School bullying and autism/ADHD - duty of care?

I don't have kids, myself, but I get the impression that schools are failing to protect pupils from bullying, in general.

Like so many other aspects of society, the desire to protect people's rights has swung too far in the favour of those behaving incorrectly.

Or maybe I'm just getting old and cynical.

It's not an easy task for the school. Look at it from the other perspective, little Jimmy comes home with a black eye and a 3 day suspension. He says to parent I called a kid a **** and he punched me in the face. He has been given a 1 day suspension.

Bullying is a tough thing to deal with without any concrete evidence.

Difficult we’re  seeing it now from other angle and all we hear about is how kid Y hit so and so today. Every day and someone different being hit incl teachers. Kid Y needs cut some slack given he’s got issues and maybe it’s a response to things done or said to him.  And I can see how his reputation now might mean more likely other kids wind him up. But where do you draw the line. From my selfish angle how much slack do you give when whole class basically in fear of being the one who receives the lashing out. Fortunately our boys not been hit so far anyway. Been like this for months.

Agree with AA.

Also ADHD and Autism (are they formally diagnosed with autism or is it assumed knowledge) are tough things to live with. Getting a label/diagnosis is only the beginning and life will be full of shits trying to pull him apart way beyond when he leaves school. Part of the school's goals has to be to educate him how to deal with his condition. It's not a free pass to behave badly and punching people in the face is behaving badly, no matter how much they deserve it. It's going to be a tough few years for him sadly leading to a trickier life than many have.

That is in no way to condone bullying.

Is the child formally diagnosed with autism & ADHD? if so & their diagnoses are disabling them sufficiently in education the school could support the parents to submit an application for an Education Health Care Plan. The child may also benefit from a Positive Behaviour Support plan in order for them and others to better understand their triggers and find other strategies to avoid crisis situations. How well informed on neurodiversity are the school, perhaps a refresher would assist the staff. The school should be looking at implementing Reasonable Adjustments for a neurodiverse pupil. It's not ok for pupils to go home having been punched at school.

PS: your friend may need to ring fence their duty of care to the children she works with, she's acting on what are essentially Chinese whispers to her. The incidents are occuring in an educational setting who are fully aware of what's happening, it's not as if she's stumbled upon abuse occuring and no one is aware, her actions may be detrimental. If the boys parents don't think it's being addressed correctly within the school escalate it to the governors.

To answer specific points in the OP from my (semitrained, now lapsed) expertise as a sports club welfare officer.

Can a 3rd party outside the school get involved like this?

Absolutely. As they said they have a duty to, in fact we all do where we spot such situations, but someone with expertise and responsibility being told absolutely has a duty to report it appropriately and can face legal or professional sanction for not. A member of the public - maybe not to the point of sanction but what would you let go hoping someone else would spot and what would cause you to step in. Plenty of cases could have been avoided if only someone hadn't thought 'I hope someone has reported that'

Can it lead to anything positive? Can schools do more to mitigate these confrontations?

Yes and yes; certainly the first (don't know, can't act or intervene) - the second, I'll leave schools and teachers and others to add comment as some have above already.

@qwerty - agree there, if I understand what you mean by ringfencing means. Writing to them to say what they have been told, highlighting to the school and then leaving them to act on the (useful, hopefully) info seems appropriate. If based on a second hand 12 or 13 year old's version of event a louder alarm bell has rung then act more strongly. But they can't ignore it.

but I get the impression that schools are failing to protect pupils from bullying, in general.

The notion that you can protect kids from bullying is flawed. Obviously schools should try to do this and have procedures in place but it's always going to happen.

PS: your friend may need to ring fence their duty of care to the children she works with, she’s acting on what are essentially Chinese whispers to her. The incidents are occuring in an educational setting who are fully aware of what’s happening, it’s not as if she’s stumbled upon abuse occuring and no one is aware, her actions may be detrimental.

