Supervision Outside of Normal School Hours
The duty of care extends to children not only during school hours but also outside of school hours where the students are on school property. It is common practice for parents to leave pupils at the school before hours or collect them after hours, and in that acceptance, is the obligation of the school to provide supervision. This is something which needs serious consideration in my own context as some students arrive on the premises thirty minutes before school starts. The school’s liability could be extended if it habitually assumes responsibility for its pupils beyond the limits of the school day or has given rise to an expectation of supervision prior to opening time, or beyond closing time.
…show more content…
In Koffman v The Trustees of the Roman Catholic Church for Diocese of Bathurst, Sheller J. highlighted that the duty of care does not begin when the child enters the school grounds and terminate when they leave. The decision in this case reinforces the importance of supervision. It highlights the need for precision in the words used to advise parents of risks to pupils and the limits of responsibilities which school authorities will undertake, before and after school. Interestingly, in Mays v Essex County Council the judge refuted that parents had a right to impose responsibility on teachers outside school hours. An important element in this case was that the school principal had written to parents advising them not to send their children to school too early due to lack of supervision. This is something that is required in my own …show more content…
Supervision is crucial as children can be boisterous and harder to control when outside the confines of the school. In MS Grewal v Deep Chand Sood, following the deaths of fourteen students, the Supreme Court of India imposed liability on a school for the negligent supervision of students when on a picnic trip to a riverbank. School authorities have a non-delegable duty to students to ensure that reasonable care is taken for the safety of children. The school authority cannot avoid responsibility by delegating the duty of care to someone else. The school is liable for a child who is injured even if school employees were not involved in running the activity or if took place outside the school’s premises. It is incumbent for the school authority to satisfy itself that external organizations employed are competent, thorough and professional. As with the case of Brown v Nelson, a pupil was injured on a camp when a cable broke on a rope course. Although the school authority was not expected to have expert knowledge of the procedures and equipment being used, it was expected to continue to discharge its duty of
No greater obligation is placed on school officials than to protect the children in their charge from foreseeable dangers, whether those dangers arise from the careless acts or intentional transgressions of others. Although the overarching mission of a board of education is to educate, its first imperative must be to do no harm to the children in its care. A board of education must take reasonable measures to assure that the teachers and administrators who stand as surrogate parents during the day are educating, not endangering, and protecting, not exploiting, vulnerable children (Frugis v. Bracigliano, 2003).
The minority countered this argument when the school board said, “it is our duty, our moral obligation, to protect the children in our school from this moral danger as surely as from physical and medical dangers” (qtd. in Board of
The court stated that it was the school board decision to give such a risky individual, as a trusted professional employee with authority over students. Therefore, the school board must be held accountable when those risks emerge and cause loss or damages to innocent student.
The leading issue of the WA DoE Duty of Care for Students Policy is stated in Section 1.A “Teaching staff owe a duty to take reasonable care for the safety and welfare of students whilst students are involved in school activities or are present for the purposes of a school activity” (WA DoE, 2007, p. 3). This means teachers are legally responsible to protect students from reasonably foreseeable risks of harm whenever a relationship exists between a teacher and a student. Some examples include in the playground, the classroom or during a school excursion. The second important issue addressed in the WA DoE Duty of Care for Students Policy is how teachers use their professional judgement to assess dangers, guard against risk of injury to students, and determine levels of care required, based on their knowledge of individual students and the type of school activity undertaken.... ...
What ethical principles were impacted? What was the ethical duty of care to Lewis? How was it breached?
Duty of care is legal obligation to ensure the well-being of a service user, safeguard service users from harm while they are in your care.
This essay will critically analyse Care Programme Approach (CPA) assessment and care plan in an OSCE I undertook. By utilising the CPA and sources of current literature, I hope to demonstrate my knowledge and understanding in relation to this skill as well as identifying areas with scope for learning.
When working practitioners must not only protect the children they work with when in the school setting and off site, but also themselves. Whether in school or off-site the school safeguarding policy should be referred to, to give guidance and adhered to at all times.
This essay will first address the statute used and interpretation of the threshold test by the courts, and then focus on cases involving vulnerable children to assess whether the statute in The Children Act 1989 is sufficient in protecting these children from harm. I will look at the argument in favour of the current approach taken by the courts, and the counter-argument in favour of changing the current approach. The arguments are delicately balanced and the law is always developing, so it will be interesting to see how the Supreme Court resolves this issue in future.
Background: Formed by a merger in 1996, CareGroup is the second largest health care organization that serves eastern Massachusetts. CareGroup includes a variety of physician offices, academic health centers, and community hospitals. Some of the hospitals that are part of CareGroup include Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Mount Auburn Hospital, and New England Baptist Hospital. There were several factors that resulted in the merger of CareGroup, and these factors include gaining contracting power over insurance companies (HMO’s), creating an integrated system across hospitals, and achieving a competitive advantage in terms of prices.
LaMorte, Michael. School Law: Cases and Concepts. 4th ed. London: Allyn and Bacon, 1993. Lane, Kenneth, Mary Jane Connelly, Julie Mead, Mark Gooden, and Suzanne Eckes, eds.
Social work practice has a responsibility to adequately support the chosen lifestyle of unpaid carers as their efforts form an invaluable service which saves the economy £132 billion per year (Carers UK, 2015a). Without the thousands of carers, the health of many of society’s most vulnerable would suffer as the government would struggle to fund the costs of providing alternative care. Yet there is a growing reliance upon unpaid carers who are willing and able to provide the care which allows people to remain within their home. Firstly, the health issues of an aging and unhealthy population means there are increasing numbers of people aged 18+ who find it difficult to look after themselves. Secondly, there is an expectation that unpaid carers
• The role of school and college staff is highlighted as being especially important in safeguarding children because of their position to identify concerns early on, provide early intervention and to
The patient may need assistance caring for himself following discharge from the hospital. The daughter lives too far to assist her father on a daily basis. The case worker needs to determine how much the daughter is willing to assist her father during the transition. The daughter may be willing to become her father’s caregiver during the initial recovery period. She would also be a good support system by providing medication reminders, encouraging medication compliance, dietary restriction compliance and promoting positive health behaviors.
A practical example of this is demonstrated in the case of R v Lowe. Whereby the parents failed to call the doctor. when their child fell ill. The special relationship between the child and the father made the father criminally liable where he failed to act. under his duty of care.