How far do teachers’ safeguarding responsibilities stretch?

[Jill23]

A long time lurker, but very recent poster, would be very grateful for advice. Forgive me if this is vague as potentially very outing! If you are a teacher in a school for particularly vulnerable kids and you have a welfare responsibility (not DSL, but a defined role), how far do your responsibilities stretch? Basically, I’m looking at a situation where a teacher responsible for PSHE alongside his main subject has basically used that knowledge to bat off some complaints about his own child’s behaviour at another school. Is there an overriding responsibility to child safeguarding or is it specific to the institution you work for? Would be really grateful for any ideas anyone has.

I work in a SEN school and if I had concerns I’d just talk to the head, we have procedures to report safeguarding concerns about staff members, if your school does the same you may be asked to write it up and then they can investigate.

I’m a PSHE lead and I have no idea what you’re on about. There’s no secret subject knowledge that allows our children to escape justice. Regardless of what he’s saying to his child the duty to investigate and resolve the situation lies with the child’s school not his dad’s place of work.

If there is a clear risk then you can report it to Children’s Services, e.g if he is telling his child to hurt another child, or is providing a weapon etc.

If he is just ‘not doing enough to discourage’ his child’s behaviour then there is nothing to report.

This is not safeguarding. It is just a parent being unhelpful. Most parents think their own kids are innocent. He or she likely believes their own child to be innocent and therefore are defending their actions. You need to stop focusing on the patent being a teacher and just let the school deal with the parent.

Hmm.

Obfuscating/saying I don't know or understand what I did wrong wouldn't get you very far in most secondary schools.

If you are saying this person's child is deliberately hurting another child, then the way it would go at the school I used to work at would be:

Child makes allegation
CCTV checked
Witness statements taken from any children in the vicinity/anyone else involved

Culprit is taken out of class and pastoral team give consequences.

Secondary schools expect kids to lie if they are in trouble. That's why lots of them have cctv.
Nobody pays any attention to the kid saying they didn't do it if they have him on cctv doing it.

So he is saying its not bullying because he isnt intending harm because he doesnt understand his actions are harmful.

That should be relatively easy to establish thst he does know its harmful or educate him that it is harmful

That should be relatively easy to establish thst he does know its harmful or educate him that it is harmful

Can I ask how? Genuinely; this seems to be a thing. Is his being told “x is harmful” then enough to dismiss the notion that “he doesn’t know”? (No SEN or learning disabilities)

Well, if he has no SN and someone explains something is harmful and then they do it again, they cant really then claim they didnt know?

If the school have said they cant do anything about bullying because the bully hasnt understood its bullying, it would be reasonable to ask that they do some general pshe, assembelies and individual sessions on bullying to prevent it going on again.

Well, if he has no SN and someone explains something is harmful and then they do it again, they cant really then claim they didnt know?

That’s exactly what I’d have thought - but apparently not…. Suppose the only way is to have it in writing….

Why don't you just tell us what your role is and how you are involved in the situation? Are you a member of staff at his child's school? Are you the parent of the child that is claiming to be being bullied?

Bullying is usually dealt with under the Bullying policy which is part of the Behaviour Policy. It’s not safeguarding. OP: read the safeguarding policy. It’s nothing to do with safeguarding.

The school the Dc attend should deal with it. Many many parents coach Dc on what to say especially if it’s not entirely obvious what has happened. Or even Dc is innocent and being picked on! What job the parent has is irrelevant. What matters is that the school investigates and gets to grips with the situation. Two or more Dc can say what is happening. A Dc obfuscating is a Dc not accepting blame but it’s up to the school to collect evidence that they do have involvement. Just because a DC won’t admit it, doesn’t mean the school cannot collect info or doesn’t have enough info to deal with the allegations.

This is not safeguarding. It is just a parent being unhelpful. Most parents think their own kids are innocent. He or she likely believes their own child to be innocent and therefore are defending their actions. You need to stop focusing on the patent being a teacher and just let the school deal with the parent.

Agree with this. I don't see what his job & subject specialism have to do with the situation. You can hope he would have a better overview of what the right course of action would be. However he is just a parent in this situation. He's not a teacher at the school where his child goes. So his job is irrelevant.

It's far more likely that his dc is lying about what he's doing, and he's believing them, as most parents will , than he's coaching the child in what to say to get out of it.

You're going to be on a hiding to nothing if you start trying to go after his job. You'll look pretty deranged and make it far less likely for the school to take you seriously.
Focus on your own dc and the effect it has on them. It's up to the school to make decisions about the other child.

Just to correct what I said earlier. A safeguarding policy is to do with safeguarding. What the op describes is not.