This. The school will quite rightly refuse to discuss the incident with a third party and if she's in that line of work herself she should know that.

But they can’t ignore it

If they've followed relevant procedures they pretty much can ignore it. Or at least simply issue a very brief reply. "Thank you for your concern but we are not at liberty to discuss matters like this with third parties "

By they, I mean the friend, sorry if that was confusing.

The school can act exactly as you said. Nowhere did I say the school has to take the concerned friend into the process, just that the friend has a duty to say something if (as per the OP) they are worried by what they have been told.

If they aren't worried of course they don't have to act. But they are, that's my point.

Cheers peeps.

I think the comments so far indicate this is not a simple situation and the bigger picture is always going to be complex.

Yes, the boy has been formally diagnosed but the parents have been refused entry to a more suitable school. The current school is known for taking a strong stance on bullying, wellbeing etc, but I can't testify to how well that is applied because I only hear through the ears and eyes of 12-13yr olds.

I'm wondering if the person our friend addresses her concern to might make a difference, eg is writing to the Head going to make the most noise?

By they, I mean the friend, sorry if that was confusing.

For someone from another establishment to raise a concern it would need to be a genuine child protection issue. If it's something less than that they should stay out of it.

Like I said, the friend was worried enough to be writing a letter, which seems to me to be appropriate. What honestly is the alternative? "I've heard some stuff that worries me but I'm not in full possession of the facts so I won't say anything at all"?

There's a statutory and/or professional obligation to report concerns, the only consideration is whether what they were told triggered a concern. We can argue about whether their threshold is right and the OP hasn't given enough detail about their son's explanation of what has been happening to really judge that by our own thresholds but if it triggers a concern there is then no option for the friend to ignore.

After that ball is back with the school to respond or not as they feel appropriate. And almost 100% certainly it won't involve the friend in the follow up

I’m wondering if the person our friend addresses her concern to might make a difference, eg is writing to the Head going to make the most noise?

I'll caveats this by saying it's possible there is something in what your son told her that rang real alarm bells.

However, just take a moment to think about what such a correspondence would look like. A letter or email regarding a child from a friend of the parent of that child's friend. What do the kid in questions parents think about this? The more I think about it, the more I think it's potentially a very bad idea.

only hear through the ears and eyes of 12-13yr olds.

This is the source of a huge amount of misinformation. Kids get stuff wrong in all sorts of ways and are rarely in possession of all the facts. They certainly won't have the full picture of how the incident has been dealt with.

Wot jonv said.

This is the source of a huge amount of misinformation. Kids get stuff wrong in all sorts of ways and are rarely in possession of all the facts. They certainly won’t have the full picture of how the incident has been dealt with.

For sure. Still better to flag than not and then wish you had.

What honestly is the alternative? “I’ve heard some stuff that worries me but I’m not in full possession of the facts so I won’t say anything at all”?

Like you say, it depends on the details but this is definitely an option. 'Stuff that worries me' could be everything from 'i'd have handled that differently' to evidence of harm. As qwerty points out, the school has dealt with the incident.

Ok, I vehemently disagree that's an option particularly to a professional with statutory and/or professional obligations. If they are at all worried the incident hasn't been dealt with properly, it's then a duty, not a choice of options.

Ok, I vehemently disagree that’s an option particularly to a professional with statutory and/or professional obligations. If they are at all worried the incident hasn’t been dealt with properly, it’s then a duty, not a choice of option

It's not a duty if it's just a matter of disagreeing with how the incident was handled. It is a duty if you think a child may have or could in the future be harmed.

Like I said, the friend was worried enough to be writing a letter, which seems to me to be appropriate. What honestly is the alternative? “I’ve heard some stuff that worries me but I’m not in full possession of the facts so I won’t say anything at all”?

There’s a statutory and/or professional obligation to report concerns, the only consideration is whether what they were told triggered a concern.

Previously on STW we've had similar discussions to this, only around adult behaviour.  "My neighbour does such-and-such, should I report it?  It might be nothing."

