Why a teacher DOES NOT have to report abuse

[robert totterdell]

Hi All

I thought that you might like to know this.

In the UK we have no statute law to require a teacher (or anyone else) to report sexual or other abuse.

In some Commonwealth countries; some states of the US and several EU countries (even Romania) it is a criminal offence if a teacher does not report knowledge of another person committing abuse against a child.

So in the UK if teacher A knows that teacher B is sexually abusing a child (up to 18) there is no legal requirement for him/her to report the matter - to ANYONE.

Their contract may require this but contract law is superseded by statute law. Thus if their contract said you must kill someone every day, this is in breach of statute law an thus is overruled.

The lack of statute law is the same in reporting abuse. So teacher A knows what teacher B is doing but is not required to tell anyone - at all - about it. If they are held in breach of their contract and dismissed they can argue unfair dismissal and will win.

Guess that this highlights part of the problem at CH in the past BUT it still applies so, so much for safeguarding.

There is an organisation that is working to get the law changed but a long way to go.

Again hope that this helps and thanks for your support.

[J.R.]

That really a frightening situation.

LEGALLY - No statute to protect the pupil.

MORALLY - One has to wonder about the morals of the teacher who is 'in the know'.

[Mid A 15]

No wonder people say the Law is an ass.

Unbelievable.

[CodFlabAndMuck]

It's different, but along the lines of dont walk past on the other side, it is a criminal offence in Canada to drive past another vehicle which may possibly be broken down and not offer assistance

Its because of the harsh winters

I was once parked by the side of the road, in a fairly remote area, consulting a map and another driver stopped to check I was OK

[yamaha]

Hi Robert, we let off steam about that ridiculous fact on here couple of months ago. Misprision as it is known in law - the deliberate concealment of one's knowledge of a crime.

It is astonishing that the ineffectual Mrs. May (Home Sec. / P.M. for over 8 years) hasn't taken the initiative to enact this for crimes of child abuse.

To be effective at inducing the senior managements from years past at places like CH to come clean there needs to be no statute of limitations and the penalties need to be severe.

IICSA are very slowly holding hearings on this later in September and next April - as if hearings should be necessary. Here is their news statement:

Inquiry announces further seminar on mandatory reporting
2 August 2018
Further to the seminar on mandatory reporting on 27 September, the Inquiry is today announcing that it will hold a second seminar in April 2019. The first seminar will look at existing obligations to report child sexual abuse in England and Wales, and at the experiences of other countries where mandatory reporting legislation exists. The second seminar will consider the arguments for and against the introduction of mandatory reporting legislation in England and Wales, and the practical considerations involved in introducing such a law.

1. Of course, as you point out, there are no existing obligations. 2. Who gives a sh1t what other countries do! 3. Who argues against it? ... the perpetrators? 4. The "practical consideration" that the number of prosecutions will be increased and the number of such crimes will be reduced, either by deterrence or simply by shortening the perps' careers, is sufficient to out weigh any other considerations.

[sejintenej]

, it is a criminal offence in Canada to drive past another vehicle which may possibly be broken down and not offer assistance

France also - they wanted to prosecute the journalists / photographers at the Princess Diana crash site but decided that there were already adequate trained people present (IMHO a get out)

[sejintenej]

1. Of course, as you point out, there are no existing obligations. 2. Who gives a sh1t what other countries do! 3. Who argues against it? ... the perpetrators? 4. The "practical consideration" that the number of prosecutions will be increased and the number of such crimes will be reduced, either by deterrence or simply by shortening the perps' careers, is sufficient to out weigh any other considerations.

I strongly disagree.
Item ! - a disgrace
Item 2 - everyone should. They may have ideas which we can import and this and the broken down car (see above) deserve consideration
item 3. anyone who can get their name in the papers or face on TV
item 4. agree BUT "they" will argue that the prisons are already too full and the courts too busy to handle the extra cases. Of course the police have already stopped even recording a number of crimes including some types of theft and fraud so there is the risk that they will ignore that offence as well - it's easier to catch speeding drivers.

[Golfer]

This thread is a nonsense.
A teacher has a duty to report abuse and any suspicion of abuse.
Crazy original post from someone who knows nothing,

[Golfer]

I strongly suggest the moderators delete this entire thread.

[yamaha]

A teacher has a duty to report abuse and any suspicion of abuse.

Haven't the recent CH teacher trials been reported on your planet?

Perhaps you could catch up on the one where the teacher was considered by the headmaster and his deputy to be a "CH success" and quietly moved on to another school; or the one where the victim was ignored by an assistant chaplain and dissuaded from perusing the complaint by another teacher - that was the same victim who was subjected to the deplorable "beard rash" comment by yet another teacher.

Actually you do know about these cases. A couple of months ago you tried to raise a lame defense of the assistant chaplain.

Perhaps you are being cute with semantics and by "report abuse" you mean report to the teacher's immediate senior, not report to the police - a variation on one of your colleague's posts last month which implied that a incident had been reported to the police but in fact just meant reported up the chain within CH.

The point of misprision - and of Robert's post - is that it would be a criminal offense for teachers to behave like that and smugly say that they are discharging their duty by passing the information to their seniors.

Crazy original post from someone who knows nothing,

It is getting late and you may be tired and emotional, but you should really be ashamed of that part of your comment.

[Golfer]

I'm not emotional and I'm certainly not ashamed to continue to say that this thread is nonsense.

[Golfer]

And it should be deleted.

[charlesr]

I'm not emotional and I'm certainly not ashamed to continue to say that this thread is nonsense.

It's not helpful to start criticizing the OP in such terms when he has (legally proven) reason to raise these points.

He does err slightly in his argument that statute overrides contract. It's correct to say that a contract term cannot require you to break the criminal law, but it's not right to say that a contract term requiring some course of action when there isn't an equivalent statute requirement would be struck down for being contrary to public policy.

See Golfer, there's a way of debating things without getting over-argumentative...

Sent from my SGP611 using Tapatalk

[J.R.]

This thread is currently under review by Moderators. I have told Julian my view.

[jtaylor]

Following conversations between the mods, we've agreed to leave the posts to stand for now, as the negatives seem to have been answered and the posts speak for themselves.
I'd like to encourage respectful dialog and argument across the Forum please - makes our lives easier as moderators, and avoids causing offence.