GUILTY OH - Barb Williams for child abuse, Hancock County, 2014

[Synaptic Cliff]

Bottom line as I see it..

She is the adult. It is her responsibility to control her behavior. I don't care what the child did. He is the child! Nothing he could do makes it ok for her to hurt him.

She had a responsibility to keep him safe, and that does not include slamming hid head against the wall. If she couldn't control herself, she then has the responsibility to not get in that situation in the first place. That's what being an adult means--Taking responsibility for one's actions.

JMO

 

[Constance]

I think when I was,younger a ton of years ago, this was acceptable. I never had anything like that happen to me, but I heard about kids , older, being pushed against lockers.

There are plenty of people out there that think kids are treated too mamby pamby. I see the posts on my FB about, " I was raised such and such way and I am OK."

There is corporal punishment allowed in some schools.

People want other children punished, but you better not touch their child.

We need to teach problem solving and how to deal with problems. Kids can learn to regulate their behavior.

I don't know what is up with the teacher, but clearly to a lot of us it is not OK

BBM I see this a lot, too. Along with "cutesy" little pics with slogans like "we don't need ___ control, we need child control" being passed around that actually encourage violence against children. It's disgusting.

When people say, "I got beat & I'm okay! Beat some sense into 'em!" I always think, "No, you're obviously not okay! Not if the first response you think of when dealing with an unruly child is violence." JMO.

IMO, physical violence against children by adults in our society is far too often ignored, accepted, or even encouraged. It's likely the result of the perpetrator having been victimized in a similar fashion as a child. The helpless, dominated child becomes an adult, finally holds power over someone smaller and weaker, and in their twisted minds, they feel they're right to use violence if need be, to control a child. Almost always for the child's own good. I say this not to excuse their behavior, but to point out how it is that this kind of "us against them/must dominate at all costs" attitude lives on. And on. And on.

It's not hard not to hurt children! :banghead:

 

[human]

constance, You are so right on.

You can read plenty of articles on why spanking is ok.

It is so preposterous that I cannot understand the logic of why hurting someone is teaching them anything but fear.

Would you learn if someone was hitting you? It is crazy thinking. But plenty of people believe it

 

[Salem]

And to pre-empt any flaming which assumes I'm somehow using subtlety or covertly supporting this teacher's actions, I'm bumping this half (the part relevant to the topic) of my original post to clarify my position on this.

She WILL be fired, IMO. And ultimately, IMO, she WILL end up with a misdemeanor assault conviction or plea.

The child has apparently has had some behavior issues, as many kids do. The teacher snapped, and resorted to assault to "address" the issues. That is never ok. She committed assault, IMO. Acknowledging the circumstances is neither excusing the behavior of the teacher, nor blaming the victim. It simply explains how the situation unfolded. Just as we do when we discuss most cases at WS. There is nothing at all that indicates that this teacher was on a "hunting expedition."

Interesting, KZ. I disagree. Have you read the documents and especially the one by the person (can't remember the name right now) that interviewed the child? What did you think of the way that interview progressed?

Personally, as I stated earlier, I don't think this was the first time this teacher abused this child.

Salem

 

[screecher]

snipped for focus.

From the principal's notes, BW had dropped off her class with the computer teacher. BW was in a hall discussing IN's IEP meeting with another staff member. That staff member directed BW's attention to IN, who was in the hall. The comments in the documents state that the child was in a different part of the school, and didn't use the bathroom closest to the computer teacher's classroom. (Comments at 1:25 pm) These documents are also presumably also where the interpretation that IN had incidents with "wandering" come from.

I am not verifying the veracity of these statements. Just providing the link.

Link to the document is in this article:

http://www.toledonewsnow.com/story/...ents-shed-light-on-riverdale-teacher-incident

School notes and statements from the incident:

http://ftpcontent4.worldnow.com/wto...l&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer

Thanks.


I do wonder why the special teacher didn't retrieve the 'wanderer'. Afterall, he was, for all intent and purpose under her/his charge. Barb Williams was on a free period.

 

[JeannaT]

Thanks.


I do wonder why the special teacher didn't retrieve the 'wanderer'. Afterall, he was, for all intent and purpose under her/his charge. Barb Williams was on a free period.

