yet another policy gone a bit mad...

[Gwenhwyfar]

cheerleader suspended over facebook photo

 

hope the vid link works...

 

even if you forget about the whole 'should schools be able to dictate what students do on their OWN time' thing (sometimes i can agree with those types of policies and sometimes not - depends on the situation and THIS situation i don't believe fits it) aspect, the MOTHER has confirmed that she was there and her daughter did NOT consume any alcohol, and she demonstrates in the video how the photo actually was taken and that it's misleading. (the arms crossed thing - which i've done with people myself and bet many of you have) ....

 

i don't know why the school didn't drop the issue when the parents verified that it was a misunderstanding (and misinterpretation of the photo)....are they actually saying "sorry parents, we think you're lying" ??

[Perry]

My dd is a pom, and it's made very, VERY, clear to them, that you don't ever put yourself in a position where it even appears that you might be drinking. Kids have been suspended from the squad for being at a party where alcohol is present, even if they aren't drinking.

 

This girl might not have been drinking, but I'll bet she knew full well that it that picture would have been unacceptable to the administration. If that were my daughter I'd be fully supportive of the school's decision.

Edited October 22, 2010 by Perry

[LauraGB]

I can't tell you how horribly livid I would be if I was that mother. It seems pretty invasive for the school to be using personal pics from a family wedding to oust a student, and even more so to still follow through after a legitimate explanation (one I'm not sure they are due, frankly) from the PARENTS? I would think the "innocent until *proven* guilty" theory should certainly apply to this kid (it applies to heinous criminals, doesn't it?). Ridiculous.

[Perry]

It seems pretty invasive for the school to be using personal pics from a family wedding to oust a student,

But it's on facebook. It's not private anymore.

[Barry Goldwater]

Using the school's logic, she should be arrested for public nudity as well...I can't see whether she's holding the beer, or WHETHER SHE'S DRESSED. Idiotic...school bureaocrats fail, IMO.

[Unicorn.]

I can't tell you how horribly livid I would be if I was that mother. It seems pretty invasive for the school to be using personal pics from a family wedding to oust a student, and even more so to still follow through after a legitimate explanation (one I'm not sure they are due, frankly) from the PARENTS? I would think the "innocent until *proven* guilty" theory should certainly apply to this kid (it applies to heinous criminals, doesn't it?). Ridiculous.

 

:iagree:

[*********]

I can't tell you how horribly livid I would be if I was that mother. It seems pretty invasive for the school to be using personal pics from a family wedding to oust a student, and even more so to still follow through after a legitimate explanation (one I'm not sure they are due, frankly) from the PARENTS? I would think the "innocent until *proven* guilty" theory should certainly apply to this kid (it applies to heinous criminals, doesn't it?). Ridiculous.

 

:iagree: Laura said it just right.

[Gwenhwyfar]

My dd is a pom, and it's made very, VERY, clear to them, that you don't ever put yourself in a position where it even appears that you might be drinking. Kids have been suspended from the squad for being at a party where alcohol is present, even if they aren't drinking.

 

 

"where it even appears"

 

so now the expectation is that students have to be careful what other people might MISTAKENLY and INCORRECTLY believe?

 

that's ridiculous, imo.

 

by that sort of thinking, a student shouldn't even be allowed to attend....hmmm... a family wedding?

[Gwenhwyfar]

I can't tell you how horribly livid I would be if I was that mother. It seems pretty invasive for the school to be using personal pics from a family wedding to oust a student, and even more so to still follow through after a legitimate explanation (one I'm not sure they are due, frankly) from the PARENTS? I would think the "innocent until *proven* guilty" theory should certainly apply to this kid (it applies to heinous criminals, doesn't it?). Ridiculous.

 

 

well said. :)

[JumpedIntoTheDeepEndFirst]

I think another aspect of the story that shouldn't be missed is that she met with school officials without the option to have her parents present. The meeting to determine her guilt and punishment had no one present to represent her interests. Another example of the loss of parental rights.

[mommaduck]

Good grief...it's obvious from the photo that that beer bottle is nowhere near her mouth, but rather being held closer to the camera than the girl (as stated by the mother, being held by someone else). Of course, I've read quite a bit about photography...but you can tell by the size of the bottle compared to the size of her face.

