Jump to content

Menu

Thoughts on "Zero Tolerance"?


Recommended Posts

I apologize if this has already been examined (didn't seem like it when I did a forum search), but if it hasn't... what's your opinion(s) on the "zero tolerance" movement in ps? I never really understood why it's so controversial. I suppose I am against it, because I believe that there are always (in all crimes) extenuating circumstances that must be taken into consideration. But like I said, I don't really "get" the whole zero tolerance thing. Thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm against it because I think outside of the military, (where "do as you are told right now" seems a very good policy) people should actually think about what they are doing. Zero tolerance policies are good for teaching teens that the adults around don't care about them as anything more than part of the collective, and I don't think that's good for them.

 

Rosie

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for those links, Mrs Mungo! I am feeling more and more "anti-ZT", and I can tell you all feel that way too. Can someone please provide or link to reasons supporting ZT? I just don't understand why that concept would ever catch on.

ETA: Seems to me that most ZT-related incidents are results of improper implementation, not the actual policies. Is this so, in your experience?

Edited by SuperDad
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for those links, Mrs Mungo! I am feeling more and more "anti-ZT", and I can tell you all feel that way too. Can someone please provide or link to reasons supporting ZT? I just don't understand why that concept would ever catch on.

 

They don't get paid enough to think?

 

et respond to this bit:

ETA: Seems to me that most ZT-related incidents are results of improper implementation, not the actual policies. Is this so, in your experience

 

I think zero tolerance gives administrators a reason to be lazy. For example, here's a quote from the first article, "The DOE states that all imitation weapons are prohibited because they are regarded as harmful to the school community. The principal can evaluate if the weapon looks realistic before considering suspension."

 

Did he consider whether a teeny-tiny gun for a lego person looked *realistic*? Obviously, he did not. That's the problem.

Edited by Mrs Mungo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Zero tolerance has given people the excuse to act foolishly and harmfully and often, cruelly. It has given tyrannical powers to the dimwitted and the half-witted.

Yikes. Another reason to avoid ps.

 

They don't get paid enough to think?

 

I think zero tolerance gives administrators a reason to be lazy. For example, here's a quote from the first article, "The DOE states that all imitation weapons are prohibited because they are regarded as harmful to the school community. The principal can evaluate if the weapon looks realistic before considering suspension."

 

Did he consider whether a teeny-tiny gun for a lego person looked *realistic*? Obviously, he did not. That's the problem.

:lol: to the first line.

I see your point here. It does seem extremely ridiculous. I guess schools are so afraid of, well, everything (esp. kids) that they feel the need to write an unreasonably tight policy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It caught on because some schools were (are) overwhelmed with violence. Kicking out a kid who is beating up teachers and fellow students makes sense. However, it is a policy like so many others which has illogical and often horrible unintended nonsensical consequences. It is also totally the opposite of how badly behaved teachers are treated- they get many, many chances before being fired (if ever).

 

My experience has been that it is inconsistently applied and just like other rules, the socially savvy and popular kids get treated differently. My son was bullied all year 2 years ago in 1st grade. Well documented. Caused serious health issues. Many meetings and emails and calls to resolve. One day towards the end of the year, my son grabs the main bully by his hoodie hood and pulls, which causes him to fall down. The school wanted to suspend my son after not having done anything to the bullies all year. Without our interference, the district caught wind of it on review and said, um we can't do this because you did not suspend the other boys for all these other incidents. We decided we had had enough and started homeschooling him the next year anyways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The big question is-what happens after the immediate response?

 

Having worked in public schools in fairly "tough" neighborhoods, I have NO trouble with having the immediate response to having a child pull out an unknown pharmaceutical (happened to me with a kindergartner) be "send the kid AND the unknown pills to the office, and let the principal and guidance counselor call the parent and deal with it". That's a reasonable response that saves teacher time. Let the PRINCIPAL, who gets paid to sit in the office to handle higher level situations deal with deciding whether the kid really forgot his knife after the boyscout camping trip, or whether he plans to use it to defend himself at the bus stop that afternoon because someone's threatening him-and handle it accordingly.

 

And in my former district, if you read the zero tolerance policy, that's really all it called for-that the child be immediately removed from the classroom UNTIL an assessment could be made as to whether the child was a threat to others.

