Federal Court Rules on Kids on Internet vs. School

I agree, when the school doors close, they only have basic human rights... that's it.

But when they are outside of campus, that is their free time, and nothing they do should be of any concern to the principle as that is a PARENTING issue not a SCHOLASTIC one. Schools have far exceeded their authority in this area, much to the detriment of their student body.

How things have changed. When we were kids we had to accept responsibility for our words and actions. If we got into trouble at school and got the strap, we would also be punished at home. Nowadays children cannot be punished by the school or parents - they know it and use it to their advantage.

There is so little respect these days and the powers that be are the reason - how sad.

I hardly think allowing strangers (school officials) to beat your children fosters respect. . .quite the opposite, really. And opens the door to allowing worse abuse. But I digress. . .

I don't think schools should have any authority over what children do when not in school. That's just creepy.

We were disciplined but certainly not beaten - there really is a huge difference. At least we knew there were consequences for our actions and that's a good thing.

So your school would suspend you for something you said at home? Interesting.

The reason I ask is this case is about schools trying to punish children for something they said on their free time at home.

Personally, I don't believe it is the principle's job to parent my child, nor that their authority should exceed the school campus and extend to anytime and anyplace. And I wouldn't place so much faith in educators of public schools regardless, as I have met quite a few that could herp the derp with the best of them, lol. You guys heard about the recent event where many groups wore the same colored shirt for a class photo, some of the girls wearing pink, some blue, and one group of friends wore white shirts... and the latter were suspended on grounds of suspicion of being white supremacists by the principle. Only problem... well, not only were a couple of the white kids very "urban" and clearly not racist, but a couple others in the group that were suspended weren't even white. Sucks when you're of Korean heritage and the school declares you a white supremacist!

Strap = beating. Sorry, I call it like I see it. Straps leave marks, which legally is the definition of abuse.

There can be consequences without hitting people. All I know if that my parents experienced rather a lot of physical punishment at school, and do not have any respect for the people who treated them that way. Anger, resentment, disgust, even hatred, yes, but nothing resembling respect. How does one respect an adult who hits people when he doesn't get his own way?

Plus, like I said, it emboldened the school officials to commit worse abuse. . .their high school vice-principal used to kick kids down the stairs and would throw them against the wall and choke them. Someone could have been killed! And my mom's Kindergarten teacher used to put staples in their tongues for talking. . .but what do you expect if a teacher is allowed to hit the children in her care, it's only a natural progression to more extreme pain-causing "discipline".

Honestly, the way my parents described their school years makes it sound like public schools in the 60s were some kind of Wild West, with everybody doing whatever they wanted. Did teachers even HAVE rules of conduct back then? How do children learn consequences if the adults in their life have none?

I also don't think the kids were better behaved back then. Possibly they spoke more respectfully to the teachers' faces and showed fake "respect" for fear of being punished, but behind their backs, outside of school. . .no. They did things like having a bonfire and burning their teachers in effigy, which of course now would get a kid suspended and probably arrested (and evidences a total lack of respect. You can't force people to respect you). But back then nobody thought it was the school's business what happened outside of school. . .as it should be.

I agree. I was spanked and I knew that if I did something seriously wrong, there would be a sore bum later on to remind me of it.

Time outs don't work. Talking doesn't work. Those are not consequences and many kids think it's just a huge joke that no one can do anything to them under threat of child and family services or the police getting involved with just one word from the kid. It isn't "innocent until proven guilty" when it comes to a kid saying they have been "abused", it's the other way around.

As far as punishments go, I don't think a child has to be hit to be disciplined. All children are different and what works for one doesn't necessarily work for others. Being grounded could work for one kid, taking away a cell phone for another, and delaying a privilige like getting a driver's license could work for one. I think time outs work for younger children.

Anyways, back to the topic: For the most part, I agree with the ruling. I think it opens the door for more problems though. What happens if a student releases the answers to an exam? Do teachers have the same rights? Can they gossip about their students on a social networking site?

Spanking doesn't work--all the children I know who are spanked are horrible, nasty, mean, little brats who never listen to anybody.

Really, don't you think it depends on how effective and consistent parents are rather than what specific punishment they use? Anyway, regardless of what you think parents should do, no school official should be allowed to touch a child. That's just so dangerous it boggles my mind to think anyone could believe it's safe.