 

It was a family celebratory event (a wedding). You can't restrict an athlete from attending weddings, communion, etc just because of the presence of alcohol (so if there was a photo of her drinking wine from a communion cup on facebook, she should be suspended as well? According to the rules...). If someone snapped a photo of her bringing beer or champagne out to a table, then that would cause her to be suspended also.

 

This is definitely overstepping. Whomever turned the photo into the school was simply trying to cause trouble for her.

[Gwenhwyfar]

But it's on facebook. It's not private anymore.

 

i doubt that the school administrators were on her friends list. :tongue_smilie:

 

but really though - this was a family wedding, with parents present (who have now corrected the administrations MISINTERPRETATION of the scenario).. this was not - as the policy is no doubt created to deal with - an underage bush party.

[Unicorn.]

But it's on facebook. It's not private anymore.

 

Just because it is on facebook, doesn't mean that the school should be able to use it against her. It was family photos, shared between family and friends- that's why facebook has privacy settings. Just because we put something on facebook, doesn't mean it's ok for the world to see.

 

Your emails are private, but they fly through cyberspace to get to the intended person, does that make them open to everyone- no. It should be the same w/ FB. IMHO anyway:001_smile: (smilie, just in case that came across snarky-)

[JumpedIntoTheDeepEndFirst]

My dd is a pom, and it's made very, VERY, clear to them, that you don't ever put yourself in a position where it even appears that you might be drinking. Kids have been suspended from the squad for being at a party where alcohol is present, even if they aren't drinking.

 

This girl might not have been drinking, but I'll bet she knew full well that it that picture would have been unacceptable to the administration. If that were my daughter I'd be fully supportive of the school's decision.

 

 

If the photo was from a wedding- is that now the standard? Cheerleaders may no longer attend wedding receptions. Even if they are for family members.

 

As for the wisdom of putting the photo on facebook-I guess it depends on who did that-her or someone else.

 

A rule intended to preserve the dignity of their cheer squad has been ripped totally out of context.

 

This is an issue that the school needs to revisit in consultation with the parents and fuller evidence before making their decision final.

[mommaduck]

If the photo was from a wedding- is that now the standard? Cheerleaders may no longer attend wedding receptions. Even if they are for family members.

 

As for the wisdom of putting the photo on facebook-I guess it depends on who did that-her or someone else.

 

A rule intended to preserve the dignity of their cheer squad has been ripped totally out of context.

 

This is an issue that the school needs to revisit in consultation with the parents and fuller evidence before making their decision final.

 

Also, you have the issue that other people can post photos to their albums, tag you in them, and it will show up on YOUR album page where all your friends can see it. She would have had to avoid the wedding or avoid getting her photo taken at all in order to avoid having her and any alcohol at that wedding to not be in the same photo at the same time.

[Unicorn.]

It was a family celebratory event (a wedding). You can't restrict an athlete from attending weddings, communion, etc just because of the presence of alcohol (so if there was a photo of her drinking wine from a communion cup on facebook, she should be suspended as well? According to the rules...). If someone snapped a photo of her bringing beer or champagne out to a table, then that would cause her to be suspended also.

 

This is definitely overstepping. Whomever turned the photo into the school was simply trying to cause trouble for her.

 

Good point. Someone should bring up communion w/ the school. That should suspend half their football players I would imagine.

[Perry]

"where it even appears"

 

so now the expectation is that students have to be careful what other people might MISTAKENLY and INCORRECTLY believe?

 

that's ridiculous, imo.

 

by that sort of thinking, a student shouldn't even be allowed to attend....hmmm... a family wedding?

I was curious so looked up our ps' good conduct policy:

Alcohol, Tobacco, Drugs

(Reference: Board Policy 502.5R) Students who participate in extra-curricular activities involving public performances are prohibited from possessing, using, transporting, controlling, or transmitting tobacco, alcohol, or other drugs at any time (year around) during his/her junior high or high school career. This rule applies to students 365 days per year while in school, out of school (any location), or at school events (either home or away).