To my mind, it's a mistake to think that by reporting a potential crime or, in this case, incidents at school we are also acting as judge jury and executioner so it's best not to make a fuss.  Stick to the facts, such as we know them, leave emotion at the door.  It is then up to the school to decide what, if any, further action needs to be taken based on information provided.  They might decide everything is tickity-boo.  But they absolutely will not take action over any incidents they're unaware of.

How many other parents of school friends might be hearing the same story (or a totally different one) from their kids?

My son just explained the incident in detail because he saw the whole thing, and asked me "What if this particular teacher is really bad at dealing with this type of issue? Bad kids get away with a lot in her lesson and (autistic/ADHD boy) is an easy target for her."

If that's the case, then maybe this teacher isn't up to the expected standard.

Either way, I've said that I'm going to schedule an EOY catch up call with his tutor and mention this along with my concerns for the bigger picture (on behalf of the wellbeing of all pupils). This way, there's no 3rd party intervention.

This way, there’s no 3rd party intervention.

Sensible.

Stuff like this has brought back memories of the torrid time our son had at school 30 odd years ago.He was placed in a special school from 5 until by the age of 11 he had worked so hard they decided he could move to a mainstream school.. That's when the problems started, other kids had formed friendships and the special school was seen by the mainstream kids as ripe for every type of bullying going .

They used to wind him up knowing he would react and get sent out of class . Lost count the number of times we had to go to the school about it , but never were the little shits who started ever disciplined even though the school knew who they were.

It followed him out of school and his sister and me.

Whenever we were out there was always name calling because I was his dad or daughter was his sister . It continued long after he left school with the bullies younger siblings who never knew our son . One day I snapped when a group of kids were hurling abuse as I cycled through town . I have chased , they scattered I caught one of them

He said " It wasn't me " I replied I don't care which one of you it was I'm fed up with it , you don't know our son have never met him wouldn't know what he looks like just pass the message on I've had this crap for over 10 years just give it a test . After that it stopped thankfully.

OP you have my sympathy kids are horrible sometimes.

My son was diagnosed with autism about a year ago and is in year 7. His school manages SEND children particularly well. He has a designated staff member in the SEN team he can approach with any problems, and an area he can go to de-stress. All the staff do regular training and they are prepared to be flexible with some things (e.g. homework) when it helps. They also have lessons with the children that cover SEND topics. So I would say the school has a big role to play in this.

There's definitely a role for 3rd parties too - including parents. We can (and do) speak to the SEN team when we feel there are matters that he is struggling with and they are usually acted on. I do recognise that original description ("the lad was provoked – as is often the case – by the usual suspects" and "he's an easy target") - that's what we experienced at primary school where the SEN support was less well resourced (not surprisingly as it was a much smaller operation).

I would also say that things that happen outside school can also have a bearing. By the end of the day his emotional batteries are usually drained, especially if he's been masking all day, so he's much more likely to respond badly to being provoked. So we try to make sure that he gets proper time to rest and recharge his batteries once he's home from school.

"Yes, the boy has been formally diagnosed but the parents have been refused entry to a more suitable school."

If the boy and his parents wish to move to a more suitable school catering more specifically for additional needs then they'll need to evidence that his current school can't meet his needs as listed in his EHCP, this often involves taking the Local Authority to court in a tribunal, the additional complexity to this is the cost which only makes it accessible to those who can fund it, its expensive. Those with get more, those without get less.

Diagnosis or not, Equality Act 2010 protects him here.

This is very clear disability discrimination by the school - s15, s20, s21 breaches as a minimum, arguably harrasment too.

Feel free to PM me and I'll gladly share a ton of resources and sample letters from our own legal battle with a school for our son.

Kids will always be horrible to other kids and bullying it won't stop, how we manage bullying can always evolve.

