Student Threats of Violence

Student Threats of Violence
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Student Threats of Violence Diana Browning Wright, M.S., L.E.P. Education Consultant, Educational Psychologist, Behavior Analyst developed in collaboration with Dewey G. Cornell, Ph.D. University of Virginia

Threat assessment is part of a comprehensive approach
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Threat assessment is part of a comprehensive approach Intensive monitoring and supervision Ongoing counseling Community-based treatment Alternative school placement Special education evaluation and services Intensive Interventions Students with very serious behavior problems Social skills groups Short-term counseling Mentoring and after-school programs Tutoring and other academic support Special education evaluation and services At-Risk Students Students with some problem behaviors Clear and consistent discipline Positive behavior support system School security program Programs for bullying and teasing Character development curriculum Conflict resolution for peer disputes Schoolwide Prevention All students

Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence
2007 Positive Environments, Network of Trainers: download forms and training materials P E N T

School Violence Theories:
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence School Violence Theories: 2007 No single cause No single profile No single remedy Violence is a Learned Behavior: Family, peers, community, media Threats of violence to self or others are a symptom of underlying problems.

WHY? 1. Frustration-Aggression Theory
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 WHY? 1. Frustration-Aggression Theory Aggressive behavior is an automatic consequence of frustration in goal attainment (Dollard, Doob, Miller, Mowrer, & Sears, 1939, Frustration and Aggression). Theory reformulated by Berkowitz (1989, 1993). Theory applies best to “reactive aggression” (aka hostile, emotional, or affective aggression). 2. Social Learning Theory Aggressive behavior is learned from role models (Bandura, 1973). Modern versions emphasize learning of cognitive scripts for aggression. Theory applies best to instrumental or goal-directed aggression.

2007 Reactive aggression Involves an angry response to provocation or frustration, sometimes termed affective aggression or hostile aggression. May indicate deficits in anger control, assertiveness, frustration tolerance, or conflict resolution skills.

Instrumental aggression
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Instrumental aggression Use of aggression to attain a goal, often in the absence of anger or provocation. May indicate lack of empathy or concern for others, as well as socialization experiences that taught aggression.

Pathways to Violent Behavior
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Pathways to Violent Behavior Violence Vulnerability Cognitive deficits Poor coping skills Emotional insecurity Poor anger control Learning Culture Role Models Situation Weapons Intoxication Accomplices Lack of supervision Provocation Frustration Threats Opportunity Inhibition Empathy Guilt Punishment

Motive Method Means for the violence of committing violence
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 School Violence Theories: School Shootings--Like other violent crimes, involves : for the violence of committing violence of carrying out the violent act Motive Method Means Dewey G. Cornell, Ph.D. School Violence: Fears vs. Facts violence.edschool.Virginia.edu

School Violence Factors
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 School Violence Factors Bullying, cliques, rivalries – angry depressed youth Entertainment violence – teaches of violence Unsupervised access to firearms – provides motivate method means

The First Report: FBI Shooters Report
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 The First Report: FBI Shooters Report Conclusions analyzing 17 cases: Student personality Family dynamics School environment Social Factors Associations NOT cause / effect Threat Assessment Report,

Threat Assessment Threat Assessment IS NOT to Predict
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Threat Assessment Threat Assessment IS NOT to Predict Predictions do not work based on profiles Profiles make false predictions, generate stereotypes FBI Report: School Shooters

Assess for Intensity & Diversity of Service Needs
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence Assess for Intensity & Diversity of Service Needs 2007 Reaction Error: A sole focus on punishing Assessment Error: A sole focus on the nature & severity of threat A threat of violent action to self or others Parental denial of disturbing behavior Inconsistent school discipline History of Sexual Abuse History of Physical Abuse Staff oblivious to bullying Parental conflict attachment issues History of Neglect Eating Disorder Depression Poor Anger Control Student/ Teacher mistrust Alienation Unrestricted access to entertainment violence Suicide Ideation Psychotic Features Poor Coping Skills Code of Silence Manipulative, lack of empathy, other personality difficulties Peer groups encouraging violence Drug Alcohol Problems Although found in both genders, especially associated in females with physical violence patterns

A.R.M.S. HANDLE WITH CARE ASSESS REFER SUPPORT MONITOR
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence HANDLE WITH CARE 2007 A.R.M.S. REFER MONITOR ASSESS SUPPORT

Myth 1. Juvenile violence is increasing.
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Myth 1. Juvenile violence is increasing. Juvenile Arrests for Homicide: 1993 to 2003 FBI Uniform Crime Reports

Juvenile Arrests for Homicide: 1984 to 2003
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 FBI Uniform Crime Reports

Why did violent juvenile crime increase?
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Why did violent juvenile crime increase? Source: FBI supplemental homicide data

Why did violent juvenile crime increase?
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Why did violent juvenile crime increase? Increased juvenile use of handguns Development of crack cocaine market, proliferation of gangs and drug-related crime Increase in under-parented children Increasing influence of violent entertainment

Why did violent juvenile crime decline?
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Why did violent juvenile crime decline? Economic improvement - More jobs for young adults and single parents Improvements in law enforcement – community policing, changes in crack market, fewer guns in hands of kids Education – massive increase in school and after-school programs

Reviewed 221 studies of school-based violence prevention programs
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Reviewed 221 studies of school-based violence prevention programs Average effect size = .25, which would reduce fighting 50% in a typical school

2007 Key Point If implemented properly, school violence prevention programs can reduce fighting and disruptive behavior by 50%

Myth 2. School violence is increasing.
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Myth 2. School violence is increasing. Crimes per 1,000 students Ages 12-18 Indicators of school crime and safety: 2004

Homicides in U.S. Schools: 1992-93 to 2004-05
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Cases on school grounds during school day recorded by National School Safety Center.

