child denied education because of odour

[malory]

Maybe some of you may already have heard about this tragic story of a child of 8 who has been suspended from school because of her odour condition.

http://www.wjhl.com/story/21847947/2013 ... elling-bad

I think it is shocking stuff and I think it would be good if our community could come together to support the family and educate Washington's education system about odour conditions.

I intend to send an e-mail to the 15 schools in Washington contactable via the following link ; to Karla Kyte (elementary education director), Shannon Bishop (school health supervisor) and Susan Kiernan (public relations), (all contactable via the following link(go to Board of Education page then Quick links then telephone directory) and also the board of education directors (I have listed their e-mails below).

http://www.wcde.org/education/school/sc ... 1055c3df59

[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]

The gist of my e-mail will be:
As a British primary school teacher and a sufferer of metabolic malodour disorder, I was outraged to read about the case of the eight-year-old child in a Washington school who was suspended because of her pungent odour. Although I realise that the majority of people, including medical professionals, are ignorant about metabolic odour disorders such as Trimethylaminuria (TMAU), I am very disappointed that an educational establishment within a country which claims to be forward-thinking and tolerant of people’s differences, can react in such a damaging and hostile manner towards an innocent family in need of support.
Undoubtedly, the victimised child concerned has an incurable metabolic disorder beyond her control. The actions of the school have:
1. shown a complete disregard for the psychological wellbeing of the child and family.
2. further increased the mental scarring of the young person having to deal with this socially alienating condition.
3. stigmatised the disorder to such a degree that the child and her family will have lost faith in their ability to lead normal lives. (No wonder the poor parents went to the media . They had no choice!)
4. violated this child’s human rights and jeopardised her education.
I would suggest that the school:
• apologise to the family immediately.
• research the disorder on the websites: meboresearch.org, tmau.org.uk., breathandbodyodour.proboards, rareconnect.org
• educate the school population about the disorder and ensure that the child is supported through it.

[malory]

It would be great if as many people as possible could also e-mail the above contacts so that the Washington Education Department get a clear message that discrimination on the grounds of odour should not be tolerated. Even if the school were ignorant of malodour conditions, they could have found an alternative to suspending the child and traumatising him/her in this way.

[flavouredpig]

Hi Malory,

I think the school did the right thing: They identified a child that needed help and alerted her parents to their child's abnormal condition. I definitely wished that my school did that for me (when I had bad body odour that could fill up a bus and shitty bad breath) rather than me having to tell my parents who did not believe me, they even say I don't have bad breath when I came up close to them and asked them without brushing my teeth, they refused to help me, they also ridiculed me and said I was stupid to hang around bad people who say bad things about me (I didn't even have friends to hang around with so who can these bad people be?), they also tell me that it's normal and I just needed deodorant, to brush my teeth, and use mouthwash. They did not know that it was abnormal to have chronic bad breath and excessive sweating. I felt that my parents failed me when I needed them most and I was traumatised by their lack of care about me.

Suspending the child means that the school wanted the parents to take the issue seriously and fix up the child's issue because the child cannot do it themselves, then return back to school once it is fixed (it is definitely abnormal to smell bad, we evolved to understand that a bad smell means something unhealthy or something rotting).

Also, I am glad they took the child out of school because the child would not have to withstand being ostracised (or shown disgust) by her peers and teachers which would obviously traumatise the child more (leading to a very withdrawn and mentally unstable child) than being sent home and being around people who understand her issue and care about her (her parents).

On another note, the article didn't mention anything specific about the smell. I would have liked to know what her smell was or where it came from.

I do agree with the idea of educating people on odour conditions so that they are more tolerable. However, a bad smell is a bad smell (and nobody enjoys smelling bad smells) and a child who smells bad is still (even after educating people about odours) going to be ostracised/picked on/rejected by her peers (which will lead the child to feel isolated/alone/miserable/lack of belonging/lonely). Moreover, missing out on education is better than being traumatised by her school life especially at such a young age (which is being alienated by her peers and can affect her well into adulthood).

I noticed that the article did not fully mention the school's logical reasoning for suspending the child, they only really mentioned actions taken by the school. I think the media exaggerates and twists stories to make one side look bad when that side (the school) was trying to help.

Thanks Malory.

[flavouredpig]

I also wished that I was given time to go out of school, resolve my issue, and then come back again after I've resolved it which is better than having to go to school everyday and experience peer rejection, anger (from having to smell my body odour), and ridicule everyday of my school life.

You said "Even if the school were ignorant of malodour conditions, they could have found an alternative to suspending the child and traumatising him/her in this way", what alternatives do you have in mind?

Thanks Malory.

[flavouredpig]

We need to be critical of the information that media articles report and the way that they report them.

I'd also like to further add that education is the not the most important thing for a child who has bad odour. We need to look at the various psychological effects this problem can have on a child and prioritise these problems. I would say that peer feedback affects children the most (so much more than the effect of lack of education, also, her parents can educate her at home and she wouldn't have to be ostracised by peers) and thus what should be done is to remove the child from possible psychological harm (bullying and social alienation). What the child really needs is love, care, support, and especially help.

[halitosisux]

Why is it that every other medical issue gets treated with dignity, and even a poor little girl can't even get that from the people who are supposed to be caring for her and teaching her.

If the parents and school treated her with the same dignity as any other health issue would get, then none of this would be happening.

Even if it's happening because she covers herself in shit every morning, she needs help for THAT.

But because it's a smell, we see the usual crap from people.

[malory]

Hi flavoured pig, I am SO sorry that your parents did not understand your problem and further traumatised you. If we continue to spread awareness of malodour conditions among the medical professions, then hopefully this kind of situation will become history.

It was very interesting to read everyone's comments, but, as a teacher, I have ideas for what could have happened and perhaps did not:

In my school, we rarely ever suspend children - except in extreme cases of violent aggression - because of the stigma and trauma associated with exclusion. Going to school is not just about education, it's about socialisation, and everybody has a right to interact with other children. If a school creates an anti-bullying, inclusive, tolerant ethos, then children will comply. sometimes, we do make use of internal exclusion when necessary, but the reasons for it are made clear to the child: to reflect on his/her behaviour and its consequences. In this case, the poor child not only did nothing wrong but did not ASK to be kept at home.

The first step should be a sensitive, non-accusatory interview with the parents. The parents in question (though I don't know the details of this) probably were interviewed and affirmed that they were washing and caring for their child as normal and had no idea what the odour problem could be stemming from.

A good school would then look for alternative solutions to sending the child home: this could have been moving the child's entire class to the big hall for the majority of lessons; looking for opportunities for outdoor learning in the fresh air; involving the child in small group work with a teaching assistant who could then discreetly remove the entire group from the main class to perhaps work in a different area of the school from time to time; allowing the child to choose a couple of friends to work with outside the main classroom. The latter is an approach often used with autistic children who are overwhelmed by the large, noisy classroom. The children chosen to accompany the child who leaves the classroom see it as a treat or privilege (thus the stigma of being 'different' is removed) and the accompanying chhildren are rotated each time. As a final (less desirable) option the child could have been taught one to one on the school site, or even offered some degree of home schooling.

So I disagree that the school behaved properly in this case. They could have conveyed the seriousness of the problem to the parents without subjecting the actual child to such trauma.

The job of the school now is to educate its staff and pupils.
It is not just that malodour conditions are 'simply offensive' and that is why they are not accepted. They are not accepted because SOCIETY HAS NOT YET REACHED THE POINT IN WHICH MALODOUR CONDITIONS ARE CONSIDERED DISABLING MEDICAL CONDITIONS BEYOND THE CONTROL OF THE SUFFERER. If the school were aware of the complexity of odour disorders, then they would surely have sought to accommodate and support the pupil. This would have begun by nurturing tolerance and understanding among the school's pupils and staff.

[flavouredpig]

Hi Malory,

I disagree that bad odours can be tolerated for long (especially by the children who will say "you stink" to the child even if they've been taught about malodour). However, I think that the alternatives that you mentioned could really work out for the child.
You said:
"A good school would then look for alternative solutions to sending the child home: this could have been moving the child's entire class to the big hall for the majority of lessons; looking for opportunities for outdoor learning in the fresh air; involving the child in small group work with a teaching assistant who could then discreetly remove the entire group from the main class to perhaps work in a different area of the school from time to time; allowing the child to choose a couple of friends to work with outside the main classroom. The latter is an approach often used with autistic children who are overwhelmed by the large, noisy classroom. The children chosen to accompany the child who leaves the classroom see it as a treat or privilege (thus the stigma of being 'different' is removed) and the accompanying children are rotated each time. As a final (less desirable) option the child could have been taught one to one on the school site, or even offered some degree of home schooling."
That is really interesting and I actually think that allowing the child to work in a small group with a few friends could really work. Outdoor learning in the fresh air would be hard though, the class would have to come inside to do certain activities that require a desk. The thing is I see those alternatives as a "sometimes" or "occasional" occurrence, rather than an always occurrence. The child smells constantly, so I think home schooling would be good (many children who were home schooled turned out well, for example Vanessa Hudgens).

Also, we still need to be critical of media articles Malory because we, who understand and become emotionally triggered because we have this type of problem, are easily provoked by supposed injustices towards people like ourselves. To me, the article is putting the school in a bad light and that may not be true of the school. Just because the school refuses to make comments (or tell the article the alternatives they've tried) or refuse to make a big scene out of things (like the article has done) doesn't mean they're a bad school and that we should tell them off. They are doing what they can. You work in a school, so I assume you know that schools aren't bad places and they have their reasons and strategies to accommodate their pupils.

You said: "So I disagree that the school behaved properly in this case. They could have conveyed the seriousness of the problem to the parents without subjecting the actual child to such trauma." I was wondering in what way do you feel they have traumatised the child (prior to the media getting a hold of this story (through the parents) and turning the story into a huge problem, the child would probably have been unaware that there was a problem. I know that when I was 8, I was hardly aware that I have bad breath. When I was 9, 10, 11, and 12 years old I became aware of it but it did not affect me one bit)?

Thank you Malory for posting this article, it gives me something to discuss and think about (I enjoy mental stimulation and you have provided me with that), which is better than thinking endlessly about how to solve my own breath problem (which can be a downer when the strategies I try consequently do not work).

[malory]

Well yes, you're right about the media, of course. We do not know which steps the school took prior to this happening.
But I think sending the child home 24 times in this way was definitely not the right thing to do. I think the parents got upset because they felt the school did not discuss the issue properly. Incidentally, I got a reply from one school in Tennessee which agreed with everything I said and was disappointed that the school in question behaved in this way.