6-year-old expelled over Cub Scout utensil

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by deepimpact2

lmao 13 years ago? Really? vast difference between kids then and kids now.

But here are some things you should recognize if you have experience in a school system. . .and a few other things you should realize:
1. the school system has to make sure that they are covered with respect to liability. So whether someone thinks the policy is too rigid or not, they have to do what is going to protect them from a lawsuit.
2. i think everyone recognizes that those kinds of kids need structure, and no one is questioning their intellectual prowess. However, that is irrelevant on the subject of whether there should be a zero tolerance weapons policy.
3. situations like this are why the school systems are steadily declining. From here on out parents really don't need to complain about school violence because when the school authorities try to really crack down and create policies to help combat such issues, the parents want to raise hell. Schools are just too political now. Often public outcry manages to force school officials to override doing the RIGHT thing. In this instance, the RIGHT thing was to punish him in accordance with the policy. And the fact that his mother is justifying his behavior is absolutely absurd. More evidence of what is going wrong with children and schools today.
4. while they are promoting the fact that he is a cub scout so heavily, perhaps they should question why someone in his cub scout group didn't advise him NOT to take the utensil to school. furthermore, why didn't his MOTHER advise him not to take the utensil to school and check to make sure he didn't?
5. i would also like to know why the media is publishing his name and his picture. don't they usually avoid doing that for minors? i suspect the goal was to get more people to rally against the school system by tugging at heartstrings. Realistically speaking, had the article simply stated that a 6yr old had taken a knife, spoon, fork utensil to school and left out the picture and cub scout references, there would not have been as much outcry.

There really isn't that much of a difference. What matters really is the school system.

I love how you JUST KEEP telling me that these are thing "I should realize" when what I realize is that these are some things that YOU should realize is simply "out of your control".

This is the media we are talking about. An entity that THRIVES off of bad news if they made things 'simple', they wouldn't stay in business.

And to answer your number 5, I think the picture in the article and this passage:

“Zachary wears a suit and tie some days to school by his own choice because he takes school so seriously,” said Debbie Christie, Zachary’s mother, who started a Web site, helpzachary.com, in hopes of recruiting supporters to pressure the local school board at its next open meeting on Tuesday. “He is not some sort of threat to his classmates.

”Uhhhh...COMMON SENSE to me sounds like the parents (which is what's needed for the news to print that info in the first place) gave PERMISSION for the media TO USE his likeness...but, hey...what do I know?


and to your number 3, I think we have expressed that one already since the beginning of the thread and THAT was simple in case you missed it: LACK OF COMMON SENSE.



That sums this WHOLE ENTIRE thread up nicely.

Oh and I am sorry...but what do you mean by "Those Kinds of Kids"? exactly to whom are you referring to? What is the difference between those kids and "other" kids? How do you quantify such an empirical and wide sweeping statement? How many different school systems in how many years have you taught to know the difference?

I am really hoping you aren't referring to the type of kids I taught.


...hypocrite.

[AGDee]

I can't help but sit here and think, IF this kid had cut another kid with this knife, then the news media and bulletin boards all over the country would be lamenting over the fact that someone knew this kid had a knife at school and nobody did anything about it. This is one of those issues where I can kind of see both sides and I'm totally on the fence about just what schools should do. Sure, the National Honor Society kid who took a knife to school to cut a cake and got suspended seems silly. Yes, it seems silly to take an eating utensil away from a 6 year old Cub Scout. But, NHS kids and Cub Scouts are not exempt from being emotionally disturbed or from an impulsive violent act. They are also not exempt from having that knife taken from them by another kid who might be more prone to using it in a violent manner. I worked in child and adolescent psych for years and I definitely saw 6 year olds who were highly aggressive and at risk for harming someone else. I also saw teenagers in the NHS who were the same. Sometimes you don't know what a kid is thinking until they act.

Schools have to manage their risk somehow. They have chosen to use zero tolerance to avoid it altogether. I'm not sure I blame them, even though it seems ridiculous in certain situations. Similarly to how GLOs have banned things completely rather than trying to manage them (like scavenger hunts).

