[Kobi]

Ms Tink, you ask very pertinent and difficult questions.

I didnt get the impression from the article that this child was being singled out in any way. He made the decision to out himself in various ways. The school discussed his decision with him which to me is the supportive thing to do.

The school then acted when he started running into negative reactions. To me, that is protecting a child. I suspect, being 14, he didnt have a clue as to the potential consequences of his decision. The school did. And the consequences affect a lot more people than just this one child.

There is a lot here we dont know. As is common with news reports, things are written in such a way as to evoke a reaction with a paucity of necessary information to fully understand what all was involved and to form a considered opinion based on fact rather than conjecture.

For example, we dont know what actions the school took against those exhibiting the negative behavior. The fact they moved to protect this child as best they could in a no win situation makes me believe they do take bullying and protecting children from bullies seriously. Yet we do not know what specific actions they may have taken. Nor do we know exactly what negative reactions were occuring.

We dont know what the school discussed with this child, what his reaction was to it or what was fueling his "reluctance". They do, we dont. And given that this child chose to make an advertisement about being gay that he wanted publicly displayed in the school, but was reluctant to tell his parents, makes me think there is more to this story than meets the eye.

In the same vein, we dont know why his parents decided to keep him out of school for a week. Did they drag him off to a debriefing center? Need more than a week for that. Did they decide they needed some family time to absorb this and reconnect with one another? Did the school suggest, for his protection, that he remain at home while they dealt with the perpetrators and the potential for backlash while they did so? Dont know.

As someone who has often had to make difficult decisions in situations where others where unable or unwilling to protect themselves, this isnt something anyone acting in a professional capacity should take lightly. The risks are too high. Thus, if one is going to make an error, even after careful consideration of all the options, one should err on the side of caution. Deciding what is caution versus what is risk is often a judgement call.

What is confusing me in this particular situation, and this may just be because of the way the article is written, is whether the school was acting based on what was actually occuring or based on what could potentially occur.