[Closed] STW Morality Question of the day

The internet is not real life. There are no winners. I wouldn’t have sacked someone who was giving a good service and who has served a conviction. Either you believe in restitution or you don’t?

Why not just tattoo “sec offender” on her forehead. Just to be sure in those zoom coaching sessions?

But she said “it wasn’t how it seemed” and how she was a victim in all of this. Never once admitting she’d done anything wrong, or showing any sort of remorse.

And in a Scooby Doo fashion "she'd have gotten away with it if wasn't for those meddling kids"

Not sure why you're bothered, you were gonna bin her anyway OP.

So, you were going to leave your PT anyway, and you've now left the PT. If nothing had come out of the woodwork you were leaving, stuff has come out and you're leaving....... what's morality question again?

I think even sex offenders (except those with restrictive orders) have the right for their sentence, once served, to be spent. I think that also having had a history of a sex offence follow you around for a bit, that you'd also be a bit defensive about it, so I can forgive (or at least understand why) that also.

I think if you get a useful service from her, and you're in no danger from her, why would you not continue to use her?

Can you "sack" a PT ?... surely you just stop going and dont pay them....

This thread is useless without pics.....

Lets be honest.  It was pretty much every school boys fantasy.

So, you were going to leave your PT anyway, and you’ve now left the PT. If nothing had come out of the woodwork you were leaving, stuff has come out and you’re leaving……. what’s morality question again?

Is it that OP doesn't want to give the impression that he's sacking the PT off as a result of finding out she was a wrong'un?

Its not about you though is it?
You were already on your way out the door.
Your other half though , theres the moral dilema.
Stick and show support for a known sex offender ,or leave and bang another nail in her coffin
( figuritvely speaking )

The internet is not real life. There are no winners. I wouldn’t have sacked someone who was giving a good service and who has served a conviction. Either you believe in restitution or you don’t?

Why not just tattoo “sec offender” on her forehead. Just to be sure in those zoom coaching sessions?

I do, it wasn't the fact she'd committed a crime and had been punished for it, it was how she refused to accept she'd ever done anything wrong in the first place (despite pleading guilty), in fact still felt victimised.

If she's said "I did a bad thing, but I paid for it and now I want to move on" I could accept that, but to say "it's not how it seems" and then rant on for days about how terrible it was for her, really annoyed me, she had no remorse at all about it.

Is it that OP doesn’t want to give the impression that he’s sacking the PT off as a result of finding out she was a wrong’un?

Might be, but leaving a PT or gym is hardly unusual. Paying £40/month for something you dont want otoh.....

So, you were going to leave your PT anyway, and you’ve now left the PT. If nothing had come out of the woodwork you were leaving, stuff has come out and you’re leaving……. what’s morality question again?

Is it that OP doesn’t want to give the impression that he’s sacking the PT off as a result of finding out she was a wrong’un?

Nope, just a hypothetical question for the benefit of having something to 'chat' about

"Here’s the thing though, if you were in my shoes, and you were getting good value from the service, would you have sacked her, or carried on?"

If she’s said “I did a bad thing, but I paid for it and now I want to move on” I could accept that

What difference would accepting it make when you were leaving anyway? Now you just have an extra reason to not keep paying her

I would have ditched her and been happy she is outed.

" But she said “it wasn’t how it seemed” and how she was a victim in all of this. Never once admitting she’d done anything wrong, or showing any sort of remorse. So I sacked her."

this utterly stinks and is the sex offenders mantra.

What difference would accepting it make when you were leaving anyway? Now you just have an extra reason to not keep paying her

I suppose it was the final straw, but as above, it's more of a hypothetical question, if you were happy with the service, would you:

A) Leave because she's a sex offender

B) Lease because she seemingly has no remorse for being a sex offender, refusing even to accept she was.

C) Carry on using the service.

If she’s said “I did a bad thing, but I paid for it and now I want to move on” I could accept that,

Perhaps in time she will, perhaps at the moment she's just very defensive about it all. People are fallible and make terrible decisions that they come to regret. Perhaps she's just not there yet.

If you were going to sack her off anyway, it makes no difference does it?

I don't want to get all Jordan Peterson here but if this was a guy he would have no one left in his PT group by this point IMO.

I agree to an extent about people deserving a chance but if she shows no remorse and acts the victim...

it was how she refused to accept she’d ever done anything wrong in the first place (despite pleading guilty), in fact still felt victimised

While I'm sure many guilty people wrongly feel hard done by can you not envisage a situation where somebody would plead guilty to something they didn't do?

“Here’s the thing though, if you were in my shoes, and you were getting good value from the service, would you have sacked her, or carried on?”

