Herlufsholm Boarding & Day School - Incidents and Reactions of the Royal Family

[Muhler]

The first member of the board at Herlufsholm has resigned.

She is Noemi Katznelson. She became a member of the board in 2019 as an extern (not affiliated with the school) expert, who specialize in research in the well-being of young people. I.e. the social issues young people face, like loneliness. She is also a member of the panel of expert for the Mary Foundation.

It was the documentary and the revelations in that, that led her to resign, she claims.

- The thoughts going through my mind right now is that she was brought in to help combat bullying. A thing the chairman of the boards claims they tried to do something about around that time.
So either she was not up to the job and/or her recommendations were not implemented.
Or she was given a different picture of what went on at the school, than what actually happened. I.e. as a member of the board, she was misled or not fully informed of incidents.
Or she wants to distance herself from Herlufsholm.

She writes today:
Der er elevfortællinger og oplevelser, som i omfang og karakter fuldstændig overstiger det, tidligere sager havde indikeret,« skriver Katznelson.

»Jeg fik undervejs en fornemmelse af nogle kulturelle og strukturelle udfordringer på skolen, men der tegnede sig ikke et egentligt mønster for mig, ligesom skolens trivselsundersøgelser ikke viser et så rystende billede som TV 2s dokumentar,«

"There are (in the docu) narratives from pupils and experiences which in scale and character completely exceeds that what previous cases had indicated.
I had over time (presumably while she was a member of the board) a sense of some cultural and structural challenges at the school, but there was no pattern emerging for me as such, just as the investigations regarding the well-being (at the school) does not show so disturbing an image as (is presented) in the documentary by TV2."

TV2 being the second major TV-network in DK.

 

[Izzie]

The first member of the board at Herlufsholm has resigned.

She is Noemi Katznelson. She became a member of the board in 2019 as an extern (not affiliated with the school) expert, who specialize in research in the well-being of young people. I.e. the social issues young people face, like loneliness. She is also a member of the panel of expert for the Mary Foundation.

It was the documentary and the revelations in that, that led her to resign, she claims.

- The thoughts going through my mind right now is that she was brought in to help combat bullying. A thing the chairman of the boards claims they tried to do something about around that time.
So either she was not up to the job and/or her recommendations were not implemented.
Or she was given a different picture of what went on at the school, than what actually happened. I.e. as a member of the board, she was misled or not fully informed of incidents.
Or she wants to distance herself from Herlufsholm.

She writes today:
Der er elevfortællinger og oplevelser, som i omfang og karakter fuldstændig overstiger det, tidligere sager havde indikeret,« skriver Katznelson.

»Jeg fik undervejs en fornemmelse af nogle kulturelle og strukturelle udfordringer på skolen, men der tegnede sig ikke et egentligt mønster for mig, ligesom skolens trivselsundersøgelser ikke viser et så rystende billede som TV 2s dokumentar,«

"There are (in the docu) narratives from pupils and experiences which in scale and character completely exceeds that what previous cases had indicated.
I had over time (presumably while she was a member of the board) a sense of some cultural and structural challenges at the school, but there was no pattern emerging for me as such, just as the investigations regarding the well-being (at the school) does not show so disturbing an image as (is presented) in the documentary by TV2."

TV2 being the second major TV-network in DK.

That was fast!

Frederik attended the dinner given in connection with the climate ministers meeting taking place in Denmark (he was Guest of Honor)...anyway, trusty B.T. was there waiting and, of course, he was asked about the school. There is a video to go along with the article. The article also provided an additional comment from Lene Bailey.

https://www.bt.dk/royale/kronprins-frederik-til-bt-det-er-en-ulykkelig-situation

 

[camelot23ca]

I hope to not to sound arrogant in any way, but Demark is a rather tiny country... So, are there alternatives to Herlufsholm, serious competitors in the education business, comparable boarding schools?

I mean, we would be looking here for a school with a long tradition, conservative traits, well-off "customers" and unfortunately "progressive" forms of self-government of the adolescent pupils - if I understand this thingy with the "Prefects" right. And it must be a boarding school. These criterias make me wonder, if there is a second school like this in little Denmark.

In Scotland, which is not much bigger population-wise this would probably be not so much of a problem, since they cater to an international customer base, but Denmark?

