Post by cookiemdough on Mar 22, 2013 18:32:28 GMT -5
So now seeing a picture of it I am trying to figure out how the mom didn't know he took it to school. It is kind of big to fit I an 6 year olds pants pocket
DS had to do a project on shapes for his kindergarten class a couple of months ago. He had to find items of different 3D shapes at home and take them in. We found a small empty match box in our camping gear and he took it as an example of a rectangle/cube amongst the other things he collected. The box came back with a note from the principal letting us know that it was inappropriate and not allowed.
My bad for not realizing that obviously my six year old might burn down the school or set another child on fire with an empty match box?
There is a lot of over reaching and overly PC-ness going on these days.
"Not gonna lie; I kind of keep expecting you to post one day that you threw down on someone who clearly had no idea that today was NOT THEIR DAY." ~dontcallmeshirley
DS had to do a project on shapes for his kindergarten class a couple of months ago. He had to find items of different 3D shapes at home and take them in. We found a small empty match box in our camping gear and he took it as an example of a rectangle/cube amongst the other things he collected. The box came back with a note from the principal letting us know that it was inappropriate and not allowed.
My bad for not realizing that obviously my six year old might burn down the school or set another child on fire with an empty match box?
There is a lot of over reaching and overly PC-ness going on these days.
I want to know what overly PC means.
....also team mom is a fucking idiot.
Overly politically correct. Or did you mean what do I mean by that? Because if I need to give an explanation for anything of any level at all, that will have to wait until tomorrow when I'm not tipsy and frozen from watching a soccer game in a blizzard. That's just beyond my abilities at this moment
Overly politically correct. Or did you mean what do I mean by that? Because if I need to give an explanation for anything of any level at all, that will have to wait until tomorrow when I'm not tipsy and frozen from watching a soccer game in a blizzard. That's just beyond my abilities at this moment
no, I know what PC is. To me, PC is simply being respectful. Like, you know, not knowingly being an ass to someone by saying or doing something that could be offense to them. PC seems to be thrown around like it's a curse word by some people. I see it as good manners.
"Not gonna lie; I kind of keep expecting you to post one day that you threw down on someone who clearly had no idea that today was NOT THEIR DAY." ~dontcallmeshirley
Do other kids get to bring whatever toys they want? If so, the "he shouldn't have toys at all" issue has no bearing. I happen to agree, my kids aren't even in school yet but when they have toys in the car they know they don't come in with us wherever we are going. Anyway, I do think the school is overreacting, actually. Little boys like toy guns. What if it was a squirt gun? How do you draw the line? If the school wants to ban all toy guns with the real guns they need to make that the policy. I would be fine w/ that as a parent. But treating this little 5 year old showing off his toy like someone who "brought a gun to school" is f'd up, IMO.
Post by cookiemdough on Mar 23, 2013 8:50:25 GMT -5
The school doesn't have a clear cut policy as it should, but really you would need to live under a rock to think with everything going on that it is a good idea to let your kid bring toy guns to school.
Do other kids get to bring whatever toys they want? If so, the "he shouldn't have toys at all" issue has no bearing. I happen to agree, my kids aren't even in school yet but when they have toys in the car they know they don't come in with us wherever we are going. Anyway, I do think the school is overreacting, actually. Little boys like toy guns. What if it was a squirt gun? How do you draw the line? If the school wants to ban all toy guns with the real guns they need to make that the policy. I would be fine w/ that as a parent. But treating this little 5 year old showing off his toy like someone who "brought a gun to school" is f'd up, IMO.
Oh, I think more than a 1/2 day of in school suspension would be called for if he brought a real gun to school.
So basically, if she'd just waited two days until she could discuss it with the real principal, it would have been overturned and none of this would have even been an issue.
Overly politically correct. Or did you mean what do I mean by that? Because if I need to give an explanation for anything of any level at all, that will have to wait until tomorrow when I'm not tipsy and frozen from watching a soccer game in a blizzard. That's just beyond my abilities at this moment
no, I know what PC is. To me, PC is simply being respectful. Like, you know, not knowingly being an ass to someone by saying or doing something that could be offense to them. PC seems to be thrown around like it's a curse word by some people. I see it as good manners.
