Teacher's aide suspended after abuse allegations surface

Upset is correct. All the media does is sensationalize. The days of Edward R. Murrow and Walter Cronkite are long over. And Fox 25, of all places. It's not like they have a reputation for serious journalism. What was expected by sending them the video - a thoughtful analysis?

I notice the video has been pulled from YouTube. The poster getting nervous, perhaps? And the person who named the teachers aide on the Yahoo group, you better hope she ends up convicted, or you could be looking at a libel suit.

This story is about an innocent child being abused by his teacher. Why do you keep bashing the press who brought this dangerous teacher to the public's attention? Would you like it swept under the rug so that parents are without a way to be informed of predators. You should be thanking the press and FOX. They did a great report as did channel 7. As for libel, isn't TRUTH the perfect defense of a libel suit? The teacher ABUSED this tiny child. That is plain for EVERYONE to see. The teacher could sue for ruining her reputation because someone on some Yahoo group said she was abusive but she would have a hard time proving that the statement is what ruined her reputation. I think choking an autistic three year old, pulling their hair, etc., while in the capacity of a teacher might have something more to do with her reputation being ruined, regardless of charges. The video SPEAKS FOR ITSELF! Fred, why are you going after the victims and the press and protecting this monster?

Special Ed Teacher:

Did you read my post carefully? I know perfectly well the truth is an absolute defense against libel and slander charges, which is why I said hope she's convicted.

Before it was suspiciously pulled off YouTube, I watched the video carefully. I saw what I thought was inappropriately rough treatment, but didn't think it rose to the level of "ABUSE." I saw no hair pulling, punching, hitting, or slapping. What was described as "choking" didn't look like choking to me.

In any event, sending the video to a tabloid news station, and then naming the alleged perpetrator on the internet was the wrong way to go about this. It demonstrated immaturity at best and reckless behavior at worst.

Both the actions of the teachers aide, and the hysteria following it, have cast Lexington in a bad light. I suggest we all sit tight and wait for the police and school department to finish their investigations.

http://www.brownpride.us/forum/fox-news-sued-...

nuff said

Actually, she is still on paid leave and has not been dismissed yet. So she is actualy being rewarded with a nice long vacation and a fat paycheck. I know from personal experience that she is not someone who should be working with children and I am disgusted that the superintendent has not let her go in order to save face. This mother may be mentally unstable, but she got it right this time.

First of all, the aide DOES deserve every protection under the law, to a fair and just trial, to due process and to protection from unwarranted invasion of her privacy. While the video may show roughness, you cannot with 100% certainty determine the context. Also, the fact that the child was alone with the aide, makes it possible that this was not even in the context of a school visit but was in the context of being hired as a nanny. As someone in another forum pointed out, children are typically not left home alone with teaches aides. They are not baby-sitters. While there are alcohol abusing parents who abuse children physically, any physical abuse in the schools is almost ALWAYS a case of bad judgement and poor training and supervision. These people are not predators and no matter how much you abhor what was done, this one is entitled to be considered innocence until proven otherwise.
According to a statement issued by the parents, a young child comes home from school with scratches, welts and gouges. The parents suspect this happening at the hands of a teachers aide. So, the parents proceed to LEAVE THE CHILD ALONE WITH THE SUSPECTED ABUSER so that they can videotape further abuse.
I will no longer listen to people trying to diffuse the issue by saying that we all need to focus on the injuries suffered by this child. Nobody questions that safety of children is a number one priority. These parents suspected abuse and put their child BACK into an abusive situation, KNOWINGLY. This is textbook child endangerment and if there was a prior agreement with Fox 25 to make the video and provide an exclusive, then it is RECKLESS endangerment (not just negligent). No parent would send their child on a bike with missing spokes. These parents knowingly endangered their child so that they could make a video, which increasingly suspiciously was given as an EXCLUSIVE to Fox 25. Someone claims that we don't know that the parents, police and school were the only ones who had access to the video on Sept 8th but we DO know that the parents would be the only ones who would sign a disclaimer for use of a private video of child abuse of their child. They also would be the only ones who would have enough knowledge of who does and does not have the video, to insure that Fox 25 had their exclusive. This child was harmed so that he could be videoed so that he could be a news story that Fox 25 would profit from.
The DAs office needs to open (if they have not already) an investigation into the parents, the chronology and the relationship between the parents and Fox 25. They need to subpoena the records of Fox 25 to determine who provided exclusive access to this video of parent enabled child abuse (knowingly leaving their child alone with a suspected abuser).
The Fox 25 report could not have been used to let other parents know. This, as has already been said by others, would be done by the school and at worst, by the Youtube video which at least named her and showed her face. The only benefit to the report was that it gave Fox a scoop. Other parents have already commented on the confusion and rumors caused as a side casualty.
If I so much as SNIFFED that my child were at risk, I would eliminate that risk AT ALL COSTS. Whether it meant home schooling, I don't care. If those parents disallowed any further interaction with the aide or AT LEAST supervised any further visits, it is quite possible that this child may have been spared further.

usually, welts and bruises come from other children in school not teachers.teachers work in teams. to me the video looks like an adult reaching out of a child who is running away.grabbing the shirt was a bad solution but i dont see child abuse myself, but thats just one mans opinion.

autistic children are perfectly capable of remembering who they feel comfortable with and who they dont. if the teacher was hurting this child in school, he would have recognized her sound and possibly smell and appearance when she came to the home.he would have been terrified to be left alone with her.how did the parents walk out the door for a whole hour and leave him alone like that?

if anything, watching mom & dad walk away as you are left alone with someone who you are not comfortable with would by far be more emotionally traumatic than actually being physically restrained or grabbed especially when you are 3 years old.kids unfortunately get roughed up from time to time but being left alone with someone who had hurt you would leave a much greater imprint.

was it really worth traumatizing this child just to get it all on tape?
also how much of the abuse occured during the session where the parents voluntarily left him alone with the aide?
in a million years i would have never done that with my daughter.never.i would protect her at all expenses.

autism dad wrote:

autistic children are perfectly capable of remembering who they feel comfortable with and who they dont. if the teacher was hurting this child in school, he would have recognized her sound and possibly smell and appearance when she came to the home.he would have been terrified to be left alone with her.how did the parents walk out the door for a whole hour and leave him alone like that?

good point! I watched the video and I dont think this is child abuse. The boy is trying to run-maybe because he was terrified as someone else said-and she just grabs at his shirt to bring him back. Not the best idea but hardly child abuse. If this is the base for the whole case-and there is nothing else-this is way overblown. IF.

one word for these parents who put their little boy in danger to make a news story-

- vasectomy

forget the vasectomy, why not throw the mother into the lions cage with a nanny cam. Then they can sue the zoo when she gets eaten. If the parent thought they would get some money out of the town for injury to their boy they lost any chance of that. No way you can prove that injuries were caused by what the nanny cam picked up and as has already been said, they knew that they were putting their child at risk already. Their best shot would have been just immediately telling the teachers at the school, the day that they found a golf ball sized welt. They could have gotten right to the source of the problem, avoided a media circus, avoiding further injury and avoided putting their parental rights into question. The aide would have even had a fair shot at unbiased judgement.

Has the state subpeonaed the records for Fox yet to determine who gave them exclusive access to the video and when? I suppose given that Fox has already sued for their right to lie, twist and distort the news, they certainly could change around the records before anyone gets to them. Still, if they were given an exclusive before the video was shot, then the video was shot (and this little boy injured) specifically to facilitate creating a story for this station, who is a multi-billion dollar ENTERTAINMENT COMPANY, not the guardian of our childrens safety. How much money did they make at this kids expense and at the panic of dozens of young parents all over Boston.

The parents have one possible out for themselves: IF they were PROFESSIONALLY advised to put their child in danger to get it on camera, lets say by a doctor, an educator, a police officer or a lawyer THEN they could plead ignorance. They could say that they were ADVISED to do this and in that case, they would have a very compelling lawsuit against the professional for giving them advise which caused harm and humiliation to their child. If Fox told them to do it then they get what they deserve and if they did it to try to get some money out of the town for their childs injuries, its too late, they'll get nothing other than the injuries sustained by their child.

Does Lexington breed stupid parents? I feel so bad for this little guy. If there were no nanny cams and expose media vultures he'd have a popsicle on his forehead, the parents would have a long hard talk with the school and everyone could get on with their lives.

Jon 2009 wrote:

\
Has the state subpeonaed the records for Fox yet to determine who gave them exclusive access to the video and when? I suppose given that Fox has already sued for their right to lie, twist and distort the news, they certainly could change around the records before anyone gets to them.

