To think the headteacher is wrong

[LizardVisard]

Long time lurker... DD1 is 12, in year 7 and is quiet, hard-working and has a tight group of friends, mostly girls. She was recently hauled into the headteacher's office, along with two boys, about bullying a boy in her class. The boy in question has no SEN but she says his parents recently divorced and no-one really likes him. She swears she hasn't said anything mean to him, no verbal or physical bullying at all, and the headteacher confirmed the boy hadn't accused her of that (though he did accuse the others) - but he is lonely and wants to be friends with her. She's told me (through her tears) that he stares at her in lessons and she finds him "creepy" and quite intimidating. The headteacher has told her she has to make an effort to include him at breaktimes. She is torn between wanting to do as the teacher has said, and really not liking the boy. She spends her lunchtimes with her girly friends who categorically don't want to have this boy join them. AIBU to think WTAF? Surely at 12 children can make their own decisions about who to be friends with?

Soapbox I quite agree that staring at someone and making them feel uncomfortable is bullying behaviour. However, I don't agree with your workplace analogy. From my understanding of the thread, a better analogy would be a group of colleagues from your office go out for lunch and don't invite you. It doesn't feel nice, but they are not obliged to take you with them, just to be nice.

soapbox I'm saying the head should have called in the girl separately from the two bullies.

As head, he ought to be aware that most kids this age socialise same-sex. He should have tried to chat with her a bit and see if she was comfortable befriending this boy.

As head, he should be aware of the self-harming and other disturbed behaviour. This is more than a shy kid who got off on the wrong foot and needs a quick boost to help make friends.

The fact that he talked to the bullies and this girl together, strikes me as perfunctory, rather than a real attempt to help.

bumblebee going out to lunch would be entirely social. Just as meeting up after school would be social. In work out school is different. If a child sits down to lunch and the other children at the table fall silent, get up and leave en mass or begin talking about the child and this happens repeatedly it is bullying.

Civility and manners cost nothing.

I have understood from the thread that OP's DH does not want to socialise with this child outside of the classroom, i.e. in the playground, at lunch. I haven't read anything about silence falling at the table, leaving en mass around him, but maybe I missed it.

It would be lovely for each child to notice their fellow pupil's loneliness and upset, and to each spend time with him and make an effort to include him, but merely by not seeking out his company they are not bullying him. It is not fair to put the responsibility for this child's happiness on the OP's daughters shoulders, potentially putting her in an emotional situation in which she feels out of depth.

ljny why should the head know something if he hasn't been told? Even if he is aware that this boy is self harming, does that mean he should be kept away from all other children?

Plenty of children have friends of both sexes and quite honestly it would be ludicrous for the head to demand that the boy changed his preference of friend to a male because it just can't be right that he chose a girl.

The OP said that her Dd went along with the head's suggestion because he is in a position of authority. Therefore it is unlikely she would have challenged his decision even if he asked if it was okay. I know I would have just agreed and then talked to my mum about it when I got home.

once the head has all of the facts the plan will change.

bumblebee you asked how exclusion was bullying. I was not suggesting the the op's daughter had been bullying this child or that she needed to be his best friend.

Being asked to be a friendly face for someone else does not mean being joined at the hip. usually it means acknowledging someone's existence occasionally.

In this instance it is not a good plan since the op's Dd has issues with him which could be damaging to her. However, there is nothing to suggest that the head knew this when he asked her to help out.

I didn't ask how exclusion was bullying. I said not playing with someone is not exclusion.

That poor boy needs CAMHS intervention not the help of a 12 year old schoolgirl.

bumblebee it is if everyone is doing it. I can't imagine you would just tell your child to take it on the chin if they stood by themselves all day everyday because the rest of the children were pretending they didn't exist.

Would you accept the school telling you that they can't force children to play with your child so they have to be by themselves always?

Riiight, so because I say it's not bullying to not want to play with someone, you think I have no problem with this situation? I just don't think it's helpful to say, right, the children aren't playing with him - they are bullies. It is quite possible the child is being bullied though -we all know people can be nasty. A good head will deal with the situation but they can make children want to socialise with him.

As a foster carer I have dealt with this situation. And I have dealt with bullying - both need dealing with.

The ops DD is nice to him though. The boy himself said it, she's nice to him when she sits next to him in maths. That doesn't mean she should be responsible for his well being the rest of the time.

One person, or group not particularly getting on with another person or group is natural. I'm not suggesting some sort of whole year group love in. However, children excluded by pretty much everyone is bullying. Individually, the children are not actively bullying, they have not made a decision to upset the excluded child but the result is the same.

The fastest way to deal with this is to get another child to take them under their wing, which will boost their confidence and allow them to make their own friends naturally. It is a stepping stone not a permanent arrangement. This is what the head has attempted to do.

However in this instance it is not appropriate due to issues between the op's daughter and the boy in question. Of which the head seems to be unaware.

Lizard - that all sounds awful. While I'm sure you feel for the boy, you really do need to advocate for your DD as the situation is putting her at risk of bullying or other unpleasant experiences herself. Being pleasant to him in Maths is a valuable contribution to the socialisation of the other child, and it is your DD doing her part in what has to be a whole community response to him, though if it is getting too much for her you should explain that she has done her turn and it is someone else's turn now.