Kids these days are more broadminded than my generation in regard to neurodiversity, gender identity etc, perhaps some awareness sessions of autism and ADHD to the pupils as a whole may help some of them better understand where the kids coming from. You won't always reach them all, but it may assist with what his peers deem acceptable in terms of classroom etiquette etc.

This is very clear disability discrimination by the school – s15, s20, s21 breaches as a minimum, arguably harrasment too.

That's a very strong statement based on not a lot of information, much of which is second or third hand.

@spin - I've got no problem making strong statements in this situation. We should be looking at this through the lens of the affected child, they're the person that matters here.

Ultimately if a few scary letters and the fear of escalation force the hand if the school to support this lad, then all good.

The problem with your "strong statement" is you are making very (overly) confident assertions like "This is very clear disability discrimination by the school" on the basis of an incredibly brief third hand summary of event you know no more about, originating from the mouth of one 12 year old boy who is emotionally invested.

Yes, there might well be more the school could be doing. There might well be more that the school are doing that our 12 year witness is not privy to. And yes, the OP's friend who is going to write to the school will do no harm and might well do some good. But overly certain comments such as your based on as little as you have at you disposal certainly are not.

Hard disagree - and I make thus statement on the basis of 2 1/2 years of battling it, learning case law, the anticipatory requirements of EA2010 and more. Failing to proactively make adjustments and adaptations to policies, or applying behaviour/disciplinary policies that disadvantage a child whose condition makes it harder for them to adhere to those policies, is discrimination. It's very, very clear in law, and sadly not enough parents have the means or the knowledge to force the system to meet its obligations.

I'd be more than happy to look at the specifics of this, overlay it with our own experience, the relevant case aspects and our barrister's submissions if that helps OP 👍

perhaps some awareness sessions of autism and ADHD to the pupils as a whole may help some of them better understand where the kids coming from

I think the problem here is that whilst there is a statutory PHSE curriculum, neurodiversity is not part of it and it's up to the school whether it's covered or not. Some schools are better then others when it comes to this...

Northernsoul - Ofsted would like to see a school reacting proactively to peer on peer abuse so it could be implemented by the schools Designated Safeguarding Lead separate to the curriculum. It may assist all the children involved (or not) and would give the school a nice safeguarding case study to present to Ofsted.

I make thus statement on the basis of 2 1/2 years of battling it, learning case law, the anticipatory requirements of EA2010 and more. Failing to proactively make adjustments and adaptations to policies, or applying behaviour/disciplinary policies that disadvantage a child whose condition makes it harder for them to adhere to those policies, is discrimination.

How do you know the school hasn't made adjustments to their policy?

As per OP, the lad received a harsher punishment. That's all that's needed in law.

Northernsoul – Ofsted would like to see a school reacting proactively to peer on peer abuse so it could be implemented by the schools Designated Safeguarding Lead separate to the curriculum.

Fair point - in my child's school PHSE is on the curriculum for Y7 but is covered in form lessons after that and so delivered in a different way, but they do address neurodiversity directly. My point was more one of what is statutory vs what is actually addressed (which is usually more than statutory but varies).

Hard disagree – and I make thus statement on the basis of 2 1/2 years of battling it, learning case law, the anticipatory requirements of EA2010 and more. Failing to proactively make adjustments and adaptations to policies, or applying behaviour/disciplinary policies that disadvantage a child whose condition makes it harder for them to adhere to those policies, is discrimination. It’s very, very clear in law, and sadly not enough parents have the means or the knowledge to force the system to meet its obligations.

You are making my case for me. You clearly feel very passionately about this and your direct experience, and well done you for making a difference in your specific case. But to overlay your experience directly on top of the one on the OP without having the self effacement to appreciate you do not know enough about this specific situation beyond a summary of a 12 year old's account  to make categorical statements is diminishing your contribution.

A more positive contribution would be to empathise with the op, then tell the narrative of your experience and what actions were taken to make positive change.