 

While I'm SURE there are schools/districts that have set policies that are far more draconian, I know in my area there have been media reports that make it sound much worse than it is-taking the statement that "possession of a weapon can mean a one year expulsion from the school district, charges filed with the local juvenile court system, or reassignment to an alternative school" and making it sound like possession of a lego gun by a 2nd grader automatically leads to those things-when in actuality it's more likely that the kid was warned not to bring toys to school and the legos were sent home with an annoyed mom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO, they can be extremely frustrating. I can share a couple of examples that my children have experienced:

 

My son was in a situation where he was being bullied at school. I actually witnessed an incident where two boys did something to my son and I reported it to the school. They questioned the children involved. The two boys said that my son hit one of them. The school decided that meant it was a fight. They refused any reasoning, or even me as a witness. They decided to not punish anyone. Had the two boys been punished, my boy would have been also. Bizarre.

 

This one was witnessed by the Dean of Students at the school and this is the story she told me: A different son (at the same school ;) ) was in the lunchroom. A boy who had been repeatedly warned randomly punched my son in the groin (I was told it was a "game" played often at the school called "ball tapping"). My son got angry and shoved the kid. Both boys got suspended, mine for a shorter period of time.

 

Another with son number 2 (another story witnessed by an adult who shared the details with me). In sixth grade there was a fight in the lunch room. My son was not involved in the fight, but saw a kid about to throw an unopened soda can at another kid. My son knocked the can out of the kid's hand before he could throw it. Because he was then involved in the fight, he was suspended.

 

Anyway, it just seems illogical to not consider the circumstances. Especially in cases of bullying.

 

Also, on the issue of zero tolerance of drugs, in our schools a cough drop will get you expelled. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My experience has been that it is inconsistently applied and just like other rules, the socially savvy and popular kids get treated differently. My son was bullied all year 2 years ago in 1st grade. Well documented. Caused serious health issues. Many meetings and emails and calls to resolve. One day towards the end of the year, my son grabs the main bully by his hoodie hood and pulls, which causes him to fall down. The school wanted to suspend my son after not having done anything to the bullies all year. Without our interference, the district caught wind of it on review and said, um we can't do this because you did not suspend the other boys for all these other incidents. We decided we had had enough and started homeschooling him the next year anyways.

 

YES! This is exactly the sort of thing that I have experienced regarding kids and bullying. NOTHING gets done, the victim defends himself, the victim is punished. Bizarre.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am against it because it completely precludes any sort of common sense whatsoever. Children do dumb things. That is the bottom line. They do dumb things and if a teacher/administrator cannot take into consideration whatever it was they did, the character of the child, etc. etc. then they probably should expel all children because sooner or later most kids will do something foolish. A gf's son got suspended because an older boy handed him a Leatherman on the playground. He shoved it in his desk and forgot about it. A couple weeks later, desks are cleaned out, Leatherman is found, boy is suspended for 3 days. Doesn't matter that he's a good student. Doesn't matter that he's never been in trouble before. Doesn't matter that it wasn't his Leatherman. He was suspended. I was actually kind of mad at my gf because she disciplined him for it. I told her I would have taken him to the zoo or something. I was furious at the school (it's the one my kids would be going to if they were in ps). Just one more reason we homeschool.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

... what's your opinion(s) on the "zero tolerance" movement in ps? I never really understood why it's so controversial. I suppose I am against it, because I believe that there are always (in all crimes) extenuating circumstances that must be taken into consideration. But like I said, I don't really "get" the whole zero tolerance thing. Thoughts?

 

It requires no judgement - but it also (supposedly) prevents cries of racisim because one group is being (allegedly) treated more harshly than another. this way, they're all treated stupidly.

 

I'm of the belief God gave us a brain, and expects us to use it. PS systems too often react as if no one has a brain.

 

e.g. the girl who had a knife (plastic) in her "purse" (one of those lunch bags with handles) was suspended for bringing it to school, for the same duration as someone who brought an actual steel 5" blade knife in an ankle holster would be suspended. but that was because of "zero tolerance".