Part of the issue might be that Christian, and presumably Isabella, want this particular boarding school, not necessarily boarding school in general. They’ve likely looked forward to attending for some time. They know some of the other students, they’ll have heard about the school from their friends’ older siblings and parents, they’ll be familiar with some of the traditions and so on. Herlufsholm can provide them with a taste of independence and novelty, but in an environment that would be familiar and comfortable for them.

It’s also possible that Frederik and Mary were only comfortable with the children boarding at Herlufsholm because they themselves were familiar with the school.

I don’t think there would be another boarding school in Denmark that ticks all those boxes. And going abroad to board may not be something the kids (or their parents) are willing to consider. The “second choice” could well be returning to day school in Copenhagen, and given that Christian, at least, seems to be enjoying his time at Herlufsholm, it’s unlikely that’s an option he wants to consider.

 

[Chronojourner]

Muhler or anyone, I have a question. The media is reporting that Herlufsholm has stopped requiring boarding students to sleep in large rooms with fellow boarders and is allowing them to sleep in their individual rooms (called hummers). I could not determine from the wording whether that was now a requirement that they sleep in their individual rooms or just gave them the option of doing so or sleeping in the common room. It seems to me that if it were optional, then the students could put a lot of social pressure on each other to remain in the big rooms, so it would end up solving little or nothing. Do you (or does anyone) know what the deal is with that and what the long-term plan is for sleeping arrangements? It seems that a lot of the incidents occurred in those common sleeping rooms, so I suspect that changing that is one of the keys to changing the school's culture. Thanks!

 

[Muhler]

Congratulations on your first post.

It's an option. If a pupil for whatever reason - it may not have anything to do with bullying - wish to sleep alone, the pupils are free to do so.
They could feel a little under the weather. Or wish to work into the night - perhaps somewhat against the rules. Or have personal issues. Homesick, lovesick. Or snore. Or have an allergy. - All sorts of reasons.
I don't think there will be pressure on that pupil, because if a pupil wish to sleep alone because of something to do with the other pupils, then it's a warning sign the teachers should look into.
It really ought to work.
And teens are like teens everywhere else, it's fun to be together with your mates, to chat and laugh and gossip and tell stories and what not in dorm.

I believe you are right. The purpose of having a room of your own to sleep in, will provide the pupil with a safe place to be, at least at night, when you may otherwise feel vulnerable.

https://www.bt.dk/royale/nu-er-der-ord-fra-mary-vi-tager-det-meget-alvorligt

Mary has been asked and commented on Herlufsholm.
In this video she says:

Det er en meget ulykkelig sag. Hele situationen tynger os meget som familie og vi tager det meget alvorligt,
- "It's a very unhappy issue. The whole situation weighs on us/burdens us a lot as a family and we take it very serious."

Det er helt afgørende, at der kommer tryghed på for alle skolens elever
- "It is totally decisive/imperative that there will be a sense of safety/security for all the pupils of the school."

 

[Izzie]

Thanks for the translation Muhler. Of course, BT there ready to keep asking the same questions. At this point, Mary (& Frederik) are going to keep giving basically the same response unless and/or until there is something else to respond to OR they issue another statement. Seems that their tone is FIX IT and WE ARE WATCHING CAREFULLY. At least that is what I draw as the underlying substance of her response.

BB also has a video: https://www.billedbladet.dk/video/qsSNyZ6h/3QfPXYUp

BB Article: https://www.billedbladet.dk/kongeli...d-kronprinsesse-mary-er-tynget-af-situationen

 

[Somebody]

Muhler or anyone, I have a question. The media is reporting that Herlufsholm has stopped requiring boarding students to sleep in large rooms with fellow boarders and is allowing them to sleep in their individual rooms (called hummers). I could not determine from the wording whether that was now a requirement that they sleep in their individual rooms or just gave them the option of doing so or sleeping in the common room. It seems to me that if it were optional, then the students could put a lot of social pressure on each other to remain in the big rooms, so it would end up solving little or nothing. Do you (or does anyone) know what the deal is with that and what the long-term plan is for sleeping arrangements? It seems that a lot of the incidents occurred in those common sleeping rooms, so I suspect that changing that is one of the keys to changing the school's culture. Thanks!

I agree that just making it optional for students means that social pressure may continue and become even worse as the students that do not sleep in the dorms apparently went against the overall culture of sleeping in the dorms while previously it was obligated. So, I am not sure this step will be enough in terms of providing safety for the more vulnerable students. While theoretically they have way out, that way out might not be attainable if they don't want to run the risk of being bullied even more.

