People often have a lot of questions about the TRB complaint process. I have formatted this blog as a question-and-answer (Q & A) page by taking the responses from the annual report 2024-2025.
Why do some complaints get posted publicly and some don’t?
From page 4:
“To begin with, not everything that may be the subject of discipline by an employer warrants intervention at the regulatory level. As Commissioner, I must take into account a number of factors in considering whether to take disciplinary action against a teacher. Among those considerations is the public interest. I generally do not consider it in the public interest to pursue disciplinary action in matters that do not in some way directly impact the welfare of students, or significantly impact the reputation of the teaching profession. Matters such as abuse of sick leave or conflict between staff are generally better dealt with at the employer/employee level.
Furthermore, it is important to remember that the regulatory scheme does not hold teachers to a standard of perfection. As with us all, teachers have good days and bad days, and sometimes they make mistakes. Not all such mistakes warrant disciplinary action at the regulatory level. It is only where teachers’ actions rise to the level of a marked departure from what is expected of them that disciplinary action at the regulatory level will be taken.”
How do we know if their behaviour has been a marked departure?
From page 5
“When determining if a teacher’s behaviour amounts to misconduct or incompetence, the conduct is measured against established sets of regulatory standards. In the case of teachers holding a certificate of qualification, the conduct is assessed against the Professional Standards for BC Educators as established by the British Columbia Teachers’ Council under the Teachers Act “
How do you file a complaint against a Teacher in BC? What are the stages?
Each report or complaint that is submitted to me undergoes a preliminary review. During this process I examine any material that accompanied the complaint or report, and any additional information that was received by the PCU. The Teachers Act provides that I must determine whether:
the matter is not within my jurisdiction (for example, whether the matter relates to a current or previously certified teacher),
the matter is frivolous or made in bad faith,
the matter has no reasonable prospect of resulting in an adverse finding by a hearing panel,
it is in the public interest to take any further action, and
the matter has been pursued in a timely manner. .
3. Deferal?
4. Then the Commissioner may decide to investigate the complaint.
5. The Consent Resolution (which you will see posted publicly is in place of a hearing. To read more details of this whole complaint process, you can read page 6-7 of the annual report.
6. Hearing (very rare)
Are complaints increasing?
Yes. From page 3 “while complaints from the public remain stable, reports are up from 175 to 201”
That means school districts are filing more reports on their staff.
What is the criteria for the school to report a teacher?
From page 5
“Legally, school employers must make a report to me when a teacher has been suspended, disciplined for serious misconduct or dismissed. If a teacher resigns, the superintendent or independent school principal must report the circumstances if it is in the public interest to do so. In addition, the superintendent or independent school principal must make a report, if it is in the public interest, when a teacher’s conduct or competence is considered to be in breach of the applicable standards.”
Can a teacher have a complaint filed against them for not following an IEP?
Yes. From page 14, you can see that 16 complaints/reports were filed for “Failure to follow Individual Education Plans or Failure to create an inclusive learning environment.”
Can I file a complaint against my child’s principal?
Yes. From page 5 in large font, “In this report, the term “teacher” refers to an individual who holds a Certificate of Qualification, a Letter of Permission or an Independent School Teaching Certificate. “Teacher” includes superintendents, principals, vice-principals, and classroom teachers.”
You can read about the statistics of how many complaints were filed, how many reached a consent resolution and more and all the different categories of complaints that they fall into. I find this to be very interesting information.
This annual report is also listed with other annual reports I keep track of on my Annual Report page.
[76] Employee R did not expand on his request with respect to policy changes or training during the hearing or in his closing submissions, and no evidence was presented by either party with respect to this matter. I find there is insufficient information before me to make any specific order in this regard, and I decline to do so.
********
If you are a parent and you want professional development training or policy to come out of your hearing order, if you win, you’d better ask for it! This is something to think about for anyone who wants to take their case to a hearing. You may want to add items like this in your closing submissions, just in case you win.
The fact that this is possible is very interesting!
Always ask, as you navigate the system. You never know what could happen.
For those interested in what the case is all about:
[1] Employee R is a gay man who sought part-time employment at RONA to supplement his income during the COVID-19 pandemic. He was subjected to a homophobic slur at work by a colleague and filed a complaint with his employer in which he expressed concern about his safety. Subsequently, Employee R’s regular shift was cancelled and then he was terminated.
ORDER
[77] I have found that the Respondents discriminated against Employee R in his employment based on his sexual orientation, in violation of s. 13 of the Code. Accordingly, I make the following orders:
a. I declare that the Respondents’ conduct contravened s. 13 of the Code: s. 37(2)(b).
b. I order the Respondents to cease the contravention and refrain from committing the same or similar contraventions: Code, s. 37(2)(a).
c. I order the Respondents to jointly pay Employee R the following:
i. $877.50 as compensation for wages lost because of the discrimination: Code, s. 37(2)(d)(ii).
ii. $10,000 as compensation for injury to his dignity, feelings, and self-respect: Code, s. 37(2)(d)(iii).
d. Pre and post judgement interest based on the rates set out in the Court Order Interest Act.
The term “hearsay” in this context is when kids come home and tell us things that happened at school that we didn’t witness ourselves.
Here is the heart of the issue. ———- When your child comes home and tells you what happened in school that day—– that in of itself is not evidence the tribunal will automatically accept as fact just on its own. You need evidence. The tribunal will assign little weight to hearsay evidence, compared to staff who can testify firsthand to what they witnessed.
This is going to be a source of frustration. I just want to acknowledge that.
Naturally, the first question is – how do I collect evidence when I am not even there at the school?
Good question.
This is the pickle you are in. You need to gather evidence in other ways. Or consider that your child could testify.
There was a recent BC Human Rights Tribunal decision posted, and it lays out how all of the mother’s allegations were not accepted without evidence. Some of the evidence provided from the school conflicted with her allegations. We have the burden to prove that our allegations meet the discrimination test first. Then, when we complete that, it falls to the school district to justify it, or prove the allegations are not true, with evidence.
Each allegation was not accepted by the tribunal because there was no evidence to support the allegation and/or to link the harm to the protected ground – Indigenous Identity. I highly suggest you read the case in full to fully grasp what requirements are needed for the tribunal. Each allegation is clearly listed and explained. I would basically need to cut and paste the whole case here to give you the full context.
I am going to come back to this case later, because if you are a family struggling with family law court issues, there are aspects of this case that highlight the school’s interaction with that. Two parents had different perspectives and take on the child’s education experience. If you are struggling with this – this case will be of interest to you.