 

Or the six-year old who was suspended for making a "gun" out of his finger and shooting at someone. Hello? anyone have a brain out there?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel like, at least among homeschoolers, the sense that people are against it is so pervasive that while I consider myself someone who tries not to make assumptions about where people stand, I once accidentally got into it on a different forum with someone over zero tolerance policies. This other homeschooler's argument was that clearly school officials don't have the time to take into account individual situations. They shouldn't be trusted to anyway. And allowing them to do so would just lead to abuses where people were treated unfairly and unequally. Sigh. I disagree, but that's the gist of the arguments FOR it.

 

For me, it boils down to the fact that while you have to have rules and laws, that justice is beyond just administering the laws. It has to take into account the whole picture or it's not really justice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our schools here have it. Now usually they only enforce it during sexual harassment and extreme bullying situations. (I guess part of being in a small town they pick and choose when they use it)

 

Now when my oldest was in kindergarten he was being bullied on the bus by a sixth grader. My son only 5 at the time got tired of being tripped, punched, pinched and called names he hit this older kid and my son was kicked off the bus for the whole year. The older kid nothing happened to him. They said my 5 yr old was a bully. ((yeah this kid was 45-50 lbs soaking wet.lol))

 

I will never understand school policies and how they think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My son was in a situation where he was being bullied at school. I actually witnessed an incident where two boys did something to my son and I reported it to the school. They questioned the children involved. The two boys said that my son hit one of them. The school decided that meant it was a fight. They refused any reasoning, or even me as a witness. They decided to not punish anyone. Had the two boys been punished, my boy would have been also. Bizarre.

 

Another with son number 2 (another story witnessed by an adult who shared the details with me). In sixth grade there was a fight in the lunch room. My son was not involved in the fight, but saw a kid about to throw an unopened soda can at another kid. My son knocked the can out of the kid's hand before he could throw it. Because he was then involved in the fight, he was suspended.

 

YES! This is exactly the sort of thing that I have experienced regarding kids and bullying. NOTHING gets done, the victim defends himself, the victim is punished. Bizarre.

 

I find it extremely troublesome that victims seem to be treated as perpetrators in these situations.

 

Zero tolerance=zero common sense.

 

I will never understand school policies and how they think.

 

:iagree: to both of the above.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Zero tolerance policies usually need to be enforced with a healthy dose of common sense. Unfortunately, most zero tolerance policies are specifically written to have zero tolerance for the application of common sense when adjudicating infraction of the policy. Therefore they tend to sound good on paper but the application is actually intolerable.

 

Glad Mrs. M's google-fu was up to finding the examples that prove the point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the better name for zero tolerance is zero common sense. Should the Eagle Scout with an emergency kit (including knife)in his car trunk be punished the same as the boy who brings a knife in his backpack and plans to use it during a fight? Should the drug pusher and the girl who takes Tylenol for menstrual cramps be treated the same?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can say whatever "make sense" but the PS have too many mix type of people. If the policy can prevent one single kid get killed or been bullied. IMO, It worth it

I agree some of the zero tolerance went too far.. like the lego gun. But I am in general supporting it. Some of us actually have kids still in school and in danger of been hurt if someone violate the policy, wave a knife in front of our kid or pull out a gun to show off have we don't have this policy ..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the better name for zero tolerance is zero common sense. Should the Eagle Scout with an emergency kit (including knife)in his car trunk be punished the same as the boy who brings a knife in his backpack and plans to use it during a fight? Should the drug pusher and the girl who takes Tylenol for menstrual cramps be treated the same?

how a teacher seperate a eagle scout from the kids plan to fight??? with the school so big, you can't expect that. For the girl, she should be able to go to the school nurse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Did he consider whether a teeny-tiny gun for a lego person looked *realistic*? Obviously, he did not. That's the problem.

 

I work for "the State". The problem at my location is that *if some higher up decides not to like you* they will grasp at anything to can you. It could be a horrible employee who gets nailed over something small (and everyone secretly cheers the rule, the firing, etc.) It could be a good employee with a bad boss who gets nailed over something small. It could be a scapegoat situation. And look at how we on this board react when a teacher does something questionable?