 

[Muhler]

https://www.bt.dk/royale/royal-korrespondent-om-marys-udmelding-hun-koeber-sig-tid-hos-befolkningen

This is comical!

If you are a royal reporter, what do you do, if you would like a statement from a royal expert, that has an opinion that fits the angle you wish to put in the paper:
You get an intern to interview yourself. ?

The gist of the conclusion is that M&F want to see what happens before taking a drastic decision. And that M&F has a lot of public credit, which come into play here.

 

[camelot23ca]

I agree that just making it optional for students means that social pressure may continue and become even worse as the students that do not sleep in the dorms apparently went against the overall culture of sleeping in the dorms while previously it was obligated. So, I am not sure this step will be enough in terms of providing safety for the more vulnerable students. While theoretically they have way out, that way out might not be attainable if they don't want to run the risk of being bullied even more.

I think at this early stage the school has taken the sort of actions that can be put in place quickly and that they can then use to show parents and the press that they’re “taking the situation seriously.” The Headmaster leaving once things blew up in the press was a given, but a change in leadership doesn’t necessarily translate into immediate change on the ground for students. Doing away with the prefect system again sounds good, but doing it suddenly will lead to anger and resentment among some of the students who will (rightly) say they’re being punished for things they haven’t done. And giving students a choice about whether to sleep in their room or in the dorm just adds another opportunity for subtle social exclusion.

Right now the school is in crisis mode, and it seems to be making the sort of decisions that have the potential to drive problematic behaviours further underground. The only way the school will change in a substantive way is if they can get the students onboard and actively involved in turning things around. If they alienate the kids, especially the older students, things will only get worse.

 

[Chronojourner]

Congratulations on your first post.

It's an option. If a pupil for whatever reason - it may not have anything to do with bullying - wish to sleep alone, the pupils are free to do so.
They could feel a little under the weather. Or wish to work into the night - perhaps somewhat against the rules. Or have personal issues. Homesick, lovesick. Or snore. Or have an allergy. - All sorts of reasons.
I don't think there will be pressure on that pupil, because if a pupil wish to sleep alone because of something to do with the other pupils, then it's a warning sign the teachers should look into.
It really ought to work.
And teens are like teens everywhere else, it's fun to be together with your mates, to chat and laugh and gossip and tell stories and what not in dorm.

I believe you are right. The purpose of having a room of your own to sleep in, will provide the pupil with a safe place to be, at least at night, when you may otherwise feel vulnerable.

https://www.bt.dk/royale/nu-er-der-ord-fra-mary-vi-tager-det-meget-alvorligt

Mary has been asked and commented on Herlufsholm.
In this video she says:

Det er en meget ulykkelig sag. Hele situationen tynger os meget som familie og vi tager det meget alvorligt,
- "It's a very unhappy issue. The whole situation weighs on us/burdens us a lot as a family and we take it very serious."

Det er helt afgørende, at der kommer tryghed på for alle skolens elever
- "It is totally decisive/imperative that there will be a sense of safety/security for all the pupils of the school."

First, thank you for congratulating me on my first post. Second, Thank you for the information about the sleeping arrangements at the school. I'm not sure I agree with your assessment, though. I'm much more in cinque with the post Somebody made (see their response below your original response). My experience is that teenagers like to fit in and that peer pressure has more of an effect on them than on adults. I definitely think that having it optional may not work because the abusers can bring a lot of social pressure to bear to make the bullied students continue as normal. Is there a cultural difference in Denmark that I am not factoring in?

As for a barrack-style sleeping arrangement itself, as far as I can tell, this style of student accommodation is very rare outside of military academies, and probably for good reason, if a lot of the bullying issues take place there. The reason that militaries do it, aside from its cost savings, is that it builds a tight comradery and promotes unit cohesion. I suspect the same was true for Herlufsholm, back in the day. And I suspect that even today, students come out of the school with an extremely strong bond, due to living is such close proximity for extended periods of time.

I agree that just making it optional for students means that social pressure may continue and become even worse as the students that do not sleep in the dorms apparently went against the overall culture of sleeping in the dorms while previously it was obligated. So, I am not sure this step will be enough in terms of providing safety for the more vulnerable students. While theoretically they have way out, that way out might not be attainable if they don't want to run the risk of being bullied even more.