Good idea but forget a subpeona as Fox spends billions of dollars a year on legal retainers to make sure that they can do whatever they want. On the other hand, if WHDH also got it second then they were probably an afterthought and they might just make a story out of investigating how it got started and ended up a Fox exclusive.

Did you see the interview with balloon boy parents? These little kids become the focus of media circuses and the ONLY ones who win are the media companies. Did the parents really think that they would get their own reality show out of this? Is it worth it for the short term money at the expense of self respect and a childs dignity. Look at their websites, jammed with advertisements. How can parents allow the safety of their own children to become fodder for news smut like Fox 25? I just don't understand. These are CHILDREN. Grow up parents and start acting like adults.

No, Lexington has many great parents. Unfortunately, these parents did not think through the fact that their video proved that they were willing to put their child in harms way. Maybe it will prove abuse by the aide but I doubt it. For sure it wont prove that the boys injuries were caused by the aide. Child and protective services do need to give great consideration to the fact that the parents knowingly PUT their child in what they believed would be a dangerous situation.

Gladly, the aide worked with very young children who would not have seen or understood the news clip. Counselors are trained to deal with situations where a teacher has fallen under some sort of accusation. This can be extremely upsetting to children who are old enough to understand and counselors know how to give kids this information in an appropriate way which carefully outlines ONLY FACTS and helps them to not feel that their safety is at risk and the whole world is crashing down on them. They are also there to help kids sort through what they have heard so that they do not go off the deep end in speculation. TV stations are governed by the same body as adult channels, pay channels and cartoon channels. Beyond profanity and obscenity, they can say whatever they like and you KNOW that they are going to present things in a SKEWED fashion (especially Fox). It is very traumatic for an older child to hear about a teacher this way and opens the floodgates to wild speculation. It is also VERY unfair to parents who have no preparation such that when something about their child's teacher gets blasted on the news they suddenly are caught without preparation. People are emailing frantically, every parent is in panic state wondering if their child is affected, the schools are flooded with phone calls AND nobody has the time to go through the facts carefully. The fact that it was unveiled through the news (or the internet) is unconscionable to me and I am very very upset with these parents for doing this.

These parents may not be stupid and it certainly has nothing to do with them being Lexingtonians but what they did was very foolish and could just land them losing custody of their child which, given the fear and panic that they created, might be justified.

Concerned Teacher wrote:

This story is almost two weeks old and was based on “rumors.” Since that questionable journalistic story quite a bit has happened. Many parents have reported concerns, the teacher was found guilty by the Department of Children and Families, and she was replaced at the school. The assistant district attorney is still investigating this case so it must be a large investigation to be taking such a long time to investigate. The complaints are probably going to the assistant district attorney who is investigating. Thanks again to the family for bringing public awareness to the issue of screening, training and supervision of teachers who work with disabled children. I hope Lexington does a better job of this in the future. Acknowledging the problems rather than trying to cover them up is the only way these problems will be solved. Clearly they have serious problems when a teacher like this is allowed to work in the school for four years. Kudos to whoever gave the video to the press. Reports said it was anonymous.

Well "Concerned Teacher" (who is posting allegations that they know nothing about during school hours) there has not been a single additional allegation against this aide. Not one? Where on earth did you get your [mis]information from I wonder or were you trying to protect the parents or perhaps curb the mess caused by Fox and others? What the other 'parent concerns' were were simply fears and panic caused by the dissemination of this information from sensationalistic news stations like WFXT. The litany of 'complaints' did not amount to any formal allegation whatsoever and gives strength to the overwhelming feeling of frustation among parents at having had to learn about issues regarding their children from television because of sneaky underhanded skewed and often speculative information finding its way to these cash rich multibillion dollar entertainment companies.

Meanwhile, rumor has it that the police are doing everything that they can to rein in the speculation caused by the media blitz here because the parents are now coming under suspicion for reasons already outlined.

I think it would not be a bad idea at all to know who disseminated the video.

