To be annoyed with school? Poss trigger warning.

[AntheaBelveden]

DD1 is 16, in her first year of sixth form. One of her A levels is law.

Her law teacher took the class to court today so they could see a case being tried.

The case turned out to be one of child sexual abuse.

DD1 has come home in floods of tears as the evidence they heard was very graphic and included testimony from one of the victims (it's a historical case, so the victims are now adults).

DD got very upset in the court, as did others from their class and asked the teacher if they could leave.

The teacher told them they could leave " if they really had to" but it may affect their marks at the end of the year.

AIBU to think they should have been allowed to leave?

[MistresssIggi]

I think they should have been allowed to leave - perhaps an issue with where they would safely go as teacher couldn't supervise those inside and outside the court simultaneously.
As for a skive - a trip requires: some kind of form to get permission from the head in the first place, writing permission slips, photocopying them and chasing them up from students, emailing staff/putting notices in the bulletin, planning cover work for whatever other lesson you miss (which can takes hours), dealing with whatever shot happened when you were away once you're back at school. But yeah, a great skive.

[CotswoldStrife]

I wouldn't be happy with that. I have a friend who is a lawyer and she avoids criminal law like the plague because some of the cases are so unpleasant.

I would raise that with the school. A level law does not mean a career in the legal system.

[Sara107]

I think this was inappropriate and surprised some posters think otherwise. If these children go into law, of course they may be exposed to hideous cases but for now they are 16 years old and could have been taken to a case which would tell them just as much about criminal law and court procedure without being distressing. They are barely more than children themselves, and while all children should be educated about sexual abuse, I don't think the graphic details are necessary at that age. It will be a decade before any of them are fully qualified practising barristers and they will be mature enough to cope with that sort of situation then.

[WLF46]

They were "allowed" to leave, the teacher was not keeping them there at gunpoint. If they are unable to stomach the realities of such a trial then they are hardly suited to study or practise law.

The best advice would be for your child to keep attending trials. If they are exposed to the hideous reality often enough, they will eventually become desensitised to evidence about child abuse (for example). That is what they will need to do to be able to objectively look at evidence.

If a case like this puts her off law, so be it - better to find out now rather than later down the line. I seriously doubt any number of parking offence cases would mean she wasn't upset by her first child abuse trial though!

[MrsNuckyThompson]

Oh for goodness sake that's ridiculous.

For those who are saying 'lawyers have to get used to it': a) lawyers are in their twenties at a minimum when they qualify; and b) the vast majority of lawyers do NOT practice criminal law (I've been a lawyer for 15 years and have never set foot in a criminal court)

I think this was highly inappropriate of the teacher and even more so to threaten children with poor grades for being upset.

[Goingtobeawesome]

I can't even find the words for how this should never have been allowed to happen.

Putting stuff in brackets, to me, makes it seem less important or relevant. Bad choice.

[Booboostwo]

I taught ethics to undergraduate medical students, who were older that OP's DD and more likely to come across the sensitive topics we discussed than lawyers are likely to have to deal with child abuse cases and I approached this type of thing much more carefully. Students were warned in advance, they were prepared, they were told they could leave with no repercussions and what to do about getting help if they needed it afterwards.

[TeachingPostQuery]

Completely unacceptable IMO. He probably wouldn't have been able to take them to the cinema to see a fictional film discussing those things. As it would have been rated 18.

The trip ended up being about the terrible things people do to each other, not the law. Had they had discussions in advance to prepare them for this or just about how court would work?

He certainly shouldn't be penalising them for leaving.

[KERALA1]

I know everybody studies criminal law - obv have a law degree and am a solicitor myself. I am talking about practising it - only then do you face horrifying reality like this.

I did my training contract in a tiny firm so did all types of high street work. When I was asked to watch a video of my client being gang raped I decided for sure that I did not want to be exposed to that stuff on a daily basis. Switched to corporate - more money less trauma!

[Allthebestnamesareused]

I am a solicitor. At no time did I have specific training to "cope with emotional cases" - all training was legal and procedural. you do just have to get used to cases. I have never practised criminal law but came up against some very harrowing stories during civil lawsuits and matrimonial matters albeit at an age where I was more mature to deal with them.

[SDTGisAnEvilWolefGenius]

WLF46 - can you really not tell the difference in emotional maturity and readiness to hear distressing material between 16-17 year olds, and 21+ year old graduates?

