Girl May Be Expelled For Taking Birth Control On Campus

[Vic]

Nothing new here. A guy in my senior class in high school was expelled for taking ibuprofen on campus... and that was in 1989.

 

[Exterous]

Its the result of having to have blanket policies to protect the school, teachers, administrators from the lawsuit happy parents. Its easier to follow a simple policy that make every effort to close any little loophole that might allow children to be treated differently based on some variable.

In the education world - reading between the lines, taking personal responsibility, or having any 'gray areas' in your policy is a good way to get yourself fired or sued.

 

[Brainonska511]

Originally posted by: piasabird
So why cant you take your birth control pills at home?

You can't just take them whenever you feel like during the day. You have to take them at a certain time to maintain hormone levels. Of course, it would have been smart of the girl to start taking the pills so that they would coincide when she was not in school.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Exterous
Its the result of having to have blanket policies to protect the school, teachers, administrators from the lawsuit happy parents. Its easier to follow a simple policy that make every effort to close any little loophole that might allow children to be treated differently based on some variable.

In the education world - reading between the lines, taking personal responsibility, or having any 'gray areas' in your policy is a good way to get yourself fired or sued.

Exactly. Think of it this way: how is a teacher supposed to know if it's a prescribed birth control pill or some illicit drug? Answer: they're not. And yet if it were some illicit drug, and a teacher knowingly allowed it (even if they were lead to be believe it was legal and prescribed medicine), the district could be sued for millions and the teacher/staff/adminstrators subsequently fired. So the only recourse is a zero tolerance policy. Which is why, anti-public education knee-jerkers like CAD to the contrary, zero tolerance policies are just as common in private schools as public.

So if you're looking for fault here, blame litigation-happy parents and their fat parasite lawyers.

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: JKing106

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
stupid people in charge

Which is another way of saying government.

Which is to say bible thumping religious fanatics who think they know what's best for your child. There are girls who take birth control to regulate their menses. But everybody knows there's a secret ingredient in those pills that makes them drop their pants and kill babies!

Fairfax, VA is about as far from bible thumpers as they come. It's practically a suburb of DC.

 

[GenHoth]

Originally posted by: Vic
Nothing new here. A guy in my senior class in high school was expelled for taking ibuprofen on campus... and that was in 1989.

Just about every athlete would have been gone... Glad our school wasn't this bad

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: GenHoth

Originally posted by: Vic
Nothing new here. A guy in my senior class in high school was expelled for taking ibuprofen on campus... and that was in 1989.

Just about every athlete would have been gone... Glad our school wasn't this bad

Actually, it was a great school (and still is as far as I know). There is value in discretion, and often punishment for a lack thereof.

 

[BrunoPuntzJones]

Originally posted by: AreaCode707
Only reason I could think of that this reaction makes sense is...

Some kids bring bad drugs to school in Rx drug bottles
School officials have no way of knowing whether the med the kid just took from an Rx drug bottle is legit
Therefore kids are not allowed to take Rx drugs on campus

That actually makes some amount of sense. Can't truly tell what they're taking so you make a rule that nobody can take anything.

Now, as others have suggested, this would be a completely moot point if they allow the kids to take Rx meds in a controlled environment and still had a "no tolerance" policy on the campus itself (meds are kept under nurse control or something, kids come to a particular place and take them.)

I think it's as stupid as anything that she got suspended for this, but after pausing to think about it I could see a possible chain of events that makes it somewhat understandable. They should stagger the punishments though; a few days if your parent vouches for you, a longer period if you were taking actual bad drugs.

Then just put them in a Tic-Tac bottle. Ain't rocket science to get around.

 

[fallout man]

Originally posted by: piasabird
So why cant you take your birth control pills at home?

Why can't you just shit at home, and not waste taxpayer dollars number-two-ing while you should be learning. School taxes are expensive, and wasting that money that's distributed to you from the taxpayers on pooping time is a travesty. It's un-American, it's immoral, and it smells bad.

Why can't schools just shut down the bathrooms? They'll save on water costs, and the costs of the janitorial staff they employ to clean up the dook some kid left in the urinal during class-time.

Same goes for you employed high-school graduate people. Shitting on the clock is immoral. Bathroom Ninja does not approve.