Myth 3. School homicides are increasing.
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Myth 3. School homicides are increasing. Cases on school grounds during school day recorded by National School Safety Center.

Myth 4. Schools are violent places.
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Myth 4. Schools are violent places. Includes all forms of violent crime, including simple assaults and threats of violence. Data from National Crime Victimization Survey

Myth 5. Students are at risk of being killed at school.
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Myth 5. Students are at risk of being killed at school.

2007 What is the likelihood of a student committing a homicide at your school? 93 student homicides cases in 10 years = 9.3/year ( to ) 119,000 schools 9.3/year ÷119,000 = 1 case every 12,800 years

FBI Recommendations on School Violence
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 FBI Recommendations on School Violence “One response to the pressure for action may be an effort to identify the next shooter by developing a “profile” of the typical school shooter. This may sound like a reasonable preventive measure, but in practice, trying to draw up a catalogue or “checklist” of warning signs to detect a potential school shooter can be shortsighted, even dangerous. Such lists, publicized by the media, can end up unfairly labeling many nonviolent students as potentially dangerous or even lethal. In fact, a great many adolescents who will never commit violent acts will show some of the behaviors or personality traits included on the list.” (FBI report pp 2-3) Download at

Profiling does not work.
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Profiling does not work. School shootings are too rare. Profiles make false predictions. Profiles generate stereotypes. Profiles don’t solve problems.

FBI Recommendations on School Violence
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 FBI Recommendations on School Violence “Although the risk of an actual shooting incident at any one school is very low, threats of violence are potentially a problem at any school. Once a threat is made, having a fair, rational, and standardized method of evaluating and responding to threats is critically important.” (FBI report p 1) Download at

Secret Service/DOE Recommendations:
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Secret Service/DOE Recommendations: Create a planning team to develop a threat assessment program. Identify roles for school personnel. Clarify role of law enforcement. Conduct threat assessments of students who make threats of violence. Download at: Or

Threat Assessment Identification of threats made by students.
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Threat Assessment Identification of threats made by students. Evaluation of seriousness of threat and danger it poses to others, recognizing that all threats are not the same (e.g., toy guns are not dangerous). Intervention to reduce risk of violence. Follow-up to assess intervention results.

6 Principles of the Threat Assessment Process
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 6 Principles of the Threat Assessment Process (abridged from Secret Service/DOE Guide) Targeted violence is the result of an understandable process, not a random or spontaneous act. Consider person, situation, setting, & target. Maintain an investigative, skeptical mindset. Focus on facts and behaviors, not traits. Use information from all possible sources. Making a threat is not the same as posing a threat. Ask “Is this student on a path toward an attack?”

2007

No Magic Formula or Crystal Ball
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 No Magic Formula or Crystal Ball There is no formula, prescription, or checklist that will predict or prevent all violent acts. School authorities must make reasoned judgments based on the facts of each individual situation, and monitor situations over time.

What is a threat? A threat is an expression of intent to harm someone.
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 What is a threat? A threat is an expression of intent to harm someone. Threats may be spoken, written, or gestured. Threats may be direct or indirect, and need not be communicated to the intended victim or victims. (“I’m going to get him.”) Weapon possession is presumed to be a threat unless circumstances clearly indicate otherwise. (“I forgot my knife was in my backpack.”) When in doubt, assume it is a threat.

Continuum of Threats Warning of impending violence
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Continuum of Threats Warning of impending violence Attempts to intimidate or frighten Thrill of causing a disruption Attention-seeking, boasting Fleeting expressions of anger Jokes Figures of speech

Grade Levels for 188 Student Threats of Violence
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Grade Levels for 188 Student Threats of Violence 6 27 14 10 28 23 20 8 3 5 15 25 30 K 1 2 4 7 9 11 12 . Number of threats

Where did threats take place?
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Where did threats take place? 86 19 18 16 13 6 20 40 60 80 Classroom Hallway Outdoors Other rooms Bus/Bus stop Cafeteria Gym/Restroom Number of threats

Who reported the threats?
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Who reported the threats? 82 71 14 12 8 20 40 60 80 Teachers Students Parents Admin/coun Other Number of threats

What did the students threaten to do?
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 What did the students threaten to do? N = 188 cases

Who was the victim of threats?
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Who was the victim of threats? 141 23 6 17 50 100 150 Student Teacher Other Multiple Number of threats

Student and Victim Gender
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Student and Victim Gender Male Victim Female Boy Made Threat 51% 27% Girl Made 10% 13% 78% 23%

Student and Victim Special Ed Status
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Student and Victim Special Ed Status Not Spec Ed Victim Spec Ed Regular Ed Threat 52% 3% 32% 13% 55% 45% N = 155.

