Freedom Hill principal going to Haycock

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't have a kid at FH or Haycock, but I kind of feel like people are getting their carts in front of their horses with this re: Bloom.

Looking at all the info. we have now, it is clear that there was abuse. BUT, did Bloom have that info in the spring? I can see how a person/principal could get info. that a kid has had bruises over the past several months, and not make the conclusion that the kid has been abused by the teacher. These kids may have difficulty moving/walking and a principal may have thought that could be the reason for bruises just as well as someone abusing the kid.

I think the details that have been released are inconclusive (as far as the public is concerned) on what the principal knew and when. It's natural to be careful about accusing someone of child abuse when you don't have direct evidence.

I'm not saying Bloom is innocent or guilty. I'm saying we don't really have solid info. yet to come to any conclusions.... but some of y'all have already pronounced him guilty without facts.

He's been arrested, so presumably there's proof that he did something bad.

You're... not getting the whole "innocent until proven guilty" thing, are you?

There may be evidence he did something bad, but whether or not there is proof is exactly what the trial will establish.

You have a lot of really smart and educated people on here, along with a WHOLE BUNCH OF LAWYERS. Please don't think this is going to trial. This case will be pleaded. It's in Bloom's best interest to plead out. It's a slap on the wrist. If he goes to trial, he exposes himself and FCPS to a whole lot of scrutiny. There's proof he didn't follow the law by reporting the case when someone came to him. There's most certainly PROOF of that. He wasn't supposed to figure out whether it was abuse or not, he was only required to report it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This isn’t an isolated incident. Fcps has a history of covering up incidents of violence against students. There was the incident earlier this year at the Great Falls Elementary, I personally know of incidents at McNair, and god knows where else.

There’s another school in Region 1. The adm insisted on covering up incidents but it didn’t turn well for them. Sometimes Santa Claus brings a new adm.

[Anonymous]

If the principal thought it had been reported by the note-taker, he had no duty to report. If the principal did not have a reasonable belief that a kid was abused, he had no duty to report.

No one on the board know exactly what the orincioal was told by the note taker or what the notes revealed. We don't know if he should have reasonably suspected child abuse.

The fact that we now know there was abuse is irrelevant to his obligation at the time.

[Anonymous]

I am so glad FCPD did this all so publicly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems like the abuse is more likely when the kids are special ed/special needs. I have to think that the principals are at least subconsciously making a calculation that it is easier to "correct" the "mistake" of the employee rather than try to find a replacement. The pay is low and the difficulty of working with special needs kids can be high.

This is really shocking -- when there is at least one video and multiple instances/witnesses.

I'm a parent of a child with learning disabilities. My child is in college now and you wouldn't believe half the stuff I have experienced as a parent and school volunteer. The truth is that pretty much everyone considers these students, these children, as less than and probably most of you posting here at your core think that. Go read about what happens in schools where restraint and seclusion are used. This population, particularly non verbal students, are regularly abused by teachers. These kids aren't respected or valued and are viewed as unwanted problems by school administrators. Scott Bloom may have been a nice guy to some of you and your kids, but the fact that he didnt do the right thing with respect to these students shows his true values.

Scott Bloom cares about students as long as they aren't disabled.

I have worked with students who needed restraints sometimes because they would be throwing things and harming other students in their inclusion classroom or hurting their teacher or aide. Sometimes restraint is necessary. These women are not in trouble for restraining children, they are in trouble because they were abusing them (slapping, pushing, etc.). Please don’t be so naive, some students need to be restrained in order to keep themself from harming other kids, themself, or teachers. As an aide with CPI training in the past I sometimes had to do it and it was emotional but it was what we were trained to do. Even then, the student you’re restraining is sometimes trying to head but you, step on your toe, moves around a lot which hurts your back. I’d never do that type of work again. My friend taught special education in a private school where teachers were often out with concussions and broken fingers (the students were 17+ with TBIs). She loved helping people but eventually burned out. She still teaches special ed but in a less intensive position. It’s hard work and it’s emotional work. Let’s not pretend it’s easy or that restraints are done to be evil...

What these women did was something no special education professional would be trained to do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems like the abuse is more likely when the kids are special ed/special needs. I have to think that the principals are at least subconsciously making a calculation that it is easier to "correct" the "mistake" of the employee rather than try to find a replacement. The pay is low and the difficulty of working with special needs kids can be high.

