Terence McHenry

Introduction

Terence McHenry taught at special-education settings including King’s College in Taunton and the Sheiling School in Thornbury. In November 2022 a Teaching Regulation Agency professional conduct panel found he concealed his medical history and alcohol issues from both schools on pre-employment questionnaires and during disciplinary investigations, attended work unfit and under the influence, and sent threatening messages — including a text to Pupil A’s mother stating “tell him I will kill him”, and messages to his headteacher warning “it is a declaration of war” and “You won’t like me when I am angry”. McHenry did not respond to the allegations. Decision maker Sarah Buxcey banned him from teaching indefinitely with a five-year review period.

Background Information

The dishonesty findings span four episodes: the pre-employment medical questionnaire of 16 October 2010 for King’s College, Taunton; the February 2015 disciplinary investigation there; the pre-employment medical questionnaire of 24 October 2018 for the Sheiling School; and the September 2019 disciplinary investigation at Sheiling. Each time, McHenry provided false or misleading information about, or failed to disclose, his previous medical history and issues with alcohol. The panel also found he attended work unfit to do so and under the influence of alcohol — at King’s College around 11 February 2015 and at Sheiling around 30 August 2019. The texting offences came at the end of the sequence, in August 2019, when the Sheiling placement was collapsing.

The Controversy or Incident That Led to Their Cancellation

“Tell him I will kill him”: the text to a pupil’s mother capped concealment findings at two schools; five-year review.

On or around 6 August 2019 McHenry texted Pupil A’s mother with the words “tell him I will kill him”, referring to the pupil. To his headteacher he wrote on or around 9 August 2019 that “If anyone tried to get into my home, it is a declaration of war. And you don’t threaten the McHenry family”, and a week later that “But I am becoming angry with his attitude. You won’t like me when I am angry” and “But do not bullshit me”. The panel found the concealment allegations proved across all four episodes — finding his conduct lacked integrity and was dishonest — and found the two unfit-for-work incidents proved. McHenry provided no response to the notice of proceedings, and the case was heard in his absence with no mitigation before the panel.

Public Reaction and Consequences

The panel treated the combination as seriously aggravating: sustained dishonesty toward two employers about the very history that bore on his fitness to teach, repeated unfit attendance at special-education settings, and direct threats that reached a pupil through his mother. The absence of any response, insight or mitigation left the public-interest balance one-sided, and the recommendation of a five-year review reflected both the gravity of the threats and the concealment pattern. Buxcey adopted it, finding prohibition necessary to protect pupils and maintain confidence. The published decision is the case’s main public record; neither school’s handling nor the ban attracted press coverage. The case sits in the concealment-plus-threats tier of TRA outcomes, where dishonesty findings do the structural damage and the threats supply the severity.

Current Status

McHenry is prohibited from teaching indefinitely and cannot teach in any school, sixth form college, relevant youth accommodation or children’s home in England. He may apply for the order to be set aside, but not until 25 November 2027 — five years from the date of Buxcey’s order, 22 November 2022, at the earliest — and an application is not an automatic right; a panel would decide whether the order should be lifted. The panel’s determination is dated 17 November 2022. He retains a right of appeal to the King’s Bench Division of the High Court within 28 days of notice of the order.

Impact on Their Career/Life

The case is a compound failure record: two schools, nine years apart, were each misled on intake about the same underlying history, and each in turn discovered it in a disciplinary setting — meaning the second school hired him precisely because the first concealment had never been regulatorily recorded. That gap is what the five-year review and publication are designed to close: any future employer checking the TRA record will see the full pattern. For special-education settings, where staff fitness and emotional regulation carry heightened weight, the threatening texts to a pupil’s mother made retention impossible regardless of his classroom record; for McHenry, the earliest path back to teaching runs through demonstrating insight he showed no sign of at the hearing.

Sources

• Dept for Education, “Teacher misconduct panel outcome: Mr Terence McHenry” — source