Here is another case that went all the way to a hearing and deals with the issue of hearsay from a child.
[42] I have assigned relatively little weight to the Mother’s evidence where it conflicted with the first-hand accounts given by the School Counsellor, Principal, Vice Principal, and Teachers H, M, and G. I have found the Mother’s hearsay evidence considerably less reliable than the direct evidence of reliable witnesses, where there is a conflict.
[37] I am entitled to accept some, none or all of a witness’ testimony. Where there was disagreement in the evidence, my findings and reasons are set out. Where necessary to do so, I have assessed credibility and considered factors such as the witness’ demeanour, powers of observation, opportunity for knowledge, judgment, memory, and ability to describe clearly what they saw and heard….(continues)
[228] In summary, none of these incidents amount to discrimination under the Code. The Mother made numerous allegations about the School District accepting the word of Caucasian students over that of her Child, but agreed in cross-examination, that she did not know the races of the other students involved. Contrary to her testimony, the students involved in the Second October 2015 Incident,April 2016 Incident, and November 2016 Incident were not Caucasian.
********
[44] During cross-examination, the Mother responded to several questions regarding her testimony about her Child’s version of events by saying that she did not know or was not there. She acknowledged that most of her knowledge of the incidents came through her Child. I find that her son was more likely than not motivated to minimize his involvement in some incidents when reporting them to his Parents, so as to avoid discipline. For example, the Mother described disciplining the Child in relation to an incident where he swore at the Principal. She described their punishment as “Draconian”. (In retrospect, the Mother regretted using that word in her letter). As another example, regarding the November 2016 Incident, the Child only reported to his Parents that he grabbed another student by the collar, whereas I find, as a fact, that the Child choked a student, pushed him over a railing, and spat in his face.
********
Depending on their age and ability, you may want to consider having your child be a witness. Here is a blog about having your child testify. Does my child need to testify?
Here is a case example of a teenager who testified.
[2] I commend the Student for her participation in this difficult process. She gave evidence that was helpful, straightforward, and credible, and which I have relied on to decide this case. I also thank the Parent and representatives of the District for their hard work and sensitivity in presenting their respective cases.
******
Having your child testify will remove the issue of hearsay or double hearsay.
Also…document, document, document.
Because we are not there witnessing events, the more evidence we can have documented in emails, the better position we will be in to assess our complaint and the evidence we will need to prove our allegations.
Remember, we have to prove the elements of the discrimination test. The burden falls on the person filing the complaint to provide evidence that these things occurred.
they have a characteristic protected by the Human Rights Code [Code];
they experienced an adverse impact with respect to an area protected by the Code; and
the protected characteristic was a factor in the adverse impact.
*******
I want you to be successful and prepared. The more you understand human rights law and how this get APPLIED and interpreted by the tribunal, the better possion you will be in to assess your case, what to ask for if you are seeking legal advice, and what steps you need to take now to either resolve your issues or make your case through a complaint.
This is an employment case, and the employee is in the school setting. I have only ever written on two other staff employee cases. I don’t focus on this at all, but every once in a while, a case will come along that is very helpful for others to know about. The legal test for employment and human rights can be very specific.
[17] At a hearing, Mr. Misiak would have to establish that he has a disability, that the District treated him adversely, and that the adverse treatment was connected to his physical disability: Moore v. BC (Education), 2012 SCC 61at para. 33. Mr. Misiak is not required to prove the complaint at this time but need only point to some evidence capable of taking the complaint “out of the realm of conjecture”: Berezoutskaiaat para. 24. The threshold to move the complaint forward to a hearing is low.
[18] The District says there is no evidence that Mr. Misiak has suffered a disability related adverse impact and his compliant has not been taken out of the realm of conjecture. I agree.
*******
He had an injury to his elbow from 2018 that limited what he could do with his left arm.
********
[20] The materials show WorkSafeBC advised that Mr. Misiak was limited in performing repetitive motion with his left arm, and forceful or sustained gripping with his left hand. The undisputed evidence of the District is that Mr. Misiak was placed in a job that does not require repetitive motions with his left arm or any forceful or sustained gripping. Mr. Misiak has not identified any accommodation that was recommended by WorkSafeBC, or that he requested, that was not implemented.
[19] ……..The District provided detailed evidence of the recommendations made by WorkSafeBC and how they implemented each recommendation. While Mr. Misiak says in his response that his WorkSafeBC claim was denied and he was not accommodated, the evidence before me shows the District implemented all of the recommendations made by WorkSafeBC.
[22] Mr. Misiak’s submissions are general complaints about the conduct of members of the health and safety committee at meetings, and the quality of air filters in schools. It is unclear on the materials what equipment Mr. Misiak is saying he had to supply for himself. He says the District took a long time to purchase and install new drill presses for the school’s woodworking program but has not pointed to how this is related to any physical disability he has. Similarly, Mr. Misiak alleges someone stood in front of him during a health and safety meeting and he was unable to respond to questions. Mr. Misiak has not provided any information that links his experience at a meeting to any disability. The District points out that there is no evidence to support Mr. Misiak’s allegation that he was not paid for his work.
*******
Four points to highlight
* The test to move a complaint past the dismissal stage is LOW….but you still have requirements you must meet.
** You will need to be able to identify your disability-related adverse impact. Not just any adverse impact. It has to pass the discrimination test.
*** You need to point to some kind of evidence that supports what you are claiming.
**** You can have unfair, horrible stuff happen to you, but it doesn’t mean that it is discrimination. There is not going to be legal remedies for all of the negative experiences you have in your life, or for all of the horrible things that people are going to do to you.
You will save yourself a lot of unnecessary pain and deprive the lawyers of their billable hours by understanding what complaint systems can create change and what those systems need from you in order to be successful. There are limitations in all of them, and they are all connected to different legislation. There are also complaint avenues or resolution avenues as an employee that I do not mention in this blog or on my website, as I primarily focus on parents advocating on behalf of their children. Information on complaint system options.
Parents & caregivers, we too have to focus on our kids’ disability-related needs, and how the harm they experience is connected to those needs, to be able to pass the discrimination test. We too, have an education case from the tribunal that has been very clear that not all negative experiences are discrimination.
[110] ….I accept that these incidents which X relayed to Y were upsetting to X. I appreciate that the interactions may have fed into X’s general feelings of unease at school, but the fact alone that these events may have happened is not enough, in itself, to establish that X’s disability factored into them. Not all negative experiences are discrimination. Even accepting that these incidents occurred, I did not hear evidence that could establish, on a balance of probabilities, that X’s disability was a factor in the conduct of the adults involved in these interactions.
