Teacher Fired After Being a Victim of Domestic Violence and Her Ex Husband's behavior

page: 2
23
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 13 2013 @ 09:19 PM
link   
Seems ironic the Catholic Church protecting pedophile priests but firing a teacher because of the "children's safety"



abcnews.go.com...




posted on Jun, 13 2013 @ 09:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by WeRpeons
The school should have pressed charges against this man! He was a danger to the school and the teacher! Instead of criminalizing the victim here, the courts should have thrown this wacko immediately back in jail. This opens the door for any person being a victim of domestic violence to lose their job through no fault of their own.


Very true. The laws suck when it comes to protecting victims od domestic violence. The courts should have been more strict. But they werent so perhaps the school also felt like their hands were tied.



Lets put the shoe on the other foot. How would you feel if you lost your job because of no fault of your own?


Just like I said in my OP when something similiar did almost happen to me, it sucks but I
understand. Just like the person I know I also mentioned, it sucks but that could have led to lawsuits or worse.

Thanks so much for contributing your perspective. It is a good one!



posted on Jun, 14 2013 @ 02:08 AM
link   
Im actually baffled that people are on the side of the school, like this man should be allowed to screw his ex-wife over by being a d**k, turning up where she works? He'd probably be loving this!

I wonder if posters would have the same reaction if it was a male teacher who got sacked due to his crazy wife turning up!



posted on Jun, 14 2013 @ 06:08 AM
link   
And people wonder why I absolutely refuse to ever allow my kids into one of these establishments.

Our system is so screwed up now that it's not even funny.

It's a double edged blade folks. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
I choose to stay out of this paradigm entirely.

Kids can learn to read just fine without having to be institutionalized.



posted on Jun, 14 2013 @ 06:28 AM
link   
Whoa....this thread just touched a nerve, and I am SO angry!

When I finally was able to escape my abusive husband....I also lost my job due to HIS actions. I needed my job to support 3 children. I worked as a receptionist, sitting behind a large window that faced the main street in town.
My ex would continually drive by and stare in at me. Management were afraid that he would do something (like shoot me through the window)...and they didn't want to have to deal with it.
In a small town, people talked....and I was not able to get a similar job again. Losing my income created a downward spiral that had horrible after-effects for myself and my kids.

All that 'help' that we think is "out there" for victims of domestic violence is a joke. So many people are willing to blame the victim.

So the school was more interested in protecting "potential" victims....as opposed to supporting the "present" victim?
Nice.
jacygirl



posted on Jun, 14 2013 @ 07:32 AM
link   
reply to post by AshleyD
 


I saw this report. What a very difficult situation all around. I would not want that teacher at the school but that might be my gut reaction as a parent and in light of recent school shootings. Not saying that's right because the teacher should not be penalized more than she already is for doing nothing more than marrying poorly. Marrying poorly can be deadly though. I often wonder why more women cannot spot signs of unreasonable aggression earlier, before the relationship goes down a permanent road toward destruction? Perhaps the school should offer to re-locate this woman or provide a hefty severance pay before cutting her loose? Maybe they should keep her but make her husband go for counseling? IDK but what a tough call.



posted on Jun, 14 2013 @ 07:32 AM
link   
edit on 14-6-2013 by Loveaduck because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 14 2013 @ 07:35 AM
link   
Imagine if every employer could can you for something completely beyond your control.

I've had lunatic stalkers before come into my place of work.

That's what the police are for. The police and a pistol on my side.

It's not my fault some psycho latched on to me. It's not this teachers fault her ex is a lunatic.

It'd be like firing her for having HIV to "protect the kids."



posted on Jun, 14 2013 @ 09:04 AM
link   
I have read opinions about this and am on the side of those who don't believe she should have lost her job. The police should have been called and then the legal system should do its bit, serving and protecting.

Now, what i want to read is the actual laws in place for that state or the US. There must be precedent already in place. I feel that the school is violating the law and would like to know what the law has to say.



posted on Jun, 14 2013 @ 09:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Unity_99

I have read opinions about this and am on the side of those who don't believe she should have lost her job. The police should have been called and then the legal system should do its bit, serving and protecting.


It's funny because this incident illustrates how little faith there is in the police to do their job and in the effectiveness of such frivolous nonsense as restraining orders.

Apparently the schools administrators know these things are worthless.



posted on Jun, 14 2013 @ 09:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by SearchLightsInc
Im actually baffled that people are on the side of the school, like this man should be allowed to screw his ex-wife over by being a d**k, turning up where she works? He'd probably be loving this!

I wonder if posters would have the same reaction if it was a male teacher who got sacked due to his crazy wife turning up!
I understand where you are coming from, but a job at a school is different than almost any other job.

As a former teacher, I know first hand, that safety is the first, second and third priority of any teacher in a school. It has to be.

Yes I would have the same reaction if the genders were flipped, as it doesnt matter who it is, anyone who brings an unsafe environment to a school has to be removed. THEY HAVE TO BE.

