This seems like a tragic case of misplaced grief. The school is damned if they do/don’t. If they kept him on and he starts failing all classes he’s obviously going to struggle mentally as well. I think the parents feel massive guilt and need to find someone to blame. It’s a tragic situation but I dont think a school can be expected to convert itself to one that caters to special needs because of a single student. There are multiple privates that support kids with learning disabilities that he could have thrived at.

Anonymous wrote:What I don’t understand is why the school’s evaluation of him is so favorable.

Because the parents — and the article — cherrypicked a few quotes. I guarantee the overall evaluation does not read like that.

It’s heartbreaking, but the parents are clearly looking for a scapegoat. A school can’t be expected to keep every student no matter what needs arise.

It’s a terrible tragedy and I feel for the parents but don’t understand why they insisted on keeping him at the school after the school told them years earlier that it couldn’t accommodate him. It seems like in their grief they are looking for someone to blame.

Evaluations look favorable if you don’t know what to look for. These are children and they bury the negatives among positives. It should be obvious that cherry picking the positives for an article is flawed.

Anonymous wrote:What I don’t understand is why the school’s evaluation of him is so favorable.

To humor the parents.

https://rethinking65.com/2023/07/03/an-elite-school-a-boys-suicide-and-a-question-of-blame/

It sounds like a lot of people failed this child but no the school. The school saw signs early on, recommended evaluation and another school but the parents insisted on keeping him at that school. The school supported the parents request for the child to remain until 8th when things began to unravel and he wasn't a good fit. The evaluator failed to take this child's needs seriously and said the child would be fine at the school with the right supports but this child need far more supports than a regular private (and some publics) can handle. It sounds like the parents did get tutoring but no mention of mental health services.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I don’t understand is why the school’s evaluation of him is so favorable.

Maybe because they cared about the individual student ?

Maybe because the school teachers were afraid as to how the parents would treat their son if he received a poor review ? It seems clear that the school was aware that the parents were in denial and probably did not get appropriate counseling for their son.

Maybe. It does seem like either the child should have negative evaluations and asked not to return or positive evaluations and asked to return.

Anonymous wrote:What I don’t understand is why the school’s evaluation of him is so favorable.

Maybe because they cared about the individual student ?

Maybe because the school teachers were afraid as to how the parents would treat their son if he received a poor review ? It seems clear that the school was aware that the parents were in denial and probably did not get appropriate counseling for their son.

What I don’t understand is why the school’s evaluation of him is so favorable.

I would not be surprised to read that the parents were in denial (despite the uncalled for patience (5 years) by the school) and demoralized their own son by labeling him a failure or stupid while failing to get him much needed counseling.

But this is just speculation. At least wait until the school responds (files an answer to the lawsuit). As of now, we have just one side of the story and it does not seem to implicate the school in any manner that would lead to legal liability.

Anonymous wrote:I think there are a lot of interesting questions about what private schools owe their students? ethically, and the ways in which their rhetoric and reality are not aligned.

That said I thought the article was pretty irresponsible. It was heartbreaking and I get why they ran it, but I don’t think it was the right call.

The school blew it on the article. Just blew it so badly that I can’t even believe it. How could a school so rich be so bad at PR? It’s shocking.

What are you talking about ?

The article is not a school public relations (PR) piece.

Elite schools are not a substitute for professional counseling by a certified, licensed therapist.

My impression is that the parents were in denial and failed to get the proper, needed counseling for their son and now want to blame the son's suicide on a school that he left 3 months before. The parent's probably thought that the prestigious school would settle rather than endure bad publicity. It looks like the parents are at fault, not the school.

I think there are a lot of interesting questions about what private schools owe their students? ethically, and the ways in which their rhetoric and reality are not aligned.

That said I thought the article was pretty irresponsible. It was heartbreaking and I get why they ran it, but I don’t think it was the right call.

The school blew it on the article. Just blew it so badly that I can’t even believe it. How could a school so rich be so bad at PR? It’s shocking.

I read the article from another source. The 13 year old boy's suicide occurred 3 months after he was dismissed/counseled out of the school.

The school made the family aware of the student's condition 5 years earlier and informed the parents that the school could not help.

The article did not mention whether or not the boy's parents placed him in counseling with a qualified therapist.

There are at least two sides to every story. The press lies to sensationalize anything that it can about elite private schools. I know this from being a first-hand observer to what happened to the head of school at an elite New England private school.

The scant account in the newspaper probably was sourced from the plaintiff's lawsuit filing. I assure you that the defendant school's response will paint a different picture and enlighten us all. As it is, just based on the plaintiff's lawsuit filing, there isn't much substance to any claim against St. Ann's, but I will withhold my opinion until the defendant files a response followed by any further response to the defendant's answer by the plaintiff.

I read the article. Sounds like the school tried to counsel him out from around age eight.

The question is why did the parents keep the kids in a school that clearly wasn’t equipped or willing to deal with his learning disabilities? Could they not get him in anywhere, maybe?

But yes, top privates generally will counsel your kid out if she or he cannot perform. If you can’t deal with that, send your kid to a k thru 8 instead of a k thru 12. Because it’s hard to tell whether a four year old will be able to handle a super rigorous high school. So some kids need to change schools.

Reading the NYT article about the suicide at St. Ann’s in NYC after a talented but dyslexic boy was “counseled out” just reaffirmed to me that private schools are places for horrible, cut-throat administrators who are happy to accept collateral damage to kids as long as they can rake in the bucks and cultivate their elite image.

I truly hope this boy’s parents who are suing bankrupt that school - and that parents who participate in this vicious game appreciate that this type of tragedy could one day befall them as well.