Facebook Group

[wheypat]

Hi

I'm a member of a facebook group which is a support group for parents of disabled children. Occasionally people have talked in there about their child's education and have mentioned schools by name. The admin for the group got a letter from the council recently asking this practice to stop.

Do they have any legal grounds to make us stop? They letter did not threaten any legal action, it was a polite request.

We don't feel like stopping as the education system is so poor for our kids that any useful hints and tips we can get from parents in a similar position is very useful.

[JohnB]

No idea on the legality, but as schools are public institutions, I think you should be able to name them, as you would companies. What are the group's privacy settings, can anyone read or post?

I'd have more sympathy if they were concerned about naming individual teachers, but not the school as a whole.

I presume the authors of individual postings are responsible for any defamatory content, and suggest you push back hard at any attempt at censorship.

[wheypat]

No idea on the legality, but as schools are public institutions, I think you should be able to name them, as you would companies. What are the group's privacy settings, can anyone read or post?

I'd have more sympathy if they were concerned about naming individual teachers, but not the school as a whole.

I presume the authors of individual postings are responsible for any defamatory content, and suggest you push back hard at any attempt at censorship.

Group is private and we have chosen write back with "get stuffed" but thought I'd check out the legality first . . .

[redsturgeon]

No idea on the legality, but as schools are public institutions, I think you should be able to name them, as you would companies. What are the group's privacy settings, can anyone read or post?

I'd have more sympathy if they were concerned about naming individual teachers, but not the school as a whole.

I presume the authors of individual postings are responsible for any defamatory content, and suggest you push back hard at any attempt at censorship.

Group is private and we have chosen write back with "get stuffed" but thought I'd check out the legality first . . .

I like the Private Eye course of action in these cases:

http://www.lettersofnote.com/2013/08/ar ... sdram.html

John

[pochisoldi]

No idea on the legality, but as schools are public institutions, I think you should be able to name them, as you would companies. What are the group's privacy settings, can anyone read or post?

I'd have more sympathy if they were concerned about naming individual teachers, but not the school as a whole.

I presume the authors of individual postings are responsible for any defamatory content, and suggest you push back hard at any attempt at censorship.

If you were having the same private conversation in a pub they'd be none the wiser and couldn't do a thing about it.

Personally I wouldn't dignify their request with a response, and if pushed would suggest that the council is seeking to stifle the group's right to self expression.

Any organisation that seeks to stifle comment and feedback clearly has issues, and would be better off trying to work with their critics rather than trying to silence them.

PochiSoldi

[Stonge]

If the group is private, how has the council read these posts.

What is your policy on members sharing posts outside the group?

[midnightcatprowl]

Speaking as an ex-educational psychologist I'd say that the Council ought be pleased that you are interested enough in your children's education to participate in this group!

I think the reply from the group has to be polite (you have to live with the education authority after all) but firm.

First of all how do they know what is being said in the group? Well it is just faintly possible that someone has disguised their identity and joined the group to find out what you are saying. So you should ask how they know what is being said in a private members only group. It is much more likely of course that a genuine group member, when discussing their child's education with someone from the education department or with the child's teacher or headteacher, has quoted something posted in the Facebook Group as a reason why they do or don't want their child to move on to x, y or z school. Nevertheless you should challenge them on the issue of the privacy of the group.

The second form of polite attack is really quite simple. Across the land parents stand outside schools waiting for their children and while they wait they talk about schools and teachers, the school the child is in, which school they might like their child to go to. They discuss the teachers in this school and the potential schools. These conversations also go on in cafes, across the fences in back gardens, in pubs, in dart's teams, in country clubs, in factories and offices and staff rooms, in bus shelters and on railway platforms. Not only has the LEA absolutely no control over such conversations but LEA staff themselves, and especially the more senior staff, probably carry on more of these conversations themselves on behalf of their own children than anyone else! They are trying to stop you doing what everyone else does and what they themselves do the most of.

I'd also suggest that you again politely but firmly express some 'surprise' that in a situation where there are dire pressures in the education system - for all children regardless of their particular needs - that someone employed in the education service has time to fret about what you might be saying in your group and suggest that they might be better employed in putting their efforts into improving the provision available for your children.

