TEACHERS will be relieved that Marjorie Evans has been cleared of assaulting an unruly pupil.

The High Court judge ruled that she had "administered the entirely appropriate form of restraint hold".

Teachers have been given guidance by the Department for Education about how they can "use reasonable force to control or restrain pupils". They can hold, push, pull, lead and even place a hand in the centre of the offending pupil's back.

However, the same guidance points out that there is no legal definition of what is "reasonable force". Therefore, every time a teacher intervenes, they are treading a thin line. Only their judgement of what is reasonable force can save them from a complaint.

Yesterday's ruling does not alter where that thin line is drawn. It certainly does not bend it so that teachers are given freedom to show violence to children. They are still not allowed to slap or hit their charges - and nor should they be.

Yesterday's ruling merely says that Mrs Evans did not cross the line.

It is sad, though, that we are having this debate. Ten-year-old children, even if they do have special needs, should not be pushing, punching and head-butting teachers.

And that, more often than not, comes down to the parents. If we expect teachers to act reasonably and responsibly, we should also expect parents to act reasonably and responsibly. All too often, parents are keen to support their child - even when, as in this case, they admit he can be a little "monster" - rather than their school.

But if we trust teachers enough to give them our children, we really ought to trust their judgement on disciplinary matters in all but the most exceptional of cases. It might also be added that special needs teachers, like Mrs Evans, are usually very special people themselves.