I absolutely agree. They could end up even more socially ostracized because they dared to sleep apart from everyone else. Thanks for the post.

I think at this early stage the school has taken the sort of actions that can be put in place quickly and that they can then use to show parents and the press that they’re “taking the situation seriously.” The Headmaster leaving once things blew up in the press was a given, but a change in leadership doesn’t necessarily translate into immediate change on the ground for students. Doing away with the prefect system again sounds good, but doing it suddenly will lead to anger and resentment among some of the students who will (rightly) say they’re being punished for things they haven’t done. And giving students a choice about whether to sleep in their room or in the dorm just adds another opportunity for subtle social exclusion.

Right now the school is in crisis mode, and it seems to be making the sort of decisions that have the potential to drive problematic behaviours further underground. The only way the school will change in a substantive way is if they can get the students onboard and actively involved in turning things around. If they alienate the kids, especially the older students, things will only get worse.

I agree, Camelot. I'm sure the school felt it needed to do something immediately, in order to show the country that they were trying to make an immediate difference, but understands that it will take time and planning to affect long-term change.

I've been in organizations that were trying to change their culture, and I can tell you that it is one of the hardest things for any organization to do. There are always intrenched interests and forces that resist the change, and it requires planning, effort and patience to overcome these.

Usually, that resistance comes from two sources, institutional structures and employees. As this is a school and not a business, we can add a third source in the form of former students and student families. My guess is that, ultimately, the school will need to remove up to one-third of its employees before they break the hold on this source of resistance. In terms of institutional structures, I think they should make sure to take all of the advice of an independent review group, who can come in, do an analysis and make recommendations. The school needs to make sure they follow those recommendations. There will be pressure to select some and leave others undone. This is a mistake, as the changes represent a whole package that work interactively to achieve the desired change. And that's another thing, the school needs to be very specific about what they want the goals of the group's analysis to be. That statement of goals is the starting point and if it's not good then what they get out will not be good.

As for the former students and the parents, that will be the hardest thing to change. If they're serious about change, then they may have to alienate a substantial number of those people and their money, at least initially. Some will certainly come back, but others won't. Never having dealt with that kind of organization, I'm not sure the best way to handle it, but I'd seek advice from the same independent group that provided the recommendations for institutional change.

Regardless, I fear that the necessary changes will take years and be messy.

 

[Izzie]

The Mary Foundation has put out another statement apparently needing to clarify for people how the foundation works given all the misinformation by some.

https://www.instagram.com/p/CdswiYQMPtX/

Muhler - would you be so kind as to provide a translation? My Instagram translation function wasn't too helpful on this one.

Thanks!

 

[Muhler]

Yes, it's the manager of the Mary Foundation, Helle Østergaard, who defines what the foundation does.

"The Mary Foundation indentify, develop and run projects on co-operation with partners with the purpose of fighting social isolation within these areas: Bullying and wellbeing, Loneliness and Domestic Abuse.
It s not the purpose of the Mary Foundation to handle individual cases.

The Mary Foundation has within these three areas set up a panel of experts, who provide input and sparring in the work with out projects and the focus-area based in their knowledge and research. The members of the panel of expert does not present specific individual cases to us. Both because the members are not allowed to pass on information that are of sensitive character for individuals and because we are not put into the world to handle individual cases. (*) The members of the panels are not paid and they are not employed by the Mary Foundation, just as none of them are members of the our board."

- She goes on to recap some of the accomplishments of the Mary Foundation, in partcular Free from Bullying.

(*) That's of course dealt with under the systems, that are ultimately responsible to the various ministries. - In the case of Herlufsholm, the Ministry of Education. Because it's a private school, otherwise it would first be the responsibility of the municipality to look at problems at the school. Then the Ministry of Education, followed by the Ministry of Interior if need be.

-----------------


I read the last posts with great interest. I do think you are a little pessimistic though. Let's see what if anything happens, before we "paint the Devil on the wall." (Saying, meaning outlining the worst case scenario.)

Because Herlufsholm has, in contrast to previous cases, a lot to win if they do implement successful changes and a lot to lose if the don't.
And a lot of central people have a lot to lose if they don't.

The focus on Herlufsholm and the changes there, that will have to be implemented decisively and fast, is massive. The press would love to dig up a new case that is handled badly, because Christian and soon Isabella is there.
If Herlufsholm screws up, it's not just public scorn, but one of the biggest prizes they have ever had, a future king, and perhaps more future kings, they lose.
That's a major goof for a proud, elite school and it's goodbye to other DRF members for generations perhaps if not ever.
On top of that a number of people in central positions belongs to the circles around the DRF, some of them are in the innermost circle! It's a major goof if they embarrass the DRF further. It may even cost them a much coveted friendship. With all the titles, perks, medals and not least social standing that entails.
So I'm pretty optimistic.

And as for culture being difficult to turn around. They can be.
But cultures can be changed and surprisingly fast!
It depends on how determined you are, and how much of an incentive there is to implement these changes.
For the pupils it's quite simple: Do you support a system that has the potential of bullying and misuse? - Well, the majority will have to answer no to that one.
Otherwise you do as with everybody else who don't understand or want to follow the new rules on the workplace: There are the new rules, there is the door. You can follow them or walk out the door.

Until I was 30-35 it was very common to drink at work and sometimes you got quite tipsy. Now it's almost unheard of. And that was a culture that was ancient.
Smoking at the workplace was the norm until only 20 years ago, now it's being almost eradicated. There was some rearguard action, in vain. And I don't miss smelling like an ashtray.
Hard language and bullying too, even fights was common when I was young at the workplace. Now there are rules and a culture in place to step in and stop that. Despite that behavior having been around since forever.
Me Too changed a lot of things in very short time! And that despite sexism having been very common, also since forever.

- So if you want to, things can change, and change fast!

 

[Izzie]

Thank you Muhler!

I think many are confused as to what the Mary Foundation's role is and assume the foundation can just walk up to the doors of the school and make changes. That is not true. The Mary Foundation conducts studies/research, etc. in order to gather data and based on that date and with the assistance of the experts in that field craft initiatives and/or programs to target a particular area/issue. They then promote those initiatives/programs and it is up to schools, programs, etc whether to adopt/implement/try an initiative or program.

At this point, The Mary Foundation can do nothing except keep promoting their condemnation of any type of violence/bullying and keep on with their own business. IF/WHEN the school decides to implement a particular program of theirs, then maybe a more specific statement particular to the school can be made. And IMO, if I were the Mary Foundation, I would be very careful about anything not looking like a conflict of interest.

Further, I would like to add how it is getting a little tiresome for Mary/Frederik to be constantly asked the same questions. They cannot comment any further than they already have. There is an ongoing administrative/legal/criminal investigation happening. And why aren't reporters tracking down other parents for comments. How about the Board Member that just resigned. How about other students to see if they want to talk. They can even try to talk to the police (they will only be met with a "we cannot comment on an ongoing investigation"). Mary and Frederik are NOT the poster people for this! They did not cause this, were not involved in it, are not on the Board nor in any administrative position! Besides, like I said, there is an ongoing investigation on multiple fronts that may prevent them from making any further or more in depth statements. Regardless of being members of the DRF, in this regard they are first and foremost parents of a student at the school and may, at this time, have to abide by certain guidelines. So, maybe the reporters can hunt down some other prey to feed on regarding this issue and see what they have to say.

 

[Archduchess Zelia]

As expected, no change of school for Christian and Isabella

 

[Blog Real]

New statement from Frederik and Mary:

As parents, we are at this time facing some difficult considerations about our oldest children's schooling. It is discussed in many places - also here on our own social media. It makes an impression on us. We have previously stated that we as a family are burdened by the unfortunate situation on Herlufsholm, and that we will follow the changes that are obviously necessary. Here we will try to share some of our thoughts and put more words into the considerations we make as a family.

Bullying, violence and abuse are never acceptable. We must respond to the painful and devastating events by insisting on changes that ensure a safe environment for all. And then we must acknowledge the courage of those who have shared their violent experiences.

At the same time, we are the parents of a son who is very happy to go to school. And a daughter who has long been looking forward to starting the same place.

The question is whether the two sides can go hand in hand; whether we as parents can let our children go to Herlufsholm and at the same time react and insist on changes that benefit all students at the school. There will be divided opinions about that. But for us, the answer depends both on the studies that have been initiated and on the effect of the initiatives that the school has already decided. In addition, we will look at the school's upcoming initiatives, but also at what we as parents can demand and contribute. The goal must be a future Herlufsholm, where all students - no matter who they are - thrive and can feel safe based on healthy values.

Finally, we will continue to talk to our children, show them confidence and listen to their wishes. Their perspective must necessarily also be taken into account when making our decision about their future schooling.

Like all other parents, we want to do the best for our children. At the same time, we are aware of our special position as Crown Prince Couple.

Here and now we do not know all the answers. As a family, we need more knowledge to be able to make the right decision for our children.



The Crown Prince Couple

https://www.instagram.com/p/Ce5-vlQDb9L/?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=

https://www.kongehuset.dk/nyheder/brev-fra-kronprinsparret

 

[Annine]

I really dont think this message helps. The press wants to ask them questions for real, not just have pre-printed PR messages in social media. If they sat down with a real news outlet (not Billedbladet) and answered some real critical questions, I think they could more easily put it behind them, and not have questions thrown at them on all engagements...

 

[Archduchess Zelia]

I think they were right to make a statement – it is a big problem for them and not just in the eyes of sensationalist journalists – and they were especially right to emphasise the fact that Christian and Isabella themselves wish to go to Herlufsholm. But at the same time, they still don't really say much else than they already have said. And I fear that means the public sentiment won't change a lot. Instead of saying "we await the pending reports" (meaning the decision will be made once the reports are released), this seems more like an indefinite postponement of the decision which they hope will make the press back off indefinitely as well.

And reading between the lines, it seems pretty clear to me that they don't intend to pull the children so why drag that announcement out? They talk about wanting to see the effects of the changes already implemented. That's fair, but you won't see that until well into next school year, so why not just establish that Christian will stay and Isabella will start this August? If they think the critical comments will die down if the announcement is made over the summer, I'd say they're very naive.

 

[Izzie]

Good statement from Mary and Frederik. I figured they would have to put out another statement. And it seems like they are aware of the sentiments...maybe even hearing about the disrespectful and sometimes vile bullying (how ironic) comments on their social media (by bullies themselves or just internet trolls with nothing better to do). I know some will find fault with this statement (like every other statement) because it is not what THEY want to see/hear and are projecting their desires onto Mary, Frederik and the kids. As usual, they know more than we do at this point. I like the statement comes from them as parents, not the Crown Prince Couple...which I think many are forgetting they are first and foremost parents of Christian and Isabella.

I read this statement as most certainly putting the school on even more notice than they have before. Plus, making it understood that the kids continuing at the school is not a done deal by any means. That they are watching closely and while the wishes of the kids is important (as it should be) there are other factors in this delicate balance they have to contend with.

After this statement I am left with the feeling that there is NO concrete certainty that the kids will go to that school come the fall. That is not just how I read the statement and really looking at the statement objectively and keeping MY preconceived premature conclusions out of the equation or analysis thereof. I mean that could just be my obvious naivety but my take-away nonetheless.

And I always try to remember that just because a group is the loudest (online, in the media, on blogs, etc.) does not make them the majority by any means. It just makes them a loud MINORITY. That is a good thing to remember when trying to assert some type of statistical analysis to situations. So I try to always be a little more diligent in my research of any issue when formulating a position on the matter instead of just going with the loudest group. But again that may just be also naive OR 30 years in a business that requires that type of thought process.

 

[polyesco]

I really appreciate this part of their statement

"In addition, we will look at the school's upcoming initiatives, but also at what we as parents can demand and contribute. ...
Finally, we will continue to talk to our children, show them confidence and listen to their wishes. Their perspective must necessarily also be taken into account when making our decision about their future schooling.
Like all other parents, we want to do the best for our children. At the same time, we are aware of our special position as Crown Prince Couple."

They are seeing the school react and no doubt we watch very closely how the changes unfold. They are not just wiping their hands of this, they want and expect change.
It must be very hard. Christian seems to be well adjusted and so far has had no fault in this. Im glad they respect his opinion too.
Being the CPC but also parents of 4 must be very hard and I think they are finding the right balance.

 

[Izzie]

I really appreciate this part of their statement

"In addition, we will look at the school's upcoming initiatives, but also at what we as parents can demand and contribute. ...
Finally, we will continue to talk to our children, show them confidence and listen to their wishes. Their perspective must necessarily also be taken into account when making our decision about their future schooling.
Like all other parents, we want to do the best for our children. At the same time, we are aware of our special position as Crown Prince Couple."

