Aibu to want this boy excluded from school.

[dementedmumof6]

There is a boy in my highschool aged dd year at school, that is currently on police bail for threatening to rape a younger girl he knows. Who has sent inappropriate sexual texts to my daughter and who told one of her friends that as soon as he gets the chance he was going to rape her and that she would enjoy it.

For the last month he has been in seclusion, enters school after everyone else , is taught on his own and leaves early,

However the friend that he threatened to rape has been told that as of Monday he will be back in class as normal until it goes to court and that to keep her safe she is to make sure that she doesn't go anywhere in the school without someone with her at all times , when she asked them to clarify was told that she was to have one of her friends with her (so not even an adult ) even to go to the toilet,so that he can't approach her.

So the question is would I be unreasonable to go into school and insist that this isn't appropriate that if they are worried about the boys behaviour he should either have a teacher with him at all times or be excluded , and he shouldn't be allowed anywhere near any of the girls in the school.

[Whistleblower0]

if the teachers complained about inclusion policies you would see the SN board go up in very angry flames

You are spot on here!

[JohnnyBarthes]

What teethers said [wunk]

fwiw my (admittedly brief - just a few months in a secondary school) experience of inclusion was overwhelmingly positive - for everyone involved. The benefits massively outweighed the cost of some children not getting quite as much attention as they might have done, for those children as much as for the ones who were 'included'. Those children would, I believe, passionately agree. They were extraordinarily protective of one particular boy who exhibited really quite bizarre behaviour that might have otherwise provoked flaming torches and pitchforks.

Don't start bashing inclusion on the basis of the OP's extreme case and the apparent inaction of this one school, basically.

[Whistleblower0]

Johnny, the boy who has threathned that the op's dd with rape has no place in any mainstream setting whatsoever! In fact i dont think he's entitled to any education at all!
Do you find sexual violence acceptable when it's under the guise of inclusion of a child with SN?
Are you a teacher BTW?

[tethersend]

"In fact i dont think he's entitled to any education at all!"

He is. Education is a right afforded to all children, not a privilege to be earned.

The question as to whether or not he should be in mainstream school is a valid one, but please don't confuse this with his right to an education. He is entitled to one, just as all children are.

[Whistleblower0]

Ok tethersend he may be by law, but he shouldn't be. HTH
I"m sure he's very grateful for you pleading on his behalf.

[JohnnyBarthes]

No, I'm not a teacher, Whistle. Nor am I a man sashh (who basically mansplained rape to me, which has really fucked me off)

There are posts on this thread claiming that inclusion is a failure. That's utter bollocks - inclusion can and has benefited not just the pupils who are able to attend mainstream school when in less enlightened times they wouldn't have, but also those students learning alongside them.

The school in discussion here appears to be fucking up and letting everyone down - don't blame inclusive policies for this, blame ineptitude.

[JohnnyBarthes]

The question as to whether or not he should be in mainstream school is a valid one, but please don't confuse this with his right to an education. He is entitled to one, just as all children are.

exACTly.

[BoneyBackJefferson]

TBH, we don't know that the boy in question has a SN or a SEN but if he has then that will be another hurdle for the school to overcome before they can exclude.

[tethersend]

I'm not pleading for anything, whistleblower. I don't need to; the law, rightly, says that all children are entitled to an education, regardless of their actions.

Even the most dangerous children in secure units and young offenders' institutions are educated. Were you unaware of this?

I am a teacher BTW, if it makes a difference.

[ShinyBauble]

In fact, depriving him of an education would only quicken the downward spiral.

We can't drag him round the back of a building and shoot him, so we have to deal with him. At 14 there is still a remote chance that he may not end up in a lifetime pattern of 'rape women until caught and actually convicted, go to jail, come out, rape women till caught and actually convicted'. Education is important.

The only thing I disagree with is the fact that girls are being told they have to modify their behaviour to avoid being attacked by him. If he is going to be around innocent kids, he needs to be constantly monitored and kept separate.

[ShinyBauble]

• I meant to say might, not would. (First sentence.)

