Child being questioned in school
Discussion
overend said:
Derek Smith said:
Just to clarify:
The child was questioned without an appropriate adult being present and,
The information was going to be used against the child's mother.
Is that correct?
yesThe child was questioned without an appropriate adult being present and,
The information was going to be used against the child's mother.
Is that correct?
CoolHands said:
Derek are you suggesting that an appropriate adult must be present when a pupil is questioned about an incident in school by a teacher? Because I don't think that is correct.
Just asking a question.However, one of my little jobs is as safeguarding officer for a sports club. The rules when dealing with questioning children (under the age of 18) have just been modified and these are based, quite closely, on those used by the Army for discipline of cadets.
If I had allowed a club member to be treated in the way described by the OP then I would be removed from post and my club would be subject of censure and, I reckon, a hefty fine.
From what the OP states, the kid became distressed at one time, then refused to answer questions. The questioning then continued. It would appear that he had no independent person, or someone whose role was to look after his interests, present at this examination.
Whilst I am unaware of the specific regulations the school operates under, I'd be somewhat surprised to find that a distressed child should be questioned. I'd also be surprised if the questioning of a child as a witness in a discipline enquiry should not have an adult present.
If it is a serious incident then it should be done properly. If it is not serious then it should still be done properly.
In the club's case, if a child is being questioned then he/she should be questioned by someone he knows and with whom he gets on with. He will have a/both parent/s /other adult with him/her at all time. The procedures and questions should be explained to him/her before the enquiry. The room should be arranged with everyone sitting together and not in a formal manner.
It's no problem.
CoolHands said:
Derek are you suggesting that an appropriate adult must be present when a pupil is questioned about an incident in school by a teacher? Because I don't think that is correct.
If they were questioning the kid about something that the kid had done, then fair enough, but to involve the child in a disciplinary investigation about his/her mother, without an independent adult being present smacks of bullying. How is it going to affect the home environment if the mother gets disciplined purely on the word of her child, who was questioned under duress?I'd be pissed of it was one of my kids.
Derek Smith said:
Just asking a question.
However, one of my little jobs is as safeguarding officer for a sports club. The rules when dealing with questioning children (under the age of 18) have just been modified and these are based, quite closely, on those used by the Army for discipline of cadets.
If I had allowed a club member to be treated in the way described by the OP then I would be removed from post and my club would be subject of censure and, I reckon, a hefty fine.
From what the OP states, the kid became distressed at one time, then refused to answer questions. The questioning then continued. It would appear that he had no independent person, or someone whose role was to look after his interests, present at this examination.
Whilst I am unaware of the specific regulations the school operates under, I'd be somewhat surprised to find that a distressed child should be questioned. I'd also be surprised if the questioning of a child as a witness in a discipline enquiry should not have an adult present.
If it is a serious incident then it should be done properly. If it is not serious then it should still be done properly.
In the club's case, if a child is being questioned then he/she should be questioned by someone he knows and with whom he gets on with. He will have a/both parent/s /other adult with him/her at all time. The procedures and questions should be explained to him/her before the enquiry. The room should be arranged with everyone sitting together and not in a formal manner.
It's no problem.
The key to this really is what the mother is thought to have done which the OP refuses to answer.However, one of my little jobs is as safeguarding officer for a sports club. The rules when dealing with questioning children (under the age of 18) have just been modified and these are based, quite closely, on those used by the Army for discipline of cadets.
If I had allowed a club member to be treated in the way described by the OP then I would be removed from post and my club would be subject of censure and, I reckon, a hefty fine.
From what the OP states, the kid became distressed at one time, then refused to answer questions. The questioning then continued. It would appear that he had no independent person, or someone whose role was to look after his interests, present at this examination.
Whilst I am unaware of the specific regulations the school operates under, I'd be somewhat surprised to find that a distressed child should be questioned. I'd also be surprised if the questioning of a child as a witness in a discipline enquiry should not have an adult present.
If it is a serious incident then it should be done properly. If it is not serious then it should still be done properly.
In the club's case, if a child is being questioned then he/she should be questioned by someone he knows and with whom he gets on with. He will have a/both parent/s /other adult with him/her at all time. The procedures and questions should be explained to him/her before the enquiry. The room should be arranged with everyone sitting together and not in a formal manner.
It's no problem.
Derek if you are the safeguarding officer and what you have said is true you need to approach your club for some training.
Well it all seems a bit odd and as usual we won't get the whole story and doubtless the op will disappear and we'll never get an update. We don't even know what the offense is. Perhaps she nicked the tea urn & they're asking the kid does mum use a kettle or a 25 litre tea urn when she makes a cuppa in the morning at home.
overend said:
Sorry not to say exactly what she was supposed to have said. Paranoia I suppose. I know unlikely but don't want to reveal all, just in case. More concerned with treatment of friends son.
No theft involved, tea bags or urn.
The problem is, the key to if it was reasonable is about what they thought the mother had done/said.No theft involved, tea bags or urn.
If she is thought to have called the head teacher a cock for example then the whole situation seems a bit mob handed.
If 2k is missing and she is said to be bragging about it, it's different again as the should have just called the police.
If she has said she has been sending picture of herself in underwear to one of the children then the whole things a bit more reasonable.
-
I would suggest; the mother has done something wrong the child has been spoken to, sung like a canary and then likely concocted this "I didn't want to tell but they forced me to" story.
Fab32 said:
-
I would suggest; the mother has done something wrong the child has been spoken to, sung like a canary and then likely concocted this "I didn't want to tell but they forced me to" story.
I would suggest "mother" is a very strong character, and senior teachers don't want to lose their job to her, son is very introvert, and if we can lean on him, he might just squeal about something if we "plant" the seed.....then we can get rid, and our jobs are safe !!I would suggest; the mother has done something wrong the child has been spoken to, sung like a canary and then likely concocted this "I didn't want to tell but they forced me to" story.
There's always 2 sides, and I for one don't believe either of these options.........but you just never know.
mehball said:
Boohoo
Yes it's legal. The 17 year old could have easily walked out. The door wouldn't have been locked and she was't hand cuffed to a chair. If she answered questions then that's her own fault.
Yes, because as a 17 year old, being questioned by two adults in a serious manner, you would obviously know this & have enough composure to say "screw you guys, I'm outta here". Yes it's legal. The 17 year old could have easily walked out. The door wouldn't have been locked and she was't hand cuffed to a chair. If she answered questions then that's her own fault.
I'm with Otolith on this.
If a spouse cannot be forced to give evidence against their partner in court, then surely this must be on very shaky ground also, morally anyway, if not legally.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff