settings as they prepare to enter the working world, but to suggest once they cross the threshold from nursery into school, or reach compulsory school age that it's automatically unacceptable to touch them discredits any legitimate points you may have raised, tbh 🤷🏼‍♀️

Your husband physically reprimanded someone else's child whilst he was meant to be chaperoning his son.
You say your son needs to be chaperoned for physical reasons, but you don't explain what these are. Does your son have behavioural issues?

With your son's chaperone being asleep, how can he believe that your son wasn't antagonising the girl in front?
A child bouncing their chair does not warrant a telling off. Your husband sounds like he has a short temper. His reaction suggests he is used to physically reprimanding children, regardless of you saying he doesn't hit your kids.
The school can only do so much. They will act on behalf of the school and not allow your husband to chaperone again. The parents on Tue other hand may wish to take the matter further. The ball is completely in their court.

If I was the girls parent, I would be furious. I would be expecting a personal apology, and I would be paying close attention to the children's friendship for any subsequent behaviour issues that may arise between them, as a result of this.

What an idiot he was. I feel for you OP.

Yes, it is, in most circumstances. However, a child in my son's secondary school wasn't allowed to go on a school trip, unless either his Mum or Dad went too. I also had to attend school trips with my ex's son, because he had a bowel condition. It depends on why the Dad needed to chaperone his son, and if there's a reason why a TA wasn't suitable.

Apologies, yes! 😳

Maybe because the “behaviour” was minor or at the very least quiet so only those immediately around the child were aware? A teacher did speak to the OPs DH about it though, when they got off the bus.