[Rinoachicken]

When I did A Level law my class sat in on a murder trial

[LivininaBox]

16 year olds should not have to "get used" to child sex abuse. For fucks sake. Dealing with this kind of stuff can mess people up, that's why police etc in the field are given counselling. There was a case a few years back of someone in the field, police I think, who ended up getting addicted to viewing images of paedophilia. Some of the comments on this thread are disgusting.

YANBU x 1000

[ConvincingLiar]

The best advice would be for your child to keep attending trials. If they are exposed to the hideous reality often enough, they will eventually become desensitised to evidence about child abuse (for example). That is what they will need to do to be able to objectively look at evidence.

I strongly disagree. I think that's crap advice. I am a lawyer, and was a criminal lawyer for 10 years. I didn't do A level law. OPs DD should focus on her text books. In the fairly unlikely event that she wants to specialise in child abuse, she can get hardened to it in her 20s.

As others have said, most lawyers don't practice in crime, I suspect most lawyers don't spend much time in court. Plenty of people with law degrees don't become lawyers so I would think that even more A level law students don't become lawyers. I studied criminal law aged 18-19 and don't remember it being particularly traumatic. I started observing criminal cases regularly aged 22. I started acting in criminal cases aged 23. I probably didn't do any heavy weight traumatic cases until about 27-8. You don't get access to the horrible stuff until you are more likely to have the emotional maturity to deal with it. Training and support is pretty poor, so you only have your own maturity and resources to rely on. Reading cases/statements/reports is very very different to hearing victims of crime give evidence.

I agree a court visit was probably a good idea, but it sounds badly planned. Most crown courts have more than one court room running at a time. It's not difficult to establish what type of case is being heard by talking to security/ushers. If reported accurately, the threat about grades was unreasonable.

[TheCakes]

I'm a journalist working out of a crown court centre. I used to take university students on work experience with me sometimes. I'd warn them if it was going to be a distressing case and let them know it was OK to leave quietly. Knowing how those cases go, I would not be happy with my 16-year-old in there. You do get used to it, and learn to take a detached, professional approach, but children that age aren't mature enough to be able to do that.

[Dixiechickonhols]

I would contact the school. It sounds like it wasn't properly thought through or planned. Yes good experience to go to the court but the teacher should have contacted the court diary manager in advance and spoken to the staff to see what case would be best for the class. I can recall going to the magistrates when I studied A level law but it was all routine stuff, I remember a lady leaning over and begging us not to make notes, she thought we were journalists and her husband was up next.
As a trainee solicitor I regularly sat in court behind counsel making notes. My firm did a lot of child protection work. I can remember the barristers on one case shielding me from seeing the photos because I didn't need to see them and I would have been 22.

[AntheaBelveden]

Thank you for your thoughts, interesting opinions on both sides.

For the record, DD has no intention of pursuing a career in law, she thought the A level would be interesting and possibly useful.

I've arranged to speak to the teacher this afternoon, I don't think that I'm the only concerned parent as the school secretary said that he was "very popular today, everyone wants to talk to him".

[NonFatTofuttiRiceDreamsicle]

This sounds awful, poor dd. I hope you get some answers and an apology this afternoon.

[WouldHave]

I think we need a reality check here on what an A level student can be expected to cope with. Would this really be more distressing than, say, learning about the holocaust in history and dealing with dissected animals in biology?

[NonFatTofuttiRiceDreamsicle]

Yes, I think I would've found this more distressing at 16, and now.

[FairyDogMother11]

I can definitely see where you're coming from, a couple of years back I did jury service and I was on the jury of quite a distressing case. It was a GBH involving a vulnerable woman and her parents. They do go in to a huge amount of detail and when the poor woman stood up to give her evidence she was in bits and it was fairly hard to keep it together. A sexual abuse case would have been far worse. There was a child murder case going on at the same time and that was so horrific all the jury were given counselling and were discharged from ever doing jury service again. So obviously bearing in mind that can happen, I'm not certain I'd want any child of mine witnessing a case like that.

[NonFatTofuttiRiceDreamsicle]

Of course not Max, but they are the only ones it is in the op's power to support and the ones we have been invited to comment on. The reason the girl is so distressed is presumably due to the horrific suffering of the victims, which is not being competed with or diminished. If there wasn't so much sympathy with the real victims, hearing the evidence wouldn't be an issue, if that makes sense.

[hackmum]

YANBU. We know that jury members can feel deeply traumatised by this type of case, so it's not surprising that 16-year olds would be upset.