Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Should Private Schools be Closed?

12467…10

Comments

  • #152
    steddyeddy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,565 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    ted1 wrote: »
    If you are worried about spending your taxes on others, look the other way, there is loads of kids in schools whose parents don't pay any tax.

    Everyone pays tax.


  • #153
    Zubeneschamali
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    ted1 wrote: »
    Nothing to do with racism. Just to do with wanting to get in and putting your kids names down early

    And it just happens that the other kids are all white and Irish and there are no travellers. Right.


  • #154
    steddyeddy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,565 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    The Draugan wrote: »
    I'd rather send my kids to a private fee paying than community school , so no i wouldn't agree with it.

    i wouldnt deny that there were some arseholes in school with me in the private school i went to , people got bullied , but that kind of thing happens everywhere and tbf the school always dealt with it well.

    But i am 100% grateful i went there over the community schools where i'm from , they were rough as a badgers hole and lads who i knew were good enough to get good leaving certs didn't because of the environment they were in. Kids from bad family's with bad attitudes who's parents couldn't give a **** , were allowed disrupt classes waste teachers time etc. There was no streaming in those schools so weaker kids were left behind and stronger kids were held back. we were streamed i was never in the top stream but always in the second everyone in my class was at a similar level came from a similar background and ha similar goals so classes tended not to be disrupted.

    I would rather my kids were in school with kids from a predominately similar middle class background with parents who care about their education and progression.

    over 85% of my year went on to 3rd level , with well over 60% getting their fist choice, it was a record at the time but has been surpassed a number of times since my graduation 6 years ago.

    This is what winds people up. Children from all backgrounds care about education. Even if their parents don't. It's not confined to a class.


  • #155
    Bridge93
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,018 ✭✭✭Bridge93


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    Everyone pays tax.

    True but i presume he's talking about income tax and not USC or indirect taxes. We have one of the narrowest income tax bases in the world and its why our working middle class are being squeezed so hard. our top tax bracket has a remarkably low entry point compared to others like the US and UK while our entry point for income tax is stupidly high in comparison


  • #156
    DEFTLEFTHAND
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,500 ✭✭✭✭DEFTLEFTHAND


    Grayson wrote: »
    Would the John Scottus be non denominational? http://www.johnscottus.ie/about/

    They teach every religion.

    Every Secondary School in the country teaches all religions.

    RE is a Leaving Cert choice subject.


  • Advertisement
  • #157
    maudgonner
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,455 ✭✭✭maudgonner


    Zubeneschamali wrote: »
    Yes, and after you leave the free school, you can go and get grinds or tutoring.

    But that isn't what you want - you want to take tax money that should go to the guards, free to all, and spend it on subsidizing private security so that you don't have to use the guards.

    And then say hey, if we weren't paying half the cost of this security guard, the Garda would have to pay for a whole guard!

    Well yes, but then he would work for us all - not just you.

    No, the tax money still pays for the Garda. The extra, private money pays for extra, private security. I still pay towards the Gardaí, so I should still benefit from them.

    And I say this as someone who went to a community school (an excellent one) and if I had kids I would more than likely send them to a public school. I wouldn't particularly like my kids to be brought up in an environment where they didn't mix with kids from other backgrounds, but the fact of life is that it does sometimes happen. As long as my kids were getting a decent standard of education I don't see why other kids shouldn't have the taxpayer fund their basic education, regardless of what extra benefits their parents are paying for on top of that.


  • #158
    Zubeneschamali
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    ted1 wrote: »
    If you are worried about spending your taxes on others, look the other way, there is loads of kids in schools whose parents don't pay any tax.

    I have no problem spending my taxes on people who are worse off than I am.

    I have a problem spending taxes on schools which are set up to keep out all the people who are worse off than I am. This is using public policy to create a class system, it is the opposite of what we should be doing, which is spending taxes to help the kids whose parents cannot or will not.


  • #159
    Zubeneschamali
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    maudgonner wrote: »
    No, the tax money still pays for the Garda. The extra, private money pays for extra, private security. I still pay towards the Gardaí, so I should still benefit from them.

    Everyone benefits from the guards. Everyone benefits from free education.

    Not everyone benefits from fee-paying schools or private security. We should not subsidize them.