They are seeing the school react and no doubt we watch very closely how the changes unfold. They are not just wiping their hands of this, they want and expect change.
It must be very hard. Christian seems to be well adjusted and so far has had no fault in this. Im glad they respect his opinion too.
Being the CPC but also parents of 4 must be very hard and I think they are finding the right balance.

I also liked that quote from their statement. I take it to mean that they are NOT waiting for any initiative to be implemented to see if they work, but will look at what the school proposes, the tools for the implementation of said proposal and the timeframe the school anticipates to see results. Like I have said before, parents of children at the school must have much more information than anyone.

 

[Muhler]

Better late than never.

A bit long-winded for my taste though. I'd prefer their message to be shorter and simpler - avoids misunderstandings and interpretations.

They say pretty much what I would have said in their place.
And of course as parents you are naturally reluctant to, so to speak, "punish" your children for something others have done - and in some cases haven't done.
And they have left a door open, so that is something nasty occurs r is exposed they still have the option of pulling their children out.

This is parents talking and that is IMO something parents can understand and sympathize with.

 

[Archduchess Zelia]

(...) And I always try to remember that just because a group is the loudest (online, in the media, on blogs, etc.) does not make them the majority by any means. It just makes them a loud MINORITY. That is a good thing to remember when trying to assert some type of statistical analysis to situations. So I try to always be a little more diligent in my research of any issue when formulating a position on the matter instead of just going with the loudest group. But again that may just be also naive OR 30 years in a business that requires that type of thought process.

You're so free to think that this is just a case of a few loud trolls. Doesn't make it right, but I suppose it's also easier to get a sense of what the average Dane feels about the situation when you interact with them every day

And in my experience, this is something that gets people who don't usually pay lots of attention to the DRF talking. And those people aren't angry with M&F but disappointed. The sentiment is "I expected more from them".

Without deliberately trying to throw Joachim under the bus, I think he would've gotten out of this situation a lot better than M&F. The concept of allowing one's children to potentially endure (or partake in) what some of those kids have endured is much more befitting someone with Joachim's disciplined, old-fashioned and slightly self-elevated character. But M&F have positioned and framed themselves as progressive and down to earth. That is reflected in especially Mary's patronages but also in their choice of Tranegårdsskolen and cargo-biking their nanny around town. My experience is that this case and M&F's reaction has put a dent in the average Dane's illusions about them.

But even if you don't believe the above, I can guarantee you the DRF – notoriously poor at reading the room communicatively – wouldn't react with a statement like this if the critical voices only consisted a handful of sensationalist journalists and internet trolls They react because the backlash has been sizeable and I think especially the visit to Haslev was a wake-up call.

 

[Muhler]

I'm not so sure it's that big a deal in the eyes of the average Dane or that that many are talking about.
It's my impression that this is a topic that people talk about for a few minutes if someone happens to bring it up.
I personally haven't heard people discuss it in canteens or when meeting the neighbors walking the dog.

My mother-in-law talks about it in her circle, but that's because she's a super royalist.
So IMO it's more a topic, you have to look for.

It IMO only got to this level, because:
A) TV2 has two days in a row brought it up in prime-time news and because the BT-dude who cover royalty has written about it, which includes interviewing himself on the matter...
B) Because M&F handled this in a clumsy matter. - Had they issued this statement say a month ago, that would have been it.

It merely shows that the DRF and that means M&F, because they have taken over so much, really need a professional in dealing with damage control, both preventing and handling damage.
It's a weakness some of the DRF members have. They react like normal human beings, especially in regards to their children: None of your business!
Which is something I can get away with, but alas, M&F are not me, so they can't.

 

[polyesco]

Better late than never.

A bit long-winded for my taste though. I'd prefer their message to be shorter and simpler - avoids misunderstandings and interpretations.

They say pretty much what I would have said in their place.
And of course as parents you are naturally reluctant to, so to speak, "punish" your children for something others have done - and in some cases haven't done.
And they have left a door open, so that is something nasty occurs r is exposed they still have the option of pulling their children out.

This is parents talking and that is IMO something parents can understand and sympathize with.

Very true. It must be very hard to be parents during these times, and especially having your parenting questioned.
It must be difficult to see your kids being called "brats" or "spoiled" for no fault of their own. Lets be clear, there has been no evidence that Christian or Nikolai had any knowledge of this.
I do hope, this documentary will bring positive change for the school as a whole.