 

[Fingolfin269]

Originally posted by: fallout man

Originally posted by: piasabird
So why cant you take your birth control pills at home?

Why can't you just shit at home, and not waste taxpayer dollars number-two-ing while you should be learning. School taxes are expensive, and wasting that money that's distributed to you from the taxpayers on pooping time is a travesty. It's un-American, it's immoral, and it smells bad.

Why can't schools just shut down the bathrooms? They'll save on water costs, and the costs of the janitorial staff they employ to clean up the dook some kid left in the urinal during class-time.

Same goes for you employed high-school graduate people. Shitting on the clock is immoral. Bathroom Ninja does not approve.

Bad analogy. While I think this whole situation is stupid I do think it's fairly obvious to anyone that has ever shit before that when you have to shit you have to shit. Birth control isn't exactly a requirement.

 

[SammyJr]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Gotta love the gov't school system...

Yeah, because stupid laws can't be changed and corporations are next to godliness.

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: Fingolfin269

Originally posted by: fallout man

Originally posted by: piasabird
So why cant you take your birth control pills at home?

Why can't you just shit at home, and not waste taxpayer dollars number-two-ing while you should be learning. School taxes are expensive, and wasting that money that's distributed to you from the taxpayers on pooping time is a travesty. It's un-American, it's immoral, and it smells bad.

Why can't schools just shut down the bathrooms? They'll save on water costs, and the costs of the janitorial staff they employ to clean up the dook some kid left in the urinal during class-time.

Same goes for you employed high-school graduate people. Shitting on the clock is immoral. Bathroom Ninja does not approve.

Bad analogy. While I think this whole situation is stupid I do think it's fairly obvious to anyone that has ever shit before that when you have to shit you have to shit. Birth control isn't exactly a requirement.

True, but there should be no need for an analogy at all - This rule is absolutely retarded.

 

[sactoking]

Just another item in a long list of stupid things schools do.

Teach my kids and leave the damn parenting to me.

 

[AreaCode707]

Originally posted by: BrunoPuntzJones

Originally posted by: AreaCode707
Only reason I could think of that this reaction makes sense is...

Some kids bring bad drugs to school in Rx drug bottles
School officials have no way of knowing whether the med the kid just took from an Rx drug bottle is legit
Therefore kids are not allowed to take Rx drugs on campus

That actually makes some amount of sense. Can't truly tell what they're taking so you make a rule that nobody can take anything.

Now, as others have suggested, this would be a completely moot point if they allow the kids to take Rx meds in a controlled environment and still had a "no tolerance" policy on the campus itself (meds are kept under nurse control or something, kids come to a particular place and take them.)

I think it's as stupid as anything that she got suspended for this, but after pausing to think about it I could see a possible chain of events that makes it somewhat understandable. They should stagger the punishments though; a few days if your parent vouches for you, a longer period if you were taking actual bad drugs.

Then just put them in a Tic-Tac bottle. Ain't rocket science to get around.

Fair enough. Although you can examine the contents of a tic tac bottle and determine that they aren't tic tacs. With meds, you have no real way of knowing what you're holding. Ultimately, while I believe the punishment is over the top since the kid's mom vouched for her, I think I understand why the rule is there.

 

[IceBergSLiM]

i have a zero tolerance policy for zero tolerance policies.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

What ever happened to common sense? Just who are these people teaching our children?

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: AreaCode707

Originally posted by: BrunoPuntzJones

Originally posted by: AreaCode707
Only reason I could think of that this reaction makes sense is...

Some kids bring bad drugs to school in Rx drug bottles
School officials have no way of knowing whether the med the kid just took from an Rx drug bottle is legit
Therefore kids are not allowed to take Rx drugs on campus

That actually makes some amount of sense. Can't truly tell what they're taking so you make a rule that nobody can take anything.

Now, as others have suggested, this would be a completely moot point if they allow the kids to take Rx meds in a controlled environment and still had a "no tolerance" policy on the campus itself (meds are kept under nurse control or something, kids come to a particular place and take them.)

I think it's as stupid as anything that she got suspended for this, but after pausing to think about it I could see a possible chain of events that makes it somewhat understandable. They should stagger the punishments though; a few days if your parent vouches for you, a longer period if you were taking actual bad drugs.

