Bullying ‘cover-up’ at Highbury – dad

‘Curry-muncher’ cracks pushed top Grade 5 pupil to attempt suicide

PARENTS of a Grade 5 pupil at a prestigious boys school have claimed their son has been subjected to continuous bullying, profane and racist comments, but the school “covered up” the incidents and have failed to discipline the perpetrators.

Even when their son, a pupil at Highbury Preparatory School in Hillcrest, attempted suicide because of playground trauma, the parents alleged that they received an “unsympathetic” response from management.

The parents claimed a classmate was largely responsible for bullying the boy, and the bully referred to their child as a “curry muncher” and treated him like a “leper”, and then instigated other children to follow suit.

Disillusioned that their complaints about their son “suffering” at the hands of his peers were not handled appropriately, the parents transferred the youngster to another school this week.

However, the parents said they had given serious consideration to filing a damages claim against the school in the near future, because their son’s self-esteem has been “severely damaged”.

“We enrolled our son at the school three years ago because it had a strong Christian ethos and was rated one of the best in the country. So we were happy to spend around R100 000 each year on his education. The school took our money and didn’t care about the misery our son had to endure,” claimed the boy’s father.

“What my son has been through makes me feel I have failed as a parent.”

He said even though his son had been bullied since 2014, it had not affected his school work and the boy finished regularly in the top three of his class. But at the start of the third term, the boy was reluctant to return to school. That’s when the parents engaged attorney Phyllis Jailall of law firm Jailall and Associates Incorporated to raise their concerns with the school.

In written correspondence to the school, Jailall said the boy had suffered “severe physical, emotional and verbal abuse” from one pupil in particular, which began in 2014.

Flogged

The boy, on different occasions, had been “flogged with a stick”, punched and kicked by the bully. It is alleged that the bully then prompted others to beat and emotionally abuse the child.

On some occasions, the boy was mocked about wearing fake and cheap shoes, was told he was “born in the bin and lives in a shack” and was “so poor he ran with a shopping list behind a truck”.

The most recent taunt was a “touch” game, which carried the boy’s name, and was started by the bully to “ostracise” his victim and “portray him to have characteristics akin to those of a leper”.

During an “at home” meeting, the parents of two other youngsters raised their concerns with a teacher about the seriousness of the bullying and treatment meted out to the boy.

According to the Jailall’s letter, the parents of the victim met with Highbury’s principal, Brendan Carroll, and he promised to act “swiftly”, but the boy’s situation became worse.

This drove the boy to slit his wrists with a pair of scissors and it is believed that he still harboured suicidal thoughts.

Jailall said the boy was now “withdrawn, emotionally fragile and required urgent psychological assessment and counselling”.

Jailall urged the school to conduct urgent disciplinary hearings, suspend the bully and others, and requested details of the perpetrators so they could be served with protection orders.

The attorney said during her telephonic conversation with Carroll, the principal allegedly had an “acrimonious and contemptuous” attitude to the boy’s “life-threatening situation”. She noted that Carroll allegedly “lacked empathy” when speaking about the boy’s suicidal tendencies.

A senior educator at the school conducted an investigation into the bullying allegations and forwarded a report to Jailall.

In it the educator said a large number of other pupils, who were interviewed, confirmed that the boy was being ostracised and treated badly without reason.

The educator confirmed the “touch” game but said that the boy’s “fanciful stories” resulted in him being victimised and called names.

The educator recommended a formal mediation process between the boy and the bully, with the help of counsellors.

But in a responding letter on October 31, the attorney said that the school had adopted a nonchalant attitude in dealing with her client’s complaints, and that it did not seize the opportunity to conduct a “fair and proper investigation”.

She labelled the investigation a “witch-hunt” to show that the boy was responsible for the “treatment he received from the ring-leader” and others.

Jailall questioned why the parents who expressed concern about the victim’s well-being during an “at home” meeting were not interviewed, she said the school was attempting to downplay the bullying allegations and suppress the truth.

Carroll confirmed that the boy had left the school and that he was affected by incidents of bullying.

“Highbury school does not tolerate bullying,” he said.

“Respect for each other, courtesy, kindness and co-operation are expected and encouraged.

“Highbury has a comprehensive discipline policy, which includes a process for dealing with bullying.”

He said the appropriate process was followed in this case.

“We are sorry that the boy has chosen to leave the school.”