This phrase is often offered as reassurance, but it redirects attention away from the child’s experience. Good intentions do not negate harm. When schools assert effort while a student continues to suffer, the result is still exclusion—and the law evaluates that impact, not the motivation behind it. Doing one’s best is not a defence if what is offered fails to meet the child’s needs.
-
We must start with an acknowledgement of harm
Before we talk about solutions, or even feelings, we must name what has been done. We begin in the wreckage When an institution convenes a committee to…
This entry is part of The budget is the behaviour—a series of graded rebuttals that translate common institutional justifications into the language of consequence. Each response challenges euphemism, clarifies impact, and holds decision-makers accountable. Read the full series.
