Dark Reality - Educators Allow Bullying
Catherine A. Hogan, MSW, LCSW
Educational Consultant/Advocate
hoganc@optonline.net 203 877 8449
Former Connecticut School Social Worker; Member of the Connecticut Governor's Task Force on
Bullying; Former President of the Connecticut Association of School Social Workers; Clinical Instructor at
the Yale Child Study Center
TO: Judith Scruggs
RE: Educator Speaks Truth To Judith: Daniel Scruggs
Dear Judy,
Many school professionals understand how very difficult it can be for single parents with two jobs and
hourly incomes to participate in the education of their children. As a single parent, therefore, you should
be commended for your attendance at all school meetings for Daniel. It is sad that the public does not
know your strengths and your work for children in schools. The focus on your home management skills
cannot eliminate the school professionals’ responsibility in Daniel’s decision to end his life. The
responsibility of others is so clearly outlined in the Connecticut Office of the Child Advocate’s report. I
want to share with you the reasons I believe the public’s impression of what occurred to Daniel is not
balanced or fair, as well as some of the dark realities that go on in schools and that are applicable in your
case. I use the term “peer abuse” instead of “bullying,” because it creates a more accurate image of what
happens to children in the presence of adults.
The public should have a better understanding of the negligence by school personnel to Daniel. They
should know that in a meeting at school, one month before Daniel ended his life, not one person from any
agency involved in his care showed up. But you were there. The public should understand that school
professionals made decisions in violation of your rights. They should know that school professionals did
not provide Daniel the necessary and appropriate counseling for peer abuse or for understanding his
disability. The public should know that school professionals say they did not observe signs of depression;
yet you, an untrained mom in the midst of a battle for help and truthfulness, are being held accountable for
not observing signs of depression.
The public should also have a better understanding of who Daniel was and how seriously affected he was
by the peer abuse. Do you think the public understands that school test results showed that Daniel had a
very superior IQ? Do you think the public understands that Daniel’s disability of not being able to produce
on paper what was in his head was intensely confusing to him? Do you think the public is aware that
Daniel was a sensitive young man who would understandably become upset when abused by peers, or
when facing personal safety, or when seeing violence tolerated? In his early years, Daniel cried when
abused by peers; towards the end, he struck back. The suspensions that were given under such
circumstances seem uncaring and unproductive. It is understandable that a few weeks before Daniel
ended his life, he stood on a desk and screamed when other students continued to abuse him in front of
school staff.
It is essential that the public understand that while you are cited in the Child Advocate’s report as not
having been effective for Daniel, there are no statements that you refused to cooperate with anyone. But
the Child Advocate’s report does cite individuals, with state certification and license, who violated laws,
did not follow standards of professional practice, did not follow licensing requirements, and did not attend
meetings for Daniel.
In addition to the lack of public awareness on these important issues, there are dark and unspoken realities
in schools that were at work in your case. Certainly, it is true that many school professionals do
remarkable jobs for children and that their levels of dedication do not diminish despite new demands in
instruction. However, institutional settings do have dark realities, and the Office of the Child Advocate’s
report presents disturbing documentation of the dark realities in the school Daniel attended. School
professionals failed to follow laws and failed to fulfill fundamental moral and professional obligations to
your son. These dark realities are not isolated to a few school professionals or to certain schools.
Instead, these realities can exist alongside the very best practices in many schools.
It is a dark reality, for example, that school professionals may not comply with their professional obligation
to ensure the safety of children. Peer abuse is actually permitted by many school staff. Targeted children
are fortunate if they have one or more staff who advocate for them. But if administrative support for a no-
peer-abuse-environment is weak or non-existent, children may not have any educator who comes forward,
or the educator who does come forward can be ineffective. The Child Advocate’s report did not identify
one school staff person who intervened for Daniel. The psychological impact of this level of disregard and
alienation results in the loss of children through suicide or homicide.
The most difficult part of this permissive attitude towards peer abuse is that if something were happening
in school to an educator’s child, even if the educator felt unsure about whether it was teasing or peer
abuse, he would not only speak up; he would step in. The educator would probably say to the students
involved, "Forget the reason. What gives you the right to even touch my child?” The commonplace
decision that school professionals make about whose child is more valuable is immensely profound. No
one stops to think about it. The decision of value extends beyond the doors of the school. The State will
remove children from parents who allow sibling abuse, but will insist that children remain or return to
educators who allow peer abuse.
Another dark reality is that school professionals may try to resolve problems without regard for parents’
rights. Special education services were taken from Daniel, a highly gifted student with a disability, and he
was transferred, three months before he ended his life, into a program with seriously disturbed youth. The
Child Advocate’s report does not indicate that you were allowed to participate in making these decisions or
that you were provided information about how these decisions might affect Daniel. In fact, a change in
placement was made outside of the process required by law.
Consistent with the disregard for a lawful approach is the educational practice of making statements that
are not supported by evidence. It is common knowledge that parents can feel too intimidated to challenge
such statements. The Child Advocate’s report did not document educators’ claims that Daniel chronically
soiled his pants. The image created for the public is that Daniel had stools in his underwear. There is not
any mention of lack of bowel control in the 4th, 5th, and 6th, grades. Some form of lack of bowel control
occurred in third grade, but bowel and hygiene accusations were not raised again until approximately two
months before Daniel ended his life, the time when peer abuse was most severe. If Daniel was having
these problems, there should have been some referral to the school nurse over those three and one half
years.
The darkest reality is that school professionals know there is little parents can do about peer abuse because
they can’t see it. If a school is not stopping peer abuse, there is no state agency available to step in. The
Connecticut State Department of Education does provide guidelines on bullying (peer abuse) to districts,
but has no system in place to enforce those guidelines. The Office of the Child Advocate says that if the
intervention by the State Department of Education is not effective, then the only resource available to the
parent is an attorney. Many parents cannot afford to hire an attorney. Some parents have also discovered
that the State Child Protection Agency does not investigate matters of peer abuse or institutional school
neglect in allowing peer abuse. Parents are then back at square one -- an unending battle with diminishing
hope and the risk to life.
You were ultimately in a horrendous and overwhelming position. It must have been very difficult for you.
Parents in situations similar to yours may not realize how serious the peer abuse is. They question
themselves and their children when educators remain steadfast in their attitude that peer abuse is the child’
s fault. It is perfectly understandable, therefore, that you told Daniel, at one point, that he was bringing it
all on himself. This kind of statement may reflect your desperate attempt to try and trust school
professionals while still advocating for your belief in Daniel.
In closing, Judy, I want to say that school professionals have personal life problems as varied as yours and
other parents. Affluence doesn’t change vulnerability to family issues. Some educators have children with
substance abuse problems. Some have children who do not talk with them. Some leave children at home
unsupervised. Your personal life problems have nothing to do with whether school professionals did or
did not fulfill their responsibilities to Daniel.
A good number of school professionals experience stress from watching the conflict between the interests
of children and the apathy of colleagues. It should not be left to you to challenge the apathy that harmed
your child. When we lose a child, all persons, in all systems, must look at their participation. In addition,
until school personnel and state agencies acknowledge the necessity for enforceable intervention in child-to-
child abuse, the harm can continue. Parents need to believe that the system will work to protect children,
rather than remain still to protect itself.
You are a woman with great courage and resilience. You are one parent, but one for whom we work and
serve. Your mourning is unfortunately prolonged by the focused imbalance of responsibility.
Respectfully,
Catherine A. Hogan
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email transmission (and/or the attachments accompanying it) may
contain legally privileged and confidential information, and is intended only for the use of the individual or
entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
disclosure, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
communication in error, please promptly notify the sender by reply email and destroy the original message.
Thank You.
Disclaimer: The information and direction to web sites contained herein is educational and not intended to
be legal or medical advice. The information is not a substitute for discussion between patients and their
doctors nor clients and their attorneys. References to all information and opinions should not be
considered an endorsement. You are hereby advised to fully investigate all options in order to determine a
course of action or treatment that may be most appropriate for a specific situation and/or individual.
Copyright 2001- 2008 Alisha Leigh. Use of the material contained herein is unrestricted as long as it is
used for educational purposes and I am notified by e-mail of link usage. I would very much like to know
how this information is being used. Reciprocal linkage to your site is requested.