[wheypat]

If the group is private, how has the council read these posts.

What is your policy on members sharing posts outside the group?

It would seem that [at least] one parent in the group has taken posts and sent them to the council. I don't know why. The letter from the council has left one parent very upset and stressed that they may have inadvertently hurt their child's education. We do stress to members that it is a private group and they shouldn't share outside the group.

My first thought was just to reply with something along the lines of the a fore mentioned Private Eye response, but there's a reason I don't get invited to reply to these things very often . . .

[oldapple]

Wheypat, sorry not to be able to advise on your query in a legal capacity but I have worked in education for over 25 years. I have seen classroom assistants, who have been specifically employed to help children with special needs, consistently used for activities totally unrelated to helping those children. It frustrates me immensely but I am in no position to object. On the one occasion I suggested to a parent that she should ask her child what her child did each Wednesday when individualised tuition was scheduled, absolutely nothing changed when the parent did so and I believe I was portrayed as some kind of traitor. I had hoped that with a new Principal now in charge, this typical situation would improve - not so. The most recent classroom assistant recruit spent many days with virtually no contact with her special needs child but has now found herself a post elsewhere.

I've also noticed over the years that there is a strong correlation between parents who serve on the Board of Governors, or who contribute especially favourably financially, and the number of cups awarded to their children at the end of each year. We still achieved 'Outstanding' by Ofsted of course so maybe I should be on Bitter Lemons! Children who need extra help need you battling their corner at every opportunity and I would encourage you and your group not to be silenced to suit someone else.

All the best

[midnightcatprowl]

I have seen classroom assistants, who have been specifically employed to help children with special needs, consistently used for activities totally unrelated to helping those children. It frustrates me immensely but I am in no position to object. On the one occasion I suggested to a parent that she should ask her child what her child did each Wednesday when individualised tuition was scheduled, absolutely nothing changed when the parent did so and I believe I was portrayed as some kind of traitor. I had hoped that with a new Principal now in charge, this typical situation would improve - not so. The most recent classroom assistant recruit spent many days with virtually no contact with her special needs child but has now found herself a post elsewhere.

I'm 100% with you oldapple but I would just mention that there can sometimes be a different aspect to this sort of situation. Long ago I was dealing as an educational psychologist with a child whose needs were so very special and specific that, short of sending the five year old concerned to a boarding special school far away from home, I had to negotiate hard for a very special set-up for that child. Fortunately I was able to find a place in a local special school where the teacher of the class the child would enter was not only especially well qualified but also especially enthusiastic about dealing with a child posing an unusual challenge even by the standards of that school, plus the LEA would also provide a classroom assistant for that child in addition to the already fairly generous teacher/assistant ratios in that school.

Everyone was happy or so I thought! The teacher was enthused, the assistant had no particular qualifications but had the right attitude and was very positive about working with the teacher and other staff to get the best result for the child. The parents had agreed to the set-up. The child seemed to have settled well and made significant progress. Then the parents started to complain that the assistant was not with the child all the time. When I investigated it turned out that essentially the parents were complaining that a very qualified and highly enthusiastic teacher was actually teaching their child personally! The teacher - who already had a very challenging group of young pupils to deal with - had organised with the assistant (who was perfectly willing and absolutely saw the point of all this) - that the assistant would help other children in the class for half an hour or so each day while the teacher worked individually with the child concerned - and the child was responding excellently to this focused and enthused teaching.

It was very very hard to persuade the parents that actually their child had the right to receive tuition from a qualified (and well beyond basically qualified teacher) who was also extremely enthusiastic and committed to achieving the best outcome for the child concerned. They actually wanted their child to spend all the child's school time with an absolutely lovely lady who was also completely unqualified as a teacher nor a nursery nurse or indeed as anything else beyond what she'd picked up on a day to day basis in the classroom plus she was well endowed with commonsense. Remember that the assistant thought it was great that the teacher was giving the child individual tuition and the assistant was happily helping the other kids with tying aprons and find the paint brush they needed and mopping up sick and taking them to the toilet and reading them stories and all the small things which are part and parcel and a critical part of school life for young children while the teacher was providing that focused tuition to the child concerned.

To this day I still remember just how hard the struggle was to persuade the parents that their child's teacher should actually be allowed to teach their child!