So, does one instance seem silly? Sure, absolutely. Does the rule seem inflexible? Absolutely. But, it's the easy way out for the schools. As long as there is some sort of appeal process (our district does have one), I really can't argue too strongly against their choice. Case by case seems more logical, yes. But schools certainly aren't the only entity to avoid risk by banning something rather than using careful evaluation of each case.

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by AGDee

I can't help but sit here and think, IF this kid had cut another kid with this knife, then the news media and bulletin boards all over the country would be lamenting over the fact that someone knew this kid had a knife at school and nobody did anything about it. This is one of those issues where I can kind of see both sides and I'm totally on the fence about just what schools should do. Sure, the National Honor Society kid who took a knife to school to cut a cake and got suspended seems silly. Yes, it seems silly to take an eating utensil away from a 6 year old Cub Scout. But, NHS kids and Cub Scouts are not exempt from being emotionally disturbed or from an impulsive violent act. They are also not exempt from having that knife taken from them by another kid who might be more prone to using it in a violent manner. I worked in child and adolescent psych for years and I definitely saw 6 year olds who were highly aggressive and at risk for harming someone else. I also saw teenagers in the NHS who were the same. Sometimes you don't know what a kid is thinking until they act.

Schools have to manage their risk somehow. They have chosen to use zero tolerance to avoid it altogether. I'm not sure I blame them, even though it seems ridiculous in certain situations. Similarly to how GLOs have banned things completely rather than trying to manage them (like scavenger hunts).

So, does one instance seem silly? Sure, absolutely. Does the rule seem inflexible? Absolutely. But, it's the easy way out for the schools. As long as there is some sort of appeal process (our district does have one), I really can't argue too strongly against their choice. Case by case seems more logical, yes. But schools certainly aren't the only entity to avoid risk by banning something rather than using careful evaluation of each case.

That is very well put AGDee... I still can't help to think that there were many other ways that this could have been dealt with without the shcool system going so far.

[SydneyK]

Originally Posted by AGDee

So, does one instance seem silly? Sure, absolutely. Does the rule seem inflexible? Absolutely. But, it's the easy way out for the schools. As long as there is some sort of appeal process (our district does have one), I really can't argue too strongly against their choice. Case by case seems more logical, yes. But schools certainly aren't the only entity to avoid risk by banning something rather than using careful evaluation of each case.

Well said, AGDee. I particularly agree with the bolded (my emphasis). My only concern with the appeal process is what happens to the student while the appeal is under consideration? In this student's case, his mom was able to home school him. Most/many students would not have that option available to them. It seems unfair (yes, I know, who said life was fair) for the student to be penalized while the appeal is underway. Kinda tosses out the innocent until proven guilty theory (then again, I recognize the importance of keeping all students safe while determining innocence/guilt).

I'm still on the fence, too. I truly can see both sides. Unfortunately, either side seems like an extreme (way too strict vs. extremely naive). I'm having a hard time finding a way to identify the median. So far, strict policy with an appeal process seems to be the best option.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by AGDee

I can't help but sit here and think, IF this kid had cut another kid with this knife, then the news media and bulletin boards all over the country would be lamenting over the fact that someone knew this kid had a knife at school and nobody did anything about it.

No one is advocating that the school does nothing about it. Kids shouldn't have potential weapons in school, even if it is unintentionally a potential weapon.

It's a difference in opinion over what the school should've done.

I say the school should've taken the knife (duh), called the parents, talked to the kid and the parents, and given the kid a warning with the next offense being suspension (or whatever).

[AGDee]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

No one is advocating that the school does nothing about it. Kids shouldn't have potential weapons in school, even if it is unintentionally a potential weapon.

It's a difference in opinion over what the school should've done.

I say the school should've taken the knife (duh), called the parents, talked to the kid and the parents, and given the kid a warning with the next offense being suspension (or whatever).

And I think that's what I was trying to say earlier. We don't know if that didn't happen the first two or three times this kid took the knife to school. We have no way of knowing whether this is a pattern for this kid...

I think we ALL (I do it too) are quick to make judgments on how other people should react in situations when we have only heard one side of the media hyped story and the other side is bound to confidentiality so they can't tell their story. I'd agree that, if things happened exactly as presented by the mom and kid, then the punishment was extreme.

I was a little concerned about the kid's own statement "It's a dumb rule" because I'm wondering if he thinks it is dumb to ban knives from school or if he thinks it is dumb to be expelled/suspended for doing so.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by AGDee

And I think that's what I was trying to say earlier. We don't know if that didn't happen the first two or three times this kid took the knife to school. We have no way of knowing whether this is a pattern for this kid...

Right, so until we have reason to believe this is a pattern for this kid, we will keep saying they should've given a warning first.

It's interesting when the traditionally understood concept of "well, we don't know the complete story" becomes overstated, even to the point where people (not you) feel all opinions are unjustified and the discussion should cease.

[deepimpact2]

Originally Posted by AGDee

I was a little concerned about the kid's own statement "It's a dumb rule" because I'm wondering if he thinks it is dumb to ban knives from school or if he thinks it is dumb to be expelled/suspended for doing so.

He has been led to believe by his mother that he should speak out against the rule because it is wrong based on the punishment. That's probably why he said that.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

No one is advocating that the school does nothing about it. Kids shouldn't have potential weapons in school, even if it is unintentionally a potential weapon.

It's a difference in opinion over what the school should've done.

I say the school should've taken the knife (duh), called the parents, talked to the kid and the parents, and given the kid a warning with the next offense being suspension (or whatever).

Exactly.

I also think it's funny that it was suggested that allowing discretion was naive, but apparently it's not naive to assume that zero tolerance is consistently enforced by the same people who can't be trusted with discretion.

[deepimpact2]

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

There really isn't that much of a difference. What matters really is the school system.

I love how you JUST KEEP telling me that these are thing "I should realize" when what I realize is that these are some things that YOU should realize is simply "out of your control".

This is the media we are talking about. An entity that THRIVES off of bad news if they made things 'simple', they wouldn't stay in business.

And to answer your number 5, I think the picture in the article and this passage:

“Zachary wears a suit and tie some days to school by his own choice because he takes school so seriously,” said Debbie Christie, Zachary’s mother, who started a Web site, helpzachary.com, in hopes of recruiting supporters to pressure the local school board at its next open meeting on Tuesday. “He is not some sort of threat to his classmates.

”Uhhhh...COMMON SENSE to me sounds like the parents (which is what's needed for the news to print that info in the first place) gave PERMISSION for the media TO USE his likeness...but, hey...what do I know?


and to your number 3, I think we have expressed that one already since the beginning of the thread and THAT was simple in case you missed it: LACK OF COMMON SENSE.



That sums this WHOLE ENTIRE thread up nicely.

Oh and I am sorry...but what do you mean by "Those Kinds of Kids"? exactly to whom are you referring to? What is the difference between those kids and "other" kids? How do you quantify such an empirical and wide sweeping statement? How many different school systems in how many years have you taught to know the difference?

I am really hoping you aren't referring to the type of kids I taught.


...hypocrite.

Seeing as how you and others felt I was wrong for taking offense to the term "you," YOU are the hypocrite if you get upset at my usage of the phrase "those kinds of kids."

And while I notice yu want to put common sense in bold and all caps, the fact remains that YOU aren't using common sense in analysing the situation. Rules are in place to be followed. If they wanted to have a process where the weapon was confiscated first, then that is what they would have put in place. They didn't. I can't blame them.

Also, to reiterate a point I made earlier, there is something WRONG with a parent who is going to act as though her child did nothing wrong. This woman has GOT to be crazy. And I'm pretty sure had her son been at school and gotten cut with another child's knife, she would have been on the other side of the fence.

School systems need to stop being so political and allowing parents to run over them. Many parents are just NOT going to accept or admit that their child is wrong in certain instances...especially when doing so means their child will be suspended or sent to an alternative school. That is when officials have to be firm. That is one thing I will say about my school system (the one I attended and last worked in). The superintendent was very supportive of the principals in these types of situations and the board always backed him. They didn't let the parents try to tell them how to run the schools when it came to things like this. If there was a policy in place, that was it. No allowances were going to be made for one child as opposed to another.

