In recent weeks, a protected account has been deeply involved with Nicole Georgas, a courageous mother who spoke out at the District 109 board meeting in Deerfield. Through their numerous discussions since the onset of the incident, every time they thought that they had heard the worst, something even more egregious arose, compelling them to document her story. It began with secondary school teachers and administrators neglecting the concerns of young girls, which evolved into these same adults actively placing the girls in unsafe situations. And now? It’s escalated to outright lawbreaking without any repercussions—an undeniable example of uncovering neglect.

Uncovering Neglect: A Timeline of Treachery in District 109

Every parent, educator, and anyone who cherishes the safety and dignity of children should be asking: Why has no one been charged? The Deerfield Public Schools District 109 knowingly violated the rights of young girls, placing them into an unsafe and highly uncomfortable situation. School officials were repeatedly warned, protested against, and informed that their actions were wrong—yet they persisted. This was neither an accident nor a judgment error; it was a deliberate choice to ignore the voices of young girls and institutionalise the breach of their privacy. Despite this, not a single teacher or administrator has been held accountable—yet another chapter in uncovering neglect.

How did we arrive at this point? Let’s explore the timeline that unravels it all.

Events That Uncover Neglect at Deerfield Public Schools District 109

• 5th February: Cate (13 years old) was using the girls’ toilet when she saw a male student exiting a stall, realising for the first time that her privacy in a space meant exclusively for girls had been compromised.
• 24th February: In response, the girls in Cate’s P.E. class organised a silent protest, refusing to change into their gym kits with the male student—whom they called Fred—present in their changing room. Their refusal was a courageous stand against an imposed situation.
• 25th February: The school administration reacted, not by protecting the girls or addressing their concerns, but by interrogating the students about their refusal to change. Several girls were brought into Assistant Principal Cathy Van Treese’s office for questioning, yet Cate was not questioned that morning.
• On the same day: Joanna Ford (Assistant Superintendent of DPS 109), Cathy Van Treese, Robin Tortorella, Linda Van Vlissingen, and two other teachers allowed the male student to remain in the changing room while girls were present, officially sanctioning the policy.
• 26th February: Cate, absent from the changing room due to a separate P.E. activity, later discovered that again, the male student was present with the girls, as were the same school administrators and teachers who ignored their concerns.
• 27th February: The pattern repeated. Joanna Ford, Cathy Van Treese, and other teachers allowed the male student’s continued presence in the girls’ changing room, despite knowing the distress it caused.
• 3rd March: A meeting was held by Joanna Ford and Ginger Logerman (Director of Student Services for District 109), which instead of protecting the girls, escalated the situation.
• 4th March: The most egregious decision—assigning the male student a locker inside the girls’ changing room—ensured institutionalised privacy violations. These girls were not merely dismissed; their rights were entirely stripped—exemplifying uncovering neglect.

Uncovering Neglect: Why Hasn’t Anyone Been Charged?

According to Illinois law, the behaviour of the school officials aligns with multiple criminal offences:

• Sexual Exploitation of a Child: It is illegal for an adult to expose a minor to nudity or a sexual situation, which occurred when teachers and administrators forced girls to undress in front of a male student.
• Criminal Sexual Assault & Indecent Solicitation: Coercing or forcing a minor into a situation involving nudity or exposure constitutes a felony.
• Mandatory Reporting Violations: Teachers and administrators had a legal duty to report this, yet they facilitated it instead.

If an unrelated adult coerced 12-year-old girls into undressing in front of him, there would be no hesitation in contacting the authorities. So why should teachers and administrators be treated differently?

For more details on educational policies and accountability, visit your local government’s website for guidance and support.

Discuss, Share, Connect. – Register (it’s free)