[mc2fool]

It would seem that [at least] one parent in the group has taken posts and sent them to the council. I don't know why.

One thing you can do is hit them with an FoI (Freedom of Information) request. Ask to get copies of all correspondence, letters and emails, external and internal, written and recorded records, minutes of meetings, indeed everything on, about or discussing your Facebook group or related to. Now, they do have the right to and will almost certainly redact any personal identification information (names, email addresses) from the information they give you, but at least the FoI will enable you to know what they've got and what they've been saying (well, writing/emailing, etc) about it internally.

Having said that, I think my suggestion would be to just simply ignore their letter. If they follow up with another then don't reply but hit them with the FoI request first and then decide on any further action after getting the info. However...

The letter from the council has left one parent very upset and stressed that they may have inadvertently hurt their child's education.

Sorry, are you saying that their letter has threatened a negative affect on a child's education as a result of what's been said in the Facebook group? Indeed, as a result of them finding out what's been said? If so that's atrocious and a very serious matter. It sounds like bullying, and there is nothing the council should do to harm a child's education -- period -- let alone 'cos of what somebody said in a (private) FB group.

[ReformedCharacter]

It was very very hard to persuade the parents that actually their child had the right to receive tuition from a qualified (and well beyond basically qualified teacher) who was also extremely enthusiastic and committed to achieving the best outcome for the child concerned. They actually wanted their child to spend all the child's school time with an absolutely lovely lady who was also completely unqualified as a teacher nor a nursery nurse or indeed as anything else beyond what she'd picked up on a day to day basis in the classroom plus she was well endowed with commonsense. Remember that the assistant thought it was great that the teacher was giving the child individual tuition and the assistant was happily helping the other kids with tying aprons and find the paint brush they needed and mopping up sick and taking them to the toilet and reading them stories and all the small things which are part and parcel and a critical part of school life for young children while the teacher was providing that focused tuition to the child concerned.

To this day I still remember just how hard the struggle was to persuade the parents that their child's teacher should actually be allowed to teach their child!

I expect the exact proceedings vary from one LA to another but generally a child is reviewed by a panel of 'specialists' who assess the child's needs and then place the child into a banding. The child will receive additional support according to the banding. The banding will not say 'this child needs to have a specific person with them at all times at school'. The banding will say 'this child needs x hours of additional support of this type during the school day'. Consequently what actually happens is that although the child should and hopefully will receive the additional x hours support, the teaching assistant or other specialist will also perform duties for other children. To some degree the available labour is thrown into the pot and used as needed and parents are often upset to find that an individual support worker is not there for the exclusive support of their child.

I can only speak with knowledge of my local LA but I expect that the reality is the same in other parts of the country, and that is that support for 'High Needs' children has been cut to the bone. Schools have to do the best they can with the resources they have available and schools have to make very difficult decisions to best support the children that attend their schools.

RC

[wheypat]

The letter from the council has left one parent very upset and stressed that they may have inadvertently hurt their child's education.

Sorry, are you saying that their letter has threatened a negative affect on a child's education as a result of what's been said in the Facebook group? Indeed, as a result of them finding out what's been said? If so that's atrocious and a very serious matter. It sounds like bullying, and there is nothing the council should do to harm a child's education -- period -- let alone 'cos of what somebody said in a (private) FB group.

Hi

No, one parent was very upset (a lot in the group are not strong as a result of having to deal with difficult situations day in, day out). The council letter was very polite, made no threats just asked us to discontinue). Frequently stuff like this comes my way, as I'm quite ballsy and don't really worry much - my child will never achieve much so I don't have much to lose.

So no, I don' think the council is bullying us, just asking us to stop.

[mc2fool]

No, one parent was very upset (a lot in the group are not strong as a result of having to deal with difficult situations day in, day out). The council letter was very polite, made no threats just asked us to discontinue.

Ok, well then do I infer correctly that what has happened is that one (or more) members of the group have sent posts to the council that include comments other members have made?

If so I'd concentrate on identifying -- and sanctioning -- the culprit(s). If I were a member of a private group of that sort I certainly wouldn't expect or approve of my comments being sent outside of the group ...

