ARHS: Our All American High School
In a letter to Faye Brady, Director of Student Services at ARPS, dated Febuary 3rd, exactly one week after Amherst Regional High School was closed because of a Facebook "threat", the mother of the white student accused of using a racial slur corroborates everything her husband outlined in his 4 page letter used to defend himself against job termination for trying to get the schools to stop three black youths from bullying his son.
After the Wednesday, January 22nd impromptu meeting where the father first informed Mary Custard of the bullying his son was enduring, the mother also spoke with Ms. Custard later that afternoon. She wanted to know why the parents of the three black students had been contacted the day before but not her family? Ms. Custard did not give her an answer.
She closed the conversation with, "My son is afraid to go to school and this is not acceptable -- as the School should be a safe place to be."
On Friday, January 24 after three confrontations in the High School the mother met in person with Ms. Custard where the joint meeting with all the parents was concieved and scheduled for Monday, January 27. That meeting was cancelled due to the sudden closing of the school.
The mother continues, "I again told her (Ms. Custard) that my son was afraid to go to school and did not feel safe, and I felt that not enough had been done in regards to the situation."
In her poignent closing the mother directly addresses her son being branded a racist for using the "N-word" (five letter version ending in a), to congratulate a black friend (who took no offense).
"What started out as an argument between teenagers, all of whom use 'the word', somehow turned into a 'racially motivated' hate crime."
She emphatically continues: "This is NOT true as the original statement that my son made was NOT racial, but a pat on the back. My son is NOT a racist as he has been portrayed. Having been brought up in Holyoke he was brought up NOT seeing color. He has many friends of all different colors -- black, Puerto Rican, Indian, Pakistani, Moldovan as well as white.
We have many races within our own family. The accusation that my son is a racist is the most hurtful thing that has come out of this entire incident. "
Her final sentence says it all: "It was not handled expediently and was allowed to go on for four days -- far too long. Only then (after the Facebook "threat" discovered) was anything done -- obviously too little too late."
The letter was signed by the mother, father and son.
Is Ms Custard still employed by Amherst Schools? It seems that she should be suspended (with pay) until this is all sorted out.
ReplyDeleteWhy was the father fired? On what grounds? I hope he challenges that and goes to the mainstream newspaper, so MORE people hear about it.
ReplyDeleteFather was suspended without pay for three days.
ReplyDeleteActually why not have Ms Custand suspended for three days without pay and maybe the rest with till it's all sorted out. Not the full time, the father had to go three days without pay for trying to get the school to help with the issue of his son being bullied. That wasn't fair at all. The father and the mother where requesting help for the issue and it wasn't handled in a timely fashion or the right way with the laws they have now. While at it why not have the boy who was doing all the bullying be suspended for the same amount of days that these people's son had to be. What about equal fairness?
ReplyDeleteOf course we all know none of that would ever happen and the school we all know just wants to sweep the whole thing under the rug like everything else.
Keep up the pressure Larry. Maybe nothing will get done but I hear that this public situation is adding stress to the administrations job. It is the least they deserve. The truth, and some firing, will set them free.
ReplyDeleteI heard or read the the SC is going to discuss this. Did this happen tonight or will it happen at a meeting in the future? Anyone?
ReplyDeleteDid not happen tonight.
ReplyDeleteSounds like Kelley and all that knee jerk their way through Kelley throwing gas on a fire simply want say that threatening gun violence and death is ok in this case because a person was bullied. I'm not surprised.
ReplyDeleteFor these people the schools will never do anything right. Too bad their lives are so screwed up that they are so full of hate. Whatever the situation these same people get on Kelley's blog and spew hate.
One person said her/his hate of the schools has been going on for 3 generations. Wow! Give it up. Move out of town to where life won't push you into such a hateful mind set.
Why would anyone do all they could to paint a school system as so negative when clearly it is one of the more successful school districts in the state, the state that is one of the leading states in the country for education?
Tough way to spend a lifetime. To quote Mr. T, "I pity the fool."
Anon 6:50, Unless you have stepped in to the shoes of the people living under this administraion, be it Student, Parent or Employee - you will never understand.
DeleteOh, and I have no hate - "He who angers me, controls me". Not a way to exist.
DeleteWell at least you now admit he was bullied.
ReplyDeleteAnd the threat of gun violence went both ways.
Closing with Mr. T: what an inspiration.
Just how successful is this district in educating poor and minority kids?
ReplyDeleteWhere does it rank in the state on that?
This is the oldest rhetorical trick in the book (we saw David Ortiz do it last week): "those who disagree with me are haters."
Just how well do trained educators do with fact-finding, due process, and justice in a disciplinary situation? They might be great teachers, but......
ReplyDeleteIt's amazing that the SC did not address this at there latest meeting. This tells me that the truth is not on their side.
ReplyDeleteThe people of Amherst should recall these SC members! They do not have a clue as to what to do!
Sound like Anon 6:50 could be on the SC.
Larry, are you aware Amherst's bullying policy suspiciously excludes bullying by school staff against students and parents in violation of the state’s bullying statutes, M.G.L. chapter 71, section 370? The state law's definition of “bullying” effective July 1, 2013 reads as follows: "Bullying", the repeated use by one or more students or by a member of a school staff including, but not limited to, an educator, administrator, school nurse, cafeteria worker, custodian, bus driver, athletic coach, advisor to an extracurricular activity or paraprofessional of a written, verbal or electronic expression or a physical act or gesture or any combination thereof, directed at a victim that: (i) causes physical or emotional harm to the victim or damage to the victim's property; (ii) places the victim in reasonable fear of harm to himself or of damage to his property; (iii) creates a hostile environment at school for the victim; (iv) infringes on the rights of the victim at school; or (v) materially and substantially disrupts the education process or the orderly operation of a school. For the purposes of this section, bullying shall include cyber-bullying.
ReplyDeleteAnon 9:48
ReplyDeleteTuesday's meeting of the SC was the Amherst SC - which only deals with issues at the elementary school level. It is the regional committee that deals with secondary schools.
I am also guessing that since one of the issues is a personnel issue, there is no way any SC will discuss that piece of things in a public way.
It is fair game for them to ask about how the whole thing was handled but again, I do not see them getting any specific info about students in an open meeting because that is also confidential information.
Anyone interested in this needs to bring it up in public comment..otherwise no one will ask about it.
"Why would anyone do all they could to paint a school system as so negative when clearly it is one of the more successful school districts in the state, the state that is one of the leading states in the country for education?"
ReplyDeleteGet
out
of
my
way.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TScCRs8zGMQ
The fact that the white boy and his family are from Holyoke speaks volumes about the lack of responsiveness. Parents who have been in this town for decades or have another "in" (i.e. $$$) are "more equal" than others.
ReplyDeleteI guarantee if the white boy's parents had been well connected, other administrators would have stepped in to try to mitigate Custard's racism. There's a big difference in the way the school administration treats rich "tiger parents" and working class ones like the white boy's parents.
If Custard would defend all the non-"in" students like she does minorities I could actually respect her hostility. But as it is, she defends the minorities while the other administrators defend the rich kids. This leaves a huge segment of white students with nobody looking out for them - and no defense against bullying.
"I guarantee if the white boy's parents had been well connected..."
ReplyDeleteYou guarantee this? Who are you? I love how people make unfounded statements. Your statements are based on your feelings, not any facts you have presented. Too many people on this blog make unsupported assertions that tout as facts.
So Anonymous, are you suggesting we can't trust Anons?
ReplyDeleteIt has nothing to do with being an Anon. it has to do with presenting evidence to back up your assertions, anonymous or not.
ReplyDeleteSeems to me only one side of the account of this incident has been presented.
ReplyDeleteNo, one side was presented the night of the public meeting. Preemptive strike perhaps?
ReplyDeleteAnonymous 12:12,
ReplyDeleteEverything in these comments is an opinion - including my post. If you don't like what I have to say, please address the merits rather than take exception to a figure of speech. I "guarantee" you'll get better results.
Perhaps you take issue with my opinion that there is favoritism, or bias in the treatment of parents or children in the Amherst school system? Or with Custard in particular? Perhaps you could point to a positive experience you had with them where they demonstrated openness and fair dealing.
Larry, your blog made Mass live
ReplyDeleteYeah, my sitemeter informed me a while back.
ReplyDeleteI say again: Federal Grand Jury....
ReplyDelete"Perhaps you could point to a positive experience you had with them where they demonstrated openness and fair dealing."
ReplyDeleteIt's the other way around. Where are all the other complaints if they are so bad?
"It's the other way around. Where are all the other complaints if they are so bad?"
ReplyDeleteIt's the same thing as with UMass, they only need to make a few public examples out of the kids who complain to silence all the rest.
People don't dare to complain -- they "make do" as best they can and try to get on with their lives.
I didn't have a choice because I instinctively "did the right thing" at the start of my academic career -- saving a student's life at the expense of having the faculty of my department mad at me -- and at that point, "the die was cast."
If I had to do it over again, knowing what I know now....
A better example: I think almost anyone would agree that things were pretty bad in the South during Segregation -- yet "where were all the complaints?" Why did it take "Freedom Riders" from the North to challenge the bus segregation? Etc...