@convert without wanting to get into an argument here, the incidents and outcomes directly correlate to specific points in law that we have used. They also directly correlate with specific case law in the Upper Tribunal too.

On a "good faith" basis that the OP's account is truthful (and there's no reason doubt it),  there's a solid case to send a good shot across the bows at the school, quoting relevant points and putting the onus on them to fix this rather than face risk of a FTT case and the cost to defend.

It's something I'm passionate about and happy to signpost anyone to relevant resources, social media groups etc for further advice, but even at that first post, its clear something is very, very wrong and from  my own learning of the law around it, the school are exposed here.

but even at that first post, its clear something is very, very wrong

It really isn't. Maybe legal action was the way to go in your case, it's impossible to say that it would be here.

And anyway, it's not the OP's kid who was at the centre of it.

Sadly in SEND cases, legal action (or the threat of it) is the only way to get results. Local authorities lose over 98% of SEND Tribunal cases brought against them. Many kids fall through the cracks because of an opaque system that exhausts parents, and the only way to force schools, SLTs and LAs to meet their legal obligations is to go legal. Asking nicely, trying to work together all fail. There's a reason SEND parents are such fighters - we have to be.

Well, that escalated quickly.

perhaps some awareness sessions of autism and ADHD to the pupils as a whole may help some of them better understand where the kids coming from.

This might bear fruit, you know.  We once had an extraordinary general assembly at my high school, fronted by the Head which was something only reserved for Very Serious issues.  One kid had called another a spaz, and as it turned out he actually was (what we'd call cerebral palsy today I suppose).  It was a proper "oh shit" moment for the assembled kids, that one session of awareness killed that line of bullying stone dead.

This thread doesn't read especially well....

You son reports that what he perceives as a bad incident has occurred tho' the school has a reputation for being good with these things.  He's reported this to a third party , a friend who works in an unknown context with similar children.  Based on these 'facts' she's now got a duty of care.  What does she do as a job to be blunt?

Notice a lack of fact in the above.

You're going to mention the above? What do you want them to do? What are you going to do if they say ir's dealt wih , none of your business, or that your son is not seeing the complete picture (to be polite)

If the school have a reputation for being good with these things let them get on with it

the lad received a harsher punishment.

Because he punched someone in the face, the other bully did not punch anyone.

Edit, make that two people a boy and a girl

What are you going to do if they say ir’s dealt wih , none of your business, or that your son is not seeing the complete picture (to be polite)

Then that's fine, the concern has been raised and they can act on it or not as they see appropriate.

If the school have a reputation for being good with these things let them get on with it

Even good organisations miss stuff or get stuff wrong. The school can't act if it isn't aware; or may want to reflect on how they did act. The OP says (in separate posts)

A teacher saw the incident and it appears the lad received a harsher punishment than the other two.

and

“What if this particular teacher is really bad at dealing with this type of issue? Bad kids get away with a lot in her lesson and (autistic/ADHD boy) is an easy target for her.”

and a possible interpretation of that is that the school hasn't dealt with it, a (possibly substandard) teacher has dealt with it.

I know that's what-if, but it's unclear enough that I wouldn't have a problem in raising to the school so they can deal with it, or tell me they're aware and have dealt with it.

As I said, I used to be a club Welfare Officer, I'm also a newly appointed trustee for a charity that deals with vulnerable children at times. I haven't yet re-done my formal training on safeguarding but I opened up the docs I've been sent and here's a couple of salient points about duties of the people that work for the charity in any capacity. I'm sure they're pretty similar in any sports, cubs, whatever. Notice a lack of facts in the below - particularly the 'feels wrong' bit.

Exercise ‘professional curiosity’, including questioning, challenging and raising concerns when something
feels ‘wrong’;

Staff may become aware of, or suspect, harm or abuse when they:
- Witness a harmful or abusive act;
- Are told directly by a child, parent or carer or someone else about harm or abuse to the child;
- Are told something indirect by a child, parent or carer or someone else that leads to suspicion of harm or
abuse to the child

and

Concerns about harm or abuse to a child must always be shared and should be shared as soon as possible.
It is not your responsibility to investigate or verify concerns of harm or abuse.