Ok, Friday night worn off. Saturday morning caffeine starting to work. I meant it in the sense that, in way too many situations, we've evolved past simply being polite and doing the right thing to tiptoeing around and/or over reacting to simple situations in the interest of everyone everwhere never ever ever being upset about anything ever. As in reacting to a very young child having a toy (I assume in a simple, innocent act of just being a child, based on what facts presented here...of course there could be more to it) and reacting by suspending them from kindergarten because it might be perceived as a threat to people so they have to do something about it. I'm all for being polite and doing the right thing, but we've become a nation that makes knee jerk decisions out of fear and that really makes me sad.
I always have very little sympathy for parents when they go to the media, unless it's a serious case of ridiculousness on the school's part. I have a parent threatening me with a lawsuit and media attention right now for sitting her child ISS lunch (20 minutes where they sit at a desk in the cafeteria away from their friends) for cheating during a test. So I'm certainly biased when I see things like this.
That said, if the school doesn't have a firm policy in place for this, I can see how the decision might have been overturned. While my principal (and middle school coordinator and superintendent-she met with all three) backed me and my decision was supported, parents love to try to figure out a way around the teacher. ISS seems a little overdramatic, but it just depends on their policy and past decisions in matters like this.
Post by druidprincess on Mar 23, 2013 11:13:31 GMT -5
Haven't read the whole thread, but our son tried taking his wooden sword+sheath (he got it from the Renaissance Festival, it's pretty cool and well-made) to show-and-tell and was told he couldn't show it since it was a weapon.
Sigh. I get it, I guess. And I don't know that I'd allow him to take anything more than a bubble-gun to show-and-tell, but considering swords aren't exactly today's lethal weapon of choice, I thought it was a bit of an overreach. Oh well.
What an absolutely fucked up situation, on both sides. Everyone involved seems incapable of common sense and unable to take responsibility.
Mom shouldn't be sending precious to school everyday with a pocket full of toys. Teacher gets sick of precious taking toys out and distracting the other kids during class so busts him on a "no-tolerance" policy that evidently never made it into the kindergarten handbook. Media fails to recognize the difference between suspension and in-house suspension - although the actual penalty in this scenario sounds more like after school detention.
Everyone who could possibly overreact does exactly that.
I don't have any problem with a teacher instituting some sort of punishment to a student who keeps playing with his toys and talking to classmates when he's supposed to be doing something else. Especially if nothing else has gotten their attention. I would think suspension would be too harsh, but from this article, he wasn't suspended. To me suspension means you can't return to school for 3 days to a week. Honestly though, I don't think kindergarteners should be kept after school.
I kind of suspect that the teacher didn't feel empowered to deal with this kids behavior when it first became a problem, and the zero tolerance rule gave him or her the backup they felt they needed when they saw a toy gun. And that's the real problem here - whether it be the teacher's natural timidity or the opposition faced at every turn by over protective, litigious parents. I mean really - the parent is angry because of something from kindergarten going on her son's "record"? How is she going to react when the first bad grade hits his record?
no, I know what PC is. To me, PC is simply being respectful. Like, you know, not knowingly being an ass to someone by saying or doing something that could be offense to them. PC seems to be thrown around like it's a curse word by some people. I see it as good manners.
Ok, Friday night worn off. Saturday morning caffeine starting to work. I meant it in the sense that, in way too many situations, we've evolved past simply being polite and doing the right thing to tiptoeing around and/or over reacting to simple situations in the interest of everyone everwhere never ever ever being upset about anything ever. As in reacting to a very young child having a toy (I assume in a simple, innocent act of just being a child, based on what facts presented here...of course there could be more to it) and reacting by suspending them from kindergarten because it might be perceived as a threat to people so they have to do something about it. I'm all for being polite and doing the right thing, but we've become a nation that makes knee jerk decisions out of fear and that really makes me sad.
so, here is your hypothetical...maybe I'm too PC.
So Johnny takes the gun to school (did you look at it? I'm not saying it's a realistic gun, but it's not your run of the mill squirt gun). He shows it/plays with it with my child, who will not be permitted to play with guns (because they're not toys). Johnny gets a suspension. School is being too PC? Where is the respect for the way I choose to raise my child?