 

Possession/Use/Transportation/Control/Transmission—Tobacco: personal possession, use, transportation, control, or transmission. Alcohol and other drugs: as defined by legal statute and/or court interpretation. Possession, transportation, control, or transmission may be determined by prior knowledge or intent. Team rules may be more specific.

So it doesn't specifically say anything about being present where alcohol is served.

 

I think the coaches set their own expectations in addition to the school's policy. I know dd's pom coach has a zero tolerance policy, but I think at heart she has the best interest of the girls in mind. Drinking is a huge problem here, and the administration is trying to address that. I don't know if these rules help or not. I know many of these kids drink often.

 

I also know that my dd would know that that picture was not a good idea. Not saying she wouldn't have done it though. :tongue_smilie:

[Perry]

i doubt that the school administrators were on her friends list. :tongue_smilie:

My dd's pom coach is her fb friend.

[unsinkable]

Good grief...it's obvious from the photo that that beer bottle is nowhere near her mouth, but rather being held closer to the camera than the girl (as stated by the mother, being held by someone else). Of course, I've read quite a bit about photography...but you can tell by the size of the bottle compared to the size of her face.

 

It was a family celebratory event (a wedding). You can't restrict an athlete from attending weddings, communion, etc just because of the presence of alcohol (so if there was a photo of her drinking wine from a communion cup on facebook, she should be suspended as well? According to the rules...). If someone snapped a photo of her bringing beer or champagne out to a table, then that would cause her to be suspended also.

 

This is definitely overstepping. Whomever turned the photo into the school was simply trying to cause trouble for her.

 

I agree mommaD...it almost looks like an optical illusion. What if she had been sitting her own dining room table with beer bottles on the table? Jeepers!

 

I hated the tone of voice the administrator used. "Mr. Reasonable, here. Just explaining the facts."

[Sahamamama]

I think another aspect of the story that shouldn't be missed is that she met with school officials without the option to have her parents present. The meeting to determine her guilt and punishment had no one present to represent her interests. Another example of the loss of parental rights.

 

:iagree:Not to mention how intimidating that meeting must have been INTENDED to be for the student. We all know that students in public schools don't feel as though they HAVE rights, unless a parent/guardian is there to protect and defend them.

 

The school probably purposefully met with the student without a parent present... as in, "Let's see what we can get her to admit to doing with the beer bottle, let's see what we can get her to say out of fear." :tongue_smilie:

[delaney]

I'm waiting for that one to reach the courts. I would take it as far as I could if I were those parents. You can't prove who was holding it and they had no right to use that photo against her. That bottle could have been an empty filled with water for all they knew!

[Perry]

"where it even appears"

 

so now the expectation is that students have to be careful what other people might MISTAKENLY and INCORRECTLY believe?

 

that's ridiculous, imo.

 

by that sort of thinking, a student shouldn't even be allowed to attend....hmmm... a family wedding?

No, they can attend. They just shouldn't stick a beer bottle in front of their mouth and let someone take a picture.

[Gwenhwyfar]

Students who participate in extra-curricular activities involving public performances are prohibited from possessing, using, transporting, controlling, or transmitting tobacco, alcohol, or other drugs at any time (year around) during his/her junior high or high school career. This rule applies to students 365 days per year while in school, out of school (any location), or at school events (either home or away).

 

yeesh.

 

by that standard, a family who is planning a trip to their summer cabin and has their (tall strong) teenage son help carry a few 2-4s out to the truck could have their son punished at school in september if someone happened to see that...

 

or a family who chooses to allow their teens to have a glass of wine at a wedding...(or families where the cultural norm is have wine with family meals)

 

or, as someone mentioned, a student who attends a church where real wine is used during communion...

 

 

none of which the policy is INTENDED to be applied against. (i hope!)

which is what seems to have happened with this cheerleader...

[Mrs Mungo]

I think it's ridiculous. I think calling the parents would be reasonable and accepting the explanation of the parents would be reasonable.

 

Just because it is on facebook, doesn't mean that the school should be able to use it against her. It was family photos, shared between family and friends- that's why facebook has privacy settings. Just because we put something on facebook, doesn't mean it's ok for the world to see.

