School suspension - reasonable or not?

[EvaB0710]

I need a balanced opinion on a suspension - can't decide if I am being unreasonable or school is!
Teenage boys prior to school accidentally spill hair gel on a ramp. Try to wipe it with feet but as they do realise it is slippy, which they find hilarious so put some more on top so they can slide on it (but not a lot, it was only a 100ml tube to start with and still more than half full!).
Shortly prior to lessons, other pupils arrive and also slide on it but grab the rail and none fall over. They find this amusing too.
They leave and go to lessons, firmly in the belief that it would dry very quickly.
Fastforward and it didn't dry. At all. Not one bit. A number of other pupils slipped on it and a few hours later a teacher, who was also carrying books and a coffee so couldn't grab the rail, went flying. To the point they apparently needed to go to hospital, I don't doubt they did go to hospital but my suspicious brain wonders if they wanted a few hours out of work etc (maybe unfair of me!). No serious injury, some bruising to knee but apparently needs a few days off to 'recover'.

All only came to light when the teacher slipped, they watched back CCTV and saw the boys. Immediately suspended for afternoon, with a further one day suspension.

If I'm honest, I feel suspension is a step too far. Yes it was an avoidable accident and yes they deliberately put the gel down.
BUT they never intended anyone to get hurt or slip over, just slide/ skid a little.
The school's main issue seems to be that they didn't tell anyone to get it cleaned it and left it in a dangerous state.
They didn't see it as dangerous - they have only witnessed people slide on it, not fall etc AND they thought it would dry quickly/ go away. I mean tbh, who would not think that hair gel which usually sets rock hard would not dry quickly. And their teenage boys. Who incidentally were immediately remorseful and devastated they had caused injury to someone.

Is suspension for 1.5 days proportionate or are school being unreasonable?

I am questioning if the thread is genuine. The op seems to be baiting everyone

Of course you are

Absolutely acceptable length of suspension. An apology letter should also be mandatory IMHO to the teacher. An apology gift would also be sent if one of my DC caused this situation

Agree.

OP, you and parents like you are the reason I am leaving teaching this summer. Parents like you cannot believe that their precious angels could possibly do anything wrong. I currently have a blue and purple leg thanks to a kid who thinks rules are optional. Thankfully, 99% of my students are kind and thoughtful and they tried to help me when this shit hurt me (not on purpose, just like your kid, but what he didn’t realise is that he hit the leg that is full of metal). Thankfully it was caught on CCTV and there are meant to be repercussions for him but I’m not holding my breath. After 32 years in the classroom in a huge range of types of school, it’s not the kids who have finished me, it’s the dickhead parents.

1.5 days is pathetic. He should have every privilege removed for the remainder of the year. You need to actually parent your child, learning needs or not.

Fair play to the teacher for seeking medical advice and getting their injuries recorded. I hope they go to the Police - 12 year olds are deemed criminally responsible - and if your kid got a warning, they richly deserve it. As for you wailing about the actions of the teacher, shame on you. Parent your bloody kid and teach them right from wrong.

Hell yes school are being bloody unreasonable. The little scrotes should have been suspended for a week.

And as for suggesting the teacher was putting it on! For a start you don’t know that teacher’s previous medical history, they might have a previous injury that could be damaged by the fall, or low calcium levels, a knee or hip replacement, a shoulder that pops out, if female they could be pregnant. Even if they have none of those a fall as you described sounds horrible, I am not surprised they took, or were told to take, an extra day.

I've not read all of the posts but this is my view.

1.5 days is incredibly lenient.

They spilled some gel. That in itself sounds a bit bizarre but let's assume that was true and genuinely accidental.

They knew it was slippery. They thought it would dry (which isn't strange at all that it didn't). But even if that is what they thought, did they think it would try in 30 seconds? 10 minutes? Even if they thought it would take a minute or two, they should have been aware that it was a risk until it was dry and reported the spillage.

Instead they added more and left it with the risk of others slipping.

Someone did slip and injured themselves enough to go to hospital.

I'm not saying this lightly but I'm very surprised they aren't permanently excluded for these two reasons:

1. The initial spillage, even if it was an accident was deliberately added to.
2. They knew it was slippery and couldn't easily be seen by others.
3. They didn't escalate it. They added to it.
4. Even if they thought it would dry, they knew this hadn't happened in the minutes they were stood there so would not have been instant.

I'm not a teacher but I'm appalled that you're not backing them up here.

I think the school have been very lenient. It would get more than 1.5 days suspension in many schools and rightly so.

It's proportionate. Their actions were dangerous, not merely silly, but they didn't intend harm or act with malice. The injury isn't severe but would have caused pain and embarrassment. The potential for injury was a fatality - if someone lost their balance and hit their head.

The boys knew it was slippery and they deliberately made it more slippery. They saw that the gel made people slip and slide, so they should have realised that someone could fall over. They know that it's a ramp and people who use ramps are people who might fall over more than others. They chose not to tell anyone. They may well have thought it would dry, but it didn't.

Even with their SEN, they should have known it was not something they should have done.

At 12, even with varying degrees of SEN, they should have known it could cause an accident.
They added more gel because they found it slippery under foot and I assume wanted to see what happened when others walked on it (if that wasn't the case why did they add more -because from your description of events that is what they were watching).
Hopefully the teacher isn't too badly injured but you seem to be playing down any injuries and recovery time that has been said were as a result.

You don't know how bad the injury/injuries were, or if they aggravated any injuries that the teacher already had. You don't know if the injuries will prevent the teacher driving, being able to walk around the school, stand in the classroom in the normal way etc.
You also don't know if as a result of the injuries the teacher has now had to change any plans they had for the weekend/with their own family children. Assuming it was a senior school, if the teacher not being in for those few days will impact on any older students that would have had exam revision sessions with that teacher in the next few days.
I assume you see the suspension as harsh because they didn't intentionally set out to cause injury to someone, eg in the same way as someone that started a fight, but that was the consequence of their actions. The accident could have easily been prevented, and could the outcome of the accident could have actually been far worse.

I completely agree with this and their punishment was lenient. They caused harm and should face the consequences.

They hospitalised a teacher.

Age of criminal responsibility in England is 10.

Law also states that ignorance (they didn't know this would happen) doesn't provide a defence.

I'd be more worried about the teacher sueing you for damages which they're entirely able to do as there's evidence.

Some parents' understanding of their gravity of their kids' actions is absolutely astounding.

Funny how the 'teenage boys' in the OP's opening post became 12 years old a few posts later.

Most injuries and deaths are caused by stupidity, not intentional. Drunk drivers usually don’t intentionally kill/injure other people. Not observing safety regulations is usually not done to harm someone but to safe time etc.
“i didn’t intend this” usually somewhat reduces the punishment, but doesn’t give you a free pass do stupid things. His punishment has been quiet mild already

They should have received more punishment. What if the teacher had been pregnant? It could cause her to lose the baby. Your son was incredibly irresponsible.