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

Westmeath school gets temporary injunction banning a suspended teacher from it's premises

Options
1232426282976

Comments

  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 15,479 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    Exactly..

    So they can opt out , but they have to send the patient elsewhere and allow the legal thing to be done.

    Just as teacher if they behave like an adult, can opt out of certain things like Sex Ed and the like , but another teacher has to be allowed to provide that curriculum item in the school.

    Enoch Burke didn't just want to "opt out" he was demanding that the accommodation not be afforded to the child by anyone and when told that wasn't an option under the equality act he chose to start disrupting public school events to repeat his demands and then when he was suspended for causing those disruptions he chose to continue to cause disruption leading to an injunction which he also refused to comply with.

    Having told a judge that he has no intention of complying with the judges lawful order , he is now in Prison.

    And once more with feeling - He's not in Prison because of Pronouns!!!!



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,799 ✭✭✭✭Panthro


    And it'll all be self inflicted. As I said earlier if he can't change his beliefs he can change his career.



  • Registered Users Posts: 583 ✭✭✭CrookedJack


    This was the whole purpose of Burke going back to the school. He was engineering a situation where he can allow people to believe, or pretend to believe, that he has been jailed for not using a child's chosen pronouns. Cue rabid mob of the unaffected but bizarrely opinionated, yelping on about woke snowflakes ad nauseum. It's culture wars 101.



  • Registered Users Posts: 540 ✭✭✭PhoneMain


    Yes but if they work in a gynaecological hospital service (one that provides terminations for example - this could be the case in surgical terminations. I've trained in obs/gynae services and we had extensive talks as to what the protocol was in these type situations), they cant still be forced to perform these services. In this case they'd refer to another colleague who would be willing to provide the service.

    Also who's employed with the purpose of providing terminations?! The GP service is an opt in HSE contract. Hospital terminations e.g. surgical abortions after 9 weeks that cant be performed in the community are performed in gynae departments as part of a vast range of gynae services. Noone is specifically employed with the sole purpose of providing termination services, not that I'm aware of anyway.



  • Site Banned Posts: 12,341 ✭✭✭✭Faugheen


    Jesus Christ the state of this thread.

    No surprise to see the usual suspects coming in trying to derail it because they get a little upset over pronouns.

    For all the claims about the ‘woke’ etc, it’s those who deem themselves ‘anti-woke’ (whatever the f*ck that means) who are the ones who lose their minds over someone being asked to be treated with dignity and respect.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 11,105 ✭✭✭✭Furze99


    There you go - first hand testimony that medical staff can simply refuse to carry out procedures that go against their beliefs.

    The Burke case has escalated but is this not at the heart of the matter. He would prefer not to differentiate trans gender people in speech due to his beliefs. Whether or not you agree with his beliefs is immaterial, question is how is it different from medical staff refusing to be involved in procedures that are not approved of by the bishops?



  • Registered Users Posts: 540 ✭✭✭PhoneMain


    Caveat to this, we must refer on to someone who is willing to provide the service. The HSE My Options website is brilliant for this sort of service.

    Also, if I disagreed with someone's pronouns or transideology, I'm sure i'd get in a lot of hassle with the Medical Council if I refused to address someone by their preferred pronouns. I'd have the cop to at least avoid this situation, unlike Mr Burke here. You can have your beliefs but you can also avoid hassle.



  • Registered Users Posts: 540 ✭✭✭PhoneMain


    FFS, it's nothing to do with religion by the way, I have never seen 1 iota of religious interference with my work. Personally I couldnt give a sh1t what a priest thinks or doesnt think of my work.



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 15,479 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    No..

    Again , this has escalated because he didn't want ANYBODY to use a different name , not just him.

    As PhoneMain points out, as a Doctor they can opt out of carrying out the particular surgical procedure but they have to allow it to be done by someone else , either by referral as a GP or by simply allowing a colleague to complete the task.

    What they CANNOT do is stand in reception and call the patients names and damn them all to hells eternal fire for their actions and refuse to allow another Doctor to do their job.

    THAT would get them suspended - Just as has happened to Enoch Burke.