Likely because she had a class to attend. She couldn't just leave all the other kids to search for the one, who turned out to be in the other part of the school.

That's the problem with a "wanderer". There is no one who can immediately go and search - because the teacher in charge has a whole other class of kids to watch.

 

[JeannaT]

Interesting, KZ. I disagree. Have you read the documents and especially the one by the person (can't remember the name right now) that interviewed the child? What did you think of the way that interview progressed?

Personally, as I stated earlier, I don't think this was the first time this teacher abused this child.

Salem

Are you just guessing? Or do you have any information to back up your thought that this teacher has had other episodes of abuse? Because try as I might, I couldn't find ANYTHING negative against her.

 

[screecher]

And to pre-empt any flaming which assumes I'm somehow using subtlety or covertly supporting this teacher's actions, I'm bumping this half (the part relevant to the topic) of my original post to clarify my position on this.

She WILL be fired, IMO. And ultimately, IMO, she WILL end up with a misdemeanor assault conviction or plea.

The child has apparently has had some behavior issues, as many kids do. The teacher snapped, and resorted to assault to "address" the issues. That is never ok. She committed assault, IMO. Acknowledging the circumstances is neither excusing the behavior of the teacher, nor blaming the victim. It simply explains how the situation unfolded. Just as we do when we discuss most cases at WS. There is nothing at all that indicates that this teacher was on a "hunting expedition."

BBM

..."hunting expedition." hmmmm...appropriate choice of words, IMO.

I don't understand why Barb Williams wouldn't take her free period to de-stress while another teacher had the class for a special. The class, for that time period, was under someone else's watch. Not her's. Instead, she's the one who retrieves him. And not from a good heart. I call BS.

The little guy's parents asked for a different classroom in Nov. That indicates to me there were issues way back then. I absolutely believe this kid was, for lack of a better phrase, a thorn in Barb Williams big toe. And was the subject of her discomfort.

For whatever reason, it really doesn't matter, she lost all sensibility and objectivity concerning her student, this little tyke. Hence the assault. Not the first assault. IMO.

 

[K_Z]

Interesting, KZ. I disagree. Have you read the documents and especially the one by the person (can't remember the name right now) that interviewed the child? What did you think of the way that interview progressed?

Personally, as I stated earlier, I don't think this was the first time this teacher abused this child.

Salem

Thank you for your comments. I’m not exactly sure which specific thing/s we disagree on, but I’m going out on a limb and thinking it might have to do with whether or not I think she “snapped” (my interpretation). Your comments indicate you think she may have been engaging in physical violence against this child numerous times in the past. Is this the area where we disagree? Or is it more than that?

Let me explain why I think this is a case of “snapped”, versus long term physical abuse.

BW has been a teacher in this district (and probably in this same building) for 13-14 years. She definitely knows that many areas within the building are under security camera surveillance. That is not a huge secret in any public elementary school, and hallways are the first areas other than door entrances that are put under surveillance. There is no way, IMO, that she didn’t “know” the hallways were under camera surveillance.

So that begs the question, why would such a horrendous, rotten, lousy, evil, despicable, long term abusive teacher CHOOSE to abuse a child, in such a violent and clear cut fashion, in CLEAR VIEW of one, or more surveillance cameras, as well as within eye and ear of other staff?

Is she REALLY that stupid, or did she simply “snap” and lash out, not thinking about the surveillance cameras, or any other staff or volunteers that might be within ear or eye range?

She knows EXACTLY what would happen to any staff member or volunteer that did THAT to a child—and she did it ANYWAY.

To my interpretation, that equates to a situation where she gave in to emotion and snapped. If she had WANTED to conceal her abusive behavior, I do believe she could have been able to orchestrate a situation to make sure it wasn’t overheard, or seen on surveillance cameras. The very impulsive nature of her abuse says to me that she “snapped.”

Do I think she treated this child “perfectly” before this—NO. But I don’t think she physically abused him before this episode. She definitely had a bias against this child’s behavior that put him on her radar, and probably was “extra” hard on him emotionally and with discipline. That is not OK either, and shows lack of self awareness of her own emotional state (which is apparent in her comments with the principal), as well as the needs of the child.

