Teacher shot at Newport News elementary school

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So true. How are those kids supposed to feel safe in schools for the rest of their lives? Even kids in nearby classrooms who heard the shot may have been traumatized.

This is a problem with all school shootings. Sadly, we should be getting good at developing immediate crisis response and long term trauma management in our country given how often we see school shootings.

Most school systems express some concerns about what happened and going forward. This school system? Silence.

You must not be reading the news. The school system made personnel changes. They installed metal detectors. They had a family day before reopening the school. They offered emotional support and meals for a period of time.

I read the news and am aware of what you've said. They haven't explained why the principal is still working in the school system, they haven't apologized publicly for what occurred (only a lawyer vetted statement), and they're trying to absolve themselves from financial obligation. It's all very controlled to limit a payout. Conflicting statements have been made as to why that child was allowed in that type of setting.

I was responding to your comment about radio silence, which isn’t the case. Now you’re faulting them for not responding publicly to prospective litigation. That would be foolish of any entity.

There was no sincere apology in public statements by any administrator. That was my point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For whatever reasons, there is no question that the administrators of this school did not implement an appropriate IEP for this child. Totally unacceptable, and they should not be able to continue in their current positions or in another position within the school system.

There could be lots of reasons that the IEP didn’t work. But in the motion to dismiss her lawsuit, the defendants note that she, herself, advocated that the boy’s school day be extended because of his improvement.

I imagine this stage of the litigation will last for years. Negligence and even gross negligence don’t take cases out of the worker’s compensation system. In VA, pretty much the only two things that entitle an injured worker to sue are lack of insurance coverage and sexual assault, neither of which apply here. So the lower courts will likely feel bound to dismiss the suit. Either way though, there will be an appeal. To win, the courts will have to expand injured worker protections beyond the plain la gauge of the workers’ comp act, which is a tough sell in any state, especially a conservative one.


https://abcnews.go.com/amp/US/district-dismiss-lawsuit-teacher-shot-6-year-covered/story?id=98921573

PP here. Thank you for this info. Very helpful and interesting. Regarding the IEP, I have participated in the development of many IEPs over the years (kindergarten thru high school for kids with significant emotional/behavioral concerns and neurodevelopmental issues. Never did we decide a child should be in a regular classroom setting with a parent all day. However, since that is what this administration deemed appropriate, then this child should not have been in that classroom for one minute without a parent.

No, sorry. Schools can't require parents to attend school with their child and it's completely inappropriate for that to be the plan. If this child needed a 1:1 with him, the school should have gotten him and aide. This alone tells me the school messed up badly --- and that's not even getting to the gun part.

This is definitely an issue that I wish were explained. But what I’ve learned from family and contacts relating to IEP and service/accommodation issues around the country is that there really isn’t a national standard. Different areas do different things. Regardless, according to news sources, the week before this incident, parental presence had been discontinued due to progress. And the teacher herself recommended increasing his time in school due to progress. So, if the news sources are accurate, parental presence wasn’t a factor at the time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For whatever reasons, there is no question that the administrators of this school did not implement an appropriate IEP for this child. Totally unacceptable, and they should not be able to continue in their current positions or in another position within the school system.

There could be lots of reasons that the IEP didn’t work. But in the motion to dismiss her lawsuit, the defendants note that she, herself, advocated that the boy’s school day be extended because of his improvement.

I imagine this stage of the litigation will last for years. Negligence and even gross negligence don’t take cases out of the worker’s compensation system. In VA, pretty much the only two things that entitle an injured worker to sue are lack of insurance coverage and sexual assault, neither of which apply here. So the lower courts will likely feel bound to dismiss the suit. Either way though, there will be an appeal. To win, the courts will have to expand injured worker protections beyond the plain la gauge of the workers’ comp act, which is a tough sell in any state, especially a conservative one.


https://abcnews.go.com/amp/US/district-dismiss-lawsuit-teacher-shot-6-year-covered/story?id=98921573

PP here. Thank you for this info. Very helpful and interesting. Regarding the IEP, I have participated in the development of many IEPs over the years (kindergarten thru high school for kids with significant emotional/behavioral concerns and neurodevelopmental issues. Never did we decide a child should be in a regular classroom setting with a parent all day. However, since that is what this administration deemed appropriate, then this child should not have been in that classroom for one minute without a parent.

No, sorry. Schools can't require parents to attend school with their child and it's completely inappropriate for that to be the plan. If this child needed a 1:1 with him, the school should have gotten him and aide. This alone tells me the school messed up badly --- and that's not even getting to the gun part.

Just to clarify...I agree with you and didn't say I thought it was appropriate. I think it was a very faulty plan. I'm just saying that, since it was their plan, then that child should not have been in the classroom for 1 minute without a parent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For whatever reasons, there is no question that the administrators of this school did not implement an appropriate IEP for this child. Totally unacceptable, and they should not be able to continue in their current positions or in another position within the school system.

There could be lots of reasons that the IEP didn’t work. But in the motion to dismiss her lawsuit, the defendants note that she, herself, advocated that the boy’s school day be extended because of his improvement.

I imagine this stage of the litigation will last for years. Negligence and even gross negligence don’t take cases out of the worker’s compensation system. In VA, pretty much the only two things that entitle an injured worker to sue are lack of insurance coverage and sexual assault, neither of which apply here. So the lower courts will likely feel bound to dismiss the suit. Either way though, there will be an appeal. To win, the courts will have to expand injured worker protections beyond the plain la gauge of the workers’ comp act, which is a tough sell in any state, especially a conservative one.


https://abcnews.go.com/amp/US/district-dismiss-lawsuit-teacher-shot-6-year-covered/story?id=98921573

PP here. Thank you for this info. Very helpful and interesting. Regarding the IEP, I have participated in the development of many IEPs over the years (kindergarten thru high school for kids with significant emotional/behavioral concerns and neurodevelopmental issues. Never did we decide a child should be in a regular classroom setting with a parent all day. However, since that is what this administration deemed appropriate, then this child should not have been in that classroom for one minute without a parent.

No, sorry. Schools can't require parents to attend school with their child and it's completely inappropriate for that to be the plan. If this child needed a 1:1 with him, the school should have gotten him and aide. This alone tells me the school messed up badly --- and that's not even getting to the gun part.

This is definitely an issue that I wish were explained. But what I’ve learned from family and contacts relating to IEP and service/accommodation issues around the country is that there really isn’t a national standard. Different areas do different things. Regardless, according to news sources, the week before this incident, parental presence had been discontinued due to progress. And the teacher herself recommended increasing his time in school due to progress. So, if the news sources are accurate, parental presence wasn’t a factor at the time.

I bet his mom didn't disclose that she had a gun in the home.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For whatever reasons, there is no question that the administrators of this school did not implement an appropriate IEP for this child. Totally unacceptable, and they should not be able to continue in their current positions or in another position within the school system.

There could be lots of reasons that the IEP didn’t work. But in the motion to dismiss her lawsuit, the defendants note that she, herself, advocated that the boy’s school day be extended because of his improvement.

I imagine this stage of the litigation will last for years. Negligence and even gross negligence don’t take cases out of the worker’s compensation system. In VA, pretty much the only two things that entitle an injured worker to sue are lack of insurance coverage and sexual assault, neither of which apply here. So the lower courts will likely feel bound to dismiss the suit. Either way though, there will be an appeal. To win, the courts will have to expand injured worker protections beyond the plain la gauge of the workers’ comp act, which is a tough sell in any state, especially a conservative one.


https://abcnews.go.com/amp/US/district-dismiss-lawsuit-teacher-shot-6-year-covered/story?id=98921573

PP here. Thank you for this info. Very helpful and interesting. Regarding the IEP, I have participated in the development of many IEPs over the years (kindergarten thru high school for kids with significant emotional/behavioral concerns and neurodevelopmental issues. Never did we decide a child should be in a regular classroom setting with a parent all day. However, since that is what this administration deemed appropriate, then this child should not have been in that classroom for one minute without a parent.

No, sorry. Schools can't require parents to attend school with their child and it's completely inappropriate for that to be the plan. If this child needed a 1:1 with him, the school should have gotten him and aide. This alone tells me the school messed up badly --- and that's not even getting to the gun part.

This is definitely an issue that I wish were explained. But what I’ve learned from family and contacts relating to IEP and service/accommodation issues around the country is that there really isn’t a national standard. Different areas do different things. Regardless, according to news sources, the week before this incident, parental presence had been discontinued due to progress. And the teacher herself recommended increasing his time in school due to progress. So, if the news sources are accurate, parental presence wasn’t a factor at the time.

Will be interesting to learn if parents, teachers, and administrators agreed to that change in a formal IEP change (with no dissenting signatures) or just a conference with verbal agreement. Huge difference.

[Anonymous]

Apparently the mother is going to be in Good Morning America this morning (how this could be a good idea I can’t imagine).

[Anonymous]

Mom needs to go to prisons

[Anonymous]

Here is the interview from twitter. I am speechless that: 1) they agreed to do this at all, 2) the denial the mother is in re her son’s violent behavior and 3) the stonewalling by the lawyer re how violent the kid was, blaming the school district and ignoring how he got the gun.

This is America.

https://twitter.com/gma/status/1656267326637891584?s=46&t=E8qDVnObwqD3VskYpcZ1Jg

[Anonymous]

The child doesn't talk about the incident at all, he talks about the days leading up to the incident.

That's alarming to me. I know kids that age are self centered but still.

[Anonymous]

The mom says her kid as adhd https://twitter.com/postlocal/status/1656342624242892809?s=46&t=Rw_jX1uyupQwvEwsjuQulQ

[Anonymous]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2023/05/10/richneck-elementary-shooting-mother-interview-adhd/

According to mom, ADHD made him do it. He said the "teacher wasn't listening to him..."

I taught lots of kids that had diagnosis of ADHD. Restless? Yes. Distracted? yes Violent? not beyond playing rough on the playground

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here is the interview from twitter. I am speechless that: 1) they agreed to do this at all, 2) the denial the mother is in re her son’s violent behavior and 3) the stonewalling by the lawyer re how violent the kid was, blaming the school district and ignoring how he got the gun.

This is America.

https://twitter.com/gma/status/1656267326637891584?s=46&t=E8qDVnObwqD3VskYpcZ1Jg

Wow.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2023/05/10/richneck-elementary-shooting-mother-interview-adhd/

According to mom, ADHD made him do it. He said the "teacher wasn't listening to him..."

I taught lots of kids that had diagnosis of ADHD. Restless? Yes. Distracted? yes Violent? not beyond playing rough on the playground

Yeah, blaming the ADHD is WILD to me. I have a child with extremely severe ADHD who had behavioral issues in K. We didn't know any better since he hadn't been in a school style setting because of the pandemic but as soon as we were notified of what was happening during the school day (within the first two weeks of school), we had him evaluated and he then started medication, OT, play therapy, etc. At the school, while the process took longer, he had an IEP and associated services by January. No further behavioral issues during that year or since.

This honestly seems like a failure on multiple fronts to help this child, his teacher and the students negatively impacted by his behavior. At a minimum the parents should have medicated the kid when the severity became known, certainly at school by age 5 instead of waiting until the child was completely out of control in first grade. And the idea you'd just stop attending because your kid has been on medication for less than a week is absurd. They wouldn't have known whether it was even the correct medication/dosage for their child by then. And the school administrators....yikes. Horrible.

[Anonymous]

The question to the lawyer on GMA about the gun had an interesting response. He said "no adult" knows how he got it. Are they going to blame a teen relative, perhaps?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The question to the lawyer on GMA about the gun had an interesting response. He said "no adult" knows how he got it. Are they going to blame a teen relative, perhaps?

I caught that too. And, if it had a trigger lock on it, then how was it removed?