In its Media Release of 5 March 2011, the highly respected registered charity Family First NZ welcomed the majority decision by the New Zealand Teacher’s Council to formally censure a female primary school teacher for her “serious misconduct” – involving her work as a porn magazine model – and ordered her deregistration (See 35 page decision The Complaints Assessment Committee v Rachel Kellie Whitwell. NZTDT 2011/7).
The Teachers Disciplinary Tribunal ruled that the defendent, aged 29, must meet the CAC’s actual and reasonable cost associated with the disciplinary proceeding and pay half the Tribunal’s costs.
“Teachers have a special status as leaders and should be respected – especially by our children,” says Bob McCoskrie, National Director of Family First NZ.
“Modeling and selling naked photos to a pornographic magazine doesn’t meet that standard. Associating the photos with her profession of teaching children is also unacceptable.
“These sexually explicit photos of the teacher have been published and are now in the public domain. The combined role of porn star and primary school teacher simply doesn’t fit for many families. Parents would be just as concerned if a teacher was coming to school topless or teaching that pornographic magazines are harmless.
“There is a strong social stigma against pornography, and pornographic magazines such as Penthouse – for good reason. The welfare, protection and moral innocence of our children must come first.
“The issue is not whether it’s legal or not. As part of earning the respect that they deserve, they need to be aware that their personal principles and profession can not necessarily be separated,” says Mr McCoskrie.
“To pose for a porn magazine simply lets the side down.”
ENDS
Supporting References:
Decisions of Teachers Disciplinary Tribunal
Teacher censured after appearing in pornographic magazine.
Decision dated by majority dated 21 April 2011 (Hearing 16 December 2010) NZTDT 2011/7
Tribunal: Kenneth Johnston (Chairperson), Megan Cassidy, Judith Catton, Lorraine Skiffington, Patrick Walsh
(Note: Dissenting decision by Chairperson and Judith Walsh)
Counsel: Adam Lewis for Complainant. Respondent in person.
http://www.teacherscouncil.govt.nz/content/conduct-competence/disciplinary-tribunal/outcome/2011-7
Update:
Decision dated 17 April 2014 of NZTDT in Relation to Application for Orders as to Publication
[The Complaints Assessment Committee (CAC) applied for an order for the publication of the Tribunal Decision including the respondent Rachel Kellie Whitwell’s name under rule 33 of the New Zealand Teachers Council (Conduct) Rules 2004. The CAC requested an order authorising, not just the publication of Ms Whitwell’s name, but the publication of all its witnesses’ names, except Ms (deleted). Counsel for CAC confirmed that the CAC witnesses with the exception of Ms (deleted) had no objection to their names being published. …The respondent Ms Whitwell opposed this application].
Decision dated 25 October 2013 (Hearing 6-7 August 2013)
The Complaints Assessment Committee (complainant) v. Rachel Kellie Whitwell (Respondent). NZTDT 2011/7
Tribunal members: JGH Hannan (Alternative Chairperson), Peter Ferris, Vivianne Murphy, Stuart King, David Haines
Counsel: Mathew McClelland and Pherre Tancock for Complainant. Steve Crow (as advocate) for Respondent.
Par 7 states: “Mr Crow, the former partner of the respondent [Ms Rachel Kellie Whitwell], acted as her advocate.”
Leave a Reply