I'm not a horrible, nasty, mean, little brat that never listened. I got spanked occasionally as a kid. My mom would get complimented on how well behaved I'd be out in public places, because I knew that acting out and misbehaving would result in a spanking. If she said it, it was going to happen - no false threats either. The kids I know who AREN'T spanked are all the words you used and then some. I dont have kids of my own nor will I ever, but I have many friends with kids and can see the differences between the way they act and the way the parents discipline (or complete lack thereof in some cases )

Back onto the original topic though - I agree with the ruling as well, but also agree with you, Rockcat, that it could also open doors to more things like exam answers and whatnot. There was a story not too long ago of a teacher who was fired for "gossiping" about students on an anonymous blog. She didn't use their names, or even her own - did it on her own time outside of the school, and they took actions against her.

You missed my point, which was that if parents are effective and consistent, it doesn't matter what specific punishment they use. Although the kids I know who are spanked are quite horrid. . .but I think this is because their parents use hitting as a substitute for discipline.

I think we are a minority Linda.

Of course when I went to school we didn't have "time outs" and very, very few kids were ever suspended. They had to do something really, really bad to get suspended (and that doesn't mean pulling out a gun or some such thing).

We were taught to respect our elders whether that was a teacher, preacher, police officer or just an aunt or uncle. Sure, there were teachers we didn't like but we were taught to show them respect regardless.

I cannot tell you how many times I've heard of children these days taunting parents and teachers with the words "you can't touch me or you'll get arrested". They know that nobody is allowed to discipline them if they want to act out. This nonsense of taking away TV for a week, or taking away the computer or cell phone is just that - nonsense.

Not all children will take advantage but many will and do.

We grew up strong, healthy and happy with good morals and respect for others. We never considered ourselves abused nor did our parents or teachers abuse us. We're too darn soft on the kids of today. They do what they want with no regard for parents/teachers or other authority.

Gosh, how true. There was a sweet young girl with MS on Dr. Phil today whose father got on the school bus and ranted at the bullies that had been poking, pulling hair, inappropriately touching his daughter and he's being prosecuted. None of the parents whose kids were bullying this little girl ever came forward or made their bullying kids apologize to this man or his little girl. If parents won't discipline their children, then who will? Neither the parent, the school, nor the bus driver did a thing to help this child. Where were the parents of those children?

This is one reason I do not and will not teach in the school systems, though I have a degree and a certification to do so. The kids can get away with too much and the teachers can't do a darn thing about it, which to me is a crying shame.

Also- I was spanked as a child when it was necessary, and I was taught to mind my manners and respect my elders. I don't think I'm a nasty, mean brat. I think it depends on the methods and the talks parents have with their children afterwards. When I was spanked, I was then sat down and told exactly why I had been punished and why it was wrong. I think that worked really well for me.

Children absolutely need discipline. The idea that you HAVE to hit children to instill it is pretty uncreative though. Of course it is often effective, but the idea that there are no other negative things you can do than physical punishment of the child is pretty silly, and besides for a boy that is on the football team are you really going to be able to produce more physical trauma than an opposing team's full force tackle? Heck, as skaters we understood the threat of physical pain every time we took insane jumps over flights of stairs and jumping railings and flying down hills at top speed and ultimately crashing and flying off the side of the road. So the threat of a little physical pain really wasn't much of a deterrent! Heck there weren't many weeks I didn't come home with bruises and really bad scrapes, and my sister broke her arm twice and leg once and that didn't stop her from loving gymnastics.

But if you took away my computer access, didn't let me go out with my friends and locked me in my room, kicked me off the soccer team, or confiscated my gear.... uh yeah, that would pretty much suck. Not to mention that you don't just have to punish negative behavior, you can reward positive behavior too to encourage it, like here's a new pair of skates for always coming home by curfew etc.

Allowing some random stranger (which is what teacher's are) to discipline your child outside of school is pretty crazy though too, and doesn't make any more sense than allowing me to break your kid's skateboard over my knee because they annoyed me somehow. For all you know, I'm just a short tempered jerk with no common sense, and the same applies to educators in public school systems.
Yes, teacher's have the right to free speech, and people have to get over this idea that they have the right never to be offended. There are already plenty of laws in place against slander and defamation, regardless of the medium of communication, and anything were translated back to the classroom then of course that is worthy of disciplinary action for the teacher, but good luck with teacher's unions today, heh. Short of calling a student a racial slur, its pretty much impossible to get fired, especially for mere incompetence.

If a student releases answers to an exam, that is a failure on the part of the school IMO. That is just lazy to never change around even the order of exam questions at the very least, and to allow open access to the exam. And then you're just dealing with the extent of damage regardless, as even back in 1994 before the internet there were plenty of means for kids to distribute that information. I don't see how a student could gain access to an exam outside of campus though, so that would be a clear violation of on-campus rules and subject to on-campus disciplinary action too regardless.