Bad Apples

A third grader was forced to undress and school officials scrubbed his body in the shower because he "smelled badly, was dirty and … had bad hygiene." His parents have sued the Peaster School District outside Fort Worth, Texas, alleging that their son now is in therapy, distraught about being dirty or smelling badly, and showers compulsively.

Meanwhile, in a kindergarten class near San Antonio, Texas, the teacher lined up the classmates and instructed them to hit six-year-old Aiden to "teach him why bullying is bad." Some students didn't want to hit Aiden but were afraid to disobey their teacher. Then one student hit Aiden hard in his upper back and the teacher intervened. Apparently, Aiden's teacher was following the advice of a more experienced colleague and both are now on paid administrative leave. Aiden's mother has filed a police report against the teachers for bullying her son.

No one from either school contacted the children's parents first to try and resolve these issues before crossing the line from teachable moment to criminal and civil liability.

Can Report But Can't Sue

All 50 states, the US territories, and the District of Columbia provide legal immunity from lawsuits or criminal prosecution for reporting suspected child abuse. In addition, many states also protect employees who report abuse from workplace retaliation.

While some states make it relatively easy for employees to sue to enforce their rights, others may require a state agency to take legal action.

One Connecticut school principal learned this lesson the hard way. Under Connecticut law, employers are forbidden from retaliating against an employee who reports suspected child abuse. If they do, the law authorizes the state Attorney General to sue the employer.

So, when principal Carmen Perez-Dickson was demoted and later suspended after reporting two incidents of suspected child abuse, she sued the school board for retaliation. After a trial, the jury awarded her over $2 million.

Unfortunately for the former principal, the Connecticut Supreme Court overturned her verdict. Although Perez-Dickson was correct in principle that she could not legally be fired for reporting abuse, she erred by assuming that she could sue to vindicate her rights. Instead, the Court ruled that only the Connecticut Attorney General was legally authorized to prosecute employers who retaliate against employees for reporting child abuse. [Perez-Dickson v. Bridgeport (CT 2012)]