I do think this woman was VERY bothered/ upset/ annoyed by this child’s behavior, and extremely frustrated with both the child, and the communication with his parents, and possibly the reaction of administration to the ongoing situation. That is NOT an excuse, but an explanation for how the situation unfolded. This child, IN, pushed her buttons in ways that she was unable to control. That alone, had she had enough self awareness, should have been reason for HER to request IN be moved to another classroom.

I think she very impulsively snapped, and gave in to the urge to abuse physically. Otherwise, we would be hearing lots of comments from other parents about how she hated and abused their children physically and emotionally, etc. You can’t hide something like that for 14 years in the same building. We would hear about her own discipline history. There would be complaints. Small children, observers or victims, would tell someone.

It IS possible for previously “good” people to snap. We recently had a rather mild mannered OB-GYN surgeon assault a hospital administrator at a board meeting, in full view of dozens of people, board members, and media! It IS possible for previously “good” teachers to lose it. I really don’t understand why that is such a hard concept for people to grasp. Some want to impose decades of “villain” and predator behavior on this woman, without any evidence. She is now facing the consequences for her behavior. She screwed up immensely, and will never, ever recover her reputation or career.

 

[human]

Thanks.


I do wonder why the special teacher didn't retrieve the 'wanderer'. Afterall, he was, for all intent and purpose under her/his charge. Barb Williams was on a free period.

p

The free period is for planning, meeting with other staff,going to the bathroom, making copies, etc. It is not a time for relaxing and eating bon bons.

 

[screecher]

Likely because she had a class to attend. She couldn't just leave all the other kids to search for the one, who turned out to be in the other part of the school.

That's the problem with a "wanderer". There is no one who can immediately go and search - because the teacher in charge has a whole other class of kids to watch.

BBM

WTH would retrieve him when he'd wander from Barb William's room? Or did she, while leaving her room full of kids alone?

 

[screecher]

p

The free period is for planning, meeting with other staff,going to the bathroom, making copies, etc. It is not a time for relaxing and eating bon bons.

Sorry, didn't mean to equate the word de-stress with relax. Never said anything about relaxing. And eating bon bons...although I'm guessing some do. Obviously, this little guy stressed this woman. Remove oneself from the stress. For that half hour, 45 mins, however long the special is, allow some space and let the special teacher deal with it. Allow someone else to find the wanderer.

Anything other than this. I know some posters continue to say there MUST BE A HUGE HISTORY of this behavior.

Find it. Find anything else, besides this loss of temper.

BBM

Something was happening before November. Hence the request for another room. Not that the recorded assault isn't enough. That's all that needed.

[modsnip]

 

[gitana1]

snipped for focus.

From the principal's notes, BW had dropped off her class with the computer teacher. BW was in a hall discussing IN's IEP meeting with another staff member. That staff member directed BW's attention to IN, who was in the hall. The comments in the documents state that the child was in a different part of the school, and didn't use the bathroom closest to the computer teacher's classroom. (Comments at 1:25 pm) These documents are also presumably also where the interpretation that IN had incidents with "wandering" come from.

I am not verifying the veracity of these statements. Just providing the link.

Link to the document is in this article:

http://www.toledonewsnow.com/story/...ents-shed-light-on-riverdale-teacher-incident

School notes and statements from the incident:

http://ftpcontent4.worldnow.com/wto...l&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer

Thanks K_Z. I was being slightly facetious. Clearly this woman was enraged with the child and wanted to vent her rage on him. IMO. But I know you weren't trying to justify her behavior in any way. Just pointing out that the child may have some issues that contributed to the teacher snapping.

But you know, many of us have worked with kids and pretty much everyone who has, has dealt with emotional disturbed kids. Yet most do not react this way no matter what.

I had one child who was so disruptive. He would refuse to ever participate in any activity. He would just act out and prevent the other kids from being able to concentrate on what was happening. I would tell him that he could leave circle and quietly do another activity if he wasn't going to participate. But he would still make noise and bang things and prevent the rest of the class from being able to pay attention. So he got time out. And he'd then stand up holding his chair and slam it down over and over again, making a loud sound. So I then made him go do his time out in the utility room where I could see him but doors and windows would prevent the sound from being too disruptive to everyone else. (I had no aid in that class). But that didn't work either. He would literally tear it apart. I'd open the door and he'd just scream (like he was being murdered), "You never loved me!!! You never loved me!!" The anguish in his voice was incredible.

