Teacher banned for five years after long-term relationship with former student

Seán McCárthaigh

A female secondary teacher, who has been involved in a long-term relationship with a former student that began in the summer of his Leaving Certificate exams, has been struck off and banned from reapplying to have her name restored to the Register of Teachers for a minimum of five years.

The ruling of an inquiry panel of the Teaching Council followed four findings of professional misconduct against the now 33-year-old teacher over her contact and relationship with the then 18-year-old student from her former school eight years ago.

The three-person panel also ruled that her actions represented breaches of the Code of Professional Conduct for Teachers.

The sanction followed a fitness-to-teach inquiry held over six days between June 2025 and January 2026.

Neither the teacher, who did not attend the ruling on Wednesday, nor the school, can be publicly identified.

The teacher, who is now an assistant principal in a different school, admitted earlier this year that she had deliberately deceived the inquiry by giving sworn evidence that she had no further contact with the student after admitting to a “one-off” sexual encounter with him in a hotel in early August 2018.

The teacher claimed the lie about the status of their relationship had “snowballed out of control.”

However, she denied suggestions that she had “groomed” the student, whom she had taught in fifth and sixth year, via Snapchat.

Two allegations related to their daily exchange of at least one photo or video on the social media platform between June 14th, 2018, and August 14th, 2018, while he was in the process of completing his Leaving Certificate exams and awaiting his results.

She also denied a separate allegation of engaging in “a romantic relationship” with the teenager during that summer.

The ongoing nature of their relationship was revealed to the Teaching Council by one of her teaching colleagues who had seen media reports about her evidence to the fitness-to-teach hearing last year.

He forwarded photos and images from the teacher’s Instagram account to the regulatory body, which showed the couple together between 2022 and 2025, including on a holiday in Greece.

The inquiry originally arose from a complaint to the Teaching Council by her former school principal who was made aware of her affair with the teenager by the teacher’s ex-partner.

Announcing the sanction, the inquiry chairperson, Fergal McCarthy, said its findings were “incompatible with the important role a teacher plays in the life of a student.”

McCarthy said the teacher had failed to act in the best interest of the student around the time of his Leaving Certificate and later as well as failing to show judgement and focus on the development and fostering of a positive relationship with him.

He claimed her conduct “lacked integrity, respect and mutual trust” at a time when the student was aged 18 and still developing “physically, emotionally and psychologically.”

McCarthy also observed that the teacher was about 10 years senior and had been his teacher for the previous two years.

While the sanction was based only on the inquiry’s findings, the chairperson said the dishonesty of the teacher and the student in their evidence was an aggravating factor.

McCarthy said the teacher had conspired with the student to give untruthful evidence and to hide their relationship including unfollowing him from her Instagram account on the day before the inquiry began last July.

He acknowledged that the teacher had subsequently admitted they had been in a relationship and that her former student was a big part of her life with whom she was in love.

McCarthy also pointed out that the couple’s deliberate lies had caused the inquiry considerable time and expense and had highlighted how the teacher had shown no insight into the seriousness of her conduct.

He said it also demonstrated “a lack of candour and integrity.”

McCarthy said the panel had considered prohibiting the teacher from reapplying to have her registration restored for a minimum of seven years but had reduced the period by two years to recognise that she had a blemish-free career before and since as well as the fact that the relationship had post-dated the student’s Leaving Certificate.

However, he said the sanction was necessary to protect the public from the teacher repeating such conduct which he observed “could not be discounted.”

McCarthy said the sanction would also highlight to other teachers the gravity of the case and help maintain the reputation and integrity of the teaching profession.

He described it as “proportionate and appropriate” while also allowing the teacher the opportunity to teach again in the future.

In a submission on sanction earlier, counsel for the Teaching Council, Eoghan O’Sullivan, had said it was extremely important that teachers could identify the line where their relationship with a student could cross into something unprofessional and inappropriate.

Teachers had to be trusted not to cross professional boundaries and abuse their position of power, authority and dominance, said O’Sullivan.

He added: “Unfortunately in this case, that line was crossed.”

O’Sullivan said the findings against the teacher were “at the upper end of seriousness.”

He claimed the only mitigation in the case was the elapse of time since 2018 which he noted was partially due to a legal challenge taken by the teacher.

O’Sullivan said the original position that she adopted at the inquiry was “built on a pack of lies.”

Even when faced with the evidence, he claimed the teacher had persisted in disputing that she was involved in a relationship with the student in 2018 apart from the admission of a one-off sexual encounter.

O’Sullivan said she had also implicitly contended that her former partner had manufactured his evidence to the inquiry.

However, the teacher’s solicitor, Eoin McGlinchey, stressed that there was no evidence that she had an inappropriate relationship with the student while he was in school.

McGlinchey pointed out that the student was 18 at the time of the sexual encounter and considered a fully developed responsible adult and not someone regarded as vulnerable.

He also observed it was unlike other cases where a teacher and a student had sex as the couple had now been in “a loving and committed relationship” between consenting adults for over six years.

McGlinchey acknowledged they had misled the inquiry and while not excusing the fact, he said their desire to conceal their relationship was understandable,

He pointed out that his client had not come to the attention of the Teaching Council before or since the allegations relating to eight years ago.

The sanction of removing the teacher’s name from the register will not take effect until it is formally confirmed by the High Court.