AIBU to ask if school can go through my son's phone?

[ejk10]

This hasn't happened to my son yet -but he thinks it might, and happened to some of his friends today.

Apparently a child has made a statement which the school is investigating (none of the boys have been told what the complaint is) and a teacher demanded to look through this boy's phone and deleted some information. My son has not been questioned but is friends with those who have been and is wondering if the school would ask to look at his phone.

I'm not sure of the legalities of this. Part of me thinks if he has nothing wrong why worry if they look - another part of me thinks it is a huge invasion of privacy. My son assures me he has done nothing wrong - regardless of whether he has or not I'm questioning if they have the right to look through private data.

Can anyone shed any light?

“Yes. Tbh I’m a bit busy preparing a safeguarding training session for later in the week to do a thorough job - would you be a dear and crack on with that though?”

Absolutely not. On my own it would take days if not weeks.

“I am not saying that every teacher tries to 'crack the casde'. every teacher has a legal duty to report every safeguarding concern to their dedignated safeguarding lead in their school. That designated safeguarding lead will, if necessary, refer the case onwards, or will seek guidance about what to do.”

That’s correct of course. The right course of action is, virtually never, to summon little Johnny to the headmasters office, confiscate his phone and force him to unlock the phone so that the teacher can have a rifle through.

If the teacher has sought “guidance” he will virtually never receive the guidance that this is what should be done.

If the teacher has decide to interpret statutory guidance himself, then he is very foolish.

I'd love to know the answer to this as my son has been targeted by a complete creep who was making disability hate memes with my son's photo on them and then showing my son that he has an entire album of other pictures to make loads more. I emailed evidence to school and I really hope they can look on the phone and deal with the little shit.

IME it is the school that knows the family best - especially in primary, but pastoral staff in secondary too - far, far better than social care EXCEPT in a very small number of families 'already known to the authorities'.

You would be amazed at the amount of safeguarding and family information the average primary teacher carries around about their class in their head, every day!

“DSL - a teacher, usually a senior one - collects together the evidence that there is, for the referral to be made, rather than either reporting on every tiny scrap or hint of an issue, or 'summoning SS in to make an investigation of what may or may not turn out to be a case'. That evidence may be photographic, may be oral testimony, may be observations of behaviour, may be observations of marks on a child, may be e-mails, may be texts, may be shared photographs on phones.”

Yes. But an investigator must not solicit evidence by forced threat or coercion, especially when dealing with a vulnerable person under the age of 16. If the person is over 16, there are other nuances.

This is painful to read.

Why are posters disregarding the statement that directly preceeds the ones that you are quoting and underlining? Your quotes cannot be read in isolation.

As has already been said statutory guidance is not legislation and so this isn't enforceable, even if your interpretation was correct. Which it is not.

I shall repeat my earlier question: do you really think in issuing these guidelines parliament was giving teachers more rights vis a vis searching than police officers? Does that seem likely to you?!

And for posters doing legal research Googling there is plenty of case law on accessing suspect phones. That might give you a steer.

Bishop,

One would hope that the school can absolutely deal with that. A parent could of course be summoned to the school to be there while the opening of the phone was done ...but I do suspect that may parents wouldn't exactly enjoy that in practice...

“IME it is the school that knows the family best ”

That’s not for you decide when you come across cases.

I’ve no doubt teachers have a lot of information, and that’s good. It helps to safeguard children. That must be used within the boundaries of their role however. That in itself in an aspect of what makes safeguarding work. Agencies doing what the are supposed to do and involving one another.

bishop you have my complete sympathy. As you can see from this thread however, there are some people who believe their child's right not to be held accountable or be incriminated is more important than protecting those who are harmed by such awful actions and it should those parents who judge whether their child should be investigated for such actions.

In terms of following up, if your son knows of others in the year who've been sent them or seen them that's a good thing to pass on too.
It's always hilarious when peers turn on the bullies and volunteer to show us what bullies have been posting on social media. Usually at that point bully's parents are outraged at how school have ignored their child's right to privacy by commenting on things freely posted on social media and large group chats where other participants have reported it to staff. Bully's parents will usually claim its teachers who forced students to show the posts, but the reality is many students report bullying because it's morally disgusting.

I hope you get sorted.

Bishop yes the school absolutely can deal with this from a school disciplinary point of view. How horrific for your son.

It’s good you’ve got the evidence.

“I shall repeat my earlier question: do you really think in issuing these guidelines parliament was giving teachers more rights vis a vis searching than police officers? Does that seem likely to you?!”

Quite. And any powers conferred by law are never conferred without limitation and with the caveat that they will be exercised responsibly and appropriately.

People can think they are following the law and still fall foul. Especially when they get carried away and overreach. I think some teachers might have been known to do that over the years.

'Forced threat or coercion'

Could you explain what that means, in the context of a school? A teacher or headteacher uses the authority they have, within the heirarchy of the school, to ask a student hand over or unlock their phone (as they have the authority to e.g. invite a student to come to the headteacher's office, report for a detention, attend a specific class or, I don't know, tie their tie). Not doing this - in the same way as not going to the headteacher's office when asked - is punished according to the school's discipline policy.

Is that 'forced threat or coercion'? Do I use 'forced threat or coercion' to get my students to sit down? Stop fighting in the playground? Miss a playtime? Is 'usual application of the school's discipline policy' an example of 'forced threat or coercion'?

Agencies doing what the are supposed to do and involving one another

I tell you what, I flipping wish there were other agencies I could ring to deal with a whole bunch of stuff. But there aren’t. Schools are very often on their own dealing with all manner of SEMH, pastoral and behaviour issues. Thresholds for social care and family intervention services are ridiculously high. We no longer have a school beat officer.

“Is that 'forced threat or coercion'? Do I use 'forced threat or coercion' to get my students to sit down? Stop fighting in the playground? Miss a playtime? Is 'usual application of the school's discipline policy' an example of 'forced threat or coercion'?”

Again the absence of understanding nuance and complexity underlines why you should not be looking at peoples phones.

It's just that asking a child to unlock their phone ONLY seems to be an issue if this is by 'forced threat or coercion', so I need to understand - in the context of a school - what that looks like?

Streetwise,

I have made the examples deliberately ridiculous to make the point - apologies if that wasn't clear to you.

"I flipping wish there were other agencies I could ring to deal with a whole bunch of stuff. But there aren’t. Schools are very often on their own dealing with all manner of SEMH, pastoral and behaviour issues."

Absolutely.

I probably spend

Agencies doing what the are supposed to do and involving one another.

DSL rings SS 'We believe there is evidence on the mobile phone'

SS 'Excellent. What is the evidence?'

DSL 'We don't know. Can we look at it?'

SS 'Yes of course. [Probably thinking 'Idiot!'] Ask the child to open the phone and then tell us what is there'

Are schools and SS allowed to work together like that? Or does SS have to be physically present?

[Again, hypothetical situation to make the point, though I have real cases in mind]

A social worker would not say that. And they would want a lot more information on what your grounds for suspicious or concern were.

Don’t phone up social services and expect them to help you with fishing expeditions.

street

For clarity’s sake what is your area of expertise?

I won’t say.

Ok. Fair enough.

But you’re making all sorts of assertions about how you think things work within schools and in terms of multi agency work that simply aren’t true.

Don’t start coercing anyone here Smile

Well, yes, of course they would want a lot of information, which is what the DSL collects....from all the evidence provided by, you know, teachers

How much information do you pass to a DSL daily, Street? How many referrals have you made to SS in the last, I don't know, 6 months? How many children who are your responsibility are you currently losing sleep about, because there is no-one to pass their cases onto? When was your latest training on peer-on-peer abuse, including online and on phones, and your role in preventing it?

Can you provide an example of a false assertion I have made?