[wheypat]

No, one parent was very upset (a lot in the group are not strong as a result of having to deal with difficult situations day in, day out). The council letter was very polite, made no threats just asked us to discontinue.

Ok, well then do I infer correctly that what has happened is that one (or more) members of the group have sent posts to the council that include comments other members have made?

If so I'd concentrate on identifying -- and sanctioning -- the culprit(s). If I were a member of a private group of that sort I certainly wouldn't expect or approve of my comments being sent outside of the group ...

Quite! There are over 1000 of us, so it could prove tricky. Anyway, I have reassured the group that the council cannot take any action against anyone and the letter is being safely ignored.

I wonder if that will make it's way back to the council . . . . .

[mc2fool]

Quite! There are over 1000 of us, so it could prove tricky. Anyway, I have reassured the group that the council cannot take any action against anyone and the letter is being safely ignored.

Is that 1000 parents of disabled children under the same council?!? If not, then you could do some geographic filtering to get a smaller list of suspects.

Either way, put in the FOI request to the council. As I say, they'll almost certainly redact personal identifying info, however despite that there's a good chance you'll be able to figure out who sent in what. https://www.gov.uk/make-a-freedom-of-in ... oi-request

[melonfool]

I am a member of several Private and Closed FB groups - I am bewildered as to how the council sent a letter to a Facebook group - what were the mechanics of that? Who did it actually go to?

I'd have no idea how to send a letter to any single member, or admin, of any the groups I am in, and I'm IN them!

I would not do an FOI request, it just prolongs the agony for everyone (and, frankly, wastes council resources which you are trying to secure for your child's support!) and would probably just ignore it. Though if I found anyone had copied posts outside of the group, those people would be chucked out - I would imagine people talk about very sensitive issues and they expect that to be kept within the group, to take copies and give them to someone else is a breach of that trust and, to discuss such a topic, you do all need trust!

Mel

[mc2fool]

I am a member of several Private and Closed FB groups - I am bewildered as to how the council sent a letter to a Facebook group - what were the mechanics of that? Who did it actually go to?

I'd have no idea how to send a letter to any single member, or admin, of any the groups I am in, and I'm IN them!

The OP said it was the admin for the group that got the letter from the council.

One obvious guess is that the person(s) who leaked posts from the group to the council also gave them contact information, and another, and perhaps more likely, is that given that people tend to use their real names in FB, if the leaked posts included one from Fred Bloggs (Admin) complaining about Crapola High School, it'd be trivially easy for the council to look up the contact details of the F. Bloggs that has a kid at that school.

I would not do an FOI request, it just prolongs the agony for everyone (and, frankly, wastes council resources which you are trying to secure for your child's support!) and would probably just ignore it. Though if I found anyone had copied posts outside of the group, those people would be chucked out - I would imagine people talk about very sensitive issues and they expect that to be kept within the group, to take copies and give them to someone else is a breach of that trust and, to discuss such a topic, you do all need trust!

I don't get the logic of the first sentence given the rest of the paragraph. The "agony" isn't the letter from the council; it's, as you say, the breach of trust -- and the uncertainty and fear of a continued breach of trust. At the moment the group only knows that someone has breached their trust. They don't know:

Who has copied posts to the council.
Which posts they have sent to the council.
If they are continuing to send posts to the council.

The agony -- the uncertainty and lack of trust now in the group -- is prolonged until those are answered and the culprit(s) chucked out. An FOI will answer the last two of the above and there's a fair chance they'll be able to figure out the first. I'm sure other suggestions on how to identify the culprit(s) would be welcomed by the OP. That's mine.

[melonfool]

I meant just the agony with the council, I'd ignore them.

However, I can't help thinking there is a data breach in here somewhere. If the council did look someone up and get their address and use it for this, I can't see how that is a legitimate use of data. If a member of the group gave the council the address that's a bit different but there is a lot of talk at the moment about FB groups having responsibilities under GDPR as well. There been a test case in Germany already.

Mel

[melonfool]

I doubt FOI would answer those questions, they'll just say that it's individual information given in confidence that they cannot release.

This sort of thing is not what FOI was designed for and councils have myriad ways to avoid giving information, they have whole teams just working on not answering that sort of thing.

Mel