    If they continued to turn up to the Hospital/GP surgery after suspension causing disruption , that might make their employer take out an Injunction - Just as has happened to Enoch Burke.

    If they then repeatedly broke the terms of that injunction and told a judge that they would continue to do so , that would land them in Jail - Just as has happened to Enoch Burke.



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,105 ✭✭✭✭Furze99


    What's the difference between refusing and referring on? The latter is just a polite way of refusing surely.

    That's what I do when I choose not to do business with someone. Instead of refusing point blank, I just say well maybe so and so can help you better.

    I agree with you that you can choose to avoid or take on hassle. But if he really does feel strongly on the matter, what's his options as professional teacher? You'd think to refer them on, i.e. have no dealings with the student, put them in a different class. And if that's good enough for medical staff or other teaching staff, why not for him? People are willfully ignoring double standards.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 11,105 ✭✭✭✭Furze99


    Right.. let's wait for the inevitable court case. Then all the facts will be laid out in their correct sequence.

    Then we can judge better. I'll be the first to admit if I'm wrong. I hope you and others can do likewise if it's shown that this escalated way beyond the way it arose initially.



  • Registered Users Posts: 540 ✭✭✭PhoneMain


    Cos he's not been suspended due to his religious beliefs, he's been suspended due to his behaviour at the end of year gathering. Judging from media reports, that behaviour was dispecable. That's a big difference. I cant imagine how that poor student felt at the time or currently feels.


    Also, the diff between referring on is that you're not willfully blocking care of the patient, you're facilitating it. There's lots of reasons why 1 doctor performs things and another doesnt e.g. I'm not trained in inserting vaginal coils so I dont do them but I tell the patient my colleague does or I tell them of a local service who can provide the service. I'm not blocking the patient from getting that care just cos I cant/dont want to do it.



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 15,479 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    If that was what he wanted , you'd be correct but that's not what he wanted.

    He was not willing to allow ANYONE in the school to refer to the child by a different name or via pronouns.

    He wanted the requirement removed entirely not just for him , but for everyone because in his view it was against Church teachings etc. etc.

    That is the core of this issue. If it was just him saying "I don't want to do that , can I just not have to teach that child" then it might have been resolved.

    But that's not what he wanted , he wanted a show to drive his rabid evangelical agenda to everyone.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,781 ✭✭✭mohawk


    I have been agnostic/atheist since I was about 11 and so I am not one who has religious beliefs. For me this is about his actions and motivations rather then his beliefs

    I don’t think other teachers with similar beliefs should be expected to leave teaching especially if they can treat their students with compassion and respect.

    This particular case demonstrates behaviour that more then crosses the line towards his colleagues and students.



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 15,479 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    The trouble is that the court case will have absolutely nothing to do with the underlying issues.

    The current court case is exclusively about his refusal to comply with a court injunction - That only ends one way, with him agreeing to stop turning up at the school every day.

    Once that is out of the way you then need to deal with the reason for his suspension , which was his behaviour at multiple public school events where he got into shouting matches with the Principal and others. That is not a matter for the courts, it needs to go through the school (and maybe Dept of Ed?) disciplinary process first.

    At the very least that might get resolved by him getting some kind of notice on his permanent record.

    Only then do we potentially get to the underlying issue , in which frankly he doesn't have a leg to stand on.

    The equality act is absolutely clear , he cannot treat someone differently because of race,gender or sexual preference simple as that.

    As we've been discussing he could, subject to the school being able to do it, have some accommodation where he can avoid the kid . Wilsons isn't a huge school though so there might not be another suitable teacher available to allow him to do that though.

    Failing that, his "religious beliefs" have no standing in Court so he either does as requested or he takes his ball and goes home.

    It's pretty simple really.



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,383 ✭✭✭✭Geuze


    I read that the doctors in Irish hosps refusing to do terminations are mainly Muslim.



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,383 ✭✭✭✭Geuze


    He broke a Court Order, and was sent to jail, fair enough.

    He should not have disobeyed that Court Order.

    I do not have any sympathy for him there.


    However, on the underlying, substantive issue, he should not be compelled to call a boy a girl, or vice versa.