Unless it's something the teacher requests, kids shouldn't be bringing toys to school. Also, it does not say whether it was the first time he brought toys to school. I don't think it really even said he was suspended specifically for the gun.
"Not gonna lie; I kind of keep expecting you to post one day that you threw down on someone who clearly had no idea that today was NOT THEIR DAY." ~dontcallmeshirley
Ok, Friday night worn off. Saturday morning caffeine starting to work. I meant it in the sense that, in way too many situations, we've evolved past simply being polite and doing the right thing to tiptoeing around and/or over reacting to simple situations in the interest of everyone everwhere never ever ever being upset about anything ever. As in reacting to a very young child having a toy (I assume in a simple, innocent act of just being a child, based on what facts presented here...of course there could be more to it) and reacting by suspending them from kindergarten because it might be perceived as a threat to people so they have to do something about it. I'm all for being polite and doing the right thing, but we've become a nation that makes knee jerk decisions out of fear and that really makes me sad.
so, here is your hypothetical...maybe I'm too PC.
So Johnny takes the gun to school (did you look at it? I'm not saying it's a realistic gun, but it's not your run of the mill squirt gun). He shows it/plays with it with my child, who will not be permitted to play with guns (because they're not toys). Johnny gets a suspension. School is being too PC? Where is the respect for the way I choose to raise my child?
Unless it's something the teacher requests, kids shouldn't be bringing toys to school. Also, it does not say whether it was the first time he brought toys to school. I don't think it really even said he was suspended specifically for the gun.
Hypothetical facts aside the bolded part is what I find disturbing and arrogant. I have zero expectation that the rest of the public world needs to bend to accommodate the way I want my child raised and meet my personal standards and I would never expect another child be punished simply because he did/said something that I'd rather my child not see, if it isn't something that actually hurts my child. If a parent is really that afraid of what their child might learn or pick up on just from being around other children in a school setting, they should probably just home school their kids. I have a couple of extremely religious, conservative friends that have done just that because they want to control as much as possible about what their children see and hear, or rather don't see and don't hear. Me, I accept that DS is going to hear and see things at school or other kids homes that I don't have control of that might be different than what we do in our home and I openly cherish the opportunity teach him about diversity and to tell him that every family is different and different families make different choices and that we respect each other for it, no matter what.
None of us have all of the specific facts about the article and I suspect there is more to the story but, if this particular child truly brought a toy gun to school as part of the act of just being a child, suspension is ridiculously over the top. We don't have or play with toy guys in our home but if my child sees one some where else, it is far from the end of the world.
ETA: I just noticed the update that the suspension was over turned so maybe there wasn't more to the story other than the kid just brought his toy and wanted to show it to people. Rule or no rule about toys at school, kids sometimes take things out of the house when we don't know it, even if that rule is in place, because they are kids. I can't tell you how many times I've looked in the rear view mirror and discovered DS has a Lego character in the car with him when he knows he's not supposed to do it because it will always get lost and he'll get upset. But I'm not going to frisk him every time he leaves our home. I just take it away from him and he doesn't get it back for a couple of days.
Oh god, you know what? It only takes a few weeks of being in any kind of formal daycare/school setting to know you can't bring toys to school and you certainly can't bring toy guns to school. It's not some hidden secret or unknown fact. It's life and I'm actually pretty surprised there is anyone who came up in the public school system who doesn't know this.
There are plenty of thinks you can get in trouble for at school that is "part of the act of being a child." Let's not be stupid here.
So maybe this is wrong and judgy of me, but when a parent jumps to the media or a lawyer for a small issue, I'm automatically assuming they/their kid is wrong.
I know what they say about assuming right?
Yes, it is.
I'm not saying this particular mother is right, but in every damn thread where school vs. parent/student is discussed, there are always several comments like "DON'T MAKE ASSUMPTIONS! THERE'S NOT ENOUGH INFORMATION IN THE ARTICLE! WE DON'T KNOW THE WHOLE STORY!" followed by maybe this and maybe that. I'd like to see the same standard to be applied to parents instead of presuming them to be at fault when there's no indication of such. Just saying.
So Johnny takes the gun to school (did you look at it? I'm not saying it's a realistic gun, but it's not your run of the mill squirt gun). He shows it/plays with it with my child, who will not be permitted to play with guns (because they're not toys). Johnny gets a suspension. School is being too PC? Where is the respect for the way I choose to raise my child?