 

Your emails are private, but they fly through cyberspace to get to the intended person, does that make them open to everyone- no. It should be the same w/ FB. IMHO anyway:001_smile: (smilie, just in case that came across snarky-)

 

Email is a bad example. Email is not considered private. The government has spider programs that search emails looking for key phrases and can intercept emails that are suspicious.

[Mejane]

My dd is a pom, and it's made very, VERY, clear to them, that you don't ever put yourself in a position where it even appears that you might be drinking. Kids have been suspended from the squad for being at a party where alcohol is present, even if they aren't drinking.

 

 

 

My daughter's dance school is the same. The kids sign a code of conduct and know they will be kicked out if they're found doing anything wrong or even if they're involved in something questionable. It reflects on the school in the same way this picture reflects on the squad and the school.

 

Look, this girl was just being a kid. Unfortunately, modern technology does not allow for such shenanigans. Kids know that better than anyone as they're usually the ones sending the texts/pictures/vids, etc.

[Tenaj]

The principal stated that during the interview she said that she was holding a bottle of beer at some point during the wedding. That, along with the photo, would make it seem she was breaking the rules. Also, the punishment is only being suspended for two games. I know that it's too bad that it's the last two games of the season, but life's not always fair.

 

Another small point, the only reason she posted that particular photo on fb was probably because she thought it was cool that it looked like she was drinking, even if she wasn't.

[Mrs Mungo]

The principal stated that during the interview she said that she was holding a bottle of beer at some point during the wedding. That, along with the photo, would make it seem she was breaking the rules. Also, the punishment is only being suspended for two games. I know that it's too bad that it's the last two games of the season, but life's not always fair.

 

Another small point, the only reason she posted that particular photo on fb was probably because she thought it was cool that it looked like she was drinking, even if she wasn't.

 

So, I can't say "hey, eldest, hand me my Mike's," without us being investigated? Based on what the mom was saying, it sounds like this was just among the hundreds of photos of the wedding, it wasn't posted by the girl.

[Gwenhwyfar]

My daughter's dance school is the same. The kids sign a code of conduct and know they will be kicked out if they're found doing anything wrong or even if they're involved in something questionable. It reflects on the school in the same way this picture reflects on the squad and the school.

 

Look, this girl was just being a kid. Unfortunately, modern technology does not allow for such shenanigans. Kids know that better than anyone as they're usually the ones sending the texts/pictures/vids, etc.

 

this girl wasn't found doing anything wrong, nor was she involved in anything 'questionable' (as verified by her parents) [and skipping the 'questionable' by whose standards] ...how does that photo reflect on the squad or school? it's a photo from a family wedding.

[Unicorn.]

 

Email is a bad example. Email is not considered private. The government has spider programs that search emails looking for key phrases and can intercept emails that are suspicious.

 

I used email as an example because it is intended only for certain persons, as is FB, and should not be open for everyone (govt searching for terrorists aside).

 

By the way, I hate you. I cry over poor dead kittens everday. :tongue_smilie::lol:

[Renee in NC]

So, I can't say "hey, eldest, hand me my Mike's," without us being investigated? Based on what the mom was saying, it sounds like this was just among the hundreds of photos of the wedding, it wasn't posted by the girl.

 

Not only that, the principal did not find the picture on Facebook. Someone sent the picture to the school. My guess is that it was another girl (who didn't like her/was jealous/etc.) who saw her tagged in the picture and used it as a way to get her off of the squad.

 

My ds's profile picture recently was of him at 2yo at his uncle's wedding pumping the keg. Would he be punished for that?:lol:

 

ETA: And honestly, if my child was at a wedding and *I* decided he could have a glass of champagne, it's my business. In many states it wouldn't even be illegal (as long as I was serving my own child at a private function.)

[LauraGB]

That picture triggered a memory of a picture from one of our family weddings. So I went to look. Sure enough, my two kids (when they were about 5 years old) and two cousins (who were about 7 and 9) were all crowded around a table, foreheads together so they could all fit into the picture...and there we 2 champagne glasses, one wine glass and a beer bottle on the table in front of them (along with dinner plates and napkins). They obviously weren't the kids'.

 

It was a wedding. Please.