The fastest way to deal with it would be to give the boy help on the several levels on which it's needed. You may well get a very nice, sweet pupil to take him under their wing, but with a child with so much on their mental 'plate', that could well end up with them feeling responsible for them. Irresponsible.

is this a secondary school? why does the headteacher have time for this? what happened to the rest of the leadership team, or the head of year?
your daughter should avoid any creepy person, male or female. there is no need to befriend them, or to question why they 'creep her out'. instincts are for self-protection, so listen to them.

you are assuming that the head is aware of the self harming and his behaviour towards the OP's dd.

I don't think he is. I entirely agree that this boy sounds like he needs an awful lot of help. Certainly more than one kindly, school appointed friend can manage. We just have to hope that once the OP talks to the head and he has a fuller picture, something more robust will be put into place.

I think it's very clear the head is not aware. He needs to be told and then contact the relevant bodies to get him some help.

My previous suggestions which was about checking there was no nastiness in the whole situation is wrong, because, on further probing, the situation is more disturbing than your dd suggested to you, poor things (both him and your dd). You need to go in, as others say, and be very clear that the situation is more serious than the headteacher has suggested, and even if it wasn't, that your dd cannot be expected to take this child under her wing. Be very clear, your dd can't be the solution to the school's problem with this child. I'm sorry you are going through this, it all sound very fraught and your dd quite upset.

I would also make it very very clear that you don't want your dd sitting next to him in maths any more. She is not the solution to the problem and will end up having problems herself if they are not distanced from ach other. The school has a duty of care towards your dd, too.

Surely there are kind boys in the year whom he could be put with?

Lizard, you just need to write it all out and look at anything the school has about safeguarding and equality stuff.

Then you need to book to see the Head. Point out that a. the situation is more serious than a yr 7 girl can deal with. Explain nicely that they are at risk of failing their duty of care to the boy. (What are they doing asking a child to deal with this??)

b. Point out, again, that they are surely not in full possession of the facts because they/he/the Head has committed an act of gross sexism, and also come perilously close to enabling some kind of action that is really triggering alarms about sexual safeguarding ... he is notprotecting your daughter.

Seriously, it is soooo wrong - in a way it is only possible to get sooo wrong if you have zero idea of sexual politics. a. It is way to easy to tell girls to befriend troubled children - we have vaginas: we were born to make nice and care (for no money) b. Only a gender blind ... something ... would have jumped into a situation with a boy and a girl and not paused to reflect if there was a sexual issue ie. is coercing a girl to be "friends" in fact coercing a girl into a "girlfriend" situation.

Head sounds a bit out of touch.

By the way, I find it really, really odd that a HEad would get involved in something like this. I'd have thought Head of Year first, and for you to have been informed by the school/Head.

In all my dealings with my older child's school, issues of any seriousness have a sort of "grading" as to who deals with them, and how soon parents are involved. Head of Year incidents get a call home. An incident involving the Head would, frankly, be nuclear. I'd be expecting not just a call home, but an invitation into the school.

Really, if this has been going on, and there has been no direct line of communication with you ... this is just plain weird in this day and age. Frankly, there may be quite ... interesting ... issues with the school.

I think the whole thing is truly odd and disturbing.

Actually, the more I think about this, the more odd it is. I cannot imagine that a situation of like this would have been dealt with so "informally" by the Head. It's just plain weird. Not just the HEad's suggestion, but the whole procedure.

rabbit it is a small middle school for Y5-8, there are no HOYs.

Twelve year old girls can be utter bitches. An entire class sending a child to coventry is bullying. Headteachers are very experienced with children and have had years dealing with their particular age group. Girls use pychological warfare to make each other's lives hell.

The bullying must be pretty serious to have reached the head teacher. In my son's primary school of 500 children the deputy heads deal with most cases of bullying. It would be pretty nuclear for a bullying incident to reach the head in a large primary. Prehaps the bullying has been ongoing and the deputy has esclated the issue.

I think you should have a face to face meeting to assertain the facts. It may well be that OP is being fed a pack of lies by her daughter. No child will admit to being a bully.

Reallytired If the Op's dd was bullying and she had been pulled into the head's office about that then I think it is pretty unlikely she'd be wanting her mum to get involved. The dd says that the head confirmed she hadn't. Which is going to be pretty easy for Op to check. If she had been bullying then she'd be keeping very very quiet about the whole thing....

However, the fact that you (and I) wondered confirms how wrong it was for the head to haul her in at the same time as the two lads who were bullying. Pure laziness by the head.

'I don't think there's anything wrong with a 12 year old being expected to make the effort to be nice to another child.'

Yes, except the situation is more complicated than that, and this is yet another bloody example on this bloody forum of someone massively oversimplifying an issue, having a go at the OP about the new, simplified version of the issue, and conveniently ignoring everything else the OP has said that might make the issue SLIGHTLY MORE BLOODY COMPLEX THAN THAT.

Jesus Christ, I'm going to go and get a lobotomy. I think I need one.