No more exclusions and sexual violence in schools

[2fallsagain]

Have you seen the group No More exclusions are recommending that those who commit sexual violence should not be excluded? Rather they think the school should take a "community approach".

Whilst exclusions are not desirable you cannot include one child at the risk of others.

There is a big row going on with the NEU as they state it's not official policy. However many local NEU groups are tweeting in solidarity. It is alarming that so many are overriding safeguarding.

Here is SSA comment

twitter.com/SafeSchools_UK/status/1321193026228752387?s=20

TitianaTitsling
I think they're trying to argue that students who've been excluded may engage in illegal activities whilst excluded, but rather than consider the whole range of complex factors that affect students in that situation, they are choosing to try and argue that exclusion causes many of the issues.

So a student who has been excluded may be at a higher risk of being recruited into county lines, but it's not the exclusion that causes that. A poorly managed exclusion won't help if appropriate provision isn't put in place, but it's not like exclusions take innocent, well behaved students and ruin their life chances for no reason, however much some want to pretend that's the case.

i can assure you that my 8 year old is far more innocent than the politicians that have left a SEND system in crisis

@TitianaTitsling

No child ever goes out on their own illegally when excluded. I really don't understand this but, why would this have anything to do with the school? Why is illegal to go out if excluded?

Yes, as Lola has said it may be that an excluded child may be out engaging in harmful activity, eg CSA/CSE and PRUs will take that into consideration after an incident as to whether excluding a pupil would be a safeguarding issue.

I can’t say what MS schools would do as I’ve only recently started work in a MS primary, but years and years ago when I started in MS secondary if a pupil wouldn’t be supervised at home they would have an exclusion within the school. When I saw this done it was because parents were working and couldn’t take time off. This is not always the case in a PRU.

Thanks lola Im in a very sheltered rural area of Scotland, my primary school (where dc will go) had less than 40 in it so I have no experience and will readily admit little knowledge of things like this.

God sorry that makes me sound so wanky!!

TitianaTitsling
It doesn't sound wanky at all. It sounds very self aware.

One of the biggest issues I find when it comes to discussing exclusions isn't finding people who want to explore complex issues as they are reasonably easy to find, it's the loud minority of people who have an ideological position/have no intention of seeing past their own experience.

One of the biggest issues I find when it comes to discussing exclusions isn't finding people who want to explore complex issues as they are reasonably easy to find, it's the loud minority of people who have an ideological position/have no intention of seeing past their own experience.

Yup!

Titiana your life sounds blissful!

@LolaSmiles

TitianaTitsling It doesn't sound wanky at all. It sounds very self aware.

One of the biggest issues I find when it comes to discussing exclusions isn't finding people who want to explore complex issues as they are reasonably easy to find, it's the loud minority of people who have an ideological position/have no intention of seeing past their own experience.

This is very true, and is clear to see on this thread.

Schools need more support to be able to better manage children with additional needs.

There need to be more alternatives made available with specialist input.

There are probably many children who have been excluded when they could have been dealt with another way if there was more support available to schools.

The topic of this thread, however, is whether it's appropriate to ban exclusions altogether, including when a boy has raped another pupil.

Someone who rapes or sexually assaults another pupil cannot continue to go to the same school as their victim. That is an inhumane and cruel punishment for the victim of one of the most serious crimes there is. Of course the only option is permanent exclusion. I am quite alarmed to see people suggesting that the rapist shod be allowed to stay. Talk about grooming girls to grow up knowing they don't matter.

PearPickingPorky
The disturbing thing is how many people are quick to be apologists for the perpetrators of violent and sexual assault.
I agree with you that it is grooming girls to know they don't matter and it's always a case of 'poor men or boys just can't help themselves'.

It's an insidious attitude that some teens have already picked up by 12/13. The amount of times I've had to explain consent in PSHE lessons because some boys think that sexual harassment is 'banter' and can't understand how coercion can still be present without physical force is worrying. They have to be getting those messages somewhere.

I find it hard to believe that any parent of an assaulted child would genuinely be happy being told 'we could exclude but exclusions are mean and what about the poor perpetrator, how about your child and the perpetrator sit down and your child can listen to the perpetrator's feelings'

The truth is there is always exclusion in the case of sexual assault. It is just that if the perpetrator is not the one excluded, then the victim will be - either because they choose to leave, or if they stay, they do so in a diminished fearful state that in no way equates to ‘inclusion’ for them.