Think about it like this: Say the situation had nothing to do with domestic abuse. Say it was a virus. This teacher caught a communicable disease, through no fault of her own. She would have to be removed, for the safety of the children. Its the same thing here. She is, even though its not her fault, at the center of an unsafe environment.

There is a debate to be had about how abusers are legally dealt with, but with the laws as they are, the schools HAVE to think of the students first and foremost. Theres no other way around it.
I hope this lady gets another job, or is allowed to return to the one she had. But not until this situation is dealt with and the danger subsides.



posted on Jun, 14 2013 @ 09:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
Imagine if every employer could can you for something completely beyond your control.

I've had lunatic stalkers before come into my place of work.

That's what the police are for. The police and a pistol on my side.

It's not my fault some psycho latched on to me. It's not this teachers fault her ex is a lunatic.

It'd be like firing her for having HIV to "protect the kids."
Any other job, and I would agree with you. But not with kids.



posted on Jun, 14 2013 @ 10:04 AM
link   
I always feel that when events happen, even personal issues and the news, there is an agenda, that this may fit into. So perhaps, they put this out on the alternative news sites, or some news, to see if it will make the forums and garner public views to see if they can challenge the human rights code or the precedents in place protecting women from domestic violence. I always think they're testing. Because governments pass illegal legislation that violates the constitution and human rights, common law, but the only reason illegal legislation stays in place, which is massive corruption and is so outrageous it makes me feel physically ill to be living in such a backward world with so many alseep and willingly passing on corruption to their children. I always wonder if its because they don't have IQ's to think with, the majority! I believe people are instrinsically good, but don't understand why they even let 1 issue slip by, that violates freedoms and constitution, why they're not on constant serve and protect guard duty.

But the only reason even these legislations stay on the books is because most turn a blind eye to them or rationalize them. They're illegal and you can't!

I think they just keep on testing to see if there is more they can get away with.



posted on Jun, 14 2013 @ 10:07 AM
link   
reply to post by captaintyinknots
 


Yes, kids. The magic excuse for all bad behaviors.

Should a child with a hostile relative or parent be expelled as well? You know, to protect the children.



posted on Jun, 14 2013 @ 10:07 AM
link   
reply to post by captaintyinknots
 


Exactly, that's the distinction in my mind. In other jobs, adult co-workers may stand a chance.and could read the situation and take appropriate action if something went down. Children are completely dependent on their teacher and school staff for protection. If those people are concerned for their own safety, what chance do children have?



posted on Jun, 14 2013 @ 10:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
reply to post by captaintyinknots
 


Yes, kids. The magic excuse for all bad behaviors.

Should a child with a hostile relative or parent be expelled as well? You know, to protect the children.
When your job, your ENTIRE job, is to keep kids safe, then yes, kids.

I am glad you touched on something here, that I havereally noticed has been ignored in this story, and it is the part that IS a big issue to me.

Her kids are not allowed at the school now.

Its one thing to remove the adult from the situation. To remove the kid, though, is over the line.



posted on Jun, 14 2013 @ 10:27 AM
link   
Sorry, folks. I can't agree that this was one to protect the kids.

I completely understand putting the children's safety first. But this can be one by informing the police...there are stalking laws in place.

We have threats at my school all the time, an the police take them seriously. There's always a patrol within easy reach, and when we have an active threat, they are in the school. I can't tell you how many people have been arrested on school grounds for violating restraining orders, stalking, and the like.

This woman is already a victim from her husband....now she loses her job, too?

What's to stop any disgruntled ex from showing up and acting threateningly, just to get the ex fired?

We need to address the criminal here, and that is not this woman.



posted on Jun, 14 2013 @ 10:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by captaintyinknots

Her kids are not allowed at the school now.

Its one thing to remove the adult from the situation. To remove the kid, though, is over the line.


But what's the difference?

Johnny's dad is an angry drunk with a record or violence and he's been fighting with Johnny's mom. Should Johnny be allowed to attend the school?

Think of the children! Wont somebody think of the children!



posted on Jun, 14 2013 @ 10:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere

Originally posted by captaintyinknots

Her kids are not allowed at the school now.

Its one thing to remove the adult from the situation. To remove the kid, though, is over the line.


But what's the difference?

Johnny's dad is an angry drunk with a record or violence and he's been fighting with Johnny's mom. Should Johnny be allowed to attend the school?

Think of the children! Wont somebody think of the children!
You are really comparing the people that are charged with protecting the kids (the teachers) to the ones being protected (the kids)?

the difference is, it is a teachers job to foster a safe environment. Flat out.
edit on 14-6-2013 by captaintyinknots because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 14 2013 @ 10:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by captaintyinknots


the difference is, it is a teachers job to foster a safe environment. Flat out.


So expel the kid with the classy family.

Otherwise you're being inconsistent. This fired teacher wasnt a threat. A relation of hers was, allegedly.

The kid with the classy family isnt a threat. Relations to the kid are, allegedly.

You're trying to force a distinction when there is none.





top topics
 
23
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join