 

Sometimes years of a really good track record will save you after months of appeal, humiliation, fearfulness, and gossip. Sometimes you are asked to "take the fall" to make the public happy and you are quietly recycled back in somewhere else because really you ARE good (or you are bad but in an Old Boy network.) And then there are the people who, sometimes in cohoots with someone they accuse, who do it all just to set up the state for a law suit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it is absolute CRAP! My son still bears the actual scars of this crap as well. This child attacked him on the bus bit into him like a freakin animal. The aid was out sick the bus driver on a highway could not just stop it took a minute.

 

By the time he got that brat off my boy he was in the middle of a seizure and blood was everywhere. I saw the video they suspended my baby boy from the bus for a week for pushing him off. A week of no child care for a special needs boy cost me my job. I was a single mom of 4 and I needed that job badly.

 

What was he suppose to do, take it? He was just 5 years old he still has scars. The public school and their zero tolerance can kiss it. I have zero tolerance of idiots. Another child who was not given their meds at school because the nurse forgot was expelled for an emotional snap when he attacked a teacher. Even though he had no prior issues and was fine on his meds. Three days he had no meds.

 

Because a stupid nurse forgot. I am so sick of their policies and their crap. PS is worthless now and it wasn't that great to begin with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the girl, she should be able to go to the school nurse.
Should, but ps nurses are often prohibited from dispensing anything more harmless than an ice pack. The unfortunate truth is that in ps, girls who need meds for menstrual cramps often have to carry those meds with them and take them out of sight of an adult.
I think it is absolute CRAP! My son still bears the actual scars of this crap as well. This child attacked him on the bus bit into him like a freakin animal. The aid was out sick the bus driver on a highway could not just stop it took a minute.

By the time he got that brat off my boy he was in the middle of a seizure and blood was everywhere. I saw the video they suspended my baby boy from the bus for a week for pushing him off. A week of no child care for a special needs boy cost me my job. I was a single mom of 4 and I needed that job badly.

What was he suppose to do, take it? He was just 5 years old he still has scars. The public school and their zero tolerance can kiss it. I have zero tolerance of idiots. Another child who was not given their meds at school because the nurse forgot was expelled for an emotional snap when he attacked a teacher. Even though he had no prior issues and was fine on his meds. Three days he had no meds.

Because a stupid nurse forgot. I am so sick of their policies and their crap. PS is worthless now and it wasn't that great to begin with.

Wow. If I had a kid in ps right now, I would go out and withdraw her immediately just from this story. That is inexcuseably tereible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

how a teacher seperate a eagle scout from the kids plan to fight??? with the school so big, you can't expect that. For the girl, she should be able to go to the school nurse.

 

By using the brains they were born with and presumably sharpened with a master's degree. Seriously. Tylenol is not an illicit or dangerous drug. A knife in a box in the trunk of a kid's car with a bunch of supplies for camping or survival (with a reason to have them) is not a weapon. If a teacher or principal can't distinguish the two, then why do we think they are suitable to trust with the education of our children?

 

Go to the nurse. That is a nice thought, but does not reflect the maturity of a student or the limitations on school nursing staff time. Do we really think 14 year olds can't know when to take a tylenol? Do we really think that all schools have fulltime nurses? Do we really think that the nurses that schools do have don't have more to do than dispense tylenol girls with cramps?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the policy can prevent one single kid get killed or been bullied. IMO, It worth it.

 

I appreciate where you are coming from, but that kind of reasoning leads to the absolute destruction of freedom. To take it down its slippery slope, that kind of reasoning could support the illegality of anything that could ever harm anyone.

 

We already have laws against bringing handguns, knives, and drugs into school. Schools already disallow bullying. How do zero tolerance policies aid those laws?

 

Does suspending a child for his lego gun save any lives? No it does not. It actually takes an innocent situation, where NO one has been harmed, and uses it to inflict real harm on an innocent child and his family.

 

Zero Tolerance accomplishes exactly NOTHING. A child with criminal intent won't be dissuaded by ZT policies. A child with criminal intent won't be dissuaded by any laws. The only way to exist in a free society and remain free is to punish actual criminals, not potential criminals, not people who "kind of look like criminals, but aren't." Children who bring Midol to school are not criminals.

 

Zero Tolerance improves safety for no one. But it does destroy freedom for everyone.

