Thread by @WardellR

Before I clock off for the weekend, it’s worth telling a story that needs to be told as part of the “No Excuses” vs “All Behaviour is Communication” disputes I sometimes see on Twitter. (This is from today’s contextual safeguarding conference).

(THREAD)

This was the ‘case’ of a teenage boy who was subjected to a serious physical and sexual assault by his peers.

As part of the follow up to this assault a review was undertaken of all the previous involvement with this boy and his family.

It quickly became clear that this boy had a history of persistently truanting from school and when in school being regularly late for lessons, and being disruptive in lessons by going out to the toilet.

This case was dealt with by the school in the usual (for many school) way; punitive sanctions for truanting, lateness and disruption of lessons. None of thes sanctions changed this boy’s behaviour.

When nothing changed, things got a bit more creative; the school and social care looked at the family situation and identified that a younger sibling had additional needs. So - they reasoned - maybe the effort needed to be directed there.

“Is everything all right at home?”

Much effort spent oh helping the family with the sibling in case that was what was getting in the way of older brother going to school and behaving well while there.

(I’m not knocking this; families with children with additional needs often need more help than they get).

But the older boy’s behaviour at school did not change.

Then the family was threatened with punitive sanctions for the persistent truanting.

And /this/ threatened punishment of the family changed the boy’s behaviour. The truanting stopped and his attendance and behaviur improved.

Result. Right?

Improved attendance ticks the outcomes box, yes?

No.

What followed was the physical and sexual assault by this boy’s peers.

And what was learned in the aftermath of that was this....

This boy needed to be late to be safe. If he came to school at the same time as his peers, he was assaulted.

If he arrived in a classroom /after/ the teacher he was sanctioned for being late.

But if he arrived before the teacher, he was assaulted by his peers.

If he used the toilet during class time (disruptive though this may have been to his, or others’ learning), he was not assaulted, but if he went during break, he was.

He did everything he could to keep himself safe, until his family was threatened. And then he capitulated and complied. And was seriously harmed as a result of his own defences being removed.

No one had thought to discover what the school environment/context might be contributing to his risk of harm.

And nothing about the school environment had made him feel safe enough to share what was happening to him.

That account of various organisations trying so hard but still getting it so, so wrong is going to stay with me for a long time.

(I shared it so it stays with you too).

(With apologies for the various typos I have now spotted.)