News

Case study

Situation: Sally Baker (not her real name) is 14 years old and has mild learning difficulties. She is fairly independent - for example, she makes her own way to and from school and is looking forward to going to college with her school friends - but frequently displays verbal outbursts and, as such, is considered to have "challenging behaviour". Sally attends a mainstream school but has a learning support teacher. 

Problem: Sally came home from school one afternoon very distressed. She told her mother and father that she had been hit by her learning support teacher that morning. It became clear that Sally's distress was, in fact, fear. Sally's parents contacted the head teacher, who thought it all "something and nothing". She said the school had already investigated the situation and could uncover no evidence. The parents explained that Sally was too scared to attend school. The school's view was that the learning support teacher had been appointed just to support Sally and that she must return because there was no problem. It turns out that the school "investigation" had not been as thorough as perhaps it had been suggested. Sally has not been formally interviewed as part of any complaints investigation, nor have any of the other children been interviewed singularly or in a group. So far, the parents are aware only that the "investigation" amounted to the head teacher asking Sally what it was all about, but did this in the presence of the learning support teacher.

Panel responses

Steve Love
Sally is entitled to a full investigation into her allegations that she had been struck by her support teacher. This should be conducted by the child protection teams within the context of locally based procedures and the national guidelines in Working Together to Safeguard Children, which sets out how agencies and professionals should co-operate to promote children's welfare and protect them from abuse and neglect.

Child protection investigations are usually carried out jointly with police, social services and other relevant agencies including, in this type of scenario, education representatives. It is clearly not appropriate for a single agency to conduct an investigation and suggest that it somehow constitutes a proper child protection investigation.

It is important that Sally and her parents are reassured that the matter will be properly explored and that her fears and anxiety are the focus of their attention. Child protection investigations at their best are conducted in a sensitive and constructive manner for all concerned. The investigation will also consider the implications for the teacher should the allegations be a result of a misunderstanding or confusion. It will be important that this is clearly understood and that a plan is in place, should there be a reoccurrence, that all concerned can be confident with.

We have some evidence that it is more difficult for disabled children to voice this sort of concern and that they are under-represented in our child protection statistics. With this in mind, it is vital that any investigation should be tuned to Sally's special needs and it may be necessary to consider the use of specialist staff.

If the investigation concludes that there are no child protection concerns, the family and the school will need support to re-establish Sally's relationship with her learning support teacher and the school. The school and the teacher will also need support and a clear understanding of what to do should there be further incidents.

On the other hand, if it is concluded that there are child protection matters, they should be responded to appropriately so that Sally or any other child is not placed at further risk.

Emily Joslin
Sally is a young woman who should be taken seriously. Something is obviously wrong and we owe it to her to get to the bottom of this. It seems that her reaction - distress that was later realised to be fear - is not something she would normally do. This has rung alarm bells for her parents but is all too easily dismissed by the school as "something and nothing". That, in itself, suggests not only that something - however minor - did happen but also that the school has very casual attitude to this type of allegation.

Sally, her parents and social worker should insist that the school conducts a full investigation. If the investigation that took place was as described in the case study - with only Sally being interviewed and in the presence of the learning support teacher who had allegedly hit her - this is simply unacceptable. What faith can anybody put in such a way of carrying out an investigation?

Sally may have challenging behaviour sometimes but that does not mean she is in the wrong here. She may be young and she may cause problems with her verbal outbursts, but that does not put her in the wrong in this case either. It seems the school is using that to get away with inaction. It seems it might be using Sally's behaviour as an excuse to say that she is difficult, becomes upset too easily and is making a big fuss about nothing. I'm not so sure.

Perhaps the social services complaints department could involve itself. If a young person brings a complaint it must be investigated by someone not involved in the case. In social services complaints this investigator is also accompanied by an independent person who makes sure that the case is investigated properly. I would imagine that the independent person would have a lot to say about how the school conducted its own investigation in the first place.

Sally and her parents could also see if they could have an impartial advocate to see that things are done properly. She needs somebody who knows what should happen and ensure that she is treated fairly.

Whatever the outcome of a proper impartial investigation, this young woman is as entitled as anyone to be heard.

User view

Picture this. A student says she has been hit by her teacher. She tells her parents. The school investigates and gives the student a chance to tell her story. If found guilty, the teacher is fired and may never teach again. Abuse to children is not on.  

Now, another scenario. A student with learning difficulties says she has been hit by her teacher. She tells her parents. The school investigates and gives the student a chance to tell her story. But here is the catch. The student needs support to tell her story. She is given no choice in who supports her and is given the same person that might have hit her as support. The teacher is found not guiltyÉ  or was it okay for her to hit the student because she has "challenging behaviour"?  

Stories like this second picture make us angry. Now and then people file complaints against our organisation. When this happens, an independent investigation is held. All the accused can tell their side of the story and choose their support. The complainants also have their say. The independent group decides whether the complaint was fair. This is the responsible mode of action. 

This school has not properly investigated Sally's complaint. Instead, it has taken away her rights to have a real say in the investigation of what she says happened. It has made a vulnerable person more vulnerable. After all, it is known that people with learning difficulties are four times more likely to be abused than non-disabled people. It seems the school might have focused on what they call Sally's "challenging behaviours".  

Sally should be offered an advocate to support her and ensure that she has a proper say in the investigation. We advise Sally to make a report to the police because hitting someone is assault. She could ask her social worker for help. Sally should write to the school governors and the head of the education authority about what has happened. She may need a lawyer to make sure she can have her say. It is sad that people like us can be so discriminated against that even assault is seen as okay. 

Pasquelina Cerrone, Kathleen Franklin and Cheryl Priestley are members of learning difficulties self-advocacy group Milton Keynes People First. They would like to thank Voice UK for some of the ideas for what Sally can do. Voice UK supports people with learning difficulties involved in the criminal justice system and who have been abused. Their helpline number is 01332 202555.