[BoneyBackJefferson]

JohnnyBarthes

"There are posts on this thread claiming that inclusion is a failure."

No one has claimed that inclusion is a failure, just that it doesn't work for all and that it prevents issues such as this being resolved quickly and easily.

[JohnnyBarthes]

I think you were right with 'would', Shiny.

[friday16]

At 14 there is still a remote chance that he may not end up in a lifetime pattern of 'rape women until caught and actually convicted, go to jail, come out, rape women till caught and actually convicted'. Education is important.

Yes. And the education of the other pupils in the school is important as well. Which, if they're withdrawn by parents concerned about their physical safety, they won't be getting.

[tethersend]

But this is not an example of how inclusion should work- it's an example of what happens when a school doesn't fully understand the options available, or does not have access to sufficient funding or alternative provision to keep all children safe.

Children with SEN and other issues are being illegally excluded from schools every day. The balance is most certainly not tipped in their favour.

Until schools are properly funded to utilise all options for the children they teach, we will never know if inclusion works as, to date, under the current system, it's never been tried.

[soapboxqueen]

what tethersend said... again

I promise I'm not stalking

[BoneyBackJefferson]

Agree with tethers.

Inclusion has benefitted many children but it has also failed many children. It is not a total failure but it hasn't been a complete success for the reasons that have been posted.

[Curioushorse]

Hullo!

We dealt with a similar (but much more serious) situation at our school last year. If it has happened outside of school, it is actually a police matter and not a school one. They certainly will have no right to exclude him.

We begged his mother to let him go to the PRU, but we had no reason to send him ourselves. As he was facing charges from four other students in his year, we had to keep him away from those students, which meant changing his GCSE options and classes.

We ended up having to place him on a part time timetable just to accommodate him.

Knowing our situation, I'm reading between the lines with yours and would suspect that it is the case they think your daughter is safe. Trust me, the school will definitely want this child to leave and so will have asked for police back-up in any situation they think they can.

[SootikinAndSweep]

I'm staggered that manipulating a 12 year old into sending a naked photograph of herself isn't a serious enough offence for permanent exclusion.

[BoneyBackJefferson]

you would be amazed at what isn't considered a serious enough offence for a permanent exclusion.

[Whistleblower0]

Sootikin, yes unfortunately this appears to be the case. The system is completely weighted favour of these poor 'victims'
You only have to read some of the apologists for them on threads like these

[tethersend]

Whistleblower, the system is most certainly not weighted in favour of violent and dangerous children. It is not even weighted in favour of children with SEN who have no challenging behaviour at all.

I'm not sure what evidence you're basing this assumption on.

Legislation has had to be brought in in order to counteract the huge injustices children with SEN (and I include challenging behaviour in this) and children in care face(d) in education.

Incidentally, you use the word 'victim' in inverted commas- many, many children who exhibit violent and/or sexually predatory behaviour have been victims of physical and sexual abuse. This does not mean that they should be in mainstream school, particularly if they present a threat to other students, but please don't assume that they have never been victims.

[tethersend]

We are not party to all the information in this case, but on the face of it, there would be grounds for permanent exclusion:

-in response to a serious breach, or persistent breaches, of the school's behaviour policy; and

-where allowing the pupil to remain in school would seriously harm the education or welfare of the pupil or others in the school.

The boy presents a serious risk to (an)other student/s. This is acknowledged by the school victim blaming warning the girls.

Which leads me to believe that there must be more to this than the OP knows or is able to say.

[tethersend]

Sorry, exclusion guidance here.

[RabbitRabbit78]

YANBU.

If the school think he may harm another pupil, they should make sure HE is accompanied by an adult at all times (at the very least) and not shift the onus onto other children who they evidently know are potential victims.

Yes innocent until proven guilty, right to an education; however all the other children in the school have a right to feel safe and by allowing this child to be included back in mainstream lessons with (what sounds like) inadequate supervision, this is not the case.

You need to make a big noise about this - head teacher, governors, press if no joy there.