Unless it's something the teacher requests, kids shouldn't be bringing toys to school. Also, it does not say whether it was the first time he brought toys to school. I don't think it really even said he was suspended specifically for the gun.
Hypothetical facts aside the bolded part is what I find disturbing and arrogant. I have zero expectation that the rest of the public world needs to bend to accommodate the way I want my child raised and meet my personal standards and I would never expect another child be punished simply because he did/said something that I'd rather my child not see, if it isn't something that actually hurts my child. If a parent is really that afraid of what their child might learn or pick up on just from being around other children in a school setting, they should probably just home school their kids. I have a couple of extremely religious, conservative friends that have done just that because they want to control as much as possible about what their children see and hear, or rather don't see and don't hear. Me, I accept that DS is going to hear and see things at school or other kids homes that I don't have control of that might be different than what we do in our home and I openly cherish the opportunity teach him about diversity and to tell him that every family is different and different families make different choices and that we respect each other for it, no matter what.
None of us have all of the specific facts about the article and I suspect there is more to the story but, if this particular child truly brought a toy gun to school as part of the act of just being a child, suspension is ridiculously over the top. We don't have or play with toy guys in our home but if my child sees one some where else, it is far from the end of the world.
ETA: I just noticed the update that the suspension was over turned so maybe there wasn't more to the story other than the kid just brought his toy and wanted to show it to people. Rule or no rule about toys at school, kids sometimes take things out of the house when we don't know it, even if that rule is in place, because they are kids. I can't tell you how many times I've looked in the rear view mirror and discovered DS has a Lego character in the car with him when he knows he's not supposed to do it because it will always get lost and he'll get upset. But I'm not going to frisk him every time he leaves our home. I just take it away from him and he doesn't get it back for a couple of days.
I did not say that the child should be punished. I'm simply saying that schools walk a fine line. Again, toys don't belong in school. I think that suspension was overturned because the mom is cray cray. Also, it was an in school suspension. Basically detention.
"Not gonna lie; I kind of keep expecting you to post one day that you threw down on someone who clearly had no idea that today was NOT THEIR DAY." ~dontcallmeshirley
So maybe this is wrong and judgy of me, but when a parent jumps to the media or a lawyer for a small issue, I'm automatically assuming they/their kid is wrong.
I know what they say about assuming right?
Yes, it is.
I'm not saying this particular mother is right, but in every damn thread where school vs. parent/student is discussed, there are always several comments like "DON'T MAKE ASSUMPTIONS! THERE'S NOT ENOUGH INFORMATION IN THE ARTICLE! WE DON'T KNOW THE WHOLE STORY!" followed by maybe this and maybe that. I'd like to see the same standard to be applied to parents instead of presuming them to be at fault when there's no indication of such. Just saying.
Still pissy about that bullying coma story huh?
Here's the thing...parents run to the media when 'they don't get their way' and they get to tell their side of the story. The schools essentially can't say shit to the media, EVER. So I do the same thing, I always presume that I am only getting half the story when it comes to media stories related to education or health care because school's and hospitals don't really get to share their side of the story because when they do they will inevitably release private information. If a parent or patient chooses to release that information it is different.
Also, I can't imagine there is paper work for an in-school suspension, where I come from an in-school suspension is more about making a point to the child than anything else, and it is usually used as step taken prior to a later real suspension (we have what is called progressive discipline in Ontario, there have to be many steps in place in order to get to suspension for all but a handful of situations).
Hypothetical facts aside the bolded part is what I find disturbing and arrogant. I have zero expectation that the rest of the public world needs to bend to accommodate the way I want my child raised and meet my personal standards and I would never expect another child be punished simply because he did/said something that I'd rather my child not see, if it isn't something that actually hurts my child. If a parent is really that afraid of what their child might learn or pick up on just from being around other children in a school setting, they should probably just home school their kids. I have a couple of extremely religious, conservative friends that have done just that because they want to control as much as possible about what their children see and hear, or rather don't see and don't hear. Me, I accept that DS is going to hear and see things at school or other kids homes that I don't have control of that might be different than what we do in our home and I openly cherish the opportunity teach him about diversity and to tell him that every family is different and different families make different choices and that we respect each other for it, no matter what.