This blog is about healing from K-12 public education.
It has been one full week since I announced I am taking a month break from both P.A.T.H and my Chair role at BCEdAccess.
It was exactly what I needed. My decision was fast. I was fighting the urge to delete my Facebook account. I was so desperate for an escape. Yet, it was hard to leave too and resist the urge to not rush back by day 2. I would have explained more about my sudden departure, but I truly didn’t have the words.
I have been operating at max capacity for a ridiculously long time. Too long. I needed to give myself permission to take the advocacy hat off. Even if for just a bit.
Why?
I have survived K-12 education. For 15 years of my life, my kids with invisible disabilities were in public school. Both graduated and went to their graduation ceremonies.
I have also survived 3 Human Rights Complaints (3 public-facing decisions – 1- Final decision from an 8-day hearing -5 years, many private decisions), 3 Ombudsperson BC complaints that lasted- 3 years, 4 OIPC complaints (1 public-facing Order – 2 years), 8 Teacher Regulation Branch complaints and an external school investigator hired by the district that lasted 2 FULL years.
My last child graduated in June of 2025. I was involved in litigation with the school district for over 5 years. Many years of internal advocacy before all of that. The third human rights complaint ended in a settlement in the fall of 2025.
Everything was now truly complete. It was all over. Then the crash of “fight mode” happened. My body felt different. The engine that was running in overdrive for so long was revving down. I felt bored and unfocused. Like….now what? Now what do I do? What do I think about? I had this space.
As the months unfolded, I felt I was running on empty anger fumes that were no longer being refueled by a dueling opponent.
I was dragging myself. The race was over. Everyone left and went home. Yet…..I was still there…running.
With everything done, I then spent a lot of time organizing all of my files. I had to do it in chunks. It was still too fresh to do it all at once. Saving or deleting thousands of school and lawyer emails. Sorting out which parts of the history of their complaints to create a binder to pass along to the kids. Their history. I was deleting hundreds and hundreds of school emails. Some of them I read and some of them I just couldn’t. Re-examining everything with a new lens. After years of clinging onto everything for potential litigation use, when I finally pressed the delete button, I felt like I was cutting off a limb. Trying to process everything with the intent of letting go.
Simultaneously, I was meeting with parents through P.A.T.H, and communicating with BCEdAccess families. Everything was blurred. It didn’t feel like K-12 ever ended.
I still found myself looking for the next fight. I needed to stop and remind myself, “Kim – it’s over! Your kids are fine!” Tears would well up, as I repeated this to myself while taking a much-needed deep, long breath.
It is true. It is over. And they are fine. Now. They weren’t always fine. But they ended up being fine because I used every external complaint system to apply pressure to the school district to ensure that they are fine. My kids got their needs met in those final years at school, finally, after years of harm and unmet needs.
Dealing with the psychological games from the school district triggered my childhood experiences that were pushed deep down. School employees will ignore you. They gaslight you. They blame you. They don’t believe you. They dismiss you. They delay you. They manipulate you. They flat-out lie to you. They use social pressure of knowing that people naturally want to be liked to “stay in line” and not cause a fuss. They use social embarrassment and shame as a weapon.
When you have a disability as well as your children, all of the systemic oppression and abuse you faced as a kid just all bubbles to the surface. It’s one thing when it’s you experiencing this, but to see your children now experiencing it….well, it is unbearable.
When I was a child, another classmate at school told me her parents had told her she was not allowed to play with me. I asked why. She said that it is because stuttering is contagious. I told her I don’t think it is. Her reply was, “Then how do you explain accents?” She went on and on about how her parents told her that people learn accents from being around others. Warned people that they should stay away from me or they would stutter too. Then she gathered everyone else up, and off they ran, leaving me to play by myself.
Growing up with a disability and facing social exclusion never leaves you. Children can be cruel. So can the adults. Growing up in the 80’s and 90’s with a stutter was brutal. I spent my childhood years trying to blend in with the wallpaper, as being seen was dangerous. Thanks to the stuttering community I found in my early adult years, I healed, felt what true forgiveness feels like and learned its ok to take up space.
My advocacy was in view of the district administration, the School Board of Trustees, lawyers and their support staff, insurance staff, the school staff, and every external complaint system employees that examined everything. I have counted 50+ people. Everything was on show for people to examine, scrutinize and form an opinion on all of my emails and emotional pleadings. What made it extra sticky was that I was a previous employee; some of these people I had previous social and employment connections with. I also started blogging on a website I created called Speaking up BC. Opening the door to expose my feelings and experiences with abelism and fighting the unfair system.
I already know what social exclusion feels like, and I know that I can survive it. So, when it came to taking the risk and sticking my neck out in front of an audience, I didn’t give a shit what people thought of me. I was willing to risk social consequences. You want to judge me, think bad things about me and not like me? Join the club. What can be looked at as a previous horrible experience from childhood can be turned into an advantage as an adult. I am free. I am not chained down by social expectations like a lot of people are. I have never fit in, and I am certainly not going to try to fit in now. So, whatever you think of me, it’s cool with me. I realized a long time ago that I have no control over how people view me. Let it go.
I have pushed back on every single wall this system tried to put in front of me, as they were constantly trying to change the maze. Walked over every “that’s not appropriate” and just kept filing another application for documents. Got amazing evidence! I have seen the dark shadows. The many gaps in this education system AND in the external complaint systems. I have seen good people do horrible things. I have seen good people be complicit bystanders. Observers who did absolutely butt-kiss nothing. I have seen educators in positions of authority over children prioritize administrative convenience and have placed children in harm’s way. I know things that would shock people. I had one external complaint system realize that they messed up my complaint. Six months of ignoring me, hoping I would go away, but I didn’t. There was no public announcement, but knowing they realized they made a mistake was comforting. Lessons learned. They, too, can learn where their gaps are.
Seeing what is behind the curtain of these systems and knowing how they really work is jarring and changes how you see life and people. I have seen people become destroyed by the systems. You aren’t just fighting the system. You are fighting trying to keep hold of yourself and not become someone else you don’t recognize or respect when you look in the mirror. I have seen desperation bring out the worst in people.
I am the type of person who has to understand all of the crevasses and all the little pieces to make sense of everything and move on. Otherwise, I will ruminate and be hooked on obsessively trying to figure it out. I needed to know and understand how on earth such a cluster fuck up could occur for so long under the watchful eyes of educators.