Carried on. but...
-wouldn't ever pay for a personal trainer
-wouldn't ever read online tirades
-ain't got a wife

so I don't think my decision making process is the same as the OP's in any form.

There is always a chance that things are not in fact what they seem. You don't really have all the facts, do you?

Not sticking up for her here, of course, because I don't have all the facts either. Just something to bear in mind.

I don’t want to get all Jordan Peterson here but if this was a guy he would have no one left in his PT group by this point IMO.

I tend to agree. I also have misgivings about the "position of trust" stuff, but that's a discussion for another thread.

it’s more of a hypothetical question, if you were happy with the service, would you:

A) Leave because she’s a sex offender

B) Lease because she seemingly has no remorse for being a sex offender, refusing even to accept she was.

C) Carry on using the service.

Honestly, I don't know, and to demonstrate how hypocritical I am, I think my response would be different if she were a he. It's a tricky one.

Lets be honest. It was pretty much every school boys fantasy.

I'm pretty sure that despite what they might think, 14-15 year old boys being groomed for sex by a predator isn't top of the list when it comes to future mental health.

There is always a chance that things are not in fact what they seem. You don’t really have all the facts, do you?

I have more facts than I'm willing to share, the case was pretty widely reported at the time, locally and nationally. In fact, I think there was a STW thread about it.

You'll have to trust me that it's a indisputable fact that she had a sexual relationship with a 16 year old boy who she taught and that she shared explicit images and messages with him when he was 14 or 15 and that she was tried and convicted for the sexual relationship. The Boy confided with a Nurse who she'd taken him to, to be tested from an STI. "Every school boys fantasy" or not, he felt he needed to tell someone about it.

Her defence was that she was unaware that she wasn't allowed to have sex with a pupil, even if they were 16 and she wasn't charged for the messages.

It's all public domain stuff, but it still doesn't feel right naming and shaming.

I’m pretty sure that despite what they might think, 14-15 year old boys being groomed for sex by a predator isn’t top of the list when it comes to future mental health.

Yep, even in 2021 we like to think that all Teenage Boys are sex crazed monsters who'd shag a lamppost if they could and would obviously love being in a relationship with one of their teachers 10 years their elder, whilst all Teenage Girls are innocent and virtuous and would only have sex with someone in the same circumstances because of some horrible mental or physical abuse they'd received from them.

it was how she refused to accept she’d ever done anything wrong in the first place (despite pleading guilty), in fact still felt victimised

I think there may be a difference in acceptable response when being trolled on the internet, rather than in a conversation in real life.

Probably would have stopped using her after the internet rant, rather than for the initial offence. If she doesn't understand what she did wrong, then her rehabilitation isn't quite there yet.

I do, it wasn’t the fact she’d committed a crime and had been punished for it, it was how she refused to accept she’d ever done anything wrong in the first place (despite pleading guilty), in fact still felt victimised.

I'm not sure this is a genuine moral quandry, so much as realising that someone is a ****?

I think you made the correct call.

FFS get a grip ...
You are not the morality police.
She was caught, served her time.
She will also regret hugely what she has done - and the circumstances surrounding it you have not idea of, and what was happening in her life.
She has been caught, done her time - and had her life wrecked by it. Rather than sitting at home and taking benefits, she is out trying to get a life and do the right thing and get her life back on track.

HTH

so much as realising that someone is a ****?

If she's been in the public eye because of this, then I'd imagine her life has been filled to brim with all sorts of stuff that while some would say is deserved, but nevertheless would be pretty awful. She can probably see the business that she's built up over the last few years crumbling away in front of her eyes, in all likelihood not for the first time I'll wager.

While it probably would have been better to come clean from the get go, I can get why she wouldn't  It takes different people different time to come to terms with what they've done

I don’t want to get all Jordan Peterson here but if this was a guy he would have no one left in his PT group by this point IMO.

correct - bad double standards onthis issue

Lets be honest. It was pretty much every school boys fantasy.

And that right there shows it

MOlgrips - its her refusal to accept wrongdoing and to use the standard sexual predator defense that irks me and thats why to me she should be shunned because it shows she did not learn the lesson or show remorse

there are zero circumtances where a teacher having sex with a underage pupil is acceptable

I refer you to my earlier comment. It's not possible to fairly judge without knowing the whole story. She's refusing to accept the wrongdoing she's accused of (apparently, according to one source) but you don't know what actually went on. These things are complex and nuanced.

there are zero circumtances where a teacher having sex with a underage pupil is acceptable

As I said, I am not condoning that. But there is a lot we don't know. I'm just asking you to think about that. I'm probably wasting my time so I'll leave it there.