Not Covered by Threat Assessment Guidelines
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Not Covered by Threat Assessment Guidelines Other school policies apply to these situations: Threats to damage property Threats made by non-students Fights or misbehavior that does not involve a threat Slurs, insults, verbal abuse that does not involve a threat to physically harm someone

Do not include misbehavior that quickly resolves
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Do not include misbehavior that quickly resolves Teachers and administrators frequently deal with minor arguments or rough, playful behavior in which one student might threaten to strike or push another. Do not include misbehavior that can be resolved in seconds, such as 2 students arguing over who cut in line. If an incident requires more prolonged intervention such as a trip to the office, then evaluate for a possible threat.

Threat Reported to Principal
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Threat Reported to Principal Step 1. Evaluate Threat. Step 2. Decide if threat is clearly transient or substantive. Threat is clearly transient. Threat is substantive. Step 3. Respond to transient threat. Step 4. Decide if the substantive threat is serious or very serious. Flow chart Threat is serious. Threat is very serious. Step 5. Respond to serious substantive threat. Step 6. Conduct Safety Evaluation. Step 7. Follow up on action plan.

Step 1. Evaluate the threat.
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Step 1. Evaluate the threat. Obtain an account of the threat and the context from the student and witnesses. Write down the exact threat. Obtain student’s explanation of the threat’s meaning and his/her intentions. Obtain witness perceptions of the threat’s meaning. Document your evaluation.

Typical Questions Do you know why I wanted to talk to you?
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Typical Questions Do you know why I wanted to talk to you? What happened today when you were [place of incident]? What exactly did you say and do? What did you mean when you said/did that? How do you think [person threatened] feels about what you said? What was the reason you said that? What you going to do now?

2007 Witness Questions What happened today when you were [place of incident]? What exactly did [student who made threat] say and do? What do you think he/she meant? How do you feel about what he/she said? Why did he/she say that?

All threats are not the same.
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 All threats are not the same. “I could just kill you for that!” (laughing) “I’m gonna kick your butt.” “There’s a bomb in the school.” “Wait until I get my gun!” “Let’s really make them pay for what they did.” Context matters...

Step 2. Transient or Substantive?
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Step 2. Transient or Substantive? Determine whether the threat is transient or substantive. The critical issue is not what the student threatened to do, but whether the student intends to carry out the threat. When in doubt, treat a threat as substantive.

Transient versus substantive threats
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Transient versus substantive threats Substantive Threats Transient Threats

2007 Transient threats Often are rhetorical remarks, not genuine expressions of intent to harm. At worst, express temporary feelings of anger or frustration. Usually can be resolved on the scene or in the office. After resolution, the threat no longer exists. Usually end with an apology or clarification.

2007 Substantive threats Express intent to physically injure someone beyond the immediate situation. There is at least some risk the student will carry out the threat. Require that you take protective action, including warning intended victims and parents. May be legal violations and require police consultation. When in doubt, treat threats as substantive.

Substantive threats: Factors to consider
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Substantive threats: Factors to consider Age of student Capability of student to carry out the threat Student’s discipline history Credibility of student and willingness to acknowledge his or her behavior Credibility of witness accounts When in doubt, treat threats as substantive.

Presumptive indicators of substantive threats
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Presumptive indicators of substantive threats Specific, plausible details. (“I am going to blast Mr. Johnson with my pistol.”) Threat has been repeated over time. (“He’s been telling everyone he is going to get you.”) Threat reported as a plan (“Wait until you see what happens next Tuesday in the library.”) Accomplices or recruitment of accomplices. Physical evidence of intent (written plans, lists of victims, bomb materials, etc.)

Threat Reported to Principal
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence Transient Threats 2007 Threat Reported to Principal Step 1. Evaluate Threat. Step 2. Decide if threat is clearly transient or substantive. Threat is clearly transient. Threat is substantive. Step 3. Respond to transient threat. Step 4. Decide if the substantive threat is serious or very serious. Flow chart Threat is serious. Threat is very serious. Step 5. Respond to serious substantive threat. Step 6. Conduct Safety Evaluation. Step 7. Follow up on action plan.

Step 3. Responses to a transient threat.
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Step 3. Responses to a transient threat. No need to take safety precautions. See that threat is resolved through explanation, apology, making amends. Provide counseling and education where appropriate. Administer discipline if appropriate.

Transient Case Steps Step 1. Evaluate the threat.
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Transient Case Steps Step 1. Evaluate the threat. Obtain a specific account of the threat by interviewing the student who made threat, the intended victim, and other witnesses. Write down the exact content of threat and statements by each party. Consider the circumstances in which the threat was made and the student’s intentions. Step 2. Decide whether the threat is transient or substantive. Consider criteria for transient versus substantive threats. Consider student’s age, credibility, and previous discipline history. Step 3. Respond to transient threat. Typical responses may include reprimand, parental notification, or other disciplinary action. Student may need to make amends and attend mediation or counseling.

Transient Case Example
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Transient Case Example 2nd grade Jake threatens to kill his classmates after being excluded. Apologizes, denies intent. Tearful and distressed. Inconsistent with previous behavior Recently removed from home for neglect; lonely and depressed Referral for counseling

Threat assessment is distinct from discipline
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Threat assessment is distinct from discipline Threat assessment is concerned with future danger to others, discipline is concerned with consequences for behavior. A threat may pose little danger, yet merit serious disciplinary consequences.