Now, someone can pick me up on this about whether the incident in the OP is harm or abuse, but the PRINCIPLE is the same, that it's a duty to flag it and where it goes after is not your concern at that point. Assuming someone else is looking into it or has done it isn't good enough, particularly to someone trained or professional.

Last night we saw some friends, one of whom works with similarly challenged kids.

Again, to me if someone works with similarly challenged (ADHD, autistic) kids then I'm going to make an assumption they are trained to some degree and therefore have a similar set of expectations as outlined above.

and a possible interpretation of that is that the school hasn’t dealt with it, a (possibly substandard) teacher has dealt with it.

Now, if a teacher has seen an incident of physical assault and no other teacher is involved afterwards my flabber would be well and truly gasted. This sort of thing would go straight to a head of year/head of house and then straight up to SLT. The punishment isn't mentioned by the op but an exclusion would occur at my school. If the child involved was on the SEN register this may be an internal isolation type exclusion but it would not be down to the teacher who witnessed it to decided punishment unless that teacher was the member of SLT who deals with behaviour and even then others would be involved.

I agree - but playing what if's, I'm pretty sure that would cause another professional versed in these things to be worried enough to flag it to the school. The OP and follow up isn't clear enough to know.

Anyway, it wasn't my intent to particularly discuss the case, much less 'what-if' scenarios of it - back to my OP on the subject answering the very specific question of

Can a 3rd party outside the school get involved like this?

The answer is still a big fat

Absolutely. As they said they have a duty to, in fact we all do where we spot such situations, but someone with expertise and responsibility absolutely has a duty to report it appropriately and can face legal or professional sanction for not.

They don't need to 'know' any specific facts, as per other post can be as weak as a feeling. Better over cautious than stuff gets missed.

It is entirely possible the professional friend is an interfering busybody too. And that the school has dealt with this perfectly and their worries are unfounded. Still right to raise them though. And I'd hope that a decent school with a decent policy on this sort of thing would thank them for the concern and say it's been / being looked into, even if their immediate response is more '**** off and leave us alone'

and he punched two of them (a boy and girl) in the face.

Most schools will deal with physical abuse more harshly than verbal abuse regardless of the people involved. Most schools will teach kids that fighting is an absolute line not to be crossed. Most schools will teach kids that they report to a teacher any verbal abuse they've received from other kids, and not to take it upon themselves to react to it, or otherwise retaliate. Those are fairly standard SOP for most high schools.

Laddo broke two major rules that are enforced pretty robustly at most schools. I'm not massively surprised that he was dealt with harshly. That the OP's son is pissed off at this, is to his credit as a mate. They both know now how to deal with any abuse in the future. That's probably where it should stop.

As a Head of Year for 12 years, been there, done that, and seen/dealt with a number of similar situations.

At the core of this, is the school's response to that one particular incident. Sanctioning each student in line with the published behaviour policy (meaning the ASD student receives the more serious sanction here) does not automatically make it a discriminatory action and there are usually better ways to resolve/improve things with a decent school without resorting to legal process.

SEN status provides context in these situation, not excuses nor a 'free pass'. Reasonable adjustments should kick in prior to any potential incident - if this is an ongoing situation then school should have adjusted social times/duties/etc. to try and mitigate. ELSA or similar support could also already be in place.

Reasonable adjustments could be applied to any consequence put in place, but imposing a suspension on an SEN student does not automatically mean the school has discriminated.

All students, SEN status notwithstanding, need to be supported to understand that there are boundaries and consequences when those boundaries are broken.

Bottom line. We don't have detail of context or what else the school has done so it's really tough to judge. My concern is that this looks like it could be one of a series of similar events, and the school don't (again, from our limited information) seem to have a strategy in place to mitigate things. For me, that's the real potential problem.