A. Having had a dealings with child abusers I would sack her off and have nothing to do with her. Normally I’m a turn the other cheek kinda guy but nonces (a teacher grooming a 14 year old with explicit pictures) can f right off. Ymmv.

MOlgrips - if you agree that its wrong for a teacher to have sex with a child in their care under any circumstances then what else is there to know? Nothing.

Yes I believe very strongly in rehabilitation but the excuse she gives is the standard sex offenders excuse. There is no excuse, there can never be an excuse, she shows no remorse. she is not yet rehabilitated

its her refusal to accept wrongdoing and to use the standard sexual predator defense that irks me and thats why to me she should be shunned because it shows she did not learn the lesson or show remorse

How do you know this is true/correct? You only have OP's version.
My take is - the law has taken its course, as long as she is no longer an offender and she is doing a decent job, go for it.
But really, OP who cares? We all take instant like/dislike to all kinds of people, that is our gut/prejudice etc. who you choose to spend your money with is up to you, you do not need to justify it. Do we need to be involved in your navel gazing?

sec offender

Demi?

there are zero circumtances where a teacher having sex with a underage pupil is acceptable

Agreed, but that isn’t what happened here. The boy was 16 at the time. Abuse of power yes, but not statutory rape, hence the suspended, relatively short, sentence I guess.

but not statutory rape

Do you live in the US?

We don’t have a charge of statutory rape, it’s rape if there is no consent and if a child is under 13 there’s no defence of consent under SOA 2003

The boy was 16 at the time. Abuse of power yes, but not statutory rape

We don’t have a charge of statutory rape

Presumably it was a reference to Age Of Consent, which I believe is revised upwards to 18 where someone is in a position of trust. Also the sexting or sexual communication is itself illegal if the recipient is under 18.

It’s a matter for the courts. I don’t see that she presents any risk to your wife or you. Nor are you facilitating and further risk by using her services.

She’s been found guilty and she’s taken the consequence. It’s not your place to add to that. That’s just pitchforks.

You never done owt you regret? Or reacted badly when called out on it? I’m no a religious chap but that stuff about he who is without sin cast the first stone and all that seems to fit here.

But really, OP who cares? We all take instant like/dislike to all kinds of people, that is our gut/prejudice etc. who you choose to spend your money with is up to you, you do not need to justify it. Do we need to be involved in your navel gazing?

It's just a question, we have all sorts of moral debates on STW. TBH, my decision to stop using her was 90% practical and 10% nonse related and it was 2 months or so ago.

I thought it would be an interesting discussion away from the usual Covid / Brexit / eBike stuff, I'm sorry you felt obligated to join in against your will.

I remember this case as it was local and being a teacher too it created a bit of discussion. About if there was gender bias in the sentence and about if society view the offence the same this way around. She also didn't come over too well at the time. A bit deluded and to be frank not taking responsibility by acknowledging she and the lad were not any adult and minor as she was in a position of responsibility. That is what rankled those in the profession most about it. At the time I remember thinking she really needed help. Her 'I'm the victim' assertions at the time were about the boy having feelings towards her (or so she thought) and messing her around. It was a bit pathetic really. So arguably not the strongest, the most rational or best placed to handle post conviction hassle.

My thoughts

You didn't sack her.

I'm assuming as you were stopping using her service anyway your real issue is looking like you are being judgemental about her conviction now as you are stopping at at a time when this has come up. Just one of those things.

Should the convicted out themselves at every opportunity - no. It's not going to serve the world much good. I'd rather not pay for her benefits for the rest of my days. She needs to be able to make a living as long as it is not with minors and if she is earning more than you'd like - tough. In a similar vein I'd quite like convicted muggers to be able to earn an honest crust and not to have to resort back to violence and crime.

Do men with similar convictions keep in gainful employment afterwards too - Google Brett Sutton.

Abuse of power yes, but not statutory rape, hence the suspended, relatively short, sentence I guess.

That's not what she was charged with, iirc. (It was fairly well publicised.)

You never done owt you regret? Or reacted badly when called out on it? I’m no a religious chap but that stuff about he who is without sin cast the first stone and all that seems to fit here.

Yeah, plenty of people will have done some weird stuff especially when younger, but most of us haven't even got close to being on the sex offenders register.

I thought it would be an interesting discussion away from the usual Covid / Brexit / eBike stuff, I’m sorry you felt obligated to join in against your will.

Sorry, I was just mucking around, hoping it was obvious irony on my part, seeing as I had commented...
But I still think you shouldn't need to justify sacking her, I think you felt obligated to keep her on when you probs did not really want to and this was a decent reason to bin her. Don't over think it.