It is unfortunate that the school was not proactive in notifying parents in a timely manner in order to avert any alarm. The school could have easily notified all the parents by sending home a note or an email. Blaming the victims, the press or anyone else is senseless. The blame for this belongs squarely on the school. The school was the FIRST who was notified of the incident as the school was who reported the incident to the Department of Children and Families. Even before the police were notified, the school was notified. It sounds like the school tried to cover up the whole incident and whoever let out that video was trying to get the information out about the instructor. This instructor was also a day care provider someplace else. Had it not been for the news footage, she would have been working in the day care that week! It was clearly a public service. The video was provided anonymously to the press, so it could have been anyone who gave it to the news. It was DCF that found the special services instructor neglected the child and treated him with excessive force and aggression in pulling his hair, etc. We should be thanking Fox and the other news stations for running the video and preventing this woman from working in daycare centers and schools since the Lexington Public School tried to sweep it under the rug and didn’t even bother to notify parents of the incident.

Lexington PTA Member wrote:

It is unfortunate that the school was not proactive in notifying parents in a timely manner in order to avert any alarm. The school could have easily notified all the parents by sending home a note or an email....... The school was the FIRST who was notified of the incident as the school was who reported the incident to the Department of Children and Families. Even before the police were notified, the school was notified.

agreed

Lexington PTA Member wrote:

It sounds like the school tried to cover up the whole incident

thats specualation and considering that schools are mandatory reporters, its a very serious accusation. Is this accusation the official position of the PTA or just your personal speculation?

Lexington PTA Member wrote:

This instructor was also a day care provider someplace else. Had it not been for the news footage, she would have been working in the day care that week!

the aide was not identifiable in the video! Fox local news is watched by a minority of people. How on earth would this have accomplished getting the word out? Do you think that this was more effective than notifying the day care? Seems it would have made for one easy phone call! You don't pop a zip with a shotgun. Especially when its pointed at your foot.

Lexington PTA Member wrote:

The video was provided anonymously to the press, so it could have been anyone who gave it to the news.

not in the case of an exclusive. The only annonymity is that Fox promised not to give them away. Whoever gave it to Fox had exclusive access to it and gave it as long as Fox didn't tell who they were (in the absence of a subpoena of course - which is hopefully pending).

Lexington PTA Member wrote:

We should be thanking Fox and the other news stations for running the video and preventing this woman from working in daycare centers and schools

Oh please, are you that shallow? Fox is a mega media company owned by a foreigner. They dont run public service, they run whatever people will watch and they love it when people feed them fodder to run. No smoking ads are public services, not exclusive video footage.

Lexington PTA Member wrote:

...since the Lexington Public School tried to sweep it under the rug and didn’t even bother to notify parents of the incident.

But you said it was the school that notified DCFS. It wasn't the news station at all!

You're a PTA member?? Scary.

Fox must not have had an exclusive or it would not have been on other TV stations right? I noticed the "Exclusive" was quickly changed to "First on Fox." “Get Real” said Fox is watched by a minority of people. Maybe that's why so many other stations were running the video? Apparently the school notified DCFS but never notified parents at the school. On the news I saw a parents right outside of the school completely shocked that anything at all had happened with a teacher at the school.

Parents receive automated calls every time there is a fund raiser or even the slightest event at the schools like, "Walk for the Arts." This wasn't important enough to warrant calling the parents at that school? If one of the aides at my child's school was abusing a student at the school I would want to know immediately so I could talk to my child and make sure nothing happened to them with the aide.

The reason the school covered it up is obvious. They wanted to try to limit their liability by not making parents aware that their children may have been abused. The school didn’t want parents asking questions. This aide worked at the school for four years. The odds on other children having been abused by the “special services instructor” are very high. Calling parents is very basic and there is no excuse for the way the school mishandled this entire situation.

If you know the name of the daycare that this woman works at please post it so we can notify the day care. For all we know they never saw the news, or as you say, did not recognize her. She is probably working with children right now. Now that is SCARY

In the case of an exclusive, it is correct that we will call the footage or interview EXCLUSIVE, until it is made available to others. Exclusivity usually has a time expiration, unless the material is copyright (such in the case of an interview). Once the material is available to other outlets, it is no longer exclusive and so FIRST ON XYZ NETWORK would be the correct change to make. We re-edit news constantly, making changes, tweaking, and correcting mistakes (the reporters make the mistakes, never us editors :-)))))

Trailers change in a matter of minutes as more accurate information becomes available. It is true that if Fox first identified the video as EXCLUSIVE, then they had a very good reason to believe that nobody else would have access to it, at least at the point that they called it exclusive.

In this case, they probably asked for a 24 hour exclusive so they could run it first. It is very easy to get exclusives from lay people who don't know the business.