Who made transient threats?
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Who made transient threats? 5 6 24 22 10 8 15 13 9 7 20 25 30 K 1 2 3 4 11 12 . Number of transient threats

Transient versus substantive threats
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Transient versus substantive threats Substantive Threats 30% Transient Threats 70%

Serious Substantive Threats Threat Reported to Principal
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence Serious Substantive Threats 2007 Threat Reported to Principal Step 1. Evaluate Threat. Step 2. Decide if threat is clearly transient or substantive. Threat is clearly transient. Threat is substantive. Step 3. Respond to transient threat. Step 4. Decide if the substantive threat is serious or very serious. Flow chart Threat is serious. Threat is very serious. Step 5. Respond to serious substantive threat. Step 6. Conduct Safety Evaluation. Step 7. Follow up on action plan.

Step 4. Serious or very serious substantive threat?
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Step 4. Serious or very serious substantive threat? Substantive assault threats are classified serious. (“I’m gonna beat him up.”) Substantive threats to kill, rape, or inflict very serious injury are classified very serious. (“I’m gonna break his arm.”) Substantive threats involving a weapon are classified very serious.

Substantive Case Examples
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Substantive Case Examples Kindergartener Rob angrily chases classmates with scissors. 7th grade William plans a fight after school. 9th grade Laura threatens to cut a girl’s throat. Has a knife in her locker.

Who made substantive threats?
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Who made substantive threats? 1 3 5 4 2 13 10 11 15 20 K 6 7 8 9 12 . Number of substantive threats

Grade Level Comparison of Transient and Substantive Threats
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Grade Level Comparison of Transient and Substantive Threats 5 6 24 22 10 8 15 13 9 7 1 3 4 2 11 20 25 30 K 12 . Number of threats Transient Substantive

Step 5. Respond to serious substantive threat.
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Step 5. Respond to serious substantive threat. Take precautions to protect potential victims. May consult with law enforcement. Notify intended victim and victim’s parents. Notify student’s parents. Discipline student for threat. Determine appropriate intervention for student, such as counseling or dispute mediation. Follow up to verify that threat has been resolved and interventions in progress.

Substantive Case Example
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Substantive Case Example Step 1. Evaluate the threat. Interview the student who made threat and any witnesses. Consider the circumstances in which the threat was made, the student’s intentions, and the victims’ interpretations of the threat. Step 2. Decide whether the threat is transient or substantive. Does the student express remorse and retract the threat? Is the student willing to make amends or resolve the conflict? What is the student’s history of discipline problems? Step 4. Decide whether the threat is serious or very serious. Did this threat involve a weapon, or a threat to kill, rape, or inflict severe injury? Step 5. Respond to the serious substantive threat. Take protective action by notifying parents of perpetrator and victims. Take disciplinary action consistent with school policy. Identify any other student support or intervention needs.

Very serious cases are relatively rare Substantive Threats
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Very serious cases are relatively rare Very Serious Substantive Threats Transient Threats

How many student threats?
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 How many student threats? 15 (8%) Very serious 42 (22%) Serious 131 (70%) Transient 188 Total threats reported 16,434 Students

2007

Very Serious Substantive Threats Threat Reported to Principal
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence Very Serious Substantive Threats 2007 Threat Reported to Principal Step 1. Evaluate Threat. Step 2. Decide if threat is clearly transient or substantive. Threat is clearly transient. Threat is substantive. Step 3. Respond to transient threat. Step 4. Decide if the substantive threat is serious or very serious. Flow chart Threat is serious. Threat is very serious. Step 5. Respond to serious substantive threat. Step 6. Conduct Safety Evaluation. Step 7. Follow up on action plan.

Step 6. Conduct a Safety Evaluation for a Very Serious Substantive Threat. 2007 Safety Evaluation conducted by a team. Principal leads the team. School psychologist or other mental health professional conducts Mental Health Assessment/extended threat inquiry. School resource officer consults on legal issues. School counselor leads intervention planning.

Valuable Functions of School Resource Officers
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Valuable Functions of School Resource Officers Provide assistance in emergencies and difficult situations Help maintain an orderly school climate Expand the range of options in dealing with student threats of violence Counsel students about the consequences of breaking the law Serve as a resource for students with fears, concerns, and information to share

Very Serious Substantive Threat: Case Example of 8th Grade John
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Very Serious Substantive Threat: Case Example of 8th Grade John 8th grade John reported by another student to have a hit list. Tells former girlfriend, “I’m gonna get even with you and all your friends by blowing you all away with a shotgun.” John denies hit list or threatening statement. Later acknowledges anger at several classmates and at Alice, his former girlfriend.

Immediate responses to a Very Serious Substantive Threat
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Immediate responses to a Very Serious Substantive Threat Take precautions to protect potential victims. Consult with law enforcement promptly. Notify intended victim and victim’s parents. Notify student’s parents. Begin Mental Health Assessment. Determine safety during suspension.

11 Key Questions Abridged from the Secret Service/DOE Guide
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 11 Key Questions Abridged from the Secret Service/DOE Guide What are the student’s motives or goals? Any communications of intent to attack? Any inappropriate interest in other attacks, weapons, or mass violence? Any attack-related behaviors? Making a plan, acquiring weapons, casing sites, etc. Does student have capacity to attack?

11 Key Questions (cont.) Abridged from the Secret Service/DOE Guide
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 11 Key Questions (cont.) Abridged from the Secret Service/DOE Guide 6. Is there hopelessness or despair? 7. Any trusting relationship with an adult? 8. Is violence regarded as way to solve a problem? Any peer influences? 9. Are student’s words consistent with actions? 10. Are others concerned about student? 11. What circumstances might trigger violence?