This is really shocking -- when there is at least one video and multiple instances/witnesses.

I'm a parent of a child with learning disabilities. My child is in college now and you wouldn't believe half the stuff I have experienced as a parent and school volunteer. The truth is that pretty much everyone considers these students, these children, as less than and probably most of you posting here at your core think that. Go read about what happens in schools where restraint and seclusion are used. This population, particularly non verbal students, are regularly abused by teachers. These kids aren't respected or valued and are viewed as unwanted problems by school administrators. Scott Bloom may have been a nice guy to some of you and your kids, but the fact that he didnt do the right thing with respect to these students shows his true values.

Scott Bloom cares about students as long as they aren't disabled.

There is a lot of treatment of kids with SNs that would never happen to non-disabled kids in FCPS. From the poor quality of their education, to the absolute bottom-of-the-barrel people hired to be special ed aides, to the way they are spoken to and about--if you haven't experienced it you have no idea. It is a completely different educational experience. There is a casual disregard across the board ESPECIALLY for kids who can't communicate. My ds is normal intelligence/verbal but has been in a lot of ED placements--you would not believe the way adults treat disabled kids and it is tolerated because it is so hard to find warm bodies to fill those classrooms.

I am a teacher who started as a special education aide. Please don’t assume all aides are “bottom of the barrel.” I’d never do that work again, it was hard. I had to be CPI trained. I often had to intervene when an autistic child was punching the hard floor out of frustration. I’ve seen aides break fingers trying to help their students not hurt themself or another child. I’ve seen students bite aides and throw scissors at them. I’ve met aides with years of experience with scars who still do the work but say “this bite mark was from a student five years ago- broke my skin.” But they still do their job because they love helping the students. Just because these two did horrible things and clearly lacked training and enough supervision, does NOT mean most aides are “bottom of the barrel.” The turnover rate in special education is extremely high and if you’re sped teacher or aide is not abusing your child, thank them. Be kind to them. Understand it’s difficult work and they don’t just quit because they care about your child too. Please don’t pretend it’s easy work... I did it to get experience during college but would not do it again. The pay is very low, it’s physically and emotionally exhausting, and now you have parents thinking you must be “bottom of the barrel” because you want to help their child get through the school day safely. Please go try to be a special education aide before you judge so harshly. These women were awful but don’t represent them all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:pp can you explain what you mean about Fairfax Police and the DA running a dog-and-pony? Are you saying nothing would have happened if it was never reported to the police? I'm curious as to who contacted whom and when.

Fairfax Police/DA's Office put out a Tweet, published on FB, held multiple news conferences (inviting reporters to cover the story) and published a press release. Criminals get caught daily, and I'm not sure many get this much publicity. Obviously, FCPD realized the story was big. And, maybe FCPD also thought if they didn't go *full scale* public, FCPS may have "buried the case". [Yes, I'm conjecturing! I don't know for sure!] I don't work there, but I think their publicity is what caused FCPS to "own" this situation, otherwise, it would have simply gone unknown. Not for a second do I think FCPS would have come clean about Bloom or the other workers, if their hands weren't forced to do it.

A lot of truth to this.
FCPD aren't know to have a news conference regarding non violent crimes, let alone indictment served to FCPS employees.

Recently there was a teach arrested for having a "relationship" with a student.
While back one was arrested for trying to flee the country for child porn.
Neither of them had any news conference and even close to the media attention this case is having.

I also heard of a lot of teachers who mess up with the students being either transferred to a different school or FCPS moving them to an administrative role. Their stories never ever make the news.

There is definitely more to do this case. Not just with what happened, but with who is actually pushing FCPD.

Who knows? With all the transferring around for decades and cover-ups perhaps the fear of potential "new sheriffs in town" will get some change. The Rachna Sizemore Heizer. Sadly the treatment of the disabled can be horrendous in FCPS even for verbal, non-violent to self or others students.

Add to that the treatment of families and even threats. Haycock immune? Academic stats and non-reliance on fcps by families are more likely to get a bad administrator IMHO.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If the principal thought it had been reported by the note-taker, he had no duty to report. If the principal did not have a reasonable belief that a kid was abused, he had no duty to report.

No one on the board know exactly what the orincioal was told by the note taker or what the notes revealed. We don't know if he should have reasonably suspected child abuse.

The fact that we now know there was abuse is irrelevant to his obligation at the time.

You clearly don't know the law, so please don't speak to it. It's not the principal's job to adjudicate whether there was abuse. The principal's job is to report any incident (suspected or confirmed) and let CPS/Police figure out what happened. Any school professional is REQUIRED to report, and that's it. There is a reason why a room full of men and women indicted him on that charge--because they saw/heard the evidence and realized he should have filed a report. Please understand before you spread garbage on here.

[Anonymous]

Clearly, not many comments come from people who have any experience with non-verbal kids and ID. I'll be adding this case to the list of why I don't ever recommend Fairfax County for special education. All three individuals failed these children who had no way to advocate for themselves. Disgusting and depressing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the principal thought it had been reported by the note-taker, he had no duty to report. If the principal did not have a reasonable belief that a kid was abused, he had no duty to report.

No one on the board know exactly what the orincioal was told by the note taker or what the notes revealed. We don't know if he should have reasonably suspected child abuse.

The fact that we now know there was abuse is irrelevant to his obligation at the time.

You clearly don't know the law, so please don't speak to it. It's not the principal's job to adjudicate whether there was abuse. The principal's job is to report any incident (suspected or confirmed) and let CPS/Police figure out what happened. Any school professional is REQUIRED to report, and that's it. There is a reason why a room full of men and women indicted him on that charge--because they saw/heard the evidence and realized he should have filed a report. Please understand before you spread garbage on here.

Honey, I am a lawyer.

Even you stipulate that he had to suspect abuse. The ststute says that a person must have reason to suspect abuse. Without knowing exactly what the note taker said to Bloom or what the notes said, we cannot know whether it was reasonable to suspect abuse. Also, the statute specifically says that you do not have to report suspected abuse if you know that someone else has reported the same instances. Read the VA statute.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't have a kid at FH or Haycock, but I kind of feel like people are getting their carts in front of their horses with this re: Bloom.

Looking at all the info. we have now, it is clear that there was abuse. BUT, did Bloom have that info in the spring? I can see how a person/principal could get info. that a kid has had bruises over the past several months, and not make the conclusion that the kid has been abused by the teacher. These kids may have difficulty moving/walking and a principal may have thought that could be the reason for bruises just as well as someone abusing the kid.

I think the details that have been released are inconclusive (as far as the public is concerned) on what the principal knew and when. It's natural to be careful about accusing someone of child abuse when you don't have direct evidence.

I'm not saying Bloom is innocent or guilty. I'm saying we don't really have solid info. yet to come to any conclusions.... but some of y'all have already pronounced him guilty without facts.

He's been arrested, so presumably there's proof that he did something bad.

You're... not getting the whole "innocent until proven guilty" thing, are you?

There may be evidence he did something bad, but whether or not there is proof is exactly what the trial will establish.

Oh shut up, you know EXACTLY what I meant, Scotty's wife.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the principal thought it had been reported by the note-taker, he had no duty to report. If the principal did not have a reasonable belief that a kid was abused, he had no duty to report.

No one on the board know exactly what the orincioal was told by the note taker or what the notes revealed. We don't know if he should have reasonably suspected child abuse.

The fact that we now know there was abuse is irrelevant to his obligation at the time.

You clearly don't know the law, so please don't speak to it. It's not the principal's job to adjudicate whether there was abuse. The principal's job is to report any incident (suspected or confirmed) and let CPS/Police figure out what happened. Any school professional is REQUIRED to report, and that's it. There is a reason why a room full of men and women indicted him on that charge--because they saw/heard the evidence and realized he should have filed a report. Please understand before you spread garbage on here.

Honey, I am a lawyer.

Even you stipulate that he had to suspect abuse. The ststute says that a person must have reason to suspect abuse. Without knowing exactly what the note taker said to Bloom or what the notes said, we cannot know whether it was reasonable to suspect abuse. Also, the statute specifically says that you do not have to report suspected abuse if you know that someone else has reported the same instances. Read the VA statute.

yet the new principal reported right away less than a month of being in charge of a new school. While it was reported to Bloom in April of previous school year.

Like the previous poster said, he will most likely take the plead deal. But, I doubt he will work in FCPS again. FCPD made a big dog and pony show out of this. They are going to want to something out of all this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the principal thought it had been reported by the note-taker, he had no duty to report. If the principal did not have a reasonable belief that a kid was abused, he had no duty to report.

No one on the board know exactly what the orincioal was told by the note taker or what the notes revealed. We don't know if he should have reasonably suspected child abuse.

The fact that we now know there was abuse is irrelevant to his obligation at the time.

You clearly don't know the law, so please don't speak to it. It's not the principal's job to adjudicate whether there was abuse. The principal's job is to report any incident (suspected or confirmed) and let CPS/Police figure out what happened. Any school professional is REQUIRED to report, and that's it. There is a reason why a room full of men and women indicted him on that charge--because they saw/heard the evidence and realized he should have filed a report. Please understand before you spread garbage on here.

Honey, I am a lawyer.

Even you stipulate that he had to suspect abuse. The ststute says that a person must have reason to suspect abuse. Without knowing exactly what the note taker said to Bloom or what the notes said, we cannot know whether it was reasonable to suspect abuse. Also, the statute specifically says that you do not have to report suspected abuse if you know that someone else has reported the same instances. Read the VA statute.

OK, "lawyer" ... I'm sure the DA's office must be conspiring against Scott Bloom because that's what they do ... target unsuspecting principals at FCPS to go after them ... and then to BLAST him all over social and traditional media. Sure, he didn't know or suspect, he was just the dumb principal in the wrong place at the wrong time. Good luck with that defense. Hopefully, you're not signing up to be his defense attorney!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the principal thought it had been reported by the note-taker, he had no duty to report. If the principal did not have a reasonable belief that a kid was abused, he had no duty to report.

No one on the board know exactly what the orincioal was told by the note taker or what the notes revealed. We don't know if he should have reasonably suspected child abuse.

The fact that we now know there was abuse is irrelevant to his obligation at the time.

You clearly don't know the law, so please don't speak to it. It's not the principal's job to adjudicate whether there was abuse. The principal's job is to report any incident (suspected or confirmed) and let CPS/Police figure out what happened. Any school professional is REQUIRED to report, and that's it. There is a reason why a room full of men and women indicted him on that charge--because they saw/heard the evidence and realized he should have filed a report. Please understand before you spread garbage on here.

Honey, I am a lawyer.

Even you stipulate that he had to suspect abuse. The ststute says that a person must have reason to suspect abuse. Without knowing exactly what the note taker said to Bloom or what the notes said, we cannot know whether it was reasonable to suspect abuse. Also, the statute specifically says that you do not have to report suspected abuse if you know that someone else has reported the same instances. Read the VA statute.

OK, "lawyer" ... I'm sure the DA's office must be conspiring against Scott Bloom because that's what they do ... target unsuspecting principals at FCPS to go after them ... and then to BLAST him all over social and traditional media. Sure, he didn't know or suspect, he was just the dumb principal in the wrong place at the wrong time. Good luck with that defense. Hopefully, you're not signing up to be his defense attorney!

His days as an educator are in serious jeopardy ... perhaps he should have used better judgment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the principal thought it had been reported by the note-taker, he had no duty to report. If the principal did not have a reasonable belief that a kid was abused, he had no duty to report.

No one on the board know exactly what the orincioal was told by the note taker or what the notes revealed. We don't know if he should have reasonably suspected child abuse.

The fact that we now know there was abuse is irrelevant to his obligation at the time.

You clearly don't know the law, so please don't speak to it. It's not the principal's job to adjudicate whether there was abuse. The principal's job is to report any incident (suspected or confirmed) and let CPS/Police figure out what happened. Any school professional is REQUIRED to report, and that's it. There is a reason why a room full of men and women indicted him on that charge--because they saw/heard the evidence and realized he should have filed a report. Please understand before you spread garbage on here.

Honey, I am a lawyer.

Even you stipulate that he had to suspect abuse. The ststute says that a person must have reason to suspect abuse. Without knowing exactly what the note taker said to Bloom or what the notes said, we cannot know whether it was reasonable to suspect abuse. Also, the statute specifically says that you do not have to report suspected abuse if you know that someone else has reported the same instances. Read the VA statute.

OK, "lawyer" ... I'm sure the DA's office must be conspiring against Scott Bloom because that's what they do ... target unsuspecting principals at FCPS to go after them ... and then to BLAST him all over social and traditional media. Sure, he didn't know or suspect, he was just the dumb principal in the wrong place at the wrong time. Good luck with that defense. Hopefully, you're not signing up to be his defense attorney!

I never once said he was innocent. I said we don't know what the facts are for him and it is premature to call for him to be fired.