ETA: This does not mean that every policy in place is a good one. In one school system where I worked, water guns were treated the same as real guns. Therefore if a child brought a water gun to school, they would be suspended for 365 days. I do think that is too stringent and should be changed, but luckily that policy only came into play once.

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by deepimpact2

Seeing as how you and others felt I was wrong for taking offense to the term "you," YOU are the hypocrite if you get upset at my usage of the phrase "those kinds of kids."

And while I notice yu want to put common sense in bold and all caps, the fact remains that YOU aren't using common sense in analysing the situation. Rules are in place to be followed. If they wanted to have a process where the weapon was confiscated first, then that is what they would have put in place. They didn't. I can't blame them.

Also, to reiterate a point I made earlier, there is something WRONG with a parent who is going to act as though her child did nothing wrong. This woman has GOT to be crazy. And I'm pretty sure had her son been at school and gotten cut with another child's knife, she would have been on the other side of the fence.

School systems need to stop being so political and allowing parents to run over them. Many parents are just NOT going to accept or admit that their child is wrong in certain instances...especially when doing so means their child will be suspended or sent to an alternative school. That is when officials have to be firm. That is one thing I will say about my school system (the one I attended and last worked in). The superintendent was very supportive of the principals in these types of situations and the board always backed him. They didn't let the parents try to tell them how to run the schools when it came to things like this. If there was a policy in place, that was it. No allowances were going to be made for one child as opposed to another.

Ok...exactly how thick headed and blind are you?

I'm not upset over 'those kind of kids' I actually find it funny that you had the STONES to even post that little ditty after the bullshyte you put KSig and Kevin through last weekend over that post you knee jerked over and everyone and their gran'ma had to explain the context TO YOU.

Having a hard time now trying to explain 'those types of children' hmm?

Doesn't feel so good now does it?

Any ol' ways...moving from your irrelevant rants to another.


Yes. Rules are in place to be followed...rules are also in place to be interpreted which is WHY rules tend to CHANGE.


and this...

School systems need to stop being so political and allowing parents to run over them. Many parents are just NOT going to accept or admit that their child is wrong in certain instances...

Just as some schools need to be fair and not think that every little child that walks in the door and makes ONE mistake (that can easily corrected by education and not punishment) will make that child a hardened criminal.

Read the article.

He. Did. Not. Know.

He is SIX.

[deepimpact2]

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

Ok...exactly how thick headed and blind are you?

I'm not upset over 'those kind of kids' I actually find it funny that you had the STONES to even post that little ditty after the bullshyte you put KSig and Kevin through last weekend over that post you knee jerked over and everyone and their gran'ma had to explain the context TO YOU.

Having a hard time now trying to explain 'those types of children' hmm?

Doesn't feel so good now does it?

Any ol' ways...moving from your irrelevant rants to another.


Yes. Rules are in place to be followed...rules are also in place to be interpreted which is WHY rules tend to CHANGE.


and this...

School systems need to stop being so political and allowing parents to run over them. Many parents are just NOT going to accept or admit that their child is wrong in certain instances...

Just as some schools need to be fair and not think that every little child that walks in the door and makes ONE mistake (that can easily corrected by education and not punishment) will make that child a hardened criminal.

Read the article.

He. Did. Not. Know.

He is SIX.

No, I'm not having a hard time explaining my terminology. I made it clear in that other thread that from now on, none of you need to get offended when I use such terminology since you pitched a fit over the way I reacted to it. So that isn't me being hypocritical. I am now doing what YOU and others said was perfectly fine. So YOU have no grounds to complain. If you had the intellectual prowess you THINK you have, you would have realized that.

In response to your statement about acting as though the child is a hardened criminal because of one mistake...I don't think anyone is saying this child or any other child who has one incident is a hardened criminal. The point is that it is far too risky for school officials to start making allowances on a case-by-case basis. How fair would it be for them to determine that one child needs a "talking to" and that another child needs severe punishment? If you have one rule that covers it all, at least you don't allow much room for abuse of discretion.