Edited by sweetbasil
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Should, but ps nurses are often prohibited from dispensing anything more harmless than an ice pack. The unfortunate truth is that in ps, girls who need meds for menstrual cramps often have to carry those meds with them and take them out of sight of an adult.

 

Wow. If I had a kid in ps right now, I would go out and withdraw her immediately just from this story. That is inexcuseably tereible.

 

Even DS's daycare will distribute med, as long as you have permission from parents..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By using the brains they were born with and presumably sharpened with a master's degree. Seriously. Tylenol is not an illicit or dangerous drug. A knife in a box in the trunk of a kid's car with a bunch of supplies for camping or survival (with a reason to have them) is not a weapon. If a teacher or principal can't distinguish the two, then why do we think they are suitable to trust with the education of our children?

 

Go to the nurse. That is a nice thought, but does not reflect the maturity of a student or the limitations on school nursing staff time. Do we really think 14 year olds can't know when to take a tylenol? Do we really think that all schools have fulltime nurses? Do we really think that the nurses that schools do have don't have more to do than dispense tylenol girls with cramps?

 

 

So, I don't understand this. We make the school and teachers take all the respoonsibilities. What about the parents? and the kids themselves. Why can they respect the rule in the school and respect OTHER kids. and not bring a knife to school. If he is a Eagle scout, he should have at least half brain?

As far as the teachers' brain. How can you prevent a kid lie about that he is a boy scout after he found with a knife and how do you know a boy scout will suddenly went nuts over something??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it is absolute CRAP! My son still bears the actual scars of this crap as well. This child attacked him on the bus bit into him like a freakin animal. The aid was out sick the bus driver on a highway could not just stop it took a minute.

 

By the time he got that brat off my boy he was in the middle of a seizure and blood was everywhere. I saw the video they suspended my baby boy from the bus for a week for pushing him off. A week of no child care for a special needs boy cost me my job. I was a single mom of 4 and I needed that job badly.

 

What was he suppose to do, take it? He was just 5 years old he still has scars. The public school and their zero tolerance can kiss it. I have zero tolerance of idiots. Another child who was not given their meds at school because the nurse forgot was expelled for an emotional snap when he attacked a teacher. Even though he had no prior issues and was fine on his meds. Three days he had no meds.

 

Because a stupid nurse forgot. I am so sick of their policies and their crap. PS is worthless now and it wasn't that great to begin with.

 

:grouphug::grouphug:That is so terrible. I was on the fence about the whole thing until I read your post. That really brings home how wrong things can go with zero tolerance.

 

On another note, we are unable to send our child to our local public middle school because it's too dangerous. However, the high school is reputed to be fine as far as safety because there is a zero tolerance policy at the high school level.

 

Why can't they weed out the dangerous kids without zero tolerance? The things I've heard the middle school kids have done and gotten away with is astounding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I appreciate where you are coming from, but that kind of reasoning leads to the absolute destruction of freedom. To take it down its slippery slope, that kind of reasoning could support the illegality of anything that could ever harm anyone.

 

We already have laws against bringing handguns, knives, and drugs into school. Schools already disallow bullying. How do zero tolerance policies aid those laws?

 

Does suspending a child for his lego gun save any lives? No it does not. It actually takes an innocent situation, where NO one has been harmed, and uses it to inflict real harm on an innocent child and his family.

 

Zero Tolerance accomplishes exactly NOTHING. A child with criminal intent won't be dissuaded by ZT policies. A child with criminal intent won't be dissuaded by any laws. The only way to exist in a free society and remain free is to punish actual criminals, not potential criminals, not people who "kind of look like criminals, but aren't." Children who bring Midol to school are not criminals.

 

Zero Tolerance improves safety for no one. But it does destroy freedom for everyone.

 

 

Obviously, the lego gun was ridiculous, I am not defending that. I do agree a kid "intend" to hurt somebody, he will be able to get a gun in one way or the other. However, ZT will prevent a kid "accidently" bring a knife to school and "accidently" hurt somebody

 

And IMO, a 7 yo, 10 yo do not have freedom. I will not allow my kids to do many thing and I don't believe they have the freedom to not to listen to ME.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, I don't understand this. We make the school and teachers take all the respoonsibilities. What about the parents? and the kids themselves. Why can they respect the rule in the school and respect OTHER kids. and not bring a knife to school. If he is a Eagle scout, he should have at least half brain?