Luckily, the teacher next door witnessed this all the time (the utility room was in between the two classrooms and it had large windows in each door so we could see into each other's classrooms). Otherwise, I'm sure someone would've thought I was hurting him.

Oh yeah, he also liked to purposefully defecate in his pants when he got put on time out. He'd just stare right at you, sitting there, with a determined look, and push out a poo.

I was a brand new 19 year old preschool teacher and this kid, bless his heart, was overwhelming.

But not once did I resort to physical violence or snap or even think about it. After so many years teaching, this is not the first time this woman has had to deal with a disturbed child. Plus, she's no young kid. She knows better. And if she doesn't, either she's given vent to her rage many times before this. Or something is going in with her that has caused her to no longer be able to control herself.

constance, You are so right on.

You can read plenty of articles on why spanking is ok.

It is so preposterous that I cannot understand the logic of why hurting someone is teaching them anything but fear.

Would you learn if someone was hitting you? It is crazy thinking. But plenty of people believe it

I'm against corporal punishment but I must say that this is far different and more violent than a typical swat or two on the rear that many parents mete out to their kids. This is total rage and she risked injuring his head and spine.

 

[gitana1]

Thank you for your comments. I’m not exactly sure which specific thing/s we disagree on, but I’m going out on a limb and thinking it might have to do with whether or not I think she “snapped” (my interpretation). Your comments indicate you think she may have been engaging in physical violence against this child numerous times in the past. Is this the area where we disagree? Or is it more than that?

Let me explain why I think this is a case of “snapped”, versus long term physical abuse.

BW has been a teacher in this district (and probably in this same building) for 13-14 years. She definitely knows that many areas within the building are under security camera surveillance. That is not a huge secret in any public elementary school, and hallways are the first areas other than door entrances that are put under surveillance. There is no way, IMO, that she didn’t “know” the hallways were under camera surveillance.

So that begs the question, why would such a horrendous, rotten, lousy, evil, despicable, long term abusive teacher CHOOSE to abuse a child, in such a violent and clear cut fashion, in CLEAR VIEW of one, or more surveillance cameras, as well as within eye and ear of other staff?

Is she REALLY that stupid, or did she simply “snap” and lash out, not thinking about the surveillance cameras, or any other staff or volunteers that might be within ear or eye range?

She knows EXACTLY what would happen to any staff member or volunteer that did THAT to a child—and she did it ANYWAY.

To my interpretation, that equates to a situation where she gave in to emotion and snapped. If she had WANTED to conceal her abusive behavior, I do believe she could have been able to orchestrate a situation to make sure it wasn’t overheard, or seen on surveillance cameras. The very impulsive nature of her abuse says to me that she “snapped.”

Do I think she treated this child “perfectly” before this—NO. But I don’t think she physically abused him before this episode. She definitely had a bias against this child’s behavior that put him on her radar, and probably was “extra” hard on him emotionally and with discipline. That is not OK either, and shows lack of self awareness of her own emotional state (which is apparent in her comments with the principal), as well as the needs of the child.

I do think this woman was VERY bothered/ upset/ annoyed by this child’s behavior, and extremely frustrated with both the child, and the communication with his parents, and possibly the reaction of administration to the ongoing situation. That is NOT an excuse, but an explanation for how the situation unfolded. This child, IN, pushed her buttons in ways that she was unable to control. That alone, had she had enough self awareness, should have been reason for HER to request IN be moved to another classroom.

I think she very impulsively snapped, and gave in to the urge to abuse physically. Otherwise, we would be hearing lots of comments from other parents about how she hated and abused their children physically and emotionally, etc. You can’t hide something like that for 14 years in the same building. We would hear about her own discipline history. There would be complaints. Small children, observers or victims, would tell someone.

It IS possible for previously “good” people to snap. We recently had a rather mild mannered OB-GYN surgeon assault a hospital administrator at a board meeting, in full view of dozens of people, board members, and media! It IS possible for previously “good” teachers to lose it. I really don’t understand why that is such a hard concept for people to grasp. Some want to impose decades of “villain” and predator behavior on this woman, without any evidence. She is now facing the consequences for her behavior. She screwed up immensely, and will never, ever recover her reputation or career.