  • #160
    DEFTLEFTHAND
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,500 ✭✭✭✭DEFTLEFTHAND


    ted1 wrote: »
    Theres kids whose parents are from Poland , Australia and Asia in my kids schools. A few tanned kids in some of the classes I imagine that they are originally from Africa

    What do you mean by tanned?


  • #161
    josha1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 71 ✭✭josha1


    Zubeneschamali wrote: »
    I have no problem spending my taxes on people who are worse off than I am.

    I have a problem spending taxes on schools which are set up to keep out all the people who are worse off than I am. This is using public policy to create a class system, it is the opposite of what we should be doing, which is spending taxes to help the kids whose parents cannot or will not.
    I feel like we're going around in circles. For the third time, maybe the fourth, your money is not going towards people going to private schools. Their parents tax money, or at least a small portion of it, goes towards the state's spending on the school.

    Please read this so that you fully understand the system, without posting the same drivel over and over again.
    Ok, maybe I should translate it directly, since you don't seem to be very good at hypotheticals.

    Private security = funding for SEN, extra teachers, rugby, maintenance etc. Directly paid for by parents in private schools for their own children. In the case of the apartments, it would be paid for directly by the apartment residents, specifically for the apartment residents.

    Guards = basic core teachers, that everyone is entitled to. The government pays for these out of the tax pool for both sets of schools, while paying for a lot more, just for public schools.

    Your money is in no way going to the private guard/'extras' provided in private schools.
    .


  • Advertisement
  • #162
    maudgonner
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,455 ✭✭✭maudgonner


    Zubeneschamali wrote: »
    Everyone benefits from the guards. Everyone benefits from free education.

    Not everyone benefits from fee-paying schools or private security. We should not subsidize them.

    Not everybody benefits from any school - only the children who attend that school do.

    Why should the tax-paying parents of a child that attends a fee-paying school not gain the same benefits from their tax money that the parents of a child attending a non-fee paying school do?


  • #163
    Zubeneschamali
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    josha1 wrote: »
    your money is not going towards people going to private schools.

    When did the Department stop paying teachers in fee paying schools with my taxes? It is news to me, but welcome news.


  • #164
    frozenfrozen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,681 ✭✭✭frozenfrozen


    Zubeneschamali wrote: »
    When did the Department stop paying teachers in fee paying schools with my taxes? It is news to me, but welcome news.

    Trolling now surely?


  • #165
    Zubeneschamali
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    maudgonner wrote: »
    Why should the tax-paying parents of a child that attends a fee-paying school not gain the same benefits from their tax money that the parents of a child attending a non-fee paying school do?

    They are fully entitled to the same benefits by enrolling in a free school.

    They want that, plus extra tuition and services, plus gatekeeping to keep out the poor and undesirables.

    It is unfair, it perpetuates and worsens class differences, it ghettoizes the free system. It undermines the whole point of free tax-funded education.


  • #166
    Zubeneschamali
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    frozenfrozen wrote: »
    Trolling now surely?

    We all know they didn't stop. We all know our tax money is being spent to subsidize superior education for those who can afford the fees. We all know our future leaders in politics and business will, like our current ones, come mostly from the fee-paying schools, and will perpetuate the system which benefitted them.

    And instead of our taxes going to help the poor to climb out of poverty through education, they will be spent on institutions set up to discriminate against the poor.

    Again - I do not blame any parent who sends their child to a fee-paying school, the system is what it is and we do our best for our kids.

    It is the system that needs changing.


  • #167
    josha1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 71 ✭✭josha1


    Zubeneschamali wrote: »
    When did the Department stop paying teachers in fee paying schools with my taxes? It is news to me, but welcome news.

    For the love of all that is holy!

    Obviously I overestimated your ability to comprehend basic reason. Read the sentence after it, while in the most technical sense of the word, your funds provide the basic teachers salaries for those attending private schools, their parents provide the funds that the state pay from the tax pool, as well as significantly more.

    In reality none of your funds go towards paying for the private schools 'extras'. I know that reality may be a hard concept to grasp considering your previous posts, so please take some time to come to terms with it before moving to the next part of my post, that I've posted 3 times now, but you have failed to respond to each time.
    Please read this so that you fully understand the system, without posting the same drivel over and over again.
    Quote:
    Ok, maybe I should translate it directly, since you don't seem to be very good at hypotheticals.