I have experienced a mixture of success and failure. My evolving motto as I moved through the system was to test and learn, and publicly expose, the decision-making of all of the systems as much as possible. I wanted to figure this out so that we could “fix” what happened to my kids so other families won’t experience the same thing. I wanted accountability. The idea that they were just pushing this under the rug and wanted it all to just go away like it was nothing enraged me. I feared the failures would just continue and never end. Lessons would never be learned. I was completely willing to fall flat on my face and feel absolutely naked under scrutiny. I didn’t care. I wanted what happened to be exposed and examined. You want to poke fingers at me and think I am emotional, great. Let’s talk about why!! Gather everybody around, like some great murder mystery plot reveal, and let’s. talk. about. why.
When trust is broken with schools, it can really mess with your mental health. There are the incidents and all of the events that broke our trust, and then there is the response from the school and district, and then again the response from their legal team. I am not just healing from one thing. There is the harm my children experienced, and then there are their responses to me and their liability processes.
I don’t regret going as far as I did. That hearing needed to happen. I would do it all over again in a heartbeat. I feel a deep sense of peace. I got the information I needed to get, I understand all of the puzzle pieces in the 1,000-piece puzzle. My kids are both doing great. They have survived, gained life skills, and are starting their adult lives. I got more than the accountability and understanding of the seriousness of what occurred than I was even expecting. Lessons were learned. I went to school amongst all of this to SFU and obtained a degree in Criminology and Legal Studies. The injustice was the catalyst that pushed me in this direction. I ended up with a meaningful career I never expected, a higher salary than working for the school districts that I left, and a whole new social network of friends and fellow advocates. But there were costs. Costs I was willing to live with. Because the alternative was not an option.
But back to the break.
I need time to reflect and acknowledge everything. To refill my cup and remember all of the goodness and incredible things that have happened. As well as all of the hardship. I wanted to heal. It will be over my dead body that I allow these people to break me. I was determined to not only create change, but to come out of this better than ever. I am ok with having scars, I’ll take them, but this needs to build me. This needs to be a launching pad and not the guillotine. I want to evolve in life.
In the fall of 2025, I started counselling to help myself process everything. Years of constant advocating for my kids in K-12 brought up a lot of my own shit. I do have to say, it would have been easier on myself if I had taken up counselling waaaaaayyy earlier.
When they say healing is not a direct straight line. No kidding! I would have times where I felt like I was free and weightless. A couple of days later, I am back to being angry and looking for a fight. Then I’d be back to being thankful for all of my experiences and how my quality of life in the end has increased. Then back to feeling that I never want to see anyone who works at the district ever again. And then the cycle continues. Counting my blessings. Then singing ABCDEFU by Gayle at the top of my lungs. Ask me how I am, and it will depend on the day. Healing is messy. All over the place. Always shifting when you think you are finally done.
I will be honest. I made mistakes. My advocacy wasn’t perfect. I was my own mountain at times. It wasn’t only them. I have gone back and reviewed previous emails, and I now see some attempts of them trying to bring this to an end. I honestly didn’t even process it. I look back on documents, and I swear what I was reading now wasn’t there then. I have no memory of reading that. But it was there. As the years unfolded, I saw everything as an attack more and more. They thought that they could end it whenever they felt like it was a good time to do so. They were too subtle and too late. When their attempts weren’t working, the lawyers went full speed ahead. A bull. Eyes on target. Set to destroy. I think they truly wanted to break me so I would shrivel up and disappear completely. Instead, I turned into a bull back. Two bulls in a room. Nothing left but stubborn will.
This break has already been exactly what I needed.
I am giving myself permission to focus on myself. This week I have vacation time off from work. I am really looking forward to some me time.
Listening to everyone navigate and share their stories on social media is triggering for me. It’s incredibly emotional. It sends me back in time, and I needed a break and separation from witnessing the trauma to smooth out all of the corners and come to a place of forgiveness. My peace needed to seep in deeper into my bones. Not just be in my head, but be in my heart.
This time off has felt like I was placing the period at the end of the sentence. Sealing the envelope. Closing the book. My children had their graduation ceremony. I needed something to signify my ending.
I have lovingly placed the K-12 education life experience on a bookshelf. I have forgiven myself for all the things that I didn’t know, but wish I had known at the time, and for all of the things I wish I did differently. I have forgiven all of the people involved for all of the things that they didn’t know at the time, and for all of the things that they wished they had done differently.
For the smaller group of people who intentionally and knowingly harmed my oldest child and me, and went ahead and did it anyway, my forgiveness is still fluid depending on the day and hasn’t solidified yet. One day, I hope to be rooting for you.
I had a wonderful person in my life when I was a teenager. She almost died in a car accident, and it severely altered her life. She fought to live and ended up on disability, lucky to be alive. She kept a picture of the totalled car in a picture frame on her wall right by the front door. The car looked so crumpled that you would think it just came out of the car crusher from a scrap yard. She was hit by a large transport truck that was speeding down the highway when it hit a patch of ice. I can’t believe any human being came out of the car alive. People would ask her why she had something so horrifying in a picture frame by her door. She would tell them, it reminds me that I survived that. I can survive anything.
Be proud of your own car crash and survival. Own it.
Healing takes more than just time. It takes focus and effort. It is a worthy goal.
To strip off the anger. To wipe away the disappointment in a system that is different from what I expected or wanted. To forgive people for not being perfect and not knowing everything, I think they should have already known. It’s a place of acceptance. I don’t need to like the system, but I accept the reality that we are all in. I don’t want to carry the heaviness and be angry for the rest of my life. Anger had served its purpose well. It was action. It was fuel. But now it is time to put it down. I don’t need it to fuel me anymore.
The ball of anger and disappointment never really goes away; it just feels different. Further off in the distance, sleeping somewhere. Not so close and alive. Demanding my attention.
Before I went on my break, I lost my words. Some would call it writer’s block. But it was more than that.
I have always been limitless in how much I could write. It flowed through me. I felt I had to try to pace myself so I wasn’t overwhelming people. But then, suddenly, the well dried up. I would lift my pen to write in my journal, or place my fingers over the keyboard to write a blog, and I just didn’t know what to say anymore. About anything. I would sit there staring at the wall. Just….nothing. I felt anxious. Something was off, but I didn’t know what. That’s when I knew. This isn’t good. I am finally beyond my limits. I have been taking care of everyone else and not enough of myself. I feared I was reaching burnout.