Updated 08-12-2008
Catherine A. Hogan, MSW, LCSW
Educational Consultant/Advocate
hoganc@optonline.net 203 877 8449
Former Connecticut School Social Worker; Member of the Connecticut Governor's Task Force on
Bullying; Former President of the Connecticut Association of School Social Workers; Clinical Instructor at
the Yale Child Study Center
TO: Judith Scruggs
RE: Educator Speaks Truth To Judith: Daniel Scruggs
Dear Judy,
Many school professionals understand how very difficult it can be for single parents with two jobs and
hourly incomes to participate in the education of their children. As a single parent, therefore, you should
be commended for your attendance at all school meetings for Daniel. It is sad that the public does not
know your strengths and your work for children in schools. The focus on your home management skills
cannot eliminate the school professionals’ responsibility in Daniel’s decision to end his life. The
responsibility of others is so clearly outlined in the Connecticut Office of the Child Advocate’s report. I
want to share with you the reasons I believe the public’s impression of what occurred to Daniel is not
balanced or fair, as well as some of the dark realities that go on in schools and that are applicable in your
case. I use the term “peer abuse” instead of “bullying,” because it creates a more accurate image of what
happens to children in the presence of adults.
The public should have a better understanding of the negligence by school personnel to Daniel. They
should know that in a meeting at school, one month before Daniel ended his life, not one person from any
agency involved in his care showed up. But you were there. The public should understand that school
professionals made decisions in violation of your rights. They should know that school professionals did
not provide Daniel the necessary and appropriate counseling for peer abuse or for understanding his
disability. The public should know that school professionals say they did not observe signs of depression;
yet you, an untrained mom in the midst of a battle for help and truthfulness, are being held accountable for
not observing signs of depression.
The public should also have a better understanding of who Daniel was and how seriously affected he was
by the peer abuse. Do you think the public understands that school test results showed that Daniel had a
very superior IQ? Do you think the public understands that Daniel’s disability of not being able to produce
on paper what was in his head was intensely confusing to him? Do you think the public is aware that
Daniel was a sensitive young man who would understandably become upset when abused by peers, or
when facing personal safety, or when seeing violence tolerated? In his early years, Daniel cried when
abused by peers; towards the end, he struck back. The suspensions that were given under such
circumstances seem uncaring and unproductive. It is understandable that a few weeks before Daniel
ended his life, he stood on a desk and screamed when other students continued to abuse him in front of
school staff.
It is essential that the public understand that while you are cited in the Child Advocate’s report as not
having been effective for Daniel, there are no statements that you refused to cooperate with anyone. But
the Child Advocate’s report does cite individuals, with state certification and license, who violated laws,
did not follow standards of professional practice, did not follow licensing requirements, and did not attend
meetings for Daniel.
In addition to the lack of public awareness on these important issues, there are dark and unspoken realities
in schools that were at work in your case. Certainly, it is true that many school professionals do
remarkable jobs for children and that their levels of dedication do not diminish despite new demands in
instruction. However, institutional settings do have dark realities, and the Office of the Child Advocate’s
report presents disturbing documentation of the dark realities in the school Daniel attended. School
professionals failed to follow laws and failed to fulfill fundamental moral and professional obligations to
your son. These dark realities are not isolated to a few school professionals or to certain schools.
Instead, these realities can exist alongside the very best practices in many schools.
It is a dark reality, for example, that school professionals may not comply with their professional obligation
to ensure the safety of children. Peer abuse is actually permitted by many school staff. Targeted children
are fortunate if they have one or more staff who advocate for them. But if administrative support for a no-
peer-abuse-environment is weak or non-existent, children may not have any educator who comes forward,
or the educator who does come forward can be ineffective. The Child Advocate’s report did not identify
one school staff person who intervened for Daniel. The psychological impact of this level of disregard and
alienation results in the loss of children through suicide or homicide.
The most difficult part of this permissive attitude towards peer abuse is that if something were happening
in school to an educator’s child, even if the educator felt unsure about whether it was teasing or peer
abuse, he would not only speak up; he would step in. The educator would probably say to the students
involved, "Forget the reason. What gives you the right to even touch my child?” The commonplace
decision that school professionals make about whose child is more valuable is immensely profound. No
one stops to think about it. The decision of value extends beyond the doors of the school. The State will
remove children from parents who allow sibling abuse, but will insist that children remain or return to
educators who allow peer abuse.
Another dark reality is that school professionals may try to resolve problems without regard for parents’
rights. Special education services were taken from Daniel, a highly gifted student with a disability, and he
was transferred, three months before he ended his life, into a program with seriously disturbed youth. The
Child Advocate’s report does not indicate that you were allowed to participate in making these decisions or
that you were provided information about how these decisions might affect Daniel. In fact, a change in
placement was made outside of the process required by law.
Consistent with the disregard for a lawful approach is the educational practice of making statements that
are not supported by evidence. It is common knowledge that parents can feel too intimidated to challenge
such statements. The Child Advocate’s report did not document educators’ claims that Daniel chronically
soiled his pants. The image created for the public is that Daniel had stools in his underwear. There is not
any mention of lack of bowel control in the 4th, 5th, and 6th, grades. Some form of lack of bowel control
occurred in third grade, but bowel and hygiene accusations were not raised again until approximately two
months before Daniel ended his life, the time when peer abuse was most severe. If Daniel was having
these problems, there should have been some referral to the school nurse over those three and one half
years.
The darkest reality is that school professionals know there is little parents can do about peer abuse because
they can’t see it. If a school is not stopping peer abuse, there is no state agency available to step in. The
Connecticut State Department of Education does provide guidelines on bullying (peer abuse) to districts,
but has no system in place to enforce those guidelines. The Office of the Child Advocate says that if the
intervention by the State Department of Education is not effective, then the only resource available to the
parent is an attorney. Many parents cannot afford to hire an attorney. Some parents have also discovered
that the State Child Protection Agency does not investigate matters of peer abuse or institutional school
neglect in allowing peer abuse. Parents are then back at square one -- an unending battle with diminishing
hope and the risk to life.
You were ultimately in a horrendous and overwhelming position. It must have been very difficult for you.
Parents in situations similar to yours may not realize how serious the peer abuse is. They question
themselves and their children when educators remain steadfast in their attitude that peer abuse is the child’
s fault. It is perfectly understandable, therefore, that you told Daniel, at one point, that he was bringing it
all on himself. This kind of statement may reflect your desperate attempt to try and trust school
professionals while still advocating for your belief in Daniel.
In closing, Judy, I want to say that school professionals have personal life problems as varied as yours and
other parents. Affluence doesn’t change vulnerability to family issues. Some educators have children with
substance abuse problems. Some have children who do not talk with them. Some leave children at home
unsupervised. Your personal life problems have nothing to do with whether school professionals did or
did not fulfill their responsibilities to Daniel.
A good number of school professionals experience stress from watching the conflict between the interests
of children and the apathy of colleagues. It should not be left to you to challenge the apathy that harmed
your child. When we lose a child, all persons, in all systems, must look at their participation. In addition,
until school personnel and state agencies acknowledge the necessity for enforceable intervention in child-to-
child abuse, the harm can continue. Parents need to believe that the system will work to protect children,
rather than remain still to protect itself.
You are a woman with great courage and resilience. You are one parent, but one for whom we work and
serve. Your mourning is unfortunately prolonged by the focused imbalance of responsibility.
Respectfully,
Catherine A. Hogan
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email transmission (and/or the attachments accompanying it) may
contain legally privileged and confidential information, and is intended only for the use of the individual or
entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
disclosure, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
communication in error, please promptly notify the sender by reply email and destroy the original message.
Thank You.
Disclaimer: The information and direction to web sites contained herein is educational and not intended to
be legal or medical advice. The information is not a substitute for discussion between patients and their
doctors nor clients and their attorneys. References to all information and opinions should not be
considered an endorsement. You are hereby advised to fully investigate all options in order to determine a
course of action or treatment that may be most appropriate for a specific situation and/or individual.
Copyright 2001- 2008 Alisha Leigh. Use of the material contained herein is unrestricted as long as it is
used for educational purposes and I am notified by e-mail of link usage. I would very much like to know
how this information is being used. Reciprocal linkage to your site is requested.
Updated 08-12-2008
ADHD: A Place to Start
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