MOlgrips – if you agree that its wrong for a teacher to have sex with a child in their care under any circumstances then what else is there to know? Nothing.

If only life really were so simple.

go on then Molgrips - try to make a defense of it.

it's time for coffee and biscuits

Surprised that the thread has continued from this.

The internet is not real life. There are no winners. I wouldn’t have sacked someone who was giving a good service and who has served a conviction. Either you believe in restitution or you don’t?

it’s time for coffee and biscuits

You mean fizzy pop and sweeties.

I wouldn’t have sacked someone who was giving a good service and who has served a conviction.

But he wasn't using the service and thought she showed an unpleasant personality when her dirty linen got aired.

Is he allowed to sack her?

I still think this is a shit dilemma BTW, because it's using the sex offence as a hook when the real problem is the person just being a ****.

Her defence was that she was unaware that she wasn’t allowed to have sex with a pupil, even if they were 16

I used to do a lot of youth work and we had it drummed into us by loads of training etc that we weren't even supposed to be in a room alone with one of our young people, and certainly not be exchanging flirtatious messages with them etc.

It was to the point where I felt we had to be overly paranoid about it but some of the young people were vulnerable so you can see why. Claiming she didn't know it wasn't allowed is utter BS IMO.

Either you believe in restitution or you don’t?

I believe in it up to a point so your black and white question doesn't work. I worked with a guy (at the youth centre in fact) who had just come out of jail for stealing (cars I think). He seemed a nice guy, we all gave him a proper chance and began to see him as a friend. But it turns out he was thieving from us too. I think he even got another chance and messed that up too.

Now it may well have been addiction/drug laws that were the underlying problem but at what point do you stop giving people a chance?

I'd have had a shave, run some Grecian 2000 through my hair, popped on my old school blazer and wandered round to pay my £40 subscription in person.

Mister-P
Free Member
I’d have had a shave, run some Grecian 2000 through my hair, popped on my old school blazer and wandered round to pay my £40 subscription in person.

Nobodies asked for pics or a link yet, so disappointed in STW ;o)

I bet if she's decent looking and her pic was in the paper/report she'll be getting a lot of unwanted clients trying to join now, that's punishment enough!

And in a Scooby Doo fashion “she’d have gotten away with it if wasn’t for those meddling kids”

Wasn't it meddling with kids that started the whole thing? 🙃

Anyway showing any kind of reaction other than humilty in this case is daft from her. Just "I've served my time, I'm learning from my mistakes" and zero engangment with the witch hunt and move on. Anything else is crackers and shows she problably did not get the kind of rehab she needs.

I think what this thread demonstrates is how differently people view male and female sex offenders - I guess thats what we are really debating here: is this as heinous as if a male teacher groomed and raped a young girl?

Not many people on here would be advocating to continue being a PT client of that male teacher - particularly if he had displayed so little remorse for what he had done as this female teacher apparently did.

Interestingly, my wife has just ditched her (male) PT for spouting some mysoginist crap during the chat while she's doing her star-jumps or whatever - she just doesn't really want to pay to be in his company for an hour a week any more. And I think thats legitimate: "not sure I want to pay to hang-out with this person when there are lots of different options available".

If my (hypothetical) PT turned out to be a Trumpist, and antivaxer or a homeopath - I'd probably ditch them for that. So: an unrepentant sex-offender? Fair enough I recon.

Nobodies asked for pics or a link yet, so disappointed in STW ;o)

I bet if she’s decent looking and her pic was in the paper/report she’ll be getting a lot of unwanted clients trying to join now, that’s punishment enough!

As a couple of us said above, it was well publicised and her pic was in the Welsh papers. Took me about 5 minutes to find the case earlier and I'm no IT genius.

If my (hypothetical) PT turned out to be a Trumpist, and antivaxer or a homeopath – I’d probably ditch them for that. So: an unrepentant sex-offender? Fair enough I recon.

Indeed, which is my point about it not being a moral quandry, balls to her.

go on then Molgrips – try to make a defense of it.

I'm not defending sex with kids. I'm saying that morality and culpability can sometimes be a complex area. I'm not going to go into it further. Read some books, watch some films. Or TV, this actually comes up in BoJack Horseman in Netflix.

Sorry bud, sounds like your wife has got you beat in an argument and you’re looking for a counter blow.

I’m not defending sex with kids.

Phew! Things could have gotten awkward if you were.

It is really obvious that as a society we treat a female teacher having sex with a boy very differently to a male teacher having sex with a girl (or boy). There is an assumption that most teenage boys are "probably up for it". I remember what it was like when I was at school and it was probably true, especially with a few of the younger female teachers. Are teenage girls any different though if they have a suitably attractive young male teacher? I don't think so. Its all irrelevent though because teachers are in a position of trust and its illegal so thats that.

