Over 15 years of research tracking the occupational health of school leaders, parents and caregivers have emerged as a significant and worsening source of threatening behaviour directed at teachers and principals.
In 2025, they were identified as a source in almost two-thirds of reported threats of violence against school leaders. In 2011, that figure sat below 25%, according to the Australian Principal Occupational Health, Safety and Wellbeing Survey conducted by Australian Catholic University (ACU).
Nearly nine in ten cases of cyberbullying of school principals that year also came from parents and caregivers.
The 2025 ACU survey found that approximately 53% of principals intend to leave the role. Nearly half — 49.6% — reported having experienced physical violence at work. Those figures are consistent with the wider picture of school principal wellbeing in dramatic decline across Australia documented in recent years.
For teachers, the picture is no less confronting. Research from UNSW Sydney found that nine in ten Australian teachers are experiencing moderate to extremely severe stress. Rates of depression and anxiety run at three times the national norm. Abusive and aggressive communication from parents is part of that burden.
What's driving the increase in abuse?
Researchers point to several overlapping factors.
Greater school choice and accountability have shifted some family relationships with schools toward a more consumer-oriented model. Immediate responses are expected. Professional decisions are challenged. Dissatisfaction can escalate quickly into formal complaints, social media campaigns, or direct confrontation.
Digital communication has made these dynamics faster and further-reaching. A dispute that once ended at the school office can now spread through parent WhatsApp groups and onto public social media within hours.
A February 2026 study led by Monash University, in collaboration with Deakin University and the University of Sydney, drew on 298 critical incident testimonies from 256 school principals nationally. It found that principals are increasingly expected to manage threats and community conflict without adequate funding or system support.
What governments are doing
Victoria and South Australia have introduced legislation giving principals the power to ban abusive parents from school grounds. The laws cover behaviour in person, by phone, email, and on social media. New South Wales is also considering similar measures.
Researchers are clear that legislation alone cannot rebuild the trust and respectful communication that makes schools function. Legal powers establish a boundary — they do not prevent relationships from deteriorating in the first place.
What schools and systems need to do
The Australian Secondary Principals' Association (ASPA) 2026 policy briefing on priorities for secondary school leaders identifies principal health and wellbeing as a central concern.
The ASPA is calling for a dedicated national strategy, with allocated funding and measurable outcomes. It also calls for principals to have access to the same professional supervision available to counsellors and psychologists. Researchers say that kind of structured support is essential for leaders routinely managing critical incidents and community trauma.
On the ground, the evidence points to several practical steps.
Schools should establish clear communication expectations for parents early, before conflict arises. Staff need training and preparation to manage difficult conversations. When interactions do turn threatening, leaders must not be left to handle them alone. Clear escalation pathways and system-level backing are both essential.
The best schools for teachers in Australia in 2026 demonstrate what structured workplace protection looks like in practice: protected time, genuine wellbeing investment, and cultures where staff feel supported. These conditions reduce attrition and build institutional resilience that no code of conduct can replicate.
Schools are workplaces. The people who work in them are entitled to safety and dignity. Meeting that standard requires sustained, systemic action — not individual schools managing crisis after crisis on their own.