    Private security = funding for SEN, extra teachers, rugby, maintenance etc. Directly paid for by parents in private schools for their own children. In the case of the apartments, it would be paid for directly by the apartment residents, specifically for the apartment residents.

    Guards = basic core teachers, that everyone is entitled to. The government pays for these out of the tax pool for both sets of schools, while paying for a lot more, just for public schools.

    Your money is in no way going to the private guard/'extras' provided in private schools.


  • #168
    Zubeneschamali
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    josha1 wrote: »
    In reality none of your funds go towards paying for the private schools teachers.

    You cannot even pretend to think that sentence is true. If it were true, then the Dept. could stop paying teachers at fee-paying schools tomorrow.

    And indeed, the very next thing you say is:
    while in the most technical sense of the word, your funds provide the basic teachers salaries for those attending private schools

    In other words, I am right. My funds pay teachers at fee-paying schools, which poor people who cannot pay fees cannot attend. This is precisely what I am complaining about.


  • #169
    maudgonner
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,455 ✭✭✭maudgonner


    Zubeneschamali wrote: »
    They are fully entitled to the same benefits by enrolling in a free school.

    They want that, plus extra tuition and services, plus gatekeeping to keep out the poor and undesirables.

    It is unfair, it perpetuates and worsens class differences, it ghettoizes the free system. It undermines the whole point of free tax-funded education.

    How? As long as every child in the state is getting a decent standard of education, what is the problem?* That's the whole point of free, tax-funded education. The system is not designed so that every child gets to go to their choice of school - it's that there is a school for every child to go to.

    A far bigger issue is that schools that are meant to be providing free education are not, they're charging for it through 'voluntary' contributions.


    (*Whether they are or not is a whole other debate).


  • #170
    josha1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 71 ✭✭josha1


    Zubeneschamali wrote: »
    You cannot even pretend to think that sentence is true. If it were true, then the Dept. could stop paying teachers at fee-paying schools tomorrow.

    And indeed, the very next thing you say is:



    In other words, I am right. My funds pay teachers at fee-paying schools, which poor people who cannot pay fees cannot attend. This is precisely what I am complaining about.
    The very fact that you use the technical sense to 'prove you are right' only serves to perpetuate your own stupidity. You must really be trolling, as the other poster stated. I don't think there's any point in continuing down this path, maybe we'll laugh about it if you're not on the wind up some day.

    For the fourth time though, please respond to this. Just as the grand finale of whatever joke you're trying to pull that no one gets.
    Please read this so that you fully understand the system, without posting the same drivel over and over again.
    Quote:
    Ok, maybe I should translate it directly, since you don't seem to be very good at hypotheticals.

    Private security = funding for SEN, extra teachers, rugby, maintenance etc. Directly paid for by parents in private schools for their own children. In the case of the apartments, it would be paid for directly by the apartment residents, specifically for the apartment residents.

    Guards = basic core teachers, that everyone is entitled to. The government pays for these out of the tax pool for both sets of schools, while paying for a lot more, just for public schools.

    Your money is in no way going to the private guard/'extras' provided in private schools.


  • #171
    VinLieger
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,729 ✭✭✭✭VinLieger


    Zubeneschamali wrote: »
    And instead of our taxes going to help the poor to climb out of poverty through education, they will be spent on institutions set up to discriminate against the poor.

    Yes that is exactly what all private schools have written into their charters as point number 1

    "First we discriminate against the poor, then second we teach the children"


  • Advertisement
  • #172
    steddyeddy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,565 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    In fairness fee paying schools by their nature discriminate based on parental wealth. If they didn't their business model wouldn't work.


  • #173
    josha1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 71 ✭✭josha1


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    In fairness fee paying schools by their nature discriminate based on parental wealth. If they didn't their business model wouldn't work.
    This is 100% true, finally someone from the other side that can see clearly.

    However they are completely entitled to do so, and give parents the choice of which type they want to send there children to.

    They also provide scholarships based on background, sporting ability, musical talent, drama etc. which I said in a different comment. They're not designed to 'keep the poors out'.


  • #174
    steddyeddy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,565 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    josha1 wrote: »
    This is 100% true, finally someone from the other side that can see clearly.

