A harsh punishment or fair enough?

meritaten

Dunroamin wrote: »

I completely disagree. To have a "crime" you must have the intention to commit it; intention is what matters, not the reaction of the "victim".

If child B intended to fool child A into believing that an invitation existed then this was a deliberately cruel and deeply unpleasant thing to do. The fact that child A has more sense than to believe in the invitation is neither here nor there.

well, we dont know that child B acted with malice do we? no-one has bothered to find out. and child A obviously didnt think so as she continued playing with her.

If it was with malice then the punishment is appropriate - if not then it is OTT.

meritaten

Cat501 wrote: »

aww meritaten, that's a bit harsh She wasn't to know that that little biatch was poisoning the other kids' minds against her son....I would, and have been up at my kids' school all guns blazing about bullying (and when we had physical bullying in our communal back area I even involved the community police officers as a last resort) but I have to say that if one of mine had a problem with what I thought was just one child, my initial response may well have been just the same as hers

sorry if it came across as harsh - I read it that mum knew what was going on and was of the opinion that it was up to the teacher to sort it out. Indeed she says so in her first sentence.
If she DIDNT know about this at the time and it only came out later, then I wholeheartedly apologise. it is easy to be wise in hindsight.

Spendless

Dunroamin wrote: »

If child B intended to fool child A into believing that an invitation existed then this was a deliberately cruel and deeply unpleasant thing to do. The fact that child A has more sense than to believe in the invitation is neither here nor there.

This is largely what a close friend of mine said to me, when I repeated the story. More to tell her of the difference of opinion between myself and my husband. DD though she didn't believe the invite to be true, was more inclined to think the child was 'setting her up' based on their previous history. Teacher must have thought this too. I know I've said punishment, but I do accept that the loss of a merit point at this point in the school year isn't a huge one. I do know for some kids that the stigma of going on amber they don't like. DD can get embarrassed and upset/ashamed when she goes on it, whereas it used to be water off a duck's back to DS! When I said punishment, I was thinking of the telling off child B got too.

As to who it is, well I think 'celeb' is probably the wrong word but can't think of how to describe without revealing the name which I don't wish to do, as I'd rather keep it a bit anonymous. DD has an email from this child star's family who act as managers thanking her for good wishes, so it is possible to have something from them that IS genuine.

Spendless

aliasojo wrote: »

I knew from the get go tbh.

I was surprised when someone said you were child B's Mum.

I wasn't. I'm used to threads on here. :whistle::silenced: I decide I would reveal who I was later on OR if it was suggested I was child B's Mum, whichever came first.

It is really, really hard to give enough info for people to give their opinion without saying too much that it's obvious you must know more about 1 version of events.

I left out the previous history between my daughter and this child, as I wanted opinions based on this story. A bit like not revealing previous convictions in court.

DD this year with regards to what has got on, has not got upset nor has she retailiated. She has remained polite whilst sticking up for herself. I ended up reporting it to teacher - who wasn't aware at this point as it alarmed me that she had started to consider it a normal school day for her.

I am really impressed that teacher got the children involved to all admit what they were doing. :eek::T My previous experience has been that they say 'wasn't me, was her' 'no wasn't me, was her'.

Anyway DD is now away from this group.

daska

If this incident was malicious in intent then it is neither here nor there that A wasn't taken in or upset, the teacher was correct to reprimand the intent; and this could possibly have been because the information provided by C made it clear that B's actions were malicious or even possibly because this is a repeat of behaviour that child B has previously been warned about. And with the best will in the world if child A was not witness to what child C saw her testimony would have been irrelevant to the teacher's decision.

Personally I would trust that the teacher was logical and justified in the tack they took and leave it at that.

Hopefully the change of class next year will result in a much more pleasant atmosphere for your daughter.

sarymclary

meritaten wrote: »

A lot of parents are of the view that Teachers rule supreme. However from what you go on to say - I am totally amazed that you didnt have a word with the teacher about this little madam!
Your poor son, I could cry for him - all that to deal with and mummy just tells him to 'play with other children'!!!
I was so gobsmaked I forgot to say that I think the teacher over-reacted a bit. I can understand why considering the past history of bullying - but perhaps she should have investigated further? unfortunately (like many of the posters) she immediately jumped to the conclusion this was done out of malice - and not just 'playing'!

I think my post explained that I had tried to tell him to ignore the nasty girl, and play with other children as a way of initially dealing with it, but it was her deviousness made it impossible. As with so many issues in schools, you don't always get the whole story in one go, so it can start with 'xyz didn't want to play this week, I dunno why?' (so it might not even be the day it happens). A bit of time passes, and your child might mention 'I didn't have anyone to play with today'. Without the knowledge that your child is actually being subjected to bullying, and if your child has never been on the receiving end of it before, it can be hard to spot. My son wasn't even aware of the control this girl had over the other children, that only became revealed to him inadvertently by another child after a few weeks had passed, but in the meantime, she would intermittently lull him into a false sense of security by pretending to be friendly again. He's the youngest of 4 children, and after 18 years of parenting, if I'd gone wading into school for every complaint and whinge, I'd have had a parking bay with my name in it! There's not much to be gained by getting involved in children's petty squabbles half the time, and a lot to lose. I'm fortunate that this approach has always meant that if I ask to see a teacher, they know full well it's for a valid problem, and I get not only listened to, but respected.

So, I already felt guilty enough, without be scolded for telling my previously friendly and popular son to go play with other, nicer children, since I didn't have the back-story to hand. By the time I did, the damage was already done, but you can be assured that I did speak to his teacher, and the issue was brought to light. He was never placed in a class with her again for the remaining years at that school.

There is a happy ending though, for anyone interested; he is now in secondary school, where he has flourished and grown so much in confidence. So far, he has been voted for several awards and prizes by his tutor group, head tutor, and 3 different teachers (we attended a prize-giving last week where he was awarded with 2 trophies). He was encouraged to take a part in a couple of drama productions; one doing a stand-up comedy routine and another where he was given a solo singing part, that got the only standing ovation of the night. He's hugely popular, and seen as a bit of a heartthrob by the girls... so the good guy does win in the end... sometimes and he's still only 11! (p.s. his tourettes is under control, and we manage it calmly as a family).

poet123

I could not agree more, as the mother of four sons.....you do need to pick your battles.

looby75

sarymclary wrote: »

There is a happy ending though, for anyone interested; he is now in secondary school, where he has flourished and grown so much in confidence. So far, he has been voted for several awards and prizes by his tutor group, head tutor, and 3 different teachers (we attended a prize-giving last week where he was awarded with 2 trophies). He was encouraged to take a part in a couple of drama productions; one doing a stand-up comedy routine and another where he was given a solo singing part, that got the only standing ovation of the night. He's hugely popular, and seen as a bit of a heartthrob by the girls... so the good guy does win in the end... sometimes and he's still only 11! (p.s. his tourettes is under control, and we manage it calmly as a family).

:T:j

Bless him I'm so pleased to hear he's doing well now.

FWIW I said exactly the same to my daughter when she was being bullied when at first it wasn't clear that it was bullying. When kids are young you never get the full story first time round, in fact you hardly ever get the full story first time round no matter how old they are lol

coolcait

daska wrote: »

If this incident was malicious in intent then it is neither here nor there that A wasn't taken in or upset, the teacher was correct to reprimand the intent; and this could possibly have been because the information provided by C made it clear that B's actions were malicious or even possibly because this is a repeat of behaviour that child B has previously been warned about. And with the best will in the world if child A was not witness to what child C saw her testimony would have been irrelevant to the teacher's decision.

Personally I would trust that the teacher was logical and justified in the tack they took and leave it at that.

Hopefully the change of class next year will result in a much more pleasant atmosphere for your daughter.

^^ This.

We don't know what Child C said to the teacher. We don't know what information the teacher got out of child B.

If Child C gave the teacher information which suggested that this was a deliberate set-up of Child A, and Child B admitted it, there would have been no reason to speak to Child A.

Given the background, and the way the teacher dealt with it then, I would be inclined to go for the view that the punishment was the very least that should have been given.

And, if all of that happens to be the case, Child C deserves kudos for reporting malicious bullying behaviour, and not taking the easy way out of muttering cravenly 'it's nothing to do with me'.

Taadaa

I agree - the teacher has made a balanced judgement on the information available to her. And she may have been working on the principle that it is better to nip these things in the bud, especially given the history. Even if there was no history, for whatever reason she has decided that it did warrant a punishment, and I think it fitted the crime in this instance.