[Mejane]

this girl wasn't found doing anything wrong, nor was she involved in anything 'questionable' (as verified by her parents) [and skipping the 'questionable' by whose standards] ...how does that photo reflect on the squad or school? it's a photo from a family wedding.

 

Not to be snarky, but of course her parents are going to say she wasn't drinking. That's why it's "questionable." Our ballet school has kicked out kids who were suspected of drinking, drugging, stealing... they just don't tolerate anything. It's their perogative as a business. I don't know how that stacks up with regard to a ps, but cheerleaders, like athletes, are representing the school. They are held to a certain standard during the season. After the season, all bets are off.

[Mrs Mungo]

I used email as an example because it is intended only for certain persons, as is FB, and should not be open for everyone (govt searching for terrorists aside).

 

I understand, email is just a touchy subject because I had an email intercepted once, I got a note from the government telling me so. I felt for the poor guys who have to read the potentially hundreds of emails from Army wives that contain key phrases. The good guys use them too, you know!

 

By the way, I hate you. I cry over poor dead kittens everday. :tongue_smilie::lol:

 

:D

 

Not only that, the principal did not find the picture on Facebook. Someone sent the picture to the school. My guess is that it was another girl (who didn't like her/was jealous/etc.) who saw her tagged in the picture and used it as a way to get her off of the squad.

 

My ds's profile picture recently was of him at 2yo at his uncle's wedding pumping the keg. Would he be punished for that?:lol:

 

:iagree:

[jenn-]

Not to be snarky, but of course her parents are going to say she wasn't drinking. That's why it's "questionable." Our ballet school has kicked out kids who were suspected of drinking, drugging, stealing... they just don't tolerate anything. It's their perogative as a business. I don't know how that stacks up with regard to a ps, but cheerleaders, like athletes, are representing the school. They are held to a certain standard during the season. After the season, all bets are off.

 

This is what I was thinking. Like her mom was really going to say "oh yeah, I knew she was drinking." She shouldn't have posed in such a way that it appeared she was drinking.

[Gwenhwyfar]

Not to be snarky, but of course her parents are going to say she wasn't drinking.

 

This is what I was thinking. Like her mom was really going to say "oh yeah, I knew she was drinking."

 

so the default position should be that the mother is lying? :001_huh:

 

whatever happened to 'innocent until proven guilty'?

[pqr]

My dd is a pom, and it's made very, VERY, clear to them, that you don't ever put yourself in a position where it even appears that you might be drinking. Kids have been suspended from the squad for being at a party where alcohol is present, even if they aren't drinking.

 

This girl might not have been drinking, but I'll bet she knew full well that it that picture would have been unacceptable to the administration. If that were my daughter I'd be fully supportive of the school's decision.

 

 

So now a child may not attend her sisters wedding? Heaven forbid she go to church as there is a touch of wine there to.

 

 

This is the "it takes a village" mentality that we were discussing a few weeks back. Some like it some..... well I will leave it at that.

 

Of course there are standards to be maintained, but anyone who has seen cheerleading competitions may find some humor in the fact that a photo with a partial bottle of beer (not being drunk by the girl) is verboten yet moves that belong in a "gentleman's club" are encouraged.

Edited October 22, 2010 by pqr

[mommaduck]

yeesh.

 

by that standard, a family who is planning a trip to their summer cabin and has their (tall strong) teenage son help carry a few 2-4s out to the truck could have their son punished at school in september if someone happened to see that...

 

or a family who chooses to allow their teens to have a glass of wine at a wedding...(or families where the cultural norm is have wine with family meals)

 

or, as someone mentioned, a student who attends a church where real wine is used during communion...

 

 

none of which the policy is INTENDED to be applied against. (i hope!)

which is what seems to have happened with this cheerleader...

 

Exactly...this policy is meant to address particular situations and people expect COMMON SENSE to be used in knowing what situations do NOT fall under that rule (family weddings where the student is NOT drunk, regardless if she was permitted a drink or not...special family dinners or religious events, communion and passover...etc). To say that none of the athletes are EVER allowed to touch, transport, or have any kind of alcohol is over stepping in a lot of ways.

 

The rule needs to be clarified and provide reasonable exceptions (basically, what should have been common sense to the board). My kids would not have been able to agree to such a rule and I would have brought up the wording for questioning.