Thanks again peeps.

I'm going to chat to the form tutor as I mentioned yesterday, and it looks like I've got more context from some of the replies to here to assist with that.

FTR this is one incident, but I've heard more than enough about how much the 'bad' kids get away with since the start of yr 7. Added to that, my son was implicated in a misdemeanour 3 months ago that resulted in me receiving a call from the deputy head stating he will be issuing an invoice (for repairs) and had CCTV evidence... after gathering my son's side of the story, I shared it with him and diplomatically made it clear that I would need to see said evidence before settling any costs, and that my stance was based on principles not financials. That was the last I heard of it, which makes me question the legitimacy of how well they supposedly deal with other issues involving bad behaviour - especially as they're supposed to be very well respected in this area.

Read the first post only, so apologies if anything else has already been said and I'm repeating.

I'm the parent of a similar child to your son's friend. My lad is 13, diagnosed ADHD (full list, he defines it!) and we are working towards finding out if he is autistic but we strongly suspect he is. He has no empathy, has real problems controlling his emotions. At primary he did not display too many symptoms. In secondary, and following some challenges at his mother's (leading to him moving in with me), he had real problems. Resulting in similar circumstances as you describe. He was regularly targeted (school have admitted this, too late) due to his extreme response to certain situations, yet seemed to be the only one being punished. He's spent the whole of year 8 up to this week at a PRU and on a reduced timetable, had essentially no education as the PRU cannot meet his needs. This week he starts at a proper Send school and I cannot have enough hope that it works out.

If there is a 3rd part person who has experience, especially in a workplace environment, with kids like you describe and like my son, then their help could be vital. My experience is that the mainstream school couldn't and didn't want to help my son, same goes for the PRU.  Neither have listens to my concerns nor my advice and the result was exactly as I warned them. It's not easy for them, I understand that, but it's much more difficult for the kids.

You should give a huge amount of credit to your son for being to kind and caring to a kid who struggles so much and can (if like mine) be quite full on and overwhelming at times. Most kids don't care, so to have someone to look over those kids with struggles is so incredibly impressive. I hope it works out for all, chances are the school won't ever change, though, and the kid may be better off elsewhere.

Most schools will deal with physical abuse more harshly than verbal abuse regardless of the people involved. Most schools will teach kids that fighting is an absolute line not to be crossed. Most schools will teach kids that they report to a teacher any verbal abuse they’ve received from other kids, and not to take it upon themselves to react to it, or otherwise retaliate. Those are fairly standard SOP for most high schools.

I've often wondered about this.  Surely people realise that getting punched in the face once (and after trying to wind up a vulnerable person over a long period of time) is nothing compared to low level abuse that can carry on over months or even years.

I wonder if the reason it is dealt with more harshly is a variation of the McNamara fallacy.  If you can't easily observe what is important, make what you can easily observe important.

Punching is easy to observe.  Constant low level torment and abuse is not.

Also, I think your son is an absolute superstar, @spacemonkey.  I'd be very proud if my son should the same empathy and moral values as your son does.

Punching is easy to observe.  Constant low level torment and abuse is not.

I was about to say the same thing in reply before you answered your own question.

Someone said earlier about the punishment for thumping someone being exclusion.  I've got to admit, I'm a little surprised by this.  The number of scraps I saw at high school, there would have been more kids excluded than not.  It was easily a weekly occurrence.

Cougar, the 1980's were a long time ago

Someone said earlier about the punishment for thumping someone being exclusion

Exclusion as punishment is essentially a thing of the past in many (if not all) local authorities in Scotland. You can exclude to give time for planning/risk assessment after a serious incident but not as a punishment.

Cougar, the 1980’s were a long time ago

This is one of the problems with a lot of discussion around education, many people's experience is out of date.

If you look at other countries you'll find in many that any sort of formal punishment is a thing of the past.