As far as the teachers' brain. How can you prevent a kid lie about that he is a boy scout after he found with a knife and how do you know a boy scout will suddenly went nuts over something??

 

It was in the trunk of a car!!! I bet he had a tire iron in there too and camping supplies include tent stakes and rope both of which make extremely effective weapons. Did the boy also have a belt? A belt is most effective in a fight and can be used to kill! Where do we stop? The answer is use common sense and the "zero tolerance" idiocy precludes common sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

how a teacher seperate a eagle scout from the kids plan to fight??? with the school so big, you can't expect that. For the girl, she should be able to go to the school nurse.

 

Haha! School nurse? Clearly you've not had a kid in a public school for a while...or at least anywhere near me. We have a DISTRICT nurse. There is not a nurse in every school and if there WAS he/she would still not be able to administer anything that isn't provided from home in a prescription bottle with all of the prescription info on it. The nurse will NOT give medication to a child otherwise. At my son's high school I would have to go there with the medication and administer it myself IN the health room. To do it in the school office would have me in violation of their drug policy. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Haha! School nurse? Clearly you've not had a kid in a public school for a while...or at least anywhere near me. We have a DISTRICT nurse. There is not a nurse in every school and if there WAS he/she would still not be able to administer anything that isn't provided from home in a prescription bottle with all of the prescription info on it. The nurse will NOT give medication to a child otherwise. At my son's high school I would have to go there with the medication and administer it myself IN the health room. To do it in the school office would have me in violation of their drug policy. ;)

again, even my DD's preschool will do it. In our state, you fill a permission for specif med aloowed with Dr. slips

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, I don't understand this. We make the school and teachers take all the respoonsibilities. What about the parents? and the kids themselves. Why can they respect the rule in the school and respect OTHER kids. and not bring a knife to school. If he is a Eagle scout, he should have at least half brain?

As far as the teachers' brain. How can you prevent a kid lie about that he is a boy scout after he found with a knife and how do you know a boy scout will suddenly went nuts over something??

 

We didn't have this stupid 'no tolerance' crap when I was in school and oddly enough teachers and administrators were able to keep order and discipline much much better.

 

You can best believe if it was your kid that had gotten suspended or arrested or forcibly restrained or shoved into a seclusion room because they were bullied and finally had enough and fought back you'd think no tolerance means 'no thought whatsoever'.

 

Yes, my kids had IEPS. Supports were supposed to be in place to help them. No tolerance was used to punish them yet the kids bullying them got off scott free.

Edited by pdalley
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obviously, the lego gun was ridiculous, I am not defending that. I do agree a kid "intend" to hurt somebody, he will be able to get a gun in one way or the other. However, ZT will prevent a kid "accidently" bring a knife to school and "accidently" hurt somebody

 

Exactly how do ZT policies accomplish this? Do ZT policies miraculously make these things disappear out of pockets and backpacks when the child crosses the school threshold? A teacher is always free to confiscate anything that is disruptive or possibly harmful.

 

ZT policies are about PUNISHMENT not safety. Does it make your child more safe because the kid with the plastic knife was thrown out of school for 10 days? If the child had criminal intent, what would stop the child from bringing it back? If the child did not have criminal intent, how does a 10 day suspension help anyone?

 

And IMO, a 7 yo, 10 yo do not have freedom. I will not allow my kids to do many thing and I don't believe they have the freedom to not to listen to ME.

 

I'm not sure what the above has to do with zero tolerance policies. The school's policies have nothing to do with what you want or allow for your own children.

 

BTW -- does anyone see the irony in ZT policies throwing kids out for Lego guns and plastic knives, but kids are allowed to walk around ALL DAY LONG with sharpened pencils and metal tipped pens? Not to mention all the 7 yr olds fashioning shivs from the sporks in the cafeteria. ;)

Edited by sweetbasil
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well if you are taking anything into consideration then it's not zero tolerance. The point of zero tolerance is that there is no thought or consideration given.

 

So...yeah...I'm against it. ;)

 

Succinctly said... and I agree with you.