It's true. Sometimes previously good people "snap" and hurt another. Or perhaps their civility and sweetness was just a thin veneer they constantly struggled to maintain, which hid their true, not so sweet natures?

There are faaaaaar to many stories of beloved teachers, Boy Scout leaders, coaches,priests and pastors who successfully hid their true natures for decades, even while abusing others.

And then one day, they give in to their sick urges and take it too far, disregarding the consequences...and get caught.

Did this woman snap or had she been hiding decades of abusive behavior? Time will tell. I'm sure if she's had issues, other kids will talk.

 

[MyBelle]

It's true. Sometimes previously good people "snap" and hurt another. Or perhaps their civility and sweetness was just a thin veneer they constantly struggled to maintain, which hid their true, not so sweet natures?

There are faaaaaar to many stories of beloved teachers, Boy Scout leaders, coaches,priests and pastors who successfully hid their true natures for decades, even while abusing others.

And then one day, they give in to their sick urges and take it too far, disregarding the consequences...and get caught.

Did this woman snap or had she been hiding decades of abusive behavior? Time will tell. I'm sure if she's had issues, other kids will talk.

I agree. Not only will kids will talk, so will their parents. I think it is important to remember his parents had already requested the child be transferred from the class and request was denied. Whatever happened to trigger their request had now escalated to an act of violence. This teacher arrogantly assumed the Principal would support her no matter what she did.

So whatever "notes" the principal made would be written in such a way to protect his own decision in denying the parents' request. His decisions bother me just as much as the teacher's actions. He should have reported her physical abuse to the police immediately and didn't. That is a huge failure on his part. No doubt she will lose her job but I think his job is in peril. And well it should be.

JMO

 

[human]

gitana, I have to disagree with you


How about if your SO just hit you a little. Lightly, not hard. Just enough to get your attention.. Is that OK?

 

[Constance]

I just wanted to point out that teachers & others in authority earn a reputation among kids that will never be found in any official records or internet links.

For instance, everyone in my elementary school knew that one certain teacher had broken a child's arm, then made the kid & entire class say he had fallen. I remember asking why he was still a teacher. An older student who witnessed the attack told me, "The teacher already said how it supposedly happened. No one would believe us if we told the truth."

This was a long time ago, and a broken arm in class likely would be more closely looked at these days, but the point is, children often talk about things among themselves that are never officially reported. And just because something was never reported doesn't mean it didn't happen. I think common sense says this is NOT the first time this teacher "lost it" on a child. JMO.

 

[JeannaT]

I certainly get that dynamic, Constance. There are teachers the kids (and many parents) know are abusive and somehow those teachers - even in good schools - somehow don't get fired.

What I'm surprised at, still, is that I can't find any anonymous postings regarding that on any forum I've found in response to this huge story. I think back on teachers who were cruel to children - even once or twice or in a minor way - and if a national story like this broke about them, there would be ripples. There would be those who would speak out, even anonymously on the internet. More likely, they would be found by this insatiable news media through rumors and would be interviewed. The silence of any detractors is what's intriguing to me.

 

[mikkismom]

Parents vent concerns over teacher inquiry

http://www.toledoblade.com/Education/2014/05/20/Parents-vent-concerns-over-teacher-inquiry.html

The incident is being investigated by the Hancock County Sheriff's Office, the Ohio Department of Education, and the Hancock County Department of Children's Service

 

[JeannaT]

Thanks, mikkismom. Interesting.

Am I the only one who continues to be struck by the lack of parental involvement or comment in this?

There were no parents at that school who spoke, or looking at the 5 folks in the audience, cared to come listen either to the school board meeting. There was a future parent who was interested in the policy and working through the policy for when his kids would attend that school, and a teacher who was in support of a policy where facts are found and decisions are made by an appropriate process. The school board also is in favor of letting the system work. What a mouth full of oatmeal.

I'm telling you what, at our schools that room would be PACKED, if only from people wanting to watch drama. There would be parents in support of the action and parents against, and although they might not speak there would be audible sighs and grunts when their viewpoint was stated. There would be parents lined up at the microphone pleading not to let this taint the reputation of their school and let's build a website bragging about our accomplishments because we have great kids and great teachers. *applause*

Is there something about that area of the country that makes them silent and less dramatic?