It is hard to establish a claim for physical abuse in schools. Schools often have both legal protections and community reluctance that help insulate them from liability. A recent case in San Jose California surmounted these obstacles and resulted in a jury verdict of $700,000 for the parents of a child with Aspergers syndrome, who was 7 years old at the time of the incident, against Eisenhower Elementary School and the classroom teacher, Karen Miller .
The classroom teacher was found to have hit, kicked, pushed the child to the floor, sat on the child, and rubbed a burrito in the girl’s hair and face. These incidents occured in 2001 and 2002. The classroom aide reported the abuse. The school’s defense attorney, Mark Davis, called the verdict "excessive" and liability was not based upon the evidence. The unfortunate post script to the story is that the teacher left Eisenhower Elementary School and got a job at another school.
The questions which this story raises for me is where is the criminal liability. Children with special needs who do far less than this teacher was found to have done, are carted away in hand cuffs, facing criminal liability and possible long term expulsion. Discipline involving children is for the purpose of imposing "consequences" and maintaining order in schools. Why the double standard ? Is it because we simply can not fathom that teachers are capable of doing bad things.
The fact that this teacher abused this child over the course of a school year, suggests to me the teacher was ill trained in positive means of behavioral intervention or crisis prevention, not well supervised and simply drowning in her classroom, unless other more serious issues were afflicting her.
Where is the accountability when a teacher can commit serious acts against a 7 year old child and later take another teaching job? We have seen the tragic legacy of allowing pedophile priests to move from parish to parish. Why was this teacher not barred from teaching children. The officials responsible for teacher licensing in California need to be asking these questions.
On a happier note the fact that the teacher aide had the courage to stand up and speak out deserves a huge degree of recognition. I can assume that she faced pressures to maintain the code of silence that schools enforce. She took a morally correct stand against school culture that does not encourage such openness.
The parents deserve great credit as well. Pursing a case like this one is not easy. The hope of these parents and parents of special needs children every where is that this verdict (and perhaps others like it–see case verdicts involving a child with autism–Download Verdict for boy with autism.doc; and case of peer bullying in school–Download Bullying_verdict.doc
) will send a message. Abuse of children in school occurs, it can not be ignored and children with special needs are especially vulnerable. Moreover, schools need to provide training and support to staff in positive behavioral supports and better supervision.