Then just put them in a Tic-Tac bottle. Ain't rocket science to get around.

Fair enough. Although you can examine the contents of a tic tac bottle and determine that they aren't tic tacs. With meds, you have no real way of knowing what you're holding. Ultimately, while I believe the punishment is over the top since the kid's mom vouched for her, I think I understand why the rule is there.

Think of it this way - if the school made a policy of calling the cops, confiscating any and all pills, and testing them to make sure they are what the kid says they are, this girl would have been treated like a criminal for an afternoon.

The school handling this 'in house' by their zero-tolerance rules has made this much worse for her, and she hasn't done anything that can really be called 'wrong'.

Zero-tolerance requires zero-brains; it's pretty ironic that school boards love it so much, since they're supposed to teach others how to think like grownups!.

 

[theeedude]

The problem is that if some kid brings some illegal drugs into school and ODs or passes them along, the school could be hit with a major lawsuit, regardless of whether it is private or public school.
Hence the zero tolerance policies. What is to stop a girl from putting narcotics in birth control dispenser? So I am not sure it's a bad policy to ban this, my problem is more with the extent of the punishment.

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: senseamp
The problem is that if some kid brings some illegal drugs into school and ODs or passes them along, the school could be hit with a major lawsuit, regardless of whether it is private or public school.
Hence the zero tolerance policies. What is to stop a girl from putting narcotics in birth control dispenser? So I am not sure it's a bad policy to ban this, my problem is more with the extent of the punishment.

How does a Zero Tolerance policy stop someone from bringing narcotics on campus if they wanted?


Why not punish the people who bring narcotics on, and not the people with a legitimate purpose? Why one-size-fits-all?

 

[silverpig]

1. I feel sorry for the diabetic kid who needs his insulin.
2. I feel sorry for the asthmatic who needs an inhaler
3. Caffeine is a drug. I guess no one is allowed to drink coffee either.

 

[sactoking]

I refer you to the wonderful writers at Cracked.com

Check out #1.

(Yes, I totally linked Cracked in a P&N discussion)

 

[AreaCode707]

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Originally posted by: AreaCode707

Originally posted by: BrunoPuntzJones

Originally posted by: AreaCode707
Only reason I could think of that this reaction makes sense is...

Some kids bring bad drugs to school in Rx drug bottles
School officials have no way of knowing whether the med the kid just took from an Rx drug bottle is legit
Therefore kids are not allowed to take Rx drugs on campus

That actually makes some amount of sense. Can't truly tell what they're taking so you make a rule that nobody can take anything.

Now, as others have suggested, this would be a completely moot point if they allow the kids to take Rx meds in a controlled environment and still had a "no tolerance" policy on the campus itself (meds are kept under nurse control or something, kids come to a particular place and take them.)

I think it's as stupid as anything that she got suspended for this, but after pausing to think about it I could see a possible chain of events that makes it somewhat understandable. They should stagger the punishments though; a few days if your parent vouches for you, a longer period if you were taking actual bad drugs.

Then just put them in a Tic-Tac bottle. Ain't rocket science to get around.

Fair enough. Although you can examine the contents of a tic tac bottle and determine that they aren't tic tacs. With meds, you have no real way of knowing what you're holding. Ultimately, while I believe the punishment is over the top since the kid's mom vouched for her, I think I understand why the rule is there.

Think of it this way - if the school made a policy of calling the cops, confiscating any and all pills, and testing them to make sure they are what the kid says they are, this girl would have been treated like a criminal for an afternoon.

The school handling this 'in house' by their zero-tolerance rules has made this much worse for her, and she hasn't done anything that can really be called 'wrong'.

Zero-tolerance requires zero-brains; it's pretty ironic that school boards love it so much, since they're supposed to teach others how to think like grownups!.

I like your approach much better than the school's. The school's is pretty dumb, just not quite as unreasoned as the OP makes it out to be. It's very accurate to state that they don't want the extra work and mental effort of correctly policing their student body.

 

[AreaCode707]

Originally posted by: OCguy

Originally posted by: senseamp
The problem is that if some kid brings some illegal drugs into school and ODs or passes them along, the school could be hit with a major lawsuit, regardless of whether it is private or public school.
Hence the zero tolerance policies. What is to stop