This is what I was thinking. Like her mom was really going to say "oh yeah, I knew she was drinking." She shouldn't have posed in such a way that it appeared she was drinking.

 

She didn't. Whomever took the photo just happened to get someone's beer bottle in the photo or someone lifted their beer as the photographer was snapping it. It was held by someone closer to the photographer. The two girls were just leaning in to get their picture taken. It was a photographic glitch, which I've seen before. I've taken a photo that made my husband look like he was standing on someone's finger; it doesn't make it so or even make it intentional on the part of the person being photographed.

Edited October 22, 2010 by mommaduck

[Mrs Mungo]

so the default position should be that the mother is lying? :001_huh:

 

whatever happened to 'innocent until proven guilty'?

 

Plus, the photo LOOKS like they have their arms crossed! Look at it at :23, not the zoomed in version. It looks like they are doing the posing-with-crossed-arms thing everyone does at weddings.

Edited October 22, 2010 by Mrs Mungo

[JumpedIntoTheDeepEndFirst]

Also-according to the parents they had a cop present at the reception to make sure there was no underage drinking.

 

And no-the default position shouldn't be that all parents lie, some do defend their kids against false accusations.

 

Finally, there is a huge difference between the policies of a private organization/business such as a dance studio or dojo and the government run public school system.

 

When does this policy hit silly? Communion at church, wedding receptions, wakes, holiday dinners, family reunions, dinner at Olive Garden? Do all parents of student athletes have to agree not to have alcohol in their homes (or tobacco)? "Nope, sorry Uncle Bob, if you want a photo with Stacy you must put down your beer first-you might jeopardize her place on the volleyball team and a college scholarship." Seriously?

[mommaduck]

This is the "it takes a village" mentality that we were discussing a few weeks back. Some like it some..... well I will leave it at that.

There's the "it takes a village" (which should just be social responsibility...not regulated) and then there's Big Brother (which is when you have all the regulations). Unfortunately, the lack of one sometimes leads to the other. But yeah, I agree...that's a twisted up issue that could get nasty and political (and you will find both conservatives and liberals on both sides of it ;) ).

[Mejane]

When does this policy hit silly? Communion at church, wedding receptions, wakes, holiday dinners, family reunions, dinner at Olive Garden? Do all parents of student athletes have to agree not to have alcohol in their homes (or tobacco)? "Nope, sorry Uncle Bob, if you want a photo with Stacy you must put down your beer first-you might jeopardize her place on the volleyball team and a college scholarship." Seriously?

 

I didn't say I don't think it's silly. It's just that most people are aware of such no tolerance policies and yet they are always surprised when this kind of thing happens. My nephew was suspended for a week for bringing two advil to school. They have a strict no drug policy. Was it silly? Yes. Should he have done it in light of the drug policy? No.

 

I tell my kids all the time to beware what kinds of pictures someone is taking of them (dressing room shots, etc) and what they are writing on FB, in texts, etc. You just never know where it's going to end up.

[pqr]

I didn't say I don't think it's silly. It's just that most people are aware of such no tolerance policies and yet they are always surprised when this kind of thing happens. My nephew was suspended for a week for bringing two advil to school. They have a strict no drug policy. Was it silly? Yes. Should he have done it in light of the drug policy? No.

 

I tell my kids all the time to beware what kinds of pictures someone is taking of them (dressing room shots, etc) and what they are writing on FB, in texts, etc. You just never know where it's going to end up.

 

 

But there must be common sense and here the school has displayed none.

[JumpedIntoTheDeepEndFirst]

I didn't say I don't think it's silly. It's just that most people are aware of such no tolerance policies and yet they are always surprised when this kind of thing happens. My nephew was suspended for a week for bringing two advil to school. They have a strict no drug policy. Was it silly? Yes. Should he have done it in light of the drug policy? No.

 

I tell my kids all the time to beware what kinds of pictures someone is taking of them (dressing room shots, etc) and what they are writing on FB, in texts, etc. You just never know where it's going to end up.

 

Then I guess people ought to write into the photographers contract at weddings that there should be no photos taken of minors in the presence of any beverage or ashtray. This just doesn't pass the test of reasonable.