 

A recent local example of ZT in action at the school in town: Grade 12 boy slams Grade 10 boy up against a locker and threatens to break his hands next time he catches Grade 10 boy pushing his little sister (also in Grade 10) part-way inside her locker and groping her. Grade 12 boy gets suspended and Grade 10 boy gets away with the groping not only that time, but all the times before and the several times since. Why? Because no one has seen the gropings other than the little sister and her word alone isn't good enough to take any action against the groper.

 

Little Sister, by the way, is in my 4H group and cries at the thought of having to go to school everyday. She has stomach aches (real ones) almost every morning because it makes her sick to think she might have a run-in with the groper. Her parents try to fight the suspension and nothing happens. They try all the time to get the groper punished and nothing happens.

 

Frankly, if that had been my boy defending any girl, I'd have given him a frikkin' medal for it. And, I would not shut up until I told every single teacher, administrator and trustee what shameful excuses for men and women they are to let such disgusting behaviour go on in that school, yet punish the one person who stands up for a defenseless little girl.

 

Even more frankly, if that had been my daughter getting groped and no one did anything about it, I'd take jail time for having kicked the groper's a$$ myself.

Edited by Audrey
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My junior high student is enrolled part time at his school. He needs an inhaler for exercise induced asthma. He has practice every day after school when the nurse is gone. Basically our doctor had to write a letter saying that he HAS to carry his inhaler on his body at all times. The office told me that they can randomly call him to the office during the school day and punish him if he can't show them his inhaler. :laugh: I tried to explain that he ONLY needs it after school, but they wouldn't budge. Oh, well. He keeps the inhaler in his athletic bag because, regardless of their moronic policy, that's the way he is kept most healthy (by having it with his practice stuff so it's sure to be at practice with him and not in the pocket of his jeans in the locker room).

 

I realize that's a bit off topic. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for those links, Mrs Mungo! I am feeling more and more "anti-ZT", and I can tell you all feel that way too. Can someone please provide or link to reasons supporting ZT? I just don't understand why that concept would ever catch on.

ETA: Seems to me that most ZT-related incidents are results of improper implementation, not the actual policies. Is this so, in your experience?

 

Zero tolerance means there is no thought or consideration, and there is nothing but the literal words in the rule. Often, these incidents are from implementing the rules as written and then officials standing behind it because they are ZT.

 

I don't support it at all. Why discourage thought when a child's entire future is on the line?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

again, even my DD's preschool will do it. In our state, you fill a permission for specif med aloowed with Dr. slips

 

That's nice for your DD's preschool, but even my public school in the late '90's (in the early days of this zero tolerance stuff) would absolutely NOT allow non-prescription drugs to be administered by anyone. And the "school nurse" was only there one day a week, so I guess we were only allowed to have cramps on Tuesdays.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Zero tolerance is crap. It taught my son that if he was being bullied and being poked with sticks that he would get detention for saying they were being butts. It also taught him that he would have to apologize to the bullies as he used "extremely" foul language.

 

...and we wonder why our schools are failing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Zero tolerance is completely ridiculous and a completely non-thinking policy. My oldest ds had a boy he didn't even know send him numerous text messages with the boy saying someone said ds was talking about him and then threatening ds with physical violence. How the boy got ds's number we have no idea...and the girl who the boy said told him is a friend of ds's and said she never spoke to the boy.

 

My ds has no problem sticking up for himself...he's a wrestler, a black belt in taekwondo, and has competed and won in numerous judo tournaments. He was, however, worried because the next few weeks are big for high school wrestlers with district/region/state championships and ds did not want to get jumped in school then suspended and unable to compete in the tournaments.

 

So, dh and ds went to the principal, showed her the texts, and the boy was brought up on bullying charges and later suspended though it took a couple days for the investigation and the principal took 2 days to even call the boy into the office for questioning.:glare:

 

Before the principal spoke to the boy, she kept ds out of the only class the two shared (gym) and told ds to duck into a classroom if he saw the boy to avoid him. She said, even though she knew about the texts and threats, if the boy started a fight with ds and ds did anything besides stand there and get hit, ds would be suspended as well. She said even if ds did just stand there and get hit, without even protecting himself, she might still be required to suspend him because there is zero tolerance for fighting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...