    However they are completely entitled to do so, and give parents the choice of which type they want to send there children to.

    They also provide scholarships based on background, sporting ability, musical talent, drama etc. which I said in a different comment. They're not designed to 'keep the poors out'.

    Well we can agree that this sort of system certainly isn't helping the already disadvantaged poor.


  • #175
    steddyeddy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,565 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    I don't think there's a lot to be done to address this problem. I think most will agree that division of educational quality by gender, class or race is wrong. That doesn't mean there's easy answers.


  • #176
    ted1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,138 ✭✭✭✭ted1


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    Everyone pays tax.

    No they don't. And don't try to claim VAT is a tax ( no VAT on food) and if your giving money weekly from the government you are receiving tax not paying it.

    PAYE, USC, LPT, PRSI are taxes.

    You are quickly losing all credibility with your statement


  • #177
    josha1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 71 ✭✭josha1


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    Well we can agree that this sort of system certainly isn't helping the already disadvantaged poor.
    Well the disadvantaged poor are being provided free education by the state, which clearly suffices to obtain sufficient grades, which I believe you or someone else made clear in the coláiste Eoin argument.

    If parents want their child to go to a certain school to receive a certain type of education - based on ethos, sporting facilities, etc. then so be it. Like I said, if parents do not have the financial capability to provide this, then they can use the schools provided for completely by the state, or try to obtain a scholarship.


  • #178
    ted1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,138 ✭✭✭✭ted1


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    In fairness fee paying schools by their nature discriminate based on parental wealth. If they didn't their business model wouldn't work.

    No it's not due to parents wealth, it's parents choice. Many Parents make sacrifices to send the kids to semi private schools.


  • #179
    steddyeddy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,565 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    ted1 wrote: »
    No they don't. And don't try to claim VAT is a tax ( no VAT on food) and if your giving money weekly from the government you are receiving tax not paying it.

    PAYE, USC, LPT, PRSI are taxes.

    You are quickly losing all credibility with your statement

    OK value added TAX isn't a tax. I don't know where I got that idea about value added TAX :pac:


  • #180
    josha1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 71 ✭✭josha1


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    OK value added TAX isn't a tax. I don't know where I got that idea about value added TAX :pac:
    If someone is in receipt of social welfare unemployment benefit, medical card, free housing, single parent etc, they can only pay tax in the technical sense of the word.
    That doesn't mean that their children shouldn't get education, it is something that everyone, including those who attend private schools is entitled to.


  • Advertisement
  • #181
    ted1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,138 ✭✭✭✭ted1


    DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »
    What do you mean by tanned?

    I mean not pale as the other poster implied.


  • #182
    steddyeddy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,565 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    josha1 wrote: »
    Well the disadvantaged poor are being provided free education by the state, which clearly suffices to obtain sufficient grades, which I believe you or someone else made clear in the coláiste Eoin argument.

    If parents want their child to go to a certain school to receive a certain type of education - based on ethos, sporting facilities, etc. then so be it. Like I said, if parents do not have the financial capability to provide this, then they can use the schools provided for completely by the state, or try to obtain a scholarship.
    ted1 wrote: »
    No it's not due to parents wealth, it's parents choice. Many Parents make sacrifices to send the kids to semi private schools.
    josha1 wrote: »
    If someone is in receipt of social welfare unemployment benefit, medical card, free housing, single parent etc, they can only pay tax in the technical sense of the word.
    That doesn't mean that their children shouldn't get education, it is something that everyone, including those who attend private schools is entitled to.

    I condemn that sort of lifestyle but it leaves me wondering why a child's education should suffer because of their parent's lifestyle.


  • #183
    josha1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 71 ✭✭josha1


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    I condemn that sort of lifestyle but it leaves me wondering why a child's education should suffer because of their parent's lifestyle.
    If you are talking about the lifestyle of parents that bend hand over foot and save while working full time to put their kids in positions that they were never in then I'm not quite sure?

    If you're talking about the social welfare brigade, exactly, their kids are entitled to the education provided by the state. I don't think many people have a problem with that. [even though they don't pay tax in reality.]


  • #184
    ted1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,138 ✭✭✭✭ted1


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    OK value added TAX isn't a tax. I don't know where I got that idea about value added TAX :pac:

    Do you are saying our effective tax rate is not 52% but 75%??


  • #185
    byhookorbycrook
    Moderators, Education Moderators, Regional South East Moderators Posts: 12,534 Mod ✭✭✭✭byhookorbycrook


    Zubeneschamali wrote: »
    Yes, horribly exclusive. No travellers, immigrants, asylum seekers, kids with learning difficulties... perfect for the "I'm not a racist, but..." crowd.
    So you know this how?Because I am a teacher of children with SEN in a Gaelscoil and call BS on this. We have several nationalities in our school and a wide variety of abilities and learning needs. But please do continue to spout your ridiculous BS. Are you aware that many Gaelscoileanna have DEIS status?Are mulit-denom?Or does that interfere with your totally inaccurate statement?


  • #186
    evolving_doors
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,812 ✭✭✭✭evolving_doors


    Bridge93 wrote: »
    I can only think of one fully private school in the Republic of the top of my head

    Institute / Bruce college (if they're still going!) / Ashfield / yeats.... Basically the 'Grinds schools' are the only private ones.


  • Advertisement
  • #187
    Glenster
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,626 ✭✭✭Glenster


    Yoi can close all pseudo private schools like CUS and Kings Hos. they're all muck anyway. Just leave the good ones open.


  • #188
    Glenster
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,626 ✭✭✭Glenster


    Gebgbegb wrote: »
    Institute / Bruce college (if they're still going!) / Ashfield / yeats.... Basically the 'Grinds schools' are the only private ones.

    private schools = selective school.

    I know *technically* it means something else. But let's be grown ups here.


  • #189
    seamus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 68,190 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    More information on this coming out from the journalist who started the story.

    The incident happened on Friday. The school was alerted, and they suspended nine boys involved.

    On Tuesday morning, parents of the accused boys came to the victim's parents looking to do a deal to make the incident go away and let them move on. "Somebody" then contacted the journalist to raise the alarm.

    Tbh, this seems slightly more reasonable given those facts. The school or the child contacted his parents. And the school took action. The school does not have an obligation to report the incident to the authorities unless they believe it is not being reported/handled. Especially at 13 years of age, there has to be a balance somewhere between what is appropriate for a school to report, and what is best left up to the parents to report. It's a tough line to walk; what is best left to parents to report and what should always be reported?

    But either way, we have this odd situation where someone becomes aware of a situation and instead of contacting the relevant authorities, goes running to a journalist to complain that the authorities aren't being contacted. What's that about?


  • #190
    evolving_doors
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,812 ✭✭✭✭evolving_doors


    Glenster wrote: »
    private schools = selective school.

    I know *technically* it means something else. But let's be grown ups here.

    Use the correct terms then if you want to be grown up!

    A private school does not receive any money from the state.
    It's important because these schools DO receive money from the state.


  • #191
    Del.Monte
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,363 ✭✭✭✭Del.Monte


    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    My kid's school is fee paying and it's CofI (nominally).

    There is no rugby played there at all.

    My kids are at a fee paying Protestant school - rugby, hockey and cricket only - and they hate them all. :D

    Anyway, thread is a train wreck - quite appropriate really since the OP is a keen poster on the C+T Forum.

    ****



  • Advertisement
  • #192
    ted1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,138 ✭✭✭✭ted1


    Del.Monte wrote: »
    My kids are at a fee paying Protestant school - rugby, hockey and cricket only - and they hate them all. :D

    Anyway, thread is a train wreck - quite appropriate really since the OP is a keen poster on the C+T Forum.

    C&T?


  • #193
    Del.Monte
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,363 ✭✭✭✭Del.Monte


    Sorry - Commuting & Transport.

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=246

    ****



  • #194
    Grayson
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,690 ✭✭✭✭Grayson


    josha1 wrote: »
    If you are talking about the lifestyle of parents that bend hand over foot and save while working full time to put their kids in positions that they were never in then I'm not quite sure?

    If you're talking about the social welfare brigade, exactly, their kids are entitled to the education provided by the state. I don't think many people have a problem with that. [even though they don't pay tax in reality.]

    Social Welfare brigade.... Suppose you tar every person in receipt of benefits the same way. The disabled, the sick, the people trying to find work, the people on supplemental allowance... They're all the same.


  • #195
    Mardy Bum
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,674 ✭✭✭Mardy Bum


    seamus wrote: »
    More information on this coming out from the journalist who started the story.

    The incident happened on Friday. The school was alerted, and they suspended nine boys involved.

    On Tuesday morning, parents of the accused boys came to the victim's parents looking to do a deal to make the incident go away and let them move on. "Somebody" then contacted the journalist to raise the alarm.

    Tbh, this seems slightly more reasonable given those facts. The school or the child contacted his parents. And the school took action. The school does not have an obligation to report the incident to the authorities unless they believe it is not being reported/handled. Especially at 13 years of age, there has to be a balance somewhere between what is appropriate for a school to report, and what is best left up to the parents to report. It's a tough line to walk; what is best left to parents to report and what should always be reported?

    But either way, we have this odd situation where someone becomes aware of a situation and instead of contacting the relevant authorities, goes running to a journalist to complain that the authorities aren't being contacted. What's that about?

    An issue like this would have to be reported to the Gardai by the school under child protection regulations.


  • #196
    Annasopra
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,220 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    josha1 wrote: »
    This is 100% true, finally someone from the other side that can see clearly.

    However they are completely entitled to do so, and give parents the choice of which type they want to send there children to.

    They also provide scholarships based on background, sporting ability, musical talent, drama etc. which I said in a different comment. They're not designed to 'keep the poors out'.

    Yeah they let only a select few in. Like the old concept of the deserving poor. So the ones they deem "undeserving" are basically kept out.

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • #197
    4ensic15
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,691 ✭✭✭4ensic15


    Grayson wrote: »
    Catholic catechism is still taught religiously.

    How else would it be thought?


  • #198
    Annasopra
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,220 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    seamus wrote: »
    More information on this coming out from the journalist who started the story.

    The incident happened on Friday. The school was alerted, and they suspended nine boys involved.

    On Tuesday morning, parents of the accused boys came to the victim's parents looking to do a deal to make the incident go away and let them move on. "Somebody" then contacted the journalist to raise the alarm.

    Tbh, this seems slightly more reasonable given those facts. The school or the child contacted his parents. And the school took action. The school does not have an obligation to report the incident to the authorities unless they believe it is not being reported/handled. Especially at 13 years of age, there has to be a balance somewhere between what is appropriate for a school to report, and what is best left up to the parents to report. It's a tough line to walk; what is best left to parents to report and what should always be reported?

    But either way, we have this odd situation where someone becomes aware of a situation and instead of contacting the relevant authorities, goes running to a journalist to complain that the authorities aren't being contacted. What's that about?


    Sorry what?

    Where on earth are you getting information that the school is not obliged to report such an incident?

    I'm really confused here. Are you saying it is reasonable the school or another childs parents tried to get this covered up?

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • #199
    Arcade_Tryer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,021 ✭✭✭Arcade_Tryer


    Joeytheparrot wrote: »
    Sorry what?

    Where on earth are you getting information that the school is not obliged to report such an incident?
    It seems the reporting of serious crime is now at the discretion of school management.


  • #200
    Annasopra
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,220 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    Arcade_Tryer wrote: »
    It seems the reporting of serious crime is now at the discretion of school management.

    The school has clear obligations under the Children First Guidelines 2011

    http://www.dcya.gov.ie/viewdoc.asp?fn=/documents/Child_Welfare_Protection/ChildrenFirst/WhatResDoesOrgsHave.htm

    The Ombudsman for Children Niall Muldoon pointed to clear guidelines that put an onus on schools to notify authorities without delay.

    "In line with Children First 2011 Guidelines for the Protection and Welfare of Children, every school was obliged to have a child protection policy.

    "Where there is a child protection concern, the designated liaison person should be notified immediately and Túsla should be contacted without delay. Any delay would not be in the best interests of the child or children involved," he said.

    http://m.independent.ie/irish-news/news/garda-fear-evidence-compromised-after-a-delay-in-reporting-alleged-sex-assault-35261734.html

    Thats why I am completely confused at the suggestion above that they don't.

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • #201
    4ensic15
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,691 ✭✭✭4ensic15


    The school was given legal advice to report the incident immediately which it ignored.
    If this school was fully private with no lower middle-class parents scraping together money to pay fees for their offspring there, most likely this incident would never have happened.


  • Advertisement
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement