(TW : discussion of Ruth Perry's suicide) To feel uncomfortable with the way Ruth Perry's death was described as 'the fault' of Ofsted?

[Carla786]

From the evidence, it's clear that the Ofsted inspector behaved abominably and the whole organisation needs a thorough overhaul.

However, I was reading a recent thread on the Caroline Flack documentary and for all the differences, one thing that reporting of Flack's suicide has shared is that it has often explicitly laid blame for a suicide on someone else.

In Flack's case, the media have been blamed for her suicide. In Perry's case, the inquest explicitly blamed Ofsted, as did some media.

This makes me uncomfortable...maybe it's wrong of me to feel this way, but I think of the GC threads that originally drew me to MN. Threads on the reporting of suicides of trans teenagers often rightly pointed out the danger of media implying that external people/forces caused a suicide, noting that it contradicts guidelines that the Samaritans (among others) have for good reason.

Perry was an adult, but these guidelines aren't just for teenagers. I don't want to downplay the terrible way she was treated by Ofsted. But I just feel very uncomfortable about the implications of media and then the official inquest explicitly implicating Ofsted in her suicide.

Am I wrong to feel uncomfortable about this?

No- where are you getting that impression? I said that the media reporting was worse for trans teens

well the fact you feel it’s “worse for trans teens”. Why are you bringing American teenagers not having their unrealistic expectations met into the suicide of a British teacher treated horrendously by her regulatory body?

I'm not convinced by that.

But otoh I thought the Perry safeguarding error was a minor admin error?

I wonder if OP thinks ‘contribute to’ means ‘caused’ or ‘is responsible for’.

No real problem? Safeguarding was inadequate! I read somewhere that in 3 years only 16 schools had been given inadequate for safeguarding. It’s a fundamental job of a headteacher to make sure children are safe in their school! If thousands of other schools can meet safeguarding standards and only 16 in 3 years can’t then it isn’t Ofsted that’s the problem, it’s the 16 schools that failed to meet this basic standard.

I can think of countless jobs/careers that have extremely stressful elements. And certain positions where you are held accountable for decisions which could be very serious and even life and death. I wouldn’t be able to do that type of job but someone has to, unfortunately you can’t eliminate stress from these jobs.

I've explained the answer to that. And so has the OP. It's quite clear.

What links the three suicides mentioned is that external factors were publicly blamed (Ofsted, the media, parents).

There are no other similarities between the three suicides.

I don't think that the message from the education community was that self-sacrifice is the way to achieve reform, but that headteachers and teachers have been trying desperately to draw attention to the flaws in the system and the impact it has on them for years, and no one paid attention and now someone is dead. Utterly devastating, particularly for those who knew her, but also I know a lot of heads were thinking 'there but for the grace of god...'

How Ofsted behaved in the immediate aftermath was also inhumane. They made the call to local schools in area and were preparing to inspect them as they were in shock and mourning.

You're not convinced by what?

The bottom line is - if she had had fair and compassionate treatment by Ofsted, she would probably still be here. Their own organisational problems are no excuse.

But the coroner knows far more about this than you do! Are you suggesting this coroner got it wrong, or that no coroner should ever comment on a case like this?

You seem to be suggesting that preventing suicides that might be influenced by media reporting is a more worthy goal than preventing ones that could be contributed to by bullying.

But in those jobs you don't have your areas of support removed from you like the head did in this case.

In Leelah Alcorn's case, the parents were criticised for removing from school and putting in virtual school and putting them in gay conversion therapy (as well as therapy to accept they were a boy, which obviously is NOT bad). The criticism wasn't just about wanting Leelah to accept they were a boy and refusing to use false pronouns.

Leelah's parents were not responsible at all for what happened. I can see how they probably wanted to isolate from trans networks who were probably encouraging the dysphoria, they were very evangelical and probably had been given info that gay conversion therapy was effective.

However, it doesn't seem impossible that gay conversion therapy and only virtual school could have inadvertently exacerbated mental health struggles. Online school during lockdown made a lot of teens depressed who had been fine before (obviously there were other factors, but I did have an effect).

The parents were NOT responsible. But I think it's fair to say that some reports weren't criticising refusal to affirm a false 'gender identity' but other actions which would probably be somewhat questionable to some people who don't believe TWAW nonsense

Yes but op sharing the gratuitously over emotive “if you believe trans lives matter”… shows a clear leaning.
and again what has the tragic death of a boy in America to do with a teacher here other than shameful piggy backing.
@Carla786 completely disrespectful to family or friends of Ruth who could be on here.

The 'it's worse for trans teens' comment is being misinterpreted by you.

I have already explained that what I meant was that media reporting of trans teenager suicides was 'worse' in that it used things like suicide note pictures and listed the method in some cases, breaking more Samaritan guidelines. Whereas the only questionable thing in media reporting of the Perry case was apportioning blame to Ofsted which Samaritans also advises against.

I don't know the ins and outs of this case. It doesn't sound a great set of circumstances for a vulnerable adolescent whatever you think of trans issues.

I don't really get what it has got to do with Ruth Perry?

Sarah Ditum is GC. The article is not TWAW. Why are you imputing motives that aren't there?

The article was criticising the TWAW media & its dangerous reporting of Alcorn's suicide. Did you read the article or just the headline?

Yes, doctors etc get inspected but there's no equivalent quite like Ofsted, is there?

This , why have you brought this example to your debate @Carla786 ?

The coroner's wording was "suicide, contributed to by an Ofsted inspection".
Again I don't get what trans teenagers have to do with it?

I didn’t read any GC in that article? All very focused‘if you believe trans lives matter’ ‘she’ for male born etc?

Because I think there has been similar ignoring of the Samaritan guidelines in Perry's case, yet I haven't seen much mention of this in media or on MN.

I agree that the coroner 's report is different from media. I did feel media reporting before the coroner's report was arguably leaning towards 'Ofsted was the reason'

why would uk media or mn focus on an American teenage boy?

I'm talking about Perry in that post.

Surely you can be GC and believe that the lives of trans people matter?

In that article, Ditum was specifically pointing out that the dangerous tactics of TWAW were worsening trans teenagers' mental health (not GC feminists, who other reports of course blamed).

Using the wrong pronouns is bad but this was 2015. Ditum was probably had great difficulty getting the piece published at all.

Ditum has been at the forefront of GC since 2015.

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2016/05/what-is-gender-anyway

What is your point about the Samaritan guideline? You’re not being clear at all.