And if you would stop trying to come against me so hard and use your head you would realize that.

Finally, with respect to your comment that he did not know? What's your point? Ignorance of the law is no excuse. Even at six school officials can make a child understand that they cannot bring guns or knives to school. Furthermore, his mother knew, yet she is responding as though this is just truly shocking. Perhaps she should have confiscated the knife in her own home only allowing him access to it when he is supervised. Wait, I'm sorry, that's asking for a parent to do their job as a parent. My bad.

You're pathetic.

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by deepimpact2

No, I'm not having a hard time explaining my terminology. I made it clear in that other thread that from now on, none of you need to get offended when I use such terminology since you pitched a fit over the way I reacted to it. So that isn't me being hypocritical. I am now doing what YOU and others said was perfectly fine. So YOU have no grounds to complain. If you had the intellectual prowess you THINK you have, you would have realized that.

In response to your statement about acting as though the child is a hardened criminal because of one mistake...I don't think anyone is saying this child or any other child who has one incident is a hardened criminal. The point is that it is far too risky for school officials to start making allowances on a case-by-case basis. How fair would it be for them to determine that one child needs a "talking to" and that another child needs severe punishment? If you have one rule that covers it all, at least you don't allow much room for abuse of discretion.

And if you would stop trying to come against me so hard and use your head you would realize that.

Finally, with respect to your comment that he did not know? What's your point? Ignorance of the law is no excuse. Even at six school officials can make a child understand that they cannot bring guns or knives to school. Furthermore, his mother knew, yet she is responding as though this is just truly shocking. Perhaps she should have confiscated the knife in her own home only allowing him access to it when he is supervised. Wait, I'm sorry, that's asking for a parent to do their job as a parent. My bad.

You're pathetic.

Woman please...nobody pitched a fit except you.

Because you think everyone on GC has an agenda towards you...

And after reading your last post...well throwing spitballs against a brick wall explaining why your opinions are fails per each post is useless, so let's K.I.M.

Originally Posted by DrPhil

And it's really stupid because we alllllllllllllll agree that the kid shouldn't have the damn knife at school. What the hell is deepimpact butthurt over?

If it makes her feel any better, Obama still has his Nobel Peace Prize.

Oh I dunno, maybe because 7 or 8 of us agree and she is the odd one out and we won't let her have the last word...so why don't we all shut up and let her so she has something to feel good about today, hmmm?

[deepimpact2]

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

Woman please...nobody pitched a fit except you.

Because you think everyone on GC has an agenda towards you...

And after reading your last post...well throwing spitballs against a brick wall explaining why your opinions are fails per each post is useless, so let's K.I.M.



Oh I dunno, maybe because 7 or 8 of us agree and she is the odd one out and we won't let her have the last word...so why don't we all shut up and let her so she has something to feel good about today, hmmm?

I don't care about being the odd one out because in the grand scheme of things I have found that most of the opinions of the same few who always disagree with me are not based in reality or actual knowledge. Periodically I talk to different people about the things said here on GC in response to various issues. Overwhelmingly I have found that most people I talk to think the opinions of those 7 or 8 are off base. And the people I talk to have no qualms about telling me if they disagree with me.

So I wear it as a badge of honor that I'm "the odd one out" on this issue because your ideas about how schools should handle this type of situation are beyond absurd. Not only do they show a lack of knowledge, and a willingness to disregard rules, but also they show a lack of concern for the welfare of other students in general.

Oh and you might want to lose the generalizations. I never said EVERYONE on GC has an agenda against me. It is just the same few that try to raise hell in every thread.

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by deepimpact2

I don't care about being the odd one out because in the grand scheme of things I have found that most of the opini...blah blah blah...blahblah blah.

Originally Posted by deepimpact2

No, the problem is that you and a few others were just determined from the beginning since you decided you didn't like me for whatever stupid reason, that you we..blah blah blah.

Pssst....this thread nor any others you hijack are about you.

There. I said it. Now go run tell dat.

and Yes Vandal Squirrel, that is EXACTLY what DS was doing leave it to DI to take it seriously.