News

Accusations that Amy Gehring had sex with pupils were rejected by a jury last week. But the case highlighted the lack of adequate vetting of supply staff. Natalie Valios reports.

It has been hard to miss the newspaper reports of the allegations against Canadian supply teacher Amy Gehring. The 26-year-old was cleared at Guildford crown court last week of indecently assaulting three pupils aged 14 and 15, including two brothers.

What the jury did not know when they passed their verdict was that Gehring had already been the subject of a joint Surrey police and social services investigation over allegations that she had had sex with a teenage boy at the first school she taught at after arriving in the UK. It was also claimed that she had kissed another boy. During this investigation, Gehring was suspended by TimePlan, the teaching supply agency employing her. The investigation did not lead to criminal proceedings.

However, Surrey council's child protection unit wrote to TimePlan in November 2000 explicitly outlining its concerns. It warned that Gehring "may act in the same way again if she obtained another teaching position, and pose a risk to children", adding that it considered her unfit to teach.

Surrey council also notified all local schools in the area. But as Gehring was not a council employee, she was not subject to the council's disciplinary procedures and it had no statutory authority to stop the agency using her.

Surrey Police wrote to the department for education and skills informing it of the situation. TimePlan, however, did not do the same, despite its legal duty as an employer to inform the DfES of any cause for concern it might have about its employees.

After the DfES received the police information it instigated List 99 proceedings. List 99 is held by the DfES and names professionals in the education sector banned from working with children, either because they have been found guilty of a criminal offence or because of professional misconduct.

As part of these proceedings, it wrote to TimePlan in November 2000 requesting information, but received nothing until January. By this time TimePlan had placed Gehring in her second school and the second set of allegations which were to see Gehring in court had already come to light.

Contrary to some newspaper reports, Gehring was not put on List 99 at this point as the lengthy checks involved in the procedure had not been completed. List 99 investigations are suspended during criminal trials as they involve questioning witnesses, which could prejudice trials. In the event of a guilty verdict, the individual is automatically put on the list. If acquitted, the investigation resumes and their name can be added if their behaviour is deemed unprofessional. The investigation into Gehring's behaviour will now be resumed.

The DfES is adamant that it could not have done more to prevent events without the relevant information from TimePlan. "If we had had the full facts of the case in October [when TimePlan was aware of the first claims] the later allegations at the very least would not have had the time to emerge or would never have happened," says a spokesperson. "But as soon as we did receive information we instigated proceedings."

In a statement, TimePlan says that the manager of its Surrey office did not disclose the letter from the child protection team to its director of education, Chris King. Had they done so, the agency insists it "would not have allowed Miss Gehring to continue working for us". The Surrey manager has now been sacked and King has resigned.

This case raises disturbing questions about the autonomy of teaching agencies. Surrey council is currently reviewing procedures with teacher recruitment agencies to see what other improvements can be made. It is considering proposals to ensure that, wherever practical, health, social services and education authorities validate employment agencies that follow agreed safeguards, including informing the authorities of any concerns arising from previous placements.

Until four years ago, teaching agencies were not required to check List 99 or run a criminal records check on employees. That has now changed. But if an individual appears on neither, an agency only has references to go on.

So what does the National Union of Teachers think of teaching agencies? "Not a lot," says a spokesperson. "We have concerns about agencies because you have no guarantee of the quality of people who are supplied."

Local supply agencies have been invited to a conference run by Liverpool local education authority next month. It is being held because of the increase during the past few years in the number of people - including supply teachers - coming into schools, and is aimed at trying to ensure that everyone is safe, explains Sylvia Brown, senior education officer equal opportunities at Liverpool local education authority.

"I don't know what child protection policies supply agencies have," Brown says. "But there needs to be some very clear mechanism that indicates that agencies take this issue seriously." She believes agencies should have stronger connections with LEAs with regard to their child protection policies, which could also be submitted to the DfES.

The government demonstrated its intention to take these issues seriously with the Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 2000. This introduced a new offence of abuse of position of trust - covering ostensibly consensual behaviour - and made it an offence for a person aged 18 or over to have sex or other sexual activity with a person under 18 where they are in a position of trust, for example if they are a teacher.

Gehring admitted in evidence that she could not remember whether she had had sex with one of the boys. She said that she had sent him a text message questioning this, and that she had taken the morning after pill. Would a jury have been so keen to acquit a male teacher taking the stand who admitted he was so drunk he could not remember whether he had had sex or not with one of his underage pupils?

It seems cases like this are not just about sex, but about sexism. If a girl has sex with a male teacher, society is more likely to consider the teacher to be in the wrong. Turn it the other way round, and people snigger while perpetuating the "Mrs Robinson myth" that it is every young boy's fantasy to be initiated into sex by an older woman.

Sexual crime consultant Ray Wyre says: "There is a paradox with women and sexual offending. The attitude in extreme cases is to demonise them, such as Myra Hindley and Rosemary West. When it comes to other elements of sexual abuse, we have different attitudes."

Wyre doubts that a jury would even see such allegations as a crime, or at least not one worthy of a custodial sentence. One of the problems, he adds, is the notion peddled by teaching unions and the media that the majority of allegations against teachers are false. Other professionals, such as social workers, are assumed to be guilty when an allegation is made, he says.

Paul Roffey, director of adolescence services at Ray Wyre Associates, adds that there is a dangerous presumption that a boy would not find it a negative experience. In fact, he explains, the experience can lead to psychological and emotional difficulties in later life.

"I'm not sure what the difficulty is in seeing what women do as child abuse," Roffey says. "Boys may believe they are giving consent but in the cold light of day when the woman is not there controlling them, the impact is the same as for girls."

We are told that our school days are the best days of our lives. But for children to be in a position to learn, they must first be safe. Education secretary Estelle Morris has written to TimePlan asking it to justify its actions. The department for trade and industry, which regulates employment agencies, is expected to investigate events. In the light of last month's appointment of the Catholic Church's first director of child protection, perhaps it is now time for other agencies placed in a position of trust to re-examine their child protection practices too.