Inquest to look at Ofsted role in lead up to death of headteacher Ruth Perry
Ruth Perry’s family said they hope the inquest into her suicide will prevent other avoidable deaths
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Ofsted has denied that the manner in which a school inspection was carried out contributed to the death of headteacher Ruth Perry.
Ms Perry took her own life in January following an Ofsted report which downgraded her Caversham Primary School in Reading from its highest rating, outstanding, to its lowest, inadequate, over safeguarding concerns.
Her sister Professor Julia Waters previously said Ms Perry had experienced the “worst day of her life” after inspectors reviewed the school on November 15 and 16 last year.
Ahead of a pre-inquest review at Reading Town Hall, Ms Perry’s family said they hope the inquest will prevent other avoidable deaths, sparing loved ones the “excruciating pain” they have endured.
Speaking at the hearing on Tuesday, Bilal Rawat, representing Ofsted, a non-ministerial Government department that inspects school standards, told the hearing: “The position of Ofsted is that the inspection that was conducted revealed serious safeguarding concerns and that informed the judgment.
“We want to be very clear about we don’t accept the suggestion that it was the fact of the inspection that contributed to or affected Ms Perry’s mental health or the manner in which done, it was what was found.”
Responding to his remarks, the coroner said: “I think Mr Rawat was saying they don’t accept it was the manner in which the inspection was done which caused Ruth’s death.”
Mr Rawat added: “It is the question of whether it’s the fact of the inspection or what the inspection revealed that is relevant.”
Senior coroner Heidi Connor said she would not be investigating the inner workings of Ofsted and “minutiae” of its inspection process at inquest.
But she added: “I have indicated the scope will include the Ofsted inspection and matters that flowed from that with regard to Ruth.”
She added: “I am of course aware that there has been in recent times an announcement of a parliamentary committee inquiry into Ofsted and I have reminded myself of the terms of reference for that inquiry.”
These terms of reference include “the impact of Ofsted inspections on workload and wellbeing for teachers” and “the usefulness of Ofsted inspections and inspection reports”.
But the coroner added: “That inquiry and this inquest are entirely separate procedure focussing on entirely different evidence.
“I have, it’s fair to say, had quite a lot of members of the public writing to me about Ruth’s case and I do think that some of the correspondence I’ve had was better addressed to the inquiry.”
The coroner said a document had been circulated to her over nine deaths possibly linked to Ofsted inspections.
Lawyers for the family want this to be explored at the inquest.
James Robottom, for Ms Perrys’ family, said: “The family have made written submissions outlining that from their position there is at least an arguable case of the structural issue regarding the welfare of headteachers going through the Ofsted process.
“That evidence should be adduced, in my submission, in some way through the inquest.”
He added: “This inquest at this point hasn’t ruled out being Article two. In an Article two inquest previous deaths may be relevant both to the provision of death function of Article 2 and to the systemic function of Article two.
“They shouldn’t be ruled out of the feature just by virtue of the fact they are not concerned with that particular case.”
The coroner said: “I would be extremely caution of drawing parallels with cases that I don’t have the full picture of, whilst welcome to make submissions in relation to those cases I think it is unlikely I will be looking at nine other cases I haven’t had involvement with.”
She added: “It’s difficult to have one without the other, I think, in terms of considering whether Ofsted should have a system in place for welfare of teachers after an inspection, I’ll remind you of the terms of reference for the inquiry.”
She said it was “more likely to be a matter for the inquiry than this inquest”, adding: “My instinct is that is stretching the elastic a little to far and it’s unlikely I would get into that.”
A further pre-inquest review will be heard on October 27 and the inquest is listed for the week starting Monday, December 4, 2023, with the coroner expecting to deliver her conclusions on Thursday, December 7 2023.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments