AIBU to complain about safety after violent behaviour in primary class?

[TeutoburgForest]

NC for this and posting here for traffic

My child is in primary school in what has always been a lovely class. Last year a child transferred in who had been removed from his mum’s care so obviously issues going on, now living with a different family member.

The child is extremely violent and threatens other children for telling the teachers. They have been temporarily excluded at least twice - the latest for two days. Yesterday the child attacked my child and gave a death threat. The children in the class do not feel safe and obviously are not safe! I pushed to meet the head and executive head today and asked them at what threshold this behaviour meets the grounds for permanent exclusion. The answer was basically - it won’t. The child will be given extra support and referrals will be made etc but the head said the bar for permanent exclusion is so high it basically won’t happen. I said (because this kid already had a mountain of support) so basically for the next two years the rest of class have to put up with things as they are? Silence. I’m appalled that the majority of kids are used in what feels like a social experiment so that a tiny minority get to be educated ‘in their community’. I’m going to the board of governors/education trust executive team with complaints re safeguarding of the rest of the class - any advice on how to do this effectively welcome.

As a teacher in a class with a violent child I feel your pain. Unfortunately even with extra adults issues happen and there is a limit to what can be done. Society is in a terrible place and violent children are becoming the norm in many classes. It is really really hard to deal with.

@TeutoburgForest can you elaborate on the attack?

It maybe felt that your child wasn’t in any danger.

I’m sorry you have to deal with this. I do feel for the class teacher. Honestly I have become more right wing in the past 24 hours than I knew was possible!

Someone mentioned going to the police, if there was physical violence and death threats I would do that. If this child is dangerous action should be taken and if the school can't/won't then someone needs to.

isn't it awful.

make the scummy parents teach him.

I imagine it was more a case of the head not being able or willing to sit and list to another parent what it would take to have the child permanently excluded. It’s not as cut and dry as “well if he does X then he’s out”, but fairly obviously there would be a limit even if that limit is far higher than what the parents of other children in the class would deem reasonable.

So this is the response you need to complain to the governors about I think. This is an insufficient response when they have a duty to keep children safe.

There was an exclusion in our primary, possibly two. It's on their school accounts.
Keep reporting every incident to head/ goveners etc.

You need to take the approach of how they are going to safeguard your child, I'm surprised they discussed the other child with you, and whether permanent exclusion was possible. It is possible at primary level but an extremely high threshold. The school have a duty of care to prevent harm to the other children so that is the focus you need to take. I would say that I will be going to the police if you are not satisfied with their answer- violent assaults and death threats is so extreme and the support this child has is clearly not enough.

Primary schools can absolutely exclude a child, 3 children in my step daughters year 4 class were permanently excluded last year. The issues with these particular children had been ongoing since reception and they basically terrorised the other children for years.

SLT would be very willing to exclude violent children, if they could.

Paper trail everything, diary incidents, I know you are looking at alternative schooling but for now, follow up any meeting in person or phone call with an email talking about what was agreed to keep your child safe at school. Advise other parents to do the same. Instal an app on your phone that records all phone calls then you can pretty much transcribe what they said.

We had a lot of internal exclusions, so a child sitting with SLT and doing their work with them in a one to one situation because there are only so many TAs and after some of them were injured from this child and others (kicked, spat at, a broken finger in one case when they removed a child from a classroom) no one was willing to work 1 to 1 on a permanent basis. They brought in a specialist SEMH teacher who took the worst children into a calmer classroom setting meaning the other children got a chance to learn. There was a lot of talk about "choices" and "pausing" between feeling something and acting on it.

Under the Equality Act children are entitled to be educated with their peers, that meant we had year 5 children working at a year 2 level who were taken out of class all the time but stayed with their mates for play times, lunch tables, same cloakroom, registration then out of class. This is why SEN provision is so important. It isn't just about those children with SEN or behavioural needs but the other children in the class who would be taught alongside them. The whole system is a mess.

Unfortunately, I came across a similar situation. The child was not a looked after child but was a child with SEMH difficulties and the parents refused any form of support. The child (no fault of his own)- was terrorising all the children in his class including the class teacher. They had installed a panic button for the teacher! The child remained in the same class until secondary school.

Permanent exclusion is basically non existent. The HT is absolutely correct- their hands will be tied and temporary short term exclusions are also highly scrutinised/head teachers dragged through tribunals to justify them (speaking from experience). This profile of child is on the rise in mainstream classrooms too. The system is on its knees.

We had a similar situation some years back .
Then we were told by a teacher that for any action , they had to have evidence- the teacher gestured with his figures to what looked the width of a large dictionary.
we were able to move DS to a private school,but appreciate that’s not an option for many. Unfair and wrong that well behaved children are potentially subjected to awful experiences like this for years on end .

They can be excluded but last year there were 524 permanent exclusions at primary level. So it is unusual.

I dont hold with this "dont fight back" malarkey. Everyone, even youngsters, have a right to defend themselves from bullies. Why should they make themselves a sitting target?

The bar isn’t that high, but permanent exclusion triggers all sorts of negative consequences for a school. Even temporary exclusion does.

Good luck. If they don’t remove them, he’s likely to stay.
The kids who get removed by their parents tend to be the victims, not the perpetrators .

The same right wing that underfunded education and social care you mean? Or maybe that helped drive numbers of children in poverty up?

Or are you suggesting eugenics?

What a strange thing to say

While it's awful for your child, it's awful for the violent child too. What do you expect to happen to them exactly? Where do they go if expelled?

Of course they can permanently exclude a child! Their hands are not tied! By whom? They need to ensure they follow procedure and the child has gone far beyond acceptable behaviour with time given to improve and strategies deployed, but the head has a right to exclude a child. The governors then can ratify the decision but they never make the first decision to exclude. Therefore they have no power in this whatsoever.

As over 500 primary dc are excluded each year, of course the head can p ex. The great difficulty is that this is a looked after child but all heads MUST keep other dc safe. The school needs to work extra hard to get this child to a special school to meet their needs. The mainstream school obviously cannot. No school can discuss this with you but they have shown an intent to not keep the class safe. I’d be fuming too! None of this is pleasant, but heads cannot just duck responsibilities. Just see dc leave if this continues.

I suggest you read the government guidance on excluding dc. It’s a last resort but it’s a legal option once behaviour strategies fail . Theres no come back! From whom? Ofsted will comment if its used regularly but the school must gather evidence, show strategies have failed and be clear when enough is enough.

The problem is that it will take months if not years until “all behavioural strategies have failed “.
In the in-between time both this child (who likely needs specialist provision) and all the other children in class are suffering.

Yes indeed, this is the way in which people mean Headteacher's hands are tied.

I agree. The school has a duty of care to safeguard all the pupils, and they are failing in that duty. If this happened to my child I would be telling their class teacher, the head and the chair of governors that if they do not keep my child safe from being attacked again, then I would report the school to the police.