Police arrest parents who slate school on class WhatsApp

[noblegiraffe]

A primary school sought advice from the police after '“a high volume of direct correspondence and public social media posts” that had become upsetting for staff, parents and governors.' and the police response was to send 6 officers to their house to arrest the couple making the posts and put them in a cell all day.

Although the couple sound like an absolute pain in the arse who should pack it in, 6 police officers seems like a teensy bit of overkill, particularly with the amount of crime currently going uninvestigated. But with schools faced with spiralling numbers of vexatious parental complaints, something needs to happen. I think some unions are starting to offer legal advice and template solicitor letters for this situation.

https://www.thetimes.com/article/d8c8566b-99b1-45c6-814b-008042d74a3a?shareToken=6deab807d148cf7695ed4d9d3664c51e

I think that the problem here and generally is that there is an element of subjectivity about what is and isn't unreasonable. Also a lack of clarity/guidance/legal requirement around banning parents. I can see that if a parent is violent or the teachers feel at physical risk, then a case could be made for banning... but in that situation there must surely be special provisions put in place to ensure that the child isn't negatively affected and to have a plan for the future? It isn't reasonable for a child to be "collateral damage" (as a poster said upthread) to save the teachers' feelings is it? And in this case, there was no threat or fear of violence or damage, and so was it reasonable to ban?

Is there any guidance/legal requirements around banning parents from schools incidentally?

@hameth is your job related to policy making, just out of curiosity?

Sorry wrong post answer!

This circular reasoning is quite amusing.

Posters have explained in detail why banning the parents from the site and refusing to communicate with them other than by email was a breach of various laws and statutes.

The police have confirmed that the parents committed no crime and therefore this behaviour from the school seems to be totally unreasonable and disproportionate as well as illegal.

You are then trying to argue that the fact that the school took this unreasonable, disproportionate and illegal action constitutes evidence that it was in fact reasonable and proportionate to do so (ignoring the reasons that have been explained several times now why this was also illegal, but we’ll leave that aside for a moment) because the school wouldn’t have done so unless it was reasonable and proportionate to do so.

Do you not see any issue at all with your logic here? 🤦🏻‍♀️😆

If such reasoning had any logical validity then by definition any action a school might decide to take would always be reasonable and proportionate because a school would never do something for no reason and a school decided to do it so it must be reasonable and proportionate by definition, in @Hercisback1 world.

The glaring flaw in your reasoning, lit up in bright neon lights, is the underlying and unquestioned assumption you appear to hold that schools always behave in a reasonable and proportionate manner.

It is self-evident that one cannot, while holding such an assumption (which copious evidence in many cases, not just this one, disproves and refutes), reason in any logical or rational way to determine whether a school has or has not behaved reasonably in a particular situation. Hence your seemingly unshakeable belief that whatever a school has done by definition must be justified and correct.

The lack of rationality is quite mind-boggling.

This is similar to arguing with the zero exclusions people. They're convinced every exclusion is illegal and little Freddie didn't deserve it because his needs weren't being met.

It is highly unlikely that parents were banned from the site for a minor reason. My experience in multiple schools is that parents should be banned for their behaviour, long before they are.

I don't like your continued focus on the person, not the discussion. Happy to discuss any points, but I don't feel I need to justify myself personally to a total stranger. I'm happy with my knowledge base and perspective on this, thank you..

Schools really don't do things for no reason. We work hard enough as it is. Why would we make extra effort for no reason?

You seem to come from the other extreme that schools are always doing unreasonable things, and best fire all those teachers ASAP.

(newsflash, they're already walking due to people like you).

That was my first response, but you should listen to the husband giving his side of the story on Andrew Gold's Heretics podcast/YouTube. It was overkill.

If an exclusion is unlawful (and no, not all are before you accuse me of saying that) there is no excuse for it despite what some try to excuse. That is not to say schools can never suspend or permanently exclude, but if a suspension or permanent exclusion is required, schools must follow the correct process.

What evidence?

I mean actual evidence rather than an extrapolation of evidence based on the school’s actions?

You are taking the fact they were banned from the premises as evidence that they should have been banned from the premises.

Countless examples have been given of the unreasonable behaviour, all of which are totally unreasonable, that some people have experienced at the hands of abusive parents. All of them have been worse than what has been described on countless news outlets.

Do you accept that it might be a possibility that this has resulted from someone at the school taking an unreasonable stance on what the parents wrote then doubling down and banning them form the premises?

The police involvement may have come from an overly sensitive reaction to parental griping. From what has been said, the detectives hadn’t reviewed the evidence so the arrests would have been done to further their investigation. Sounds like when they did look at the emails/whatsapps they decided they didn’t meet the legal standard of criminal activity.