Mental Health Assessment Extended Safety Inquiry
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Mental Health Assessment Extended Safety Inquiry Not a prediction model. Identify any mental health needs. Identify reasons why threat was made. Propose strategies for reducing risk.

Step 7. Follow up with action plan.
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Step 7. Follow up with action plan. Determine action plan to reduce risk of violence. Identify appropriate interventions for student. Schedule follow-up contact with student to assess current risk and update plan. Document plan in Safety Evaluation Report.

Document parent contact of Potential victims and student
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Threat Documentation At all stages, document who interviewed whom Document conclusions Document parent contact of Potential victims and student who made the threat

2007 Research Needs Controlled studies comparing schools with and without threat assessment. Research on threat context and student characteristics. More follow-up studies of threat outcomes. Identification of effective threat prevention efforts (e.g., bullying reduction).

2007 European study by Olweus found that 60% of bullies have a criminal conviction by age 24, compared to 10% of controls.

2007 Typical Threat 1 On interview, the student says he has no plans to harm the classmate and that he just lost his temper. He offers to apologize. What kind of threat?

2007 Typical Threat 2 A student tells a friend that he is going to beat up Joe in the back parking lot after school today. The friend tells you. What do you do?

2007 Typical Threat 2 On interview, the student denies making such a statement. He says that what he does after school is his own business. What kind of threat?

2007 Typical Threat 3 A student sends an threatening to “blow away the preps” at school. When interviewed, the boy says he has a right to free speech. He has a history of discipline problems and students say they are worried. What kind of threat? What do you do?

2007 Typical Threat 4 A 5th grader is being teased on a daily basis by several students on his school bus. One day he screams that he is going to shoot everyone on the bus. What kind of threat? What do you do?

School Safety Assessment/ Extended Threat Inquiry
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 School Safety Assessment/ Extended Threat Inquiry Who – school staff member who is a mental health professional When – as soon as possible after a very serious threat How – Modify questions as clinically appropriate, use as much existing information as possible, concentrate on risk of violence

Sources of information for school safety assessment
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Sources of information for school safety assessment Mental health professional will interview: Student Intended victim/witnesses Student’s parent School staff who know student (including SRO, school counselor, teachers) Outside professionals who know student

2007 Assessment FAQ’s Parental Permission? – not required in potential school safety emergency, but otherwise necessary Testing? – use if clinically indicated, to supplement interviews (“ass External evaluations? – Not a substitute for evaluation by trained school staff

The Threat Inquiry Process
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 The Threat Inquiry Process What behaviors/communications were reported and by whom? What was the situation? Who, if anyone, witnessed the reported behavior? What was the context for the reported behavior: what else was going on at the time of the reported behavior? WHAT IS CORROBORATED? WHAT WARRANTS SCRUTINY?

Least Complex to Most Complex
Can’t Immediately Tell? Dig! Investigate! Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Least Complex to Most Complex Immediate Features: Environment/Instruction Interactions Immediate Past Predictors: Interactions/Previous Environments Long-Term Influences & Stresses: Temperament/Genetics, Disability, Abuse, Parent/Child Conflicts, Disorders: e.g., cutting, clinical depression, etc.

Student Interview Review of threat and relationship with victim
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Student Interview Review of threat and relationship with victim Stress and situational factors, family support Mental health symptoms (depression, psychosis, severe anxiety, or suicidality) Access to firearms Previous aggressive and delinquent behavior, exposure to violence Peer relations and social adjustment Coping and strengths Bullying and victimization experiences

Beginning the student interview
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Beginning the student interview “Do you know why I wanted to meet with you today?” Explain purpose of interview to understand what happened, why it happened, and what should be done to resolve the problem. Information will be shared with school staff who will be deciding what to do about the problem. No promise of confidentiality. This is the student’s opportunity to tell his/her side of the story and have a voice in what is decided.

Parent interview Parent knowledge of threat
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Parent interview Parent knowledge of threat Current stressors, family relations, childhood history Recent behavior and mental health School adjustment Peer relations and bullying History of aggressive and delinquent behavior, exposure to violence, access to weapons Willingness to assist in a safety plan Parent attitude toward school and Law enforcement

Teacher/Staff Interviews
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Teacher/Staff Interviews Academics Teacher knowledge of threat Student’s peer relations Depression and/or suicidality Discipline Aggression

Safe School Initiative Conclusions
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Safe School Initiative Conclusions Targeted violence is a result of an understandable process. It is NOT a random or spontaneous act. Consider person, situation, setting & target Maintain an investigative, skeptical mindset Focus on FACTS and BEHAVIORS, not traits Use information from all possible sources Making a threat is not the same as POSING a treat; Ask, “Is this student on a path towards an attack?” USSS/DOE Safe School Initiative

10 Key Safe Schools Initiative Findings
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 10 Key Safe Schools Initiative Findings Incidents of targeted violence at school are rarely sudden, impulsive acts Prior to most incidents, other people knew about the attacker’s idea and/or plan to attack Most attackers did not threaten their targets directly prior to advancing the attack There is no accurate or useful “profile” of students who engage in targeted school violence Most attackers engaged in some behavior, prior to the incident, that caused concern or indicated a need for help

10 Key Safe Schools Initiative Findings
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 10 Key Safe Schools Initiative Findings Many attackers known to have difficulty coping with significant losses or personal failures. Many had considered or attempted suicide. Many attackers felt bullied, persecuted, or injured by others prior to the attack Most attackers had access to and had used weapons prior to the attack In many cased, other students were involved in some capacity Despite prompt law enforcement responses, most shooting incidents were stopped by means other than law enforcement intervention USSS/DOE Safe School Initiative

11 Key Interview Areas see www.pent.ca.gov for interview guide
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 11 Key Interview Areas see for interview guide What are the student’s motives or goals? Any communication with others of intent to attack? Any inappropriate interest in other attacks, weapons or mass violence? USSS/DOE Safe School Initiative

Threat Inquiry: 11 Key Interview Areas
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Threat Inquiry: 11 Key Interview Areas Any trusting relationship with at least one adult? Is violence regarded as a way to solve a problem? Are there peer influences? Are student’s words consistent with actions? USSS/DOE Safe School Initiative

Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Threat Inquiry: 11 Key Interview Areas Are others concerned about the student’s potential for violence? What circumstances might trigger violence? USSS/DOE Safe School Initiative

Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Threat Inquiry: 11 Key Interview Areas Any attack-related behaviors? Does student have capacity to attack? Organized thinking? Means to carry out? Is there hopelessness or despair? USSS/DOE Safe School Initiative

Extended Threat Inquiry (Substantive Threats)
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Extended Threat Inquiry (Substantive Threats) Review the threat and relationship with the victim; continue answering the 11 key questions Determine current stress, situational factors, family support Look in depth for mental health symptoms (e.g., depression, psychosis) Review access to firearms, bullying experiences

Extended Threat Inquiry (Substantive Threats)
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Extended Threat Inquiry (Substantive Threats) Consider previous aggressive/delinquent behavior, exposure to violence Peer relationships and social adjustment Assess coping skills, and strengths DOES THIS STUDENT POSE A THREAT? WHAT INTERVENTIONS DOES THIS STUDENT NEED?

Liability Protection Follow recognized standards.
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Liability Protection Follow recognized standards. Make reasonable decisions (Perfection is not required.) Maintain adequate documentation (Post hoc records are inadequate.)

Tarasoff The Duty to Protect Potential Victims of Violence
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Tarasoff The Duty to Protect Potential Victims of Violence 1969, UC Berkeley student Prosenjit Poddar falls in love with Tanya Tarasoff, but she rebuffs him, goes to Brazil. Poddar becomes depressed and suicidal. Tells his psychologist that he will kill Tanya when she returns. Psychologist breaks confidentiality to notify police, ask that Poddar be hospitalized. Police interview and release Poddar, who quits therapy. Over 1 month later, Tanya returns from Brazil and Poddar stabs her to death, then turns himself in. Poddar pled insanity, but convicted and served 5 years for manslaughter, then deported. Tarasoff family sues University, police, and therapist. Tarasoff v Regents of University of California, 1974, 1976

Tarasoff The Duty to Protect Potential Victims of Violence
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Tarasoff The Duty to Protect Potential Victims of Violence 1974 and 1976 California Supreme Court decisions. Suits against University and police failed. Psychologist found liable for failing to do enough to protect Tarasoff from harm. Did not warn her personally. Court held, “The protective privilege ends where the public peril begins.” Called “the duty to warn” or the “the duty to protect.” Many cases in other states support some variation of the duty to break confidentiality and take action to protect potential victims of violence. (For exampe, Colorado federal case involving Hinckley’s psychiatrist, Brady v. Hopper Tarasoff v Regents of University of California, 1974, 1976

Confidentiality has limits
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Confidentiality has limits The Family Education Records Privacy Act (FERPA) applies to educational records, not all information about a student. Even information covered by FERPA can be disclosed in a health or safety emergency situation: “An educational agency or institution may disclose personally identifiable information from a school record to appropriate parties in connection with an emergency if knowledge of the information is necessary to protect the health or safety of the student or other individuals.” Sec (a)

Confidentiality has limits
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Confidentiality has limits Information covered by FERPA can be disclosed to other school staff. For example, disciplinary action taken against a student for conduct that posed a significant risk to the safety or well-being of that student or others CAN be disclosed to school staff who have legitimate interests in the behavior of that student. Sec 99.36(b)2 Such information can be disclosed to staff of another school who have legitimate educational interests in the behavior of that student. Sec (b)3

Access to Records/ Duty to Warn: Conclusions
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Access to Records/ Duty to Warn: Conclusions School districts have a duty to warn if threats are specific and substantive School psychologists/counselors and others have a duty to breach patient confidentiality and warn if threat is specific and substantive School districts may release confidential pupil records (general and special education records) to protect the safety of others

Threat Notification: Take charge of the process!
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Threat Notification: Take charge of the process! Immediately contact parents of all students who are involved. Safety trumps confidentiality. Share what is necessary to assure safety. Keep faculty and staff informed. They have the need to know. Consider sending a general letter of information to address rumors and fears.

Threat Notification: Information for a general letter
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Threat Notification: Information for a general letter Acknowledge that a threat was made and describe the nature of the threat. (“A student called in a bomb threat this morning.”) The school is following its policy on threats. The police were contacted and are working with school authorities. Steps were taken to assure everyone’s safety. (“The school was searched and no bomb was found. The police are continuing their investigation to identify the person responsible for the call.”) Call us if you have any questions or concerns.

Parent Notification: Parents of threat victims
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Parent Notification: Parents of threat victims FERPA does not prevent schools from notifying parents that their child has been threatened. In substantive cases, parents should be told the nature of the threat and the identity of the student who made the threat. Explain to the parents what steps have been taken to maintain the safety of their child (e.g., student disciplined, parents contacted, police notified) so they can judge what they must do. Remain in contact with parents to assure them that the school will maintain the safety of their child.

Parent Notification: Parents of threat victims
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Parent Notification: Parents of threat victims Build victim notification into the plan for a student’s return to school after making a threat. Consider requiring student to make an apology or explanation to the victim. Consider requiring student to let you disclose information to the parents of victims. Notify parents of a victim when a student is returning to school. Offer them reassurance, even if you cannot disclose confidential information.

Documentation of Threats-Why?
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Documentation of Threats-Why? Maintains quality of threat evaluation process Documents incidents and responses Liability protection Allows staff to evaluate threat rates and trends

Forms of Bullying Physical hitting, shoving, grabbing
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Forms of Bullying Physical hitting, shoving, grabbing Verbal teasing, name-calling Social spreading rumors, shunning or excluding

Download at: www.pent.ca.gov
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Bullying Assessment Flow Chart Step 1: Interview the students Download at:

Bullying Assessment Flow Chart
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Bullying Assessment Flow Chart Step 2: Was this possibly a crime?

When is bullying a crime?
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 When is bullying a crime? Assault Larceny Battery Robbery Extortion Thefts False Imprisonment Sexual Harassment Stalking Hazing Threats

Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Bullying Assessment Flow Chart Step 3: Was it bullying?

Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Bullying Assessment Flow Chart Step 4: Respond to bullying

What can we do about bullying?
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 What can we do about bullying? Staff training on bullying. Student and parent education about bullying and school policy. Classroom instruction on bullying. Identify victims. Individual counseling & discipline. Pre-post surveys to measure impact.

Potential Liability to Schools for Failure to Address the Problem $ $
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 $ $ $ Potential Liability to Schools for Failure to Address the Problem

Sexual Harassment: Key Definitions
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Sexual Harassment: Key Definitions “No person in the U.S. shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, or denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.” (Title IX, Education Amendments of 1972) Sexual harassment is “unwelcome sexual advances, requests for favors, and other verbal and physical contact of a sexual nature which takes place in the workplace” (Equal Opportunity Employment Commission)

Sexual Harassment: Davis v Monroe
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Sexual Harassment: Davis v Monroe Fifth grade girl was victim of sexual harassment over a 6 month period by a classmate who attempted to fondle her breasts, rubbed against her, and talked about getting in bed with her. Multiple complaints to teacher and principal produced no correction action. Police charged boy with sexual battery and he pled guilty. Lower courts dismissed the complaint, finding that student-to-student harassment not covered by Title IX. In May,1999 Supreme Court reversed the lower court opinion.

Sexual Harassment: Davis v Monroe Opinion
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Sexual Harassment: Davis v Monroe Opinion In May, 1999 Supreme Court ruled that a school board is liable under Title IX for student-to-student harassment if: School authorities had knowledge of the harassment. School authorities were deliberately indifferent to the sexual harassment. The sexual harassment was so severe, pervasive, and objectively offensive that it deprived the victim of access to educational opportunities and benefits. (see

Liability for Bullying
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Liability for Bullying Scruggs v. Meriden Board of Education U.S. District Court of Connecticut Middle school boy receiving LD services was bullied repeatedly, and eventually committed suicide Family sued superintendent, vice principal and school counselor Court found the school to be negligent and deliberately indifferent LW v Toms River Regional School Board of Education New Jersey boy repeatedly teased about perceived sexual orientation in elementary and middle school (called “faggot” “gay” etc., physically bullied and threatened) Court cited Davis V Monroe in finding for plaintiff, awarded 50K School ordered to revise policies, train staff, implement bullying prevention program

Sexual Orientation Harassment
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Sexual Orientation Harassment Gay and lesbian students, and students who are PERCEIVED to be gay or lesbian, are protected from harassment at school to the same extent that heterosexual students are protected from sexual harassment by other students. Additionally, students could sue for violation of civil rights, for negligent supervision, or any number of other causes of action.

Not Addressing: Sexual Orientation Harassment
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Not Addressing: Sexual Orientation Harassment Risks to school payment of compensatory damages payment of attorney’s fees Creates atmosphere conducive to school violence

Potential Personal Liability to Staff
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Potential Personal Liability to Staff School employees are personally liable for their own acts of harassment School officials may be personally liable for another’s harassment if they are “aware of specific risk of harm” and fail to take reasonable steps

Potential Personal Liability to Staff
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Potential Personal Liability to Staff School employees may not be protected by immunities, or by district or insurance carrier duties to defend and indemnify. Problem area: Intentional violation of known laws Reno v. Baird (1998) 18 Cal.4th 640; Oona v. McCaffery (1997) 122 F.3d 1207; Government Code section 825.

Teacher Intervention for Bullying
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Teacher Intervention for Bullying 71% of teachers state they “almost always intervene” 20 % of students agree they “almost always intervene” < 50% of victims ask a teacher for help Olweus Research (1999)

2007 Conclusion Bullying / sexual orientation discrimination creates a breeding ground for threats and school violence Proactively solve this problem See website for suggested solutions

Special Education Considerations In The Threat Inquiry Process
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Special Education Considerations In The Threat Inquiry Process At any point, the team may uncover evidence or suspicion of a “suspected disability” for a student with no IEP, with a 504 plan or with an IEP Assessment plan is necessary when determination of disability is examined If new or additional disability becomes suspect, assess in ALL areas of suspected disability

Suspending Students with IEPs
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Suspending Students with IEPs If you suspend in the threat inquiry process, and it will result in more than 10 days this school year Conduct an FBA of the threat behavior to determine the function of the threat for this student FBA: review of records, interviews and student observation This can often be done during an IEP meeting

Suspending Special Education Students
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Suspending Special Education Students If you suspend in the threat inquiry process, and it will result in more than 10 days this school year (continued) FBA data can also be collected outside of an IEP meeting: direct observation of the student and observation of the environment in which threat occurred and interviews with key informants who have information on the threat If suspension does not reach 11th day cumulative—no special education requirements

Some “Threat” functions Consider if FBA is to be conducted
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Some “Threat” functions Consider if FBA is to be conducted To get attention from peers or adults To protest something, to express anger or frustration To get status from others To frighten or coerce peers To joke, “playing around” To communicate an intent to attack

Special Education Threat Considerations
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Special Education Threat Considerations Provide ARMS to reduce danger Adher to all special education laws on assessment, child find, related service provision, discipline, Manifestation Determination, etc. Faulty reasoning: expulsion alone solves the problem Truth: expulsion may escalate violence

School Violence: Standard of Care and Liability
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 School Violence: Standard of Care and Liability Liability Exposure Issues Standard of Care School Safety Plans Duty to Warn

Standard of Care Defined
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Standard of Care Defined School districts meet the required standard of care when they conduct reasonable threat inquiries Reasonable means an inquiry using staff and procedures consistent with the current data when analyzed under the “totality of the circumstances”. Reasonable will be judged on a case-by-case basis.

Standard of Care: Can You Prove It?
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Standard of Care: Can You Prove It? Pre-established process? Adopted safe school plan with explicit threat assessment protocol? Trained staff? Written summary of threat inquiry process, conclusions and recommendations? Process comports with best practices?

Negligent Supervision
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Negligent Supervision

Negligent Supervision
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Negligent Supervision Elements of Negligence Duty Breach of Duty Causation Damage

Duty Statutory Duty Physical control reasonably necessary to:
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Duty Statutory Duty Physical control reasonably necessary to: maintain order protect property protect the health and safety of pupils maintain proper and appropriate conditions conducive to learning. Safe School Guarantee “Students and staff of public schools have the inalienable right to attend campuses that are safe, secure, and peaceful.” Ed. Code § 44807; (Cal. Const., Art. I, section 28.)

Duty Common Law “In loco parentis” = In the place of a parent
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Duty Common Law “In loco parentis” = In the place of a parent Special relationship duty to exercise “reasonable care” to control student prevent student from intentionally harming others or creating an unreasonable risk of bodily harm to them

Duty What is “reasonable care?”
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Duty What is “reasonable care?” That degree of care which a reasonable person in similar circumstances would exercise Dailey v. Los Angeles Unified School District (1970) 2 Cal.3d 741

Breach of Duty Inadequate supervision Ineffective supervision
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Breach of Duty Inadequate supervision Ineffective supervision Failure to follow reasonable threat inquiry protocol

Causation Proximate Cause Foreseeability “Substantial Factor” test
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Causation Proximate Cause “Substantial Factor” test Was breach a substantial factor in injury? Foreseeability Was conduct foreseeable? Was type of injury foreseeable?

Damages Is the district liable for employee’s negligence?
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Damages Is the district liable for employee’s negligence? Yes! “Vicarious Liability” a school district is vicariously liable for injuries proximately caused by the negligence of school personnel responsible for student supervision

Liability & Standard of Care
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Liability & Standard of Care Public Employees May be liable for injury proximately caused by his/her own negligent or wrongful act or omission

Summary: What Must the School Do?
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Summary: What Must the School Do? Establish a site team and operate as a team. Do NOT act alone Never believe discipline alone is adequate for any threat Document procedures, incidents and responses. Records are essential for liability protection. Take all threats seriously. Do NOT fail to evaluate any threat Determine if school-wide issues need addressing

Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Summary: What Must the School Do? Follow recognized standards: ARMS Assess-with care, to the depth necessary, using multiple informants—student, teachers, peers, parents Refer-to counselors, mental health, others as appropriate to provide needed interventions Monitor-establish specific staff to continuously monitor status of interventions and supports Support-establish adult mentors, behavior support plans, supportive staff interactions to reduce risk

Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Summary: What Must the School Do? If the initial inquiry does not immediately determine the threat is transient, assume it is serious (physical assault contemplated) or very serious (weapons/sexual assault) and proceed with extended threat inquiry/assessment Do NOT fail to inform potential victims for serious/very serious threats

Teach students to distinguish snitching from seeking help
Snitching: informing on someone for personal gain Seeking help: attempting to stop someone from being hurt

Thank You! Remember, be skeptical Be thorough Be a team!
Legally Sound, Effective Guidelines for Responding to Student Threats of Violence 2007 Thank You! Remember, be skeptical Be thorough Be a team!

Student Threats of Violence

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Student Threats of Violence"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

Student Threats of Violence

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Student Threats of Violence"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback