Knox Grammar Child Abuse: Reputation Protection, Empathy and Lessons for Every Parent
Sydney Morning Herald
Without eternal vigilance, the terrible blight on humanity that is the sexual abuse of children can happen at any school; private or public, wealthy or poor. It can happen anywhere that safeguards are weak, people turn a blind eye or communities place the reputation of an institution above that of the safety of a child. That the sexual abuse of boys by teachers – and the subsequent failure to act to protect more children – occurred at one of Australia's elite schools with an otherwise laudable reputation raises concerning issues for all parents. A three-decade-long open secret about sexual abuse at Knox Grammar on Sydney's affluent North Shore has been dragged into the public spotlight this week at hearings of the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse. That one of the key witnesses in hearings was Dr Timothy Hawkes, the headmaster of The King's School in Parramatta, and that he "didn't believe it was my place" to report child sex abuse to police while teaching at Knox in the late 1980s only raises more questions. Are the hefty fees many schools demand based on their reputations, high quality tuition and the old boys' network connections good value? More important, how do parents make sure the choices they make about which school for their children are the safest choices? Schools such as Knox charge a premium and many parents are willing to pay it. But when it comes to child safety, the executives at those schools, along with the old boys and the governing bodies, can no longer be allowed to trade on the school's name alone. Schools must keep proving they can deliver at least the basic level of pastoral care for boys in their charge. Central to that is proving that the reputation of the school NEVER takes precedence over the safety of its students. Former assistant headmaster John Rentoul wept this week as he told the commission that his son had been abused at the school, had a traumatic life as a result, and died at age 44. "I believe the school was more interested in protecting the reputation of Knox than ensuring the safety and welfare of its students," Dr Rentoul said. The commission has heard that the school's governing council was not supportive when a recent principal brought in investigators to check allegations against one teacher, who has been described as "a protected species" under a former principal. Former council members have denied knowing about minutes of secret meetings about sexual abuse claims and the disappearance of certain files. The NSW head of the Uniting Church, Jim Mein, was implicated in the destruction of documents during hearings on Friday. In his evidence on Thursday, Dr Hawkes spoke in his capacity as a former teacher at Knox from 1981-89, and as head of MacNeil House from 1986-89 – a time when a man wearing a old Knox tracksuit and a balaclava groped a boy in his bed. Dr Hawkes said he believed his duty was not to report the incident to police but to notify the headmaster immediately, which he did. The commission has heard that the headmaster then, Dr Ian Paterson, ran the school in an autocratic style for three decades until 1999. Dr Hawkes said he trusted Dr Paterson and his assistant, Stuart Pearson – a recently superannuated policeman – would deal with the abuse incident. Mr Pearson told the commission on Friday he believed police could not be notified until Dr Paterson approved. Notably, Mr Pearson said he "deeply regretted" and was "so so sorry" for not ringing the police himself on at least one occasion when a teacher showed a boy a pornographic video and made sexual advances to the student. He indicated he feared for his job at times. Dr Hawkes had told the commission the school had no instructions to staff as to legal reporting requirements. He agreed he did not check whether Dr Paterson and Mr Pearson had told police or otherwise investigated the balaclava man incident. Outside the commission, Dr Hawkes said of his conduct at the time: "I have nothing to regret". With respect, that clinical statement is as extraordinary as it is insensitive. The Herald strongly believes most people would have expected Dr Hawkes to have displayed considerable empathy and remorse for not doing more in investigating the balaclava man incident, given what has come to light subsequently about Knox's culture and the five convicted abusers – and three others who are suspected of abuse – who took advantage of it. Dr Hawkes could have reassured parents with a strong statement that the protocols at Knox were appalling and that, in hindsight, he should have recognised that and taken it upon himself to do more. Counsel assisting the commission: "I suggest to you that the only conceivable reason why you didn't make sure the police were ever contacted in the period immediately after this incident was that you were putting the reputation of the school above the interests and welfare of the boys." Dr Hawkes: "I would totally reject that comment and find it offensive, and I find it unreasonable. Iwould have absolutely no reason whatsoever to be motivated by any of those sentiments. I had particularly no motivation to have to, in a sense, protect the school, and I did not, in any way, feel that my own role or job was in any way or form to protect the school. That would never cross my mind, and to suggest so I find utterly offensive." Dr Hawkes' evidence highlights the difficult position staff at schools can find themselves in; and the disconnect between parental expectations and institutional responses. Parents who entrust their children to schoolteachers need to be sure they are empathetic and have the child's safety as first, second and third priority. Counsel assisting: "Would you agree that when it came to those boys who were boarding and who were away from their parents, who lived out of Sydney, that imposed on you a particularly heavy responsibility in terms of the pastoral care and well-being of the boys?" Dr Hawkes: "Well, whether they were boarders who lived in the country area or, indeed, city boarders, I think I owed the same duty of care to all of them." There is no suggestion Dr Hawkes has behaved in any way other than with the utmost care for the students in his care at Knox. His record as headmaster of King's School speaks for itself. He has been a leader in boy's education and pastoral care at King's. And it must be remembered that in the 1980s, when he was at Knox, the reporting of sexual abuse at schools was ad hoc. Before 1988 there were no mandatory reporting rules in NSW. The balaclava man incident at Knox took place in late 1988. But the commission has heard that even a decade later Knox still had no protocols for dealing with abuse. Teachers did not challenge the culture enough. That is tragic for the victims and their families. Knox has overhauled its child safety protocols and is on alert for further breaches. But as the principal of Knox from 2004 to the present day, John Weeks, told the commission on Friday: "We can have all the regulation, all the training, all the checks, but the most important lesson is, in protecting our children we must be vigilant at all times, that is, eternally vigilant." For parents to be sure that such a thorough and empathetic approach is being taken at their child's school, it comes down to trust – and that cannot be bought, no matter the price or the standard of school facilities or record of academic and sporting success. It cannot be assumed, no matter the social standing of those schools and teachers involved. Trust must be earned.
|
.
Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.