The mother of a nine-year-old autistic boy who alleges her son was assaulted by a teacher says she went through “weeks of hell” not knowing if he was safe at school, a fitness-to-teach inquiry has heard.
The teacher is facing allegations of professional misconduct after he is said to have “reefed” ear defenders – or headphones – from the head of the pupil who was sensitive to noise and threatened to deny him lunch, according to a special needs assistant (SNA) who says she witnessed the incident.
The school’s principal is also facing professional misconduct allegations after he is said to have failed to inform the pupil’s parents of both allegations when they were first made by the SNA, the inquiry heard.
Both the teacher and the principal have rejected the allegations.
Council to run the rule over Portobello house revival as Hugh Wallace deviates from the plan
Cathy Gannon: ‘I used to ride my pony to school, tie him up and ride him back’
The Guildford Four’s Paddy Armstrong: ‘People thought I was going to be bitter and twisted when I came out of prison’
Plane-spotters unite: A trip into the high-altitude universe of ‘AvGeeks’
The inquiry has directed that the names of the teaching staff, the pupil, parent and the school remain anonymous.
The pupil, who has limited verbal ability, was in an autism class of six pupils with one teacher and two special needs assistants (SNAs) at a large mainstream primary school.
The boy’s mother told the inquiry on Wednesday that she became aware of what she described as an “assault” from the SNA about a week after the alleged incident on February 5th, 2019.
“I was shocked, devastated. I could see from her she was devastated as well – they had a special bond,” she said.
The mother said she was formally notified about the incident by the school principal 19 weeks later – in late June 2019 – once an internal disciplinary hearing in the school had concluded.
‘Weeks of hell’
“It had been 19 weeks of hell, putting him on the bus every morning, not knowing if he was going to be safe,” she said.
Under cross-examination, Helen Callinan SC for the principal and teacher, put it to the mother that her evidence was undermined by the fact that she knew about the alleged incident yet never mentioned it to the principal and continued to send her child to school, despite her “trepidation”.
The mother responded that she did not want the SNA - who was her “eyes and ears” in the classroom - to get into trouble for reporting the incident and assumed the principal would eventually notify her.
Ms Callinan also put it to the mother that the SNA’s initial complaint never mentioned the word “assault”, “reefed” or “forceful”. The description of the incident “grew in stature” and was “embellished” over time, she said.
She said the teacher’s evidence would be that there was “no removal of headphones, no threat to prevent the child having lunch, no screaming, shouting or any kind of loud speaking into the child’s ears – and no retelling it by you will make it any more credible because you weren’t there.”
The mother said the SNA was “incredibly upset” about the incident and she had no reason do disbelieve her. “She had nothing to gain – and everything to lose,” the mother said.
The mother also said she raised concerns about her son’s lack of education with the teacher at a meeting on February 5th 2019 – the same day as the alleged assault – and the “hours” he was spending in the yard, “walking around in circles”.
At an education planning meeting with the teacher, the mother said there was no evidence of a timetable and she questioned whether the teacher really believed in her son.
She said the teacher then “became angry and red-faced, saying ‘I don’t take kindly you coming in here saying I don’t care about him’“.
Ms Callinan SC, however, said the teacher would give evidence to say he had produced a timetable and followed what had been put in place by his previous teacher and added it.
She said the mother had sought to “unseat or destroy the teacher” in the meeting and there was evidence that she had sought to “blank and ostracise” anyone who did not agree with her.
She said a bus escort would give evidence to say that when the principal passed her in the school, the mother remarked that she regretted that “she didn’t have a gun” in a threatening manner.
The mother said she had, in fact, used an old saying of her mother’s – “the sight you see when you have no gun” - about someone you dislike.
The inquiry continues and has been adjourned to a later date.
- Sign up for push alerts and have the best news, analysis and comment delivered directly to your phone
- Find The Irish Times on WhatsApp and stay up to date
- Our In The News podcast is now published daily – Find the latest episode here