None of us have all of the specific facts about the article and I suspect there is more to the story but, if this particular child truly brought a toy gun to school as part of the act of just being a child, suspension is ridiculously over the top. We don't have or play with toy guys in our home but if my child sees one some where else, it is far from the end of the world.
ETA: I just noticed the update that the suspension was over turned so maybe there wasn't more to the story other than the kid just brought his toy and wanted to show it to people. Rule or no rule about toys at school, kids sometimes take things out of the house when we don't know it, even if that rule is in place, because they are kids. I can't tell you how many times I've looked in the rear view mirror and discovered DS has a Lego character in the car with him when he knows he's not supposed to do it because it will always get lost and he'll get upset. But I'm not going to frisk him every time he leaves our home. I just take it away from him and he doesn't get it back for a couple of days.
I did not say that the child should be punished. I'm simply saying that schools walk a fine line. Again, toys don't belong in school. I think that suspension was overturned because the mom is cray cray. Also, it was an in school suspension. Basically detention.
Yep, absolutely, an in-school suspension (especially for only half a day) just means Billy spent some time in the office to make the point that he shouldn't bring toys to class.
It's good to hear so many parents say that they don't let their kids bring toys - it is so frustrating when they do. Last year the primary kids were all into these things called Silly Bands - essentially coloured rubber bracelets like we used to have when we were kids except not as thick and shaped like animals and other things. Kids would wear like 30 of them, and trade them, and lose them, and fight over them. It was fucking insane and eventually we had to ban them, which is so sad and ridiculous, but when you end up spend 20 minutes a day resolving issues related to coloured rubber bands you pretty much will do anything to make it stop.
Here's the thing...parents run to the media when 'they don't get their way' and they get to tell their side of the story. The school's essentially can't say shit to the media, EVER. So I do the same thing, I always presume that I am only getting half the story when it comes to media stories related to education or health care because school's and hospitals don't really get to share their side of the story because when they do they will inevitably release private information. If a parent or patient chooses to release that information it is different.
Also, I can't imagine there is paper work for an in-school suspension, where I come from an in-school suspension is more about making a point to the child than anything else, and it is usually used as step taken prior to a later real suspension (we have what is called progressive discipline in Ontario, there have to be many steps in place in order to get to suspension for all but a handful of situations).
Well, the victim died, so......yeah.
But I'm glad you brought that thread up because it's a perfect example of what I was talking about. All these bizarre hypothetical alternative theories abounded in that thread. Someone (possibly you, I don't remember) suggested that MAYBE the victim was winning the fight (against multiple assailants) and then just happened to slip and fall, which is what really caused his injury, not classmates beating him up or anything. I replied politely to that one, but I was laughing out loud at its absurdity when I read it.
Someone stated that MAYBE the parents failed to get medical attention soon enough or MAYBE the medical care was inadequate. That one pissed me off because there was no known evidence of medical malpractice or parental neglect stated in the article, and the prevailing standard on this board is if it's not in the article, it's false. God help anyone who dares suggest a teacher may be guilty of a crime when the article says nothing to suggest that, but in that thread it was totes cool to do that about the parents and the doctors.
And then someone made it a huge-ass point to state that the coma was medically induced, and kept repeating "The kids didn't beat him into a coma!!! The DOCTORS induced it." as though that somehow means the kids who beat him up are blameless.
So basically, in any school-related controversy, no one is allowed make any unflattering assumptions about the school/teacher(s), but at the same time it's totes OK to assume the parents are lying assholes if they contact the media, or make other derogatory assumptions about them? Assumptions are only allowed when they favor the school/teacher(s). Talk about bullshit double standards.
The school's essentially can't say shit to the media, EVER. I don't care. It doesn't prove the parents are ALWAYS wrong or that school is ALWAYS right.
Also, your last paragraph has no relevance to anything I said.
I'm not saying this particular mother is right, but in every damn thread where school vs. parent/student is discussed, there are always several comments like "DON'T MAKE ASSUMPTIONS! THERE'S NOT ENOUGH INFORMATION IN THE ARTICLE! WE DON'T KNOW THE WHOLE STORY!" followed by maybe this and maybe that. I'd like to see the same standard to be applied to parents instead of presuming them to be at fault when there's no indication of such. Just saying.