 

Total lack of due diligence on the part of the school system based on the CNN report.

[TXMary2]

I think the schools totally overstep their bounds. If this photo was taken on school grounds they would have a point - otherwise butt the heck out. You can even see the girl's glass in the photo. The schools are like little socialist countries and shouldn't have any say about what a student does outside of school. If something happens on school grounds then that is a different story.

[mommaduck]

I didn't say I don't think it's silly. It's just that most people are aware of such no tolerance policies and yet they are always surprised when this kind of thing happens. My nephew was suspended for a week for bringing two advil to school. They have a strict no drug policy. Was it silly? Yes. Should he have done it in light of the drug policy? No.

 

I tell my kids all the time to beware what kinds of pictures someone is taking of them (dressing room shots, etc) and what they are writing on FB, in texts, etc. You just never know where it's going to end up.

That is on school grounds and understandable. Their trying to push their rules into areas of life that they have no business in and children, even teens, don't always have control of is where it's overstepping and there should not be consequences. You should not punish an athlete for being at a wedding, someplace they might be required to be (it was her sister's wedding) and have no control over what is served (alcohol) and might even be simply being obedient to their elders ("here, take this glass of champagne over to your grandmother" *insert photographer taking a nice photo of one of the bridesmaids with a glass of champagne in her hand*).

 

 

*and yes, I know I just killed another kitten*

Edited October 22, 2010 by mommaduck

[Mrs Mungo]

I think the schools totally overstep their bounds. If this photo was taken on school grounds they would have a point - otherwise butt the heck out. You can even see the girl's glass in the photo. The schools are like little socialist countries and shouldn't have any say about what a student does outside of school. If something happens on school grounds then that is a different story.

 

Socialism is not equal to a dictatorship. They are not interchangeable phrases. In terms of drinking and so forth most socialist countries are FAR, FAR more lax and give FAR more power to families than in the US.

[pqr]

Socialism is not equal to a dictatorship. They are not interchangeable phrases. In terms of drinking and so forth most socialist countries are FAR, FAR more lax and give FAR more power to families than in the US.

 

 

While they may allow drinking most socialist countries do not give FAR more power to the families.

 

Many do not allow homeschooling.

Many do not allow spanking.

Many insist that certain things be taught to children over the wishes of the parents.

 

 

So apart from drinking I am not too sure what specifically you are referencing.

[Mejane]

This just doesn't pass the test of reasonable.

 

 

 

I also didn't say I thought it was reasonable. ;)

 

I said this:

 

 

Look, this girl was just being a kid. Unfortunately, modern technology does not allow for such shenanigans. Kids know that better than anyone as they're usually the ones sending the texts/pictures/vids, etc.

[Mrs Mungo]

While they may allow drinking most socialist countries do not give FAR more power to the families.

 

Many do not allow homeschooling.

Many do not allow spanking.

Many insist that certain things be taught to children over the wishes of the parents.

 

 

So apart from drinking I am not too sure what specifically you are referencing.

 

Socialism is not equal to a dictatorship. They are not interchangeable phrases. In terms of drinking and so forth most socialist countries are FAR, FAR more lax and give FAR more power to families than in the US.

Some of our Canadian, New Zealander and Australian friends here would reject your assertion that they cannot homeschool. SOME countries outlaw spanking and/or homeschooling, not all or even most.

 

eta: It reminds me of an incident I encountered the other day. A high-ranking wife was going on to a group of other wives about the pilot who refused a full-body scan. She was saying "WHO would subject themselves to that sort of scrutiny ever day?!" We all stared at her. And she said "okay, besides our husbands," and laughed.

Edited October 22, 2010 by Mrs Mungo

[HRAAB]

I don't need the school to tell me how to parent. My children, probably around 16 or so, are allowed a small glass of wine at special dinners in my house. My dh and I are perfectly capable of determining what is right and wrong for our own children. I realize schools have to have standards, and I totally agree, but I think this is overstepping their authority. It's a wedding. The parents are in control. The parents said she didn't drink. They should accept the parents' word.

 

If this were at a party with no parental supervision (thinking of the keggers we had when I was in school), that would be different.