|Re: Links on Tuesday Morning|
Poster: Runfellow Posted: 2012/5/18 9:58:22
I will lead with the consensus building statement of "I think we both agree that the police should be involved if there is abuse"
Wrong. Police should be involved if you have any cause to believe a child - any child - has been abused. The law doesn't say "if there is abuse" because it's not your job to determine whether or not the accusation is valid. This isn't a unique concept; if someone tells you they've been mugged and tells you to call the police, you wouldn't first demand to speak to a few witnesses before calling the police.
I would want the facts from my child and possibly the other two children involved or a child that was present and saw what happened. I would want to talk to the principal to get the teacher immediately removed from access to children until an investigation is complete.
Let me get this straight: if your child alleges that he or she has been abused, you're going to go down to the school yourself, question other children, and if your arbitrary standards are satisfied, tell the principal to remove a teacher from the classroom, all before you call the authorities? Do you really think it would appropriate for a parent to interrogate students at a school over abuse allegations? Even if you called their parents first, the first thing out of any reasonable parent's mouth would be "why the hell haven't you called the police yet?" How seriously do you expect the principal to take you when you tell them that you have a enough suspicion that a teacher should be removed from a classroom, but you haven't bothered to report it to the police yet?
I would have, however, protected my child which is my main goal as a parent. You'll know what that fully means someday.
Apparently you still don't. At some point it's going to be easier just to admit you were wrong than to keep doubling down.