I know my cup is filling up again because I woke up one morning and just like that, my pen is moving, and I am back to writing. My words have returned. I don’t feel depleted anymore. I was an anchor who jumped over the boat, wishing to hide in the deep and dark parts of the water.
The human rights decision is a fraction of the whole story. The tip of the iceberg. The whole story isn’t just about discrimination. The Board and the district didn’t need to make all of the systemic changes they did. They went beyond the base minimum of fulfilling their own liability needs. Some of the signs of their work are public-facing, but unless you know what to look for, you won’t be able to connect the dots. The breadcrumb trail spans years. By the significant changes that have occurred, hard conversations have clearly taken place. Even though I have never signed an NDA, I will never parade the individual details of those involved for public gawking. Some people have suggested I write a book about all of this. I am not going to do that. I also had a journalist reach out to me from another province who was very interested in the backstory of my website and how and why all of this started. She couldn’t have been more eager to write a story. I declined the offer. Enough media attention has already occurred that I am beyond satisfied. For everyone who has been connected to this, we all should have the right for this to come to an end and move on with our lives. Advocacy and sharing knowledge about these educational issues can be done in a way that is respectful and humane. I don’t need to tear people to pieces in order to use what happened as a way to advance the system. I am very selective with the information I share about everything I have experienced, and do so with purpose. I am not a tell-all novel. Information for advocacy can be offered up for families’ consideration while still respecting our family and the district’s privacy. I firmly believe we all deserve a second chance. It doesn’t benefit society if people make a mistake and we forever write them off. We want society to show grace to our children and to us who don’t get things “right” the first time; we need to show grace back.
I fight so hard for others, for the same reasons many of you all fight so hard for your children and others. I have been where so many of you have been. I, too, have quit my job due to a lack of school support. I felt like I was going to have a mental breakdown dealing with the school. Years of sleepless nights. Anxiety through the roof. Wanting to rip my face off I just couldn’t stand it anymore. Nauseous – physically sick. Stress hives breaking out all over my back and chest. Leaving in the early mornings to walk on a treadmill at a gym – I would cry and try to process what email I should send next. Terrified the staff would find me annoying and take it out on my elementary-aged child. Who was already dealing with abuse from the school.
But the quiet and unplugging is essential. I have intentionally slowed down. Engaging in somatic therapy activities. Poured on the self-care activities I know that will work for me. I know some people cringe at the word self-care. It is so overused. But I wanted it. Needed it. And it is working.
By stepping away, I have my energy back.
I am refilling my cup. I am the only one responsible for refilling it, and I am the only one with the ability to do so.
I see the big things that indicate to me I am healing. My energy and writing are back. I also see the little things.
My favourite singer is Sarah McLauchlin. I love her music. I have been listening to her for years. During the tribunal process, my music preferences switched. I was always listening to fast, pumping take-over-the-world music. A couple of days after my break started, I was gravitating back to my Sarah music. By Day 6 it was all I was listening to for hours. Going through all of her albums.
“The world is on fire, it’s more than I can handle I’ll tap into the water, try to bring my share I’ll try to bring more, more than I can handle Bring it to the table, bring what I am able”
Welcome back, Sarah. I have missed you.
I am at a place where I can make a decision. I could step away and never have anything to do with K-12 education ever again. Disappear off the grid. Or I could intentionally make the decision to come back. Previously, I felt like I was trapped in time. My children have moved on, but I was still stuck in the past.
But I don’t feel like that anymore. This break was me leaving. I found my way to the future.
I am intentionally deciding to come back. That intention makes everything feel different. It is not just a continuation.
I am not coming back as someone currently in K-12. Not as “we”. We aren’t in this together anymore. I was questioning whether I should be in the role of Chair or be doing this work if I were no longer in the same ocean, trying to keep afloat and not be swept away with the strong currents, along with everyone else. But I come to you all now as someone standing on the shoreline, on solid ground, throwing out the life preserver of lived experience to the next generation of change agents. Someone who went through it and came out on the other side still intact. I didn’t lose myself. If anything, I met myself.
It is day 7 of my break, and I am itching to come back. As much as I was ready to cut everything and run, the pendulum swung, and I am already on the other side. I am a little intense. It can be all or nothing with me. I am either ready to take over the world, or I am taping out on a beach somewhere, counting stars. Again, meeting myself.
I am still aiming to take the rest of the time to deepen and solidify all the progress so far. Or at least I am going to try. I do really want to force myself to take this time and use it. I am looking forward to being back on May 1st and reconnecting, and also meeting the new families seeking services and support through P.A.T.H and BCEdAccess. When the next runner comes up beside me to reach for the baton, I will warmly pass it off to the next Chair of BCEdAccess. P.A.T.H will continue to be an evidence-based lighthouse.
I love all the families that I have witnessed over the years, who are still trying to do the best they can for their kids and themselves in such a broken system. But also for the ones who have honoured that they need a break to refill their cups and heal. I love all the families whom I have never met and will never meet, but are still somewhere trying to stay afloat, swimming against the current. You are all in my heart.
Much love and solidarity to you all, Kim, – From solid ground. xoxo
The tribunal member goes into detail about how a tribunal member will interpret witness testimony!
*******
[15] For all witness testimony, I start from the presumption that the witness is telling the truth: Hardychuk v. Johnstone, 2012 BCSC 1359 at para. 10. When making findings of fact, I determine which evidence is most plausible based on a balance of probabilities:Mr. S v. Cannae Holdings, 2018 BCHRT 47 at para. 12. When assessing which evidence is most plausible, I consider the credibility and reliability of the witness. I consider factors including the firmness of the witnesses’ memory, whether their evidence changed during cross-examination, whether the evidence seemed unreasonable, impossible, or unlikely, and whether they had a motive to lie: Bradshaw v. Stenner, 2010 BCSC 1398, aff’d 2012 BCCA 296, leave to appeal refused, [2012] S.C.C.A. No. 392 (Q.L.) at para. 186. I also consider whether supporting or contradictory evidence exists, and whether a witness’ evidence is internally and externally consistent: Harder v. Tupas-Singh and another, 2022 BCHRT 50 at para. 6. Overall, I consider whether each witness’s evidence was in “harmony with the preponderance of the probabilities which a practical and informed person would readily recognize as reasonable in that place and in those conditions”: Faryna v. Chorny, 1951 CanLII 252 (BCCA) at para. 11.
[16] I can accept all, some, or none of a witness’ testimony, and I may attach different weight to different parts of a witness’ testimony: Meldrum v. Astro Ventures., 2013 BCHRT 144 at para. 4; Campbell v. Vancouver Police Board (No. 4), 2019 BCHRT 275 at para. 18.