    A man is a man, whether or not he thinks he is, whether or not others think he is.

    For example, Eddie Izzard is a man. He can wear a dress all he likes, and fair play to him, but he is a man.

    Am I to be compelled to call him a woman, based on his feelings?



  • Registered Users Posts: 19,440 ✭✭✭✭Brendan Bendar


    Meanwhile back in reality land………………… Is the big E still behind the high walls ?

    Thats the main question innit?



  • Posts: 8,856 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    It’s a theory 😂

    I can’t say I strongly disagree either



  • Registered Users Posts: 20,653 ✭✭✭✭amdublin



    How about based on his wishes?


    If you introduce yourself to me, "hey the name is Geuze (male name??) but call me Mary please". Who am I to say no to that?



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 15,479 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    One would assume so , he's there until he clears his contempt.

    I can't see the Judge just letting him out given that he told the Judge that he had no intention of obeying the order.

    So , I think he either clears his contempt by accepting the order which appears unlikely or the school ask for the injunction to be lifted which seems even less likely.

    Anyway he needs a few more days at least to work the "Prisoner of Conscience" angle with his donors - 24 hrs in jail wouldn't really cut it on the fundraising emails.



  • Posts: 8,856 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Just quoting you as it’s a good point you’ve made and hasn’t really been emphasised on the thread- he wanted the decision REVERSED?

    Am I correct? I think I am.



  • Registered Users Posts: 40,415 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    He was asked to use gender neutral pronouns not "call a boy a girl"



  • Registered Users Posts: 176 ✭✭Canterelle


    "A man is a man etc" - That is your opinion. Nobody can make you believe otherwise. But transgender people equally have a right to be treated with dignity and respect. Stop being so simplistic about this issue. On a personal level, you cannot be compelled to call Eddie Izzard a woman. But when a society agrees on rules that are fair and inclusive, in a workplace you can indeed be asked to respect another person.



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,799 ✭✭✭✭Panthro


    Personally speaking when it comes to religion I'd say I'm "no fixed abode". 😁. I could not care less who or what this guy believes in within his own home. Good luck to him.

    But when he brings his beliefs into the work place, it then becomes a problem which has been shown by his actions. He's pushed his beliefs and expects the employer to bend over backwards, which is not happening. Behave like adults and try to find a compromise. If not, P45 time for the employee, as he's clearly unsuited to the ethos of his employer.

    I think he's better off going and finding himself a career which aligns better along his beliefs he wishes to live by personally. Perhaps write a book or set up a podcast. The world's a big place, he might even find himself a school who's ethos align perfectly with his own, though he may need to travel for that job.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]



    So when do you reckon the hunger strike will commence? I reckon it'll be on Saturday to give his mammy and the rest of her clutch the opportunity to head up from Mayo and picket whatever prison he's in. I wonder would he be interested in selling his Garth Brooks tickets seeing as he won't be using them himself (asking for a friend).



  • Registered Users Posts: 19,440 ✭✭✭✭Brendan Bendar


    Pop out to the exercise yard an he could hear Garrett Breewks for free …… no?

    Peter could send a ticket and slot him in with all the RTE freeloaders who will be there.


    Maybe he is not in an adjacent facility….maybe he got lucky.?



  • Posts: 8,856 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    It would be cruel and unusual punishment to subject him to a Garth Brooks concert- he’d surely get to the European Court of Human Rights if that happened



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,383 ✭✭✭✭Geuze


    Opinion? Beliefs?

    Eddie Izzard is a man, there are no opinions involved.

    He may feel like a woman, he may dress like one, fair play to him, he can walk down the street in a dress, but he is a man.


    I read a doctor (can you believe it, 600 points!!) say that sex is "assigned" at birth.

    I was present at births, and sex is not "assigned" at birth.

    There are over 100 births every day in Ireland, and the sex of the babies is observed and recorded, not "assigned".



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 2,078 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Transgender I can understand. Gender fluid, sorry I got nothing. People can identify any way they like, but gender fluid makes as much sense to me as identifying as an attack helicopter. The genders are very different, despite what people will try to convince you - it's just not possible to be flip flopping from one to the other.



This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement