In Texas, two school employees have been sued after they allegedly verbally abused a boy for being “smelly” and forced him to strip and shower in front of them. The boy was just eight years old and attended Peaster Elementary School. The child’s parents, Amber and Michael Tilley, also filed a police report but no charges were brought against the employees. The lawsuit names Peaster Independent School District and Peaster Elementary School employees Julie West and Debbie Van Rite in federal court in Fort Worth.
The complaint alleges that the boy was taken to the nurse’s office where the employees “began violently washing his body with a washcloth, scrubbing him over a large portion of his body, stuck cotton balls in his ears, all while ridiculing and harassing him about being ‘dirty.'”
If the complaint allegations are true, the treatment of the third grader is truly shocking. Indeed, I cannot imagine adults showering a child without parental notice and consent absent some immediate medical emergency. The case raises a curious line between civil and criminal laws. If a teacher forces a student to strip for pleasure, he is criminally charged. However, if he did so for “bad hygiene” and proceeded to hand wash the child, it is not a crime? I am not necessarily disagreeing with the decision not to charge the employees criminally. I have been critical of the over-criminalization of conduct and intent should be the dominant factor in such an analysis. I simply find it interesting in how such cases are divided between the civil and criminal dockets.
I believe the case probably does belong on the civil side and furthermore I cannot see a viable defense to such an action. A boy in the third grade would be highly traumatized by such an act. As the father of three boys and a girl under 13, I can attest to the intense privacy notions that kick in early with children. You can add feelings of shame and self-loathing that would likely come from such an extreme act. Expert testimony in the case could be devastating for the school district.
It will be interesting to see if the District tries to portray the two employees as “rogue employees” who acted without permission.
Such measures also warp a student’s sense of not just autonomy but authority. The school’s motto “Preparing Today’s Youth for Tomorrow” has a chilling ring if this is what students are being taught about their rights as individual vis-à-vis the state.
Source: Courthouse News
Pete I nominate you!
lol
too bad the kid’s not a cowboy. they would’ve kept him out of the library.
I agree, Blouise. I suspect the parents were not people the employees of the school thought were important enough to worry about — if they complained, who cares? But it looks to me like a case of child battery. If the nurse thought there was a problem, he or she should have phoned the parents and explained the problem to them. Thereafter, proper procedures for school health standards should have been employed. What a pack of thugs!
The two employees certainly shouldn’t continue to be employees of the school district whatever else is going on, criminal or civil.
Sadistic
Had they tried a note home to the parents wondering if the child was having a hygiene problem? Hint hint.
This was assault, a criminal offense. In loco parentis? Assault by a parent is still assault.
Why do kids have less rights than adults to integrity?
A primary trauma to children is not being respected as a person. All else is small. It happens constantly.
Nosy people.
All in all…. it just another brick in the wall……
These stinkin kids. This is why we have showers at school. Ask Sandusky.
Many years ago I had a co-worker with nonexistent hygiene. No one could stand to be near him. One day a gang of his fellows grabbed him and threw him in the shower. No lawsuits resulted but the guy was a bit cleaner afterwards.
From the article in the link with the post:
“P.T. was then forced to apply deodorant at the insistence of defendant West and Van Rite, who then told P.T. ‘if you ever come to school dirty again[,] we will strip you buck naked and throw you in the shower and scrub you down.'”
The parents claim the defendant then warned their child that he and his backpack would be sprayed every morning so he would not smell.
When he asked what they were going to spray him with, the defendants said, “it will kill you,” according to the complaint.
………….
“These events have caused severe emotional trauma to P.T., to the extent that he is now in therapy and is exhibiting OCD-type behaviors, such as taking numerous baths a day, constantly cleaning his ears, and spraying himself with large amounts of cologne,” the complaint states. “P.T. has developed a phobia of getting physically too close to people, out of fear they will say he is dirty or smells, and is traumatized by attending school and continuing to be victimized.”
From what I’ve heard it was worse than stated here….. I read one account where they spayed him with perfume……
Texas Family Code Chapter 261 lists the people required to report neglect and child abuse (http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/) . Under that section, schools can be held civilly liable for failing to report. If this was indeed a case of a child with consistently poor hygiene, that should have been handled with Texas DHS, not by assaulting the child. Even if there was no sexual intent, there should still be grounds for assaulting a minor.
I think the cops should take another look at this. Two people stripping a child naked? I was going to say two women stripping a boy but as I substituted genders I realized that gender doesn’t matter. I don’t know the legal definition of assault but that’s what this seems to be to me.
While general lack of hygiene may be the issue, I wonder if the child regularly eats middle eastern cuisine? Spices used in middle eastern cuisine can produce an odor that is offensive to some.
Humiliation comes in many forms. My brother had problems with a teacher, Mrs. Jones. Seems he couldn’t do anything right. My father went to see the teacher to find out what was going on. Turns out he knew her as Miss Smith. He was about 14 and living in a foster home and there was not a lot of money. Miss Smith made him stand up in front of the class and proceeded to compare him to the kid from the wealthiest family. She started with his haircut (or lack thereof) and went to his very well worn shoes. My father went to the principal and told her that he would no longer be in Miss Smith’s class and she couldn’t make him. After the principal found out what happened my father spent English class in the principal’s office. My brother was no longer required to attend her class.
And if it *was* a neglect case, the teachers are mandated reporters in this state. That might be where the charges come into play–for taking matters into their own hands (pardon the pun) rather than following the law and reporting the issue.
Mike S. said it correctly. If this was a neglect issue, the Texas department of child services should have been involved. What were these people smoking that made them think that they have the right to force any student, any age, to strip and then hand wash him? I think criminal charges might be appropriate here if the facts hold up under scrutiny.
In loco parentis evidently live and well in TX.
Reblogged this on kipkorirdotorg.
This indeed was cruel behavior and highly inappropriate conduct. However, I’d like to know why the boy was so dirty in the first place? Was he sent to school like that or did he get dirty on the schoolyard? It’s possible there was some parental neglect. If so the child protective authorities shoul have been called in. Something smells about the case.