2 min read
There was one last form to fill in for my daughter's Bnei Akiva Israel tour before the three-and-a-half week trip. It was a nine-page code of conduct form that she and I both had to sign. The wide-ranging terms included an agreement not to possess or drink alcohol, possess or take drugs, use abusive language, intimidation, deliberately cause damage, use or possess weapons of any kind, engage in criminal activity, and so on.
The form was sitting on the kitchen table for the best part of a month, ready for her to sign after her GCSEs. It was very important for me that she read it thoroughly, understanding the consequences of any breach of the conditions.
Signed and sealed, she went off excitedly on tour. Just over a week later, my daughter called me, very upset. Five boys from her group had just been caught in possession of (or drinking) alcohol and were being sent back to the UK. I put down the phone and thought about the situation.
Yes, the kids should not have been drinking. But unless the boys were drunk, should they really have been sent home?
The next morning, I phoned one of the mums and asked if I could help get BA or the Israel trip organisers to reconsider their decision. But the boys were already on the plane home. The mother was particularly upset.
She assured me her son had not been drunk and claimed that the day after the incident, the boys were in a guarded room, possessions were confiscated, and that no food was given to them for the first four hours [Bnei Akiva denies this]. "The punishment did not fit the crime," she said.
Interestingly, the wording on the code of conduct form differentiates between drugs and alcohol. In the case of drugs, participants "will be immediately" dismissed from the programme.
But those caught with alcohol "should expect" to be removed. Dismissal is at the "sole discretion" of the organisers.
In this situation, could not discretion have been applied to keep them on tour, given the impact on the group dynamics for those remaining? In effect, they were being punished, too.
The boy's mother now says: "I cannot forgive how they were treated in the aftermath of what was not a heinous crime. My son has been severely affected by his treatment."
Since this incident, I have talked to other parents. Some believe that zero tolerance means exactly that and therefore there is no grey area (although I would argue that "sole discretion" does not indicate a zero-tolerance policy).
The other issue is that the leaders on the BA tours are typically in their early 20s. They are shouldering a huge responsibility and they do need to feel protected.
My daughter said she couldn't fault the organisation of the trip, and despite the blip, had "the best" time.
The mother has requested that her name not be published