[17] Overall, I am satisfied the witnesses testified truthfully to the best of their ability. There were several instances where Ms. Mosquera and Ms. Benkhalti gave conflicting evidence on significant issues. For the most part, I find that the conflicting evidence was the result of the misunderstanding between Ms. Mosquera and Ms. Benkhalti and not because their evidence was not credible or reliable. Further, memories surrounding certain events or conversations had understandably faded and some of the differences between the evidence of Ms. Mosquera and Ms. Benkhalti can be attributed to subjective interpretations and perceptions of the same incident.
*******
This person was self-represented and they wont their case. Even though the discrimination was due to a misunderstanding and it was not intended.
It’s a great reminder that discrimination is not about intent. You will not need to PROVE that they INTENDED to discriminate, just that they did.
Human Rights Code Section 2
*******
2 Discrimination in contravention of this Code does not require an intention to contravene this Code.
*******
[8] For the reasons that follow, I find that North Horizon discriminated – albeit unintentionally – against Ms. Mosquera based on her sex and family status. I also find that North Horizon did not retaliate against her contrary to s. 43 of the Code.
*******
She is getting over $45,000 in compensation. Click the link above to read the order and read that case in full.
This case is about the school district reducing a student’s Education Assistant (EA) support hours who was doing well with the EA support. The student originally had a full-time EA, and the district cut the time in half. The reduction in support hours led to an increase in “behaviour” that further led to exclusion.
The communication between the parent and the school was difficult, and they were banned from the school. The tribunal found that the district did not do enough to de-escalate the conflict.
The Human Rights Tribunal in Ontario found the school district discriminated. This case is what SOOOOOO many parents experience. It’s a long decision but a worthy one. I feel that many parents can print off this case and connect with what they are experiencing.
Human rights decisions in other provinces are not binding, BUT they are persuasive. So if the district tries to minimize the importance of the decision because it’s in Ontario, don’t believe them. They are just trying to do what they always do. Reduce, minimize, deny, deny. This case is from 2013. This is not “new” that parents advocacy cannot be used against them to justify the school district denying accommodations. Challenging communication does not release them of their legal duty to accommodate children with the disabilities to the point of undue hardship.
Here is another example, as I have outlined in Part 5 – Duty to Facilitate in the Duty to Accommodate series.
(c) School boards have an obligation under the Education Act to provide appropriate special education placements, programs and services to their exceptional students. Parental conduct or lack of parental authority cannot be used as a justification for not meeting an exceptional student’s needs; and
(d) I agree with the decision in R.B. v. Keewatin-Patricia District SchoolBoard, (R.B./Keewatin) 2013 HRTO 1436, an HRTO decision cited by both parties in this case, at para 265, that a parent’s “fierce advocacy” for his or her child must not and cannot prevent a school board from accommodating the child’s needs to the point of undue hardship.
Okay lets get back to the 2013 case R.B v. Keewatin-Patricia District School Board. There is a lot of history with this case and other decisions around it. But for this blog, lets focus on this decision.
a. Payment by the respondent in the amount of $35,000.00 as monetary compensation for the injury to the applicant’s dignity, feelings and self-respect;
b. R.B. will return to school in the 2013/2014 school year with a full-time shared EA in the classroom, speech/language support for 30 minutes per week and an appropriate behaviour management plan that has been agreed to by S.F. in consultation with R.B.’s treating specialists.
c. S.F. is entitled to fully participate in the IPRC review meeting for the 2013/2014 school year and the development of R.B.’s IEP for this year;
d. The trespass notice and communication ban issued in December 2011 is lifted.
********
This is what the complaint alleges in terms of the discrimination test.
*******
[218] The applicant’s assertion that he was denied meaningful access to an education can be summarized as follows:
a. Failure to provide EA support and learning strategies;
b. Failure to provide appropriate behavioural strategies and to assess R.B.’s academic and behavioural regression in a timely way;
c. Failure to provide appropriate educational programming during the withdrawal and exclusion.
[219] In addition, the applicant argues he was reprised against in the following ways:
a. The reduction of EA support in Grade 2 because of the advocacy of S.F.;
b. R.B.’s exclusion from school on October 22, 2012;
c. The communication ban.
*******
Here are some noteworthy paragraphs to highlight some areas of the decision to read more. There were some other details of the complaint that I haven’t pulled in there. It would just be too long. But this case is something that A LOT of families experience. I truly encourage you to take the time you need to read the case in full.
*******
[33] On June 23, 2011, the Vice-Principal advised S.F. that there would be a half-time EA assigned to R.B.’s classroom the next school year at Open Roads Public School (“Open Roads”). Open Roads is a school that amalgamated Riverview and another school. The Vice-Principal advised S.F. that a reduction in Ministry of Education funding had significantly reduced the school’s EA support. She further advised that the school team was confident R.B. would do very well with half-time EA support because of his growth in independence and maturity and the progress he had made in Grade 1.
[98] On October 22, 2012, R.B. was excluded from school by the school Principal for inappropriate behaviour including swearing, using profanity, spitting, yelling, cutting a child’s sweater, stomping on a child’s leg, throwing material and being non-compliant with his teacher, educational assistant, Vice-Principal and Principal. The Notice of Exclusion stated R.B.’s return to school was conditional upon the completion of a psychological assessment by the respondent’s school psychologist, Dr. Michael Stambrook, and the respondent being confident R.B.’s return would not compromise the physical and mental well-being of R.B. and his classmates.
[99] During the exclusion, R.B. was provided with instruction from an itinerant teacher three hours per week in the public library. S.F. supplemented this instruction. S.F. developed a good rapport with the itinerant teacher and R.B. made significant academic gains under her instruction. For example, when he was excluded, R.B. was reading at level 2. By February 2013, he was reading at level 7.
[113] The respondent alleges S.F. made unfounded allegations that R.B. was bullied in Grade 2...
[118] Based on the respondent’s own evidence, I cannot find that S.F. made unfounded allegations of bullying in R.B.’s Grade 2 school year.
[119] The respondent asserts that S.F. falsely accused the school of segregating R.B. in Grade 2.
[124] Based on this evidence, I cannot conclude that S.F. made unfounded allegations of segregation in R.B.’s Grade 2 school year.
[130] The respondent argues S.F. interfered with the accommodation process when she did not advise the Grade 2 teacher that R.B. was no longer taking medication in response to her inquiries in the fall of 2011, at a time when his behaviour was escalating. The evidence from Dr. Warkentin was R.B. was off medication by the end of October 2011.
[137] For these reasons I cannot find that S.F.’s failure to disclose the fact that R.B. was no longer taking medication in the fall of 2011 interfered with the school’s ability to accommodate R.B.
[143] I find that S.F.’s spouse made the statement to the Principal “if you want threatening, I’ll show you fucking threatening”. This statement was a verbal threat. There is no evidence before me that S.F.’s spouse physically threatened the Principal. Although the Principal testified he lunged towards her, the Vice-Principal testified he stepped towards her. Neither witness testified that he made any physical threat. The Principal left the room and the police were called.
[144] The fact that S.F.’s spouse made this comment cannot be attributed as misconduct on S.F.’s part. Further, there is no connection between the comment and the accommodation process for R.B
[154] Based on the above evidence, I cannot conclude that S.F.’s conduct prevented the school from accommodating R.B. in Grade 2. Even accepting that her conduct made her relationship with the school staff extremely difficult, there is no evidence that this difficult relationship prevented the school from meeting R.B.’s educational needs in Grade 2. Put simply, there is no evidence to establish a connection between S.F.’s conduct and the accommodation process for R.B.
[248] During the period of the exclusion, R.B. was provided with instruction from an itinerant teacher for three hours per week in the public library.
Conclusion:
[255] The applicant has established that he was denied a meaningful education when his EA support was cut in half in Grade 2, when he did not have an appropriate behaviour management plan from Grade 2 onwards, when he was excluded from school in October 2012 without appropriate educational instruction, and when the communication ban denied S.F. the opportunity to meet with R.B.’s teachers and EAs in order to ensure that his needs were met.
[256] When a student is excluded from school, he is denied an education. No one would suggest that providing a student three hours of instruction per week in a public library, regardless of the effectiveness of that instruction, is an appropriate education. Dr. Stambrook agreed.
a. Payment by the respondent in the amount of $35,000.00 as monetary compensation for the injury to the applicant’s dignity, feelings and self-respect;
b. R.B. will return to school in the 2013/2014 school year with a full-time shared EA in the classroom, speech/language support for 30 minutes per week and an appropriate behaviour management plan that has been agreed to by S.F. in consultation with R.B.’s treating specialists.
c. S.F. is entitled to fully participate in the IPRC review meeting for the 2013/2014 school year and the development of R.B.’s IEP for this year;
d. The trespass notice and communication ban issued in December 2011 is lifted.
*********
Another case that was accepted by the BC Human Rights Tribunal when a student was denied an EA for one of their classes, was mentioned in this anonymization decision:
This decision is an anonymization decision, but in the first paragraph it summarizes what the crux of the complaint is about.
[1] In April 2022, the Parent made a complaint against the School District on the Student’s behalf. The complaint alleges that the School District discriminated against the Student regarding its services based on the Student’s mental disability. Specifically, the complaint alleges that the School District failed to accommodate the Student by not providing him with an Education Assistant in one of his classes.
REDUCING EA HOURS THAT LED TO HARM AND A DENIAL OF ACCESSING EDUCATION CAN BE A DISCRIMINATION CLAIM
School staff have a lot of discretion and power in decision-making related to our children. Not just to their learning but to their socialization. This is given to them by the School Act, other collective agreements, and even human rights decisions uphold their expertise.
At the same time, many of them lack knowledge in education law to fulfil their duties lawfully, and they can easily overstep and make mistakes. This gap in knowledge and a call for more legal training for educators is even written about in education law textbooks. (Education Law in Canada: A Guide for Teachers and Administrators, 2nd Edition. Edited by David C. Young). This book even lacks sufficient knowledge on the Duty to Accommodate, which they admit. This book for 2025, the written content entered was capped at February 2024.
We know that the Human Rights Code supersedes teacher classroom autonomy, but many educators don’t. For some, it is quite the wake-up call when they find this out. Accommodations are required. They don’t get to decide not to provide them because of how they want to run their classroom.
Chances are, if you have read all of my blogs, you will know more about your child’s rights than they will. Which is really a failing for all involved. I don’t think it is fair for teachers to truly not understand what their legal responsibilities are, either. I would feel nervous in that role.
But first, before we dive in: What is written authority?
Written authority is law, policy or some kind of document. Something that is written and acts on behalf of other people, that has power, and people will use it as a decision-making tool. If school staff deny our requests, we always want to ask them something along the lines of: What is the written authority that supports your decision? Basically, says who? Where does it come from? People just can’t just make stuff up.
Staff may feel very confident when making statements. You would swear by their confidence that they are true. Not necessarily. And not that they are intentionally trying to mislead you. Although some people may flat-out lie to you. As I have experienced both.
When they tell us information, especially when it is related to a decision, always ask where that information comes from.
If they tell you that teachers are allowed to _______________________.
Then we can ask them to show us where the written authority is that states they are allowed to do that.
Basically, administrators are very good at spinning stories and making things look very professional. They may legitimately believe what they are saying. We want to cautiously accept what they are saying to us, and always question what they are telling us. We don’t accept vague assertions. How you want to frame your inquiry is up to you. Maybe as a sense of curiosity, and wanting to understand your rights. But you have every right to understand fully where they are coming from, and which written authority they are basing their information on. Sometimes they are correct in what they are telling us, but we also know that the Human Rights Code supersedes policy.
The topic of trust is a layered topic when it comes to education for families with kids with disabilities. We have been hurt over and over again. We know the district operates from a liability lens and they have many obligations connected to staff and the public that go beyond the best interest of our child. We want to believe that they know what they are talking about. But sometimes… honestly…. they just don’t. Or they don’t understand the whole picture.
So what is that zone of trust that we need to enter? Where we can bring ourselves to trust them enought to drop our kids off every day, but also not believe everything they say and be vigilant enough to not assume they are doing everything they can or should for our child?
Ask where that information comes from.
Because you have a lot of written authorities on your side too.
The strongest form of advocacy includes the following: strong documentation, evidence, and written authorities (using law, policy, and other documents created by the school). Follow official internal complaint/advocacy channels. When necessary, file external complaints.
Instead of us just taking their word for it, we can ask them to explain
For example: You are telling me they have full autonomy to make discipline decisions. How is the teacher’s discipline decision in line with the Teachers Standard #1?
Or
How has the school’s approach to my child’s IEP development been in line with #4 & #5?
If they have to go in front of the tribunal at the BC Human Rights Tribunal, they will need to provide evidence that they are providing your child with reasonable accommodations. So why not show you this now?
No one anywhere in any profession can just operate in a way or say things that are not grounded in truth, ethics, evidence, or in line with laws and policies. Not nurses, pharmacists, counsellors, car mechanics, engineers, dentists, etc, etc, etc.
We don’t want fluffy conversations that they think they can just float past us and we just accept these without understanding what they are talking about. We don’t accept vague beliefs or opinions. If they are using words that you don’t understand, stop them and ask them to explain. If they state something, we want to know, where is this coming from? Show me.
As you advocate, you will get better and better. You will learn more and more. Your child is getting an education. So are you.
They aren’t breaking you. They are building you. You can take this pile of shit that you are dealing with and turn it into fertilizer.
This stuff isn’t easy. Take it inch by inch. We don’t move mountains in a day. Scream into a pillow and then get to work.
Ask for help!
Here is the school advocacy help directory. These people know their stuff, and they can help you. You don’t need to do this alone. For those who would like to consult with a lawyer, I recommend Kesari Law Corp.
Accountability is extremely important in education. People who are the decision makers in children’s education have a lot of power. Their decisions have a direct impact on children’s development, learning, and mental health. Make the wrong decision, and it could send a child on the trajectory of self-harm, suicide, lifelong struggles with unemployment, mental health issues and bouncing around in the prison system. Parents aren’t fighting for preferential treatment; we are fighting for our kids’ chance at a life.
Here was the scariest thought that I had in my head. I couldn’t let go of what happened to my child without the district admitting their staff made huge mistakes. Because it they weren’t even aware or had the will to acknowledge the harm they caused, they would just repeat it. If you are doing everything to shorten our conversations, delay communicating with me, we aren’t getting off on the right foot.
The idea of them just getting to push this under a rug and carry on in their lives as if this never happened was sickening.
Without accountability, they think they are untouchable. They don’t need to answer to anyone. They can just make whatever decisions they want.
That is terrifying to me.
Especially when we are talking about children who have no control over their own lives and kids who just want to have their parents to love them and be liked by others. Just wanting to be included. Kids don’t have control over anything when they are in school. You don’t fall in line, the feedback is fierce. Charts on walls with your name on it – public shaming is their specialty. Time outside revoked. Sorry, no fresh air for you today. Even adults who are incarcerated should get “yard time” on a daily basis.
Accountability in education is extremely important. External complaints are the outside eyes that they need to know, are there. Outside the perimeter. Can be called on at a moment’s notice. Parents get a whiff of denial, minimizing, or gaslighting. We need backup.
Everyone wants accountability because the fear is that the untouchable school admin will keep doing this to other people. More kids will be harmed.
Can you imagine if the Human Rights Code were actually removed?
That could have happened.
It would be a free-for-all. Why? The Human Rights Code doesn’t have value without a way for us to enforce it. THAT is the BC Human Rights Tribunal. The process that we navigate has as much value as the Code itself. If the process is sick or unwell, so is The Code.
Think about that.
Is the BC Human Rights Tribunal process healthy? Or is it sick? And what does that mean for the Power of the Human Rights Code? How long are the delays for a complaint to be accepted? Access delayed is access denied.
Right now, it’s 18 months to 2 years.
For all of the politicians who believe in the importance of the Human Rights Code, you need to put the same importance of that into the BC Human Rights Tribunal, which is incredibly understaffed and overwhelmed with complaints.
We need the government to not just use its words, but show us with action, that they truly believe in the importance of the Human Rights Code.
The Human Rights Code and BC Human Rights Tribunal are intertwined.
If you care about the Human Rights Code, then you must also care about the process of accessing those rights through the BC Human Rights Tribunal.
When you file a human rights complaint, and if it gets accepted, you will receive an email notifying you that your complaint is proceeding.
The school will get the email as well. This is the first time they will be contacted by the BC Human Rights Tribunal. They will have an opportunity to submit a “response” a few weeks later.
It will be multiple pages long, and they will be defending themselves. Listing all the reasons that your complaint is not true, or if it is true, their decision-making is justified.
Just a heads up. It is very difficult to read.
If you need to move heavy furniture, read this right before you have to do so, and you’ll be done in a jiffy.
Some of it will be downright ridiculous to you.
At some point early on in the response, you will see the sentence “We deny each and every allegation”.
I read that sentence, and I swear, something snapped and changed in me forever.
I didn’t know this at the time, but this gets sent to every single parent.
I have seen a lot of documents from parents across this country, and this type of sentence is in every single one. Even when they know they are guilty, it doesn’t matter. I would be shocked if this sentence didn’t show up in your response.
Now. I have some thoughts on this.
I am not sure how this sentence started or who thought this would be a good idea to send to people a long time ago, but sending this to an already irate parent is not the most intelligent thing to do. In fact, you are shooting yourself in the foot as far as I am concerned.
I can tell you that after my eyeballs reached the end of this sentence, I had decided that I was taking my case to a hearing. And, I stuck to it. If I ever needed to refill my gas tank, I just re-read this one line. I was refuelled and back in action.
What I read from that sentence was this:
“Dear Kim. You have been cordially invited to attend a hearing. We do hope you will attend. We look forward to the duel.”
And my response was
“Sounds splashing. I shall be there!”
If you want to pick a fight with a mama bear, please do send this to them. I wish you good luck. The blessings will rain down upon you.
For the parents reading this shit, just know, they have to write something. They certainly are not going to send a response that says…. “ummm yup, guilty, we actually did everything they said. We thought we would get away with it…. but gosh… I guess not. Guilty!”
They will take slices of “truth” and state them as they are the most relevant important facts known to humankind. Just because they are writing stuff down doesn’t mean it is true, doesn’t mean they have evidence to back up what they are saying and doesn’t mean their arguments are strong. They could be very legally weak. For example, “XXXXX passed the class.” Meanwhile, we all know it’s because you hired a tutor. You get the idea. Or “XXXXX never asked for ________.” Meanwhile, we know that they never asked for anything because they were terrified.
But that’s what they get paid the big bucks for. (Insert eye roll)
We run on anger.
Thanks for pissing me off. xoxo. That was an excellent strategy. Cheers!
I now read that sentence and crack up. I need it on a t-shirt. It’s incredible how different I feel about these things as I look back in time, years later. Lots of things are shifting as time moves along.
So, if it propels you forward, then awesome. Read it hundreds of times.
If it’s anxiety-producing, every single person gets it. It’s not personal. It’s just one of their standard, boring, meaningless sentences. Them denying things…. heavens to Betsy. Shocking. They just plunk it in.