 

[Archduchess Zelia]

I'm not so sure it's that big a deal in the eyes of the average Dane or that that many are talking about.
It's my impression that this is a topic that people talk about for a few minutes if someone happens to bring it up.
I personally haven't heard people discuss it in canteens or when meeting the neighbors walking the dog.

My mother-in-law talks about it in her circle, but that's because she's a super royalist.
So IMO it's more a topic, you have to look for.

It IMO only got to this level, because:
A) TV2 has two days in a row brought it up in prime-time news and because the BT-dude who cover royalty has written about it, which includes interviewing himself on the matter...
B) Because M&F handled this in a clumsy matter. - Had they issued this statement say a month ago, that would have been it.

It merely shows that the DRF and that means M&F, because they have taken over so much, really need a professional in dealing with damage control, both preventing and handling damage.
It's a weakness some of the DRF members have. They react like normal human beings, especially in regards to their children: None of your business!
Which is something I can get away with, but alas, M&F are not me, so they can't.

Just because you haven't overheard canteen talk about it doesn't mean it isn't something people talk about?

My colleagues, friends, co-students, family aren't royalists and it's definitely been a subject of discussion. So while I'm certainly in no position to conduct a "statistical analysis" on the overall amount of talk it has generated across the country (), I can assure you many people are talking about it. And even if people only talk about it for a few minutes, that's still more talk than the average news about the DRF generate on average.

But I definitely agree they need to up the communications department. Sadly that has been evident for years

 

[Somebody]

To me the statement reads that as parents they are totally fine sending their children to this boarding school (even though it has systemic bullying issues), however, their position as crown prince couple makes them think twice as it might damage their credibilty.

Not a very encouraging starting point imho.

 

[polyesco]

To me it sounded that yes they are the Crown Prince Couple, but they are also parents too. They listen and value their children's voices.
Christian seems like a well adjusted young man. A sweetheart with his siblings and others.
They are open and look forward to the changes the school will bring. And they will keep a serious eye on the investigation and changes to come.

 

[Izzie]

To me it sounded that yes they are the Crown Prince Couple, but they are also parents too. They listen and value their children's voices.
Christian seems like a well adjusted young man. A sweetheart with his siblings and others.
They are open and look forward to the changes the school will bring. And they will keep a serious eye on the investigation and changes to come.

I agree. That was one of my takeaways from the statement as well.

Edited to Add:
I also see the kids (all four) as well-adjusted, loving, respectful, intelligent and articulate! It only took less than 10 minutes of watching them interact at various family events, latest being the Royal Run to see that. Christian showed what a loving big brother he is and that his siblings are adore him and vice-versa! And Isabella is a lovely young lady with alot of poise. They are teenagers that want to go to school with their friends (didn't we all at that age) and it would be wholly unfair to use that fact to make questionable assumptions about their character.

And how do people think these kids have grown up to be this way? Well, I would assume it is because they have grown up in a loving home, with loving parents, good values, respect and decency. That is attributable to the environment that Frederik and Mary have cultivated around them and instilled in them.

 

[Iolanthe]

To me the statement reads that as parents they are totally fine sending their children to this boarding school (even though it has systemic bullying issues), however, their position as crown prince couple makes them think twice as it might damage their credibilty.

Not a very encouraging starting point imho.

Yes, excactly my thoughts.
And that their children want to go to a school that has had a culture of bullying (and maybe worse) for decades - that nobody cared about while almost everbody* knew about- doesn't speak for them or their friends circle either.

*I mean, I knew about it, after I invested 10 minutes in research when they announced Christian's new school

 

[Muhler]

Just because you haven't overheard canteen talk about it doesn't mean it isn't something people talk about?

My colleagues, friends, co-students, family aren't royalists and it's definitely been a subject of discussion. So while I'm certainly in no position to conduct a "statistical analysis" on the overall amount of talk it has generated across the country (), I can assure you many people are talking about it. And even if people only talk about it for a few minutes, that's still more talk than the average news about the DRF generate on average.

But I definitely agree they need to up the communications department. Sadly that has been evident for years

Eh, I don't think I said that.

I merely said it's not my impression that people talk much about it in the circles I frequent - and they are pretty wide and diverse.
Nor do I deny it's something people talk a lot about in your circles.
So again, I'm not sure it's that big a deal for the average Dane - nationwide, to be even more specific.