So someone at school thinks they’ve got a pair of really abusive, horrible parents. Bans them from the premises. Decides to involve the police. Tells them they’ve got malicious communications etc from parents. Police assume that because a complaint has been made it must be true, cracks on with the process. Arrests the parents to further their investigation. Detectives actually read the emails etc and decide there’s nothing there. Decides no further action is necessary. And the advice they sought from the police? How did it end up becoming an investigation rather than an informal chat?

I absolutely condemn abusive behaviour and know exactly what teachers have to put up with, but I have seen nothing to suggest these particulars parents were abusive and that police involvement was required.

Are there any shows he HASN'T given 'his side of the story' on?

Well, I don't watch television, but I listen to the radio & podcasts, so this is the only place I've seen it. It sounds like the school was trying to wangle an important appointment (a new HT) and didn't like being questioned about that.

The couple in question are not the types of parents who complain about every little thing - it's a very different sort of case, it seems.

Exactly.

I'm sure there were times in the process where the parents acted in ways that were annoying, maybe even unkind and thoughtless.

Does that require arrest and times in prison cells no.

I am also sure that there were times in this situation where the school and it's staff were annoying, unkind and thoughtless.

In almost every situation in life (of course there are exceptions where one party is awful to another with no reason) but most cases both parties are at fault to some degree.

Just because they are teachers and work for a school doesn't mean there are not times when they are unreasonable, uncaring and thoughtless. If this were so they would not be human and their school would be a haven where everyone was happy all the time.

They deputy head at my son's school is generally great, one day after school she called me into the classroom gave me a dressing down about my son's behaviour, about an incident she hadn't been present for.

The next day he class teacher who had actually been there at the time explained the situation fully and said she totally understood why what had happened, happened and didn't think my son was to blame at all.

Do I think the deputy head is awful, not in the slightest, I think she was maybe tired or stressed, had had a rubbish day. I don't hold it against her. I'm sure there are days when I am.not fun to be around because I didn't sleep, work was awful. No-one is immune from being unreasonable, not even school teachers who are overworked!

But if you treat parents with such bias (ie none of them have legitimate concerns and they’re all abusive because the school says so) then it’s no wonder they get frustrated with schools!

I, for one, think that there should be more exclusions and tougher sanctions for abusive parents but what happened to critical evaluation of a situation rather than assuming someone is guilty because they’ve been accused (like the poster who said one or both of the parents must have been convicted of violent crime so were known to the police hence the 6 coppers 🙄)?

I apologise, I had already critiqued your posts as you requested, I was then curious about what your job might be based on how you had described it. As I said, there are a lot of non teachers and seemingly non parents on these threads who appear very invested in the issues notwithstanding, and it does sometimes seem curious. I didn't mean to cause offence however, and i will refrain from asking you any more questions. I apologise if my critique caused offence.

“It sounds like the school was trying to wangle an important appointment (a new HT) and didn't like being questioned about that.”

You would not believe how much truth there is in this. ALL primary schools do it. (Yes I’m a primary teacher) and they detest being questioned on anything at all.

To be fair, in relation to exclusions, Freddie's needs were almost certainly not being met - but at the same time it isn't reasonable for other children to be in the same class as Freddie if Freddie keeps thumping them. Both points of view are valid. It isn't an either/or. It isn't a case of all schools or parents being good or bad. But also to be fair there are schools which manage Freddies very well and some Freddies change their stripes and their behaviour improves and they stop thumping people. And I think that this comes about when people are willing to hear other points of view and to consider relevant research about this sort of thing and there is a willingness to act together. More communication and respect not less is the way to go?

Does anyone have screenshots of any of the WhatsApp messages so we can see what it was actually all about?

Very well said!

Neither Ros or Maxie have any criminal record. People in all sorts of walks of life are criticised by the users of their services. If you can’t tolerate being criticised such that you think people should be arrested for it, there is something very wrong with you.

All the evidence shows the school have acted abominably in this case. Yet so many on this thread refuse to believe it and continue to attack the parents. Nuts

The school clearly have put the safety of the child at school at risk and there is no evidence of any crime. You might want to assume the parents are at fault but you have no basis for that other than bias.

But even if they were, it doesn't mean they did anything wrong here.
And they didn't.

This. I would never blindly defend misconduct from someone in my profession just because we shared a profession.

When a teacher looks you straight in the face and tells you your 8year old ds should have done his homework. 8 year old ds couldn’t read and was set a 10 question comprehension exercise along with the rest of the class.
They told me that they kept him in at every break time to do the homework and he just stared at it and didn’t write a thing. And not being able to read was not an acceptable excuse as this was the national curriculum and everyone has to do it.

At that point I asked how would they fare if they were given a 10 question comprehension exercise in Mandarin. Would they be able to do it and if not why were they expecting DS to do something he couldn’t do

It’s this type of teacher that gives teaching a bad name