Anonymous wrote:How long until the HOS gets fired? Either release their “independent report” or resign. What a coward.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:How long until the HOS gets fired? Either release their “independent report” or resign. What a coward.
You’re clueless about privacy laws. And more.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:How long until the HOS gets fired? Either release their “independent report” or resign. What a coward.
You’re clueless about privacy laws. And more.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:GDS needs a new fixer who does not bring an Epstein taint to control the damage caused by working with T&M. They are problematic on multiple levels for a school like GDS and the handling of this matter has been a cluster.
Good for the family in bringing the school’s conduct to light. Sunshine is the best disinfectant.
Transparency is always the best policy and this situation shows that.
It was possible that this incident may not have been as egregious as it appears. The family could have been exaggerating what happened in the bathroom. But now the story is justifiably about how GDS responded instead of what happened.
Anonymous wrote:How long until the HOS gets fired? Either release their “independent report” or resign. What a coward.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:And exactly how would you propose that these details be released in a way that complies with privacy standards?
I don't think most people understand how privacy rights work. A private school can later be sued even if a parent wants sensitive information disclosed. I am surprised they even allowed this article to be published with details about the student such as the student withdrew from the school last winter and that they were assaulted. Since students rarely leaves in the winter the student is identifiable not only to the school community, but now to members of his new school community. Even if a parent waives confidentiality for their child, that pre-teen / teen still has privacy rights a parent can't waive. Schools are expected to protect minor identities in sensitive cases, and if they don't they can later be sued.
Parents can't force a school to issue a statement in cases were privacy has to be protected. Schools also can't give police a list of names of all the boys in the school, all the boys who had classes in that hallway, or all the boys who had discipline issues. The school would get sued by those parents. Police can't go on a fishing expedition. Private schools don't provide names to police without a subpoena, court order, or warrant. If they did they could be sued by those parents. Affluent parents aren't letting their kids be interviewed by police.
This really is a terrible situation for the boy and his family but publicizing it this way can be harmful in the years to come for the victim. I think this post should be removed, not because I have anything to do with GDS, but because it discloses way too much information about the victim.
That is complete horse manure.
Anonymous wrote:GDS needs a new fixer who does not bring an Epstein taint to control the damage caused by working with T&M. They are problematic on multiple levels for a school like GDS and the handling of this matter has been a cluster.
Good for the family in bringing the school’s conduct to light. Sunshine is the best disinfectant.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:And exactly how would you propose that these details be released in a way that complies with privacy standards?
I don't think most people understand how privacy rights work. A private school can later be sued even if a parent wants sensitive information disclosed. I am surprised they even allowed this article to be published with details about the student such as the student withdrew from the school last winter and that they were assaulted. Since students rarely leaves in the winter the student is identifiable not only to the school community, but now to members of his new school community. Even if a parent waives confidentiality for their child, that pre-teen / teen still has privacy rights a parent can't waive. Schools are expected to protect minor identities in sensitive cases, and if they don't they can later be sued.
Parents can't force a school to issue a statement in cases were privacy has to be protected. Schools also can't give police a list of names of all the boys in the school, all the boys who had classes in that hallway, or all the boys who had discipline issues. The school would get sued by those parents. Police can't go on a fishing expedition. Private schools don't provide names to police without a subpoena, court order, or warrant. If they did they could be sued by those parents. Affluent parents aren't letting their kids be interviewed by police.
This really is a terrible situation for the boy and his family but publicizing it this way can be harmful in the years to come for the victim. I think this post should be removed, not because I have anything to do with GDS, but because it discloses way too much information about the victim.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Wow! It looks like GDS has removed the ability to comment on social media. They're in containment mode. Talk with other parents. Let the know what you think.
What social media platform? It looks like anyone can still comment on their IG page. Maybe it's just you they've limited?
Anonymous wrote:Well, a few possible reasons:
1. The school didn’t refuse anything and the family preferred not to release it.
2. Everyone knows who the redacted kid is and no one wants to subject them to humiliation.
3. The report says that they did considerable questioning and have zero evidence that anything occurred.
It’s time to let this thread die as no one has brought new thoughts, except faux experts in various wannabe legal and privacy realms, for days.