I guess the ultimate question is should an offender be able to restart their life after they have been punished. I'd say yes but in the case of a sex offender they should not be put in a position of responsibility which would facilitate them re-offending.

Would I continue with a PT who was guilty of this but had served their time. Given I am unlikely to be the victim of any sort of child abuse (I'm 45) I'm not at risk. Would I leave my teenage son with her? Probably not, he's already not a great decision maker when he's thinking with what is in his pants and not his hat (no idea where he gets it from).

Took me about 5 minutes to find the case

About 30 secs.

Would probably swipe right myself TBH.

This "Thread of the Week" malarky has a lot to answer for.

As sex offences go, it's a tricky one. Yes, it's a crime, she's been punished, unless she's a repeat offender, I'd give her the benefit of the doubt, she seems to be trying to rebuild a life and career that were ruined by her stupidity.

One of my best friends is married to her economics teacher, 12 years her senior. The story is that they got together after she had left school and gone to university, but I'm not totally convinced. 25 years and 3 kids later, seems to be OK.

The abuse of trust law didn't exist when I was at school. One of my friends had a fling with our geography teacher. The metal work teacher and a head of year were also believed to gave had relationships with pupils.

While it's easy to say the teacher has the power in these situations, a pupil can destroy a teachers life if they make a complaint. All sides should have the sense not to bother.

unless she’s a repeat offender, I’d give her the benefit of the doubt

How about vocally unrepentant?

All sides should have the sense not to bother

Lol - have you ever met a teenager? Thats the point though - it only really needed one side to have any sense.... and she demonstrated a spectacular lack of it. Had her position when confronted about it been: "I demonstrated a spectacular lack of sense - however, I've paid the price and deserve a fair go", then I'd be a bit more sympathetic.

I’m saying that morality and culpability can sometimes be a complex area.

Yes in general - not in this case.

While it’s easy to say the teacher has the power in these situations, a pupil can destroy a teachers life if they make a complaint.

Only because the teacher has allowed that to happen! Jeez.

Her defence was that she was unaware that she wasn’t allowed to have sex with a pupil, even if they were 16 and she wasn’t charged for the messages

I'm with @grum.

I trained to be a teacher in 2004. It was made perfectly clear in teacher training that this was not ok

It's also been made perfectly clear every year in training sessions. Many, many training sessions. And sessions on what to do if you find out about stuff like that.

Having said that one of the guys off my trading course went to jail for some thing similar.

How about vocally unrepentant?

I don't think it makes a difference to the law regarding spent convictions. It might tweak your personal morals a bit, but there's no requirement. Given that spent convictions rely on the sentence, not the crime, she's done in 5 years I think.  It'll show up on a DBS, but essentially it's over at the point that it's spent.

This “Thread of the Week” malarky has a lot to answer for.

This.

The internet has enough shocking or divisive content as it is without giving this forum a target to shoot for....

Errmm - a mildly interesting thread with people with a range of perspectives and 70 odd comments. Nowt wrong with it at all IMO.

At the suggestion of googling the case, it doesn't seem to be a unique incident.

That's five different female teachers in Wales AFAICT.

going back over page one. Cos I wuz working.

She will also regret hugely what she has done

Doesn't sound like it from what I read

She has been caught, done her time – and had her life wrecked by it.

Doesn't sound like it from what I read

bruneep
Lets be honest. It was pretty much every school boys fantasy.

Now this is weird. Cos I know in my teens I was only interested in girls around my age. I thought Pan's People were old fogeys when my dad leered over them! Did anyone really lust over their teachers??

Like the spelling of "buy" on the 3rd earch on Cougar's list. Tis the mail tho'.

Is it wrong to have a chuckle at the idea of teachers being on a register? Does it get called each morning?

Did anyone really lust over their teachers??

Hell yeah!

Did anyone really lust over their teachers??

Strange question! The answer is very obviously yes. (In my case, I can only remember one particular teacher who was (from distant hazy memory) very good looking and probably only a few years older than me.) Didn't stop me from being more interested in girls my own age, for what little good it did me.

lust over their teachers??

Depends on age? At grammar school in 3rd year (so 13/14) we had a maths teacher that was probably in her mid-late 30s, she had kids that were 10-12. If you needed help, she'd stand in front of your desk, lean over and explain the problem. Needless to say we didn't understand much & needed plenty of help. From memory (albeit 40 years later) she was attractive but 1) we'd just started at an all boys school and 2) there weren't many female teachers so any chance of sight down blouse was not to be missed.