Maybe it's because about 99% of the time, it generally is a set of aw-y/bebe/dumbass parents behind the story?
But I'm glad you brought that thread up because it's a perfect example of what I was talking about. Someone (possibly you, I don't remember) suggested that MAYBE the victim was winning the fight (against multiple assailants) and then just happened to slip and fall, which is what really caused his injury, not classmates beating him up or anything. I replied politely to that one, but I was laughing out loud at its absurdity when I read it.
Someone stated that MAYBE the parents failed to get medical attention soon enough or MAYBE the medical care was inadequate. That one pissed me off because there was no known evidence of medical malpractice or parental neglect stated in the article, and the prevailing standard on this board is if it's not in the article, it's false.
And then someone made it a huge-ass point to state that the coma was medically induced, and kept repeating "The kids didn't beat him into a coma!!! The DOCTORS induced it." as though that somehow means the kids who beat him up are blameless.
All these bizarre hypothetical alternative theories abounded in that thread, but at the same time it's totes OK to assume the parents are lying assholes if they contact the media? Talk about bullshit double standards.
The school's essentially can't say shit to the media, EVER. Irrelevant. It doesn't prove the parents are ALWAYS wrong or that school is ALWAYS right.
Also, your last paragraph has no relevance to anything I said.
I never said the first one (about him winning). My initial point in the thread was that there was NO evidence that there was bullying, nothing in the article pointed to bullying other than the father saying he was bullied and the fact that the child fought with more than one student. Those two things are not proof of bullying, period. I never said I don't believe the parents in situations, I said I don't believe media portrayals of the events (especially when the case is still being investigated) because here is what is going to happen: Parents: HORRIBLE THINGS HAPPENED TO MY CHILD. School: We are investigating. That's it. So no, I can't form a judgement about what an appropriate punishment should be. In that case the students were suspended for one day. That is a normal suspension for fighting. I get that the child died, but at the point that the punishment was given he wasn't even in the coma yet. We still no more details about the actual situation that led to his injuries other than what the father said. I am not saying the father is lying, I am saying we heard one side of the story.
The same is essentially true here, we know the mother was unhappy with the discipline as a result of her child having a toy gun but we don't know the background and we never will. What we do know is that when she didn't like what happened she ran to the media, that in and of itself says something - and it worked, she got her way.
But I'm glad you brought that thread up because it's a perfect example of what I was talking about. All these bizarre hypothetical alternative theories abounded in that thread. Someone (possibly you, I don't remember) suggested that MAYBE the victim was winning the fight (against multiple assailants) and then just happened to slip and fall, which is what really caused his injury, not classmates beating him up or anything. I replied politely to that one, but I was laughing out loud at its absurdity when I read it.
Someone stated that MAYBE the parents failed to get medical attention soon enough or MAYBE the medical care was inadequate. That one pissed me off because there was no known evidence of medical malpractice or parental neglect stated in the article, and the prevailing standard on this board is if it's not in the article, it's false. God help anyone who dares suggest a teacher may be guilty of a crime when the article says nothing to suggest that, but in that thread it was totes cool to do that about the parents and the doctors.
And then someone made it a huge-ass point to state that the coma was medically induced, and kept repeating "The kids didn't beat him into a coma!!! The DOCTORS induced it." as though that somehow means the kids who beat him up are blameless.
So basically, in any school-related controversy, no one is allowed make any unflattering assumptions about the school/teacher(s), but at the same time it's totes OK to assume the parents are lying assholes if they contact the media, or make other derogatory assumptions about them? Assumptions are only allowed when they favor the school/teacher(s). Talk about bullshit double standards.
The school's essentially can't say shit to the media, EVER. I don't care. It doesn't prove the parents are ALWAYS wrong or that school is ALWAYS right.
Also, your last paragraph has no relevance to anything I said.
Hold up on the bolded there....that is NOT the standard on this board. "If it's not in the article" it remains an unknown.
"Not gonna lie; I kind of keep expecting you to post one day that you threw down on someone who clearly had no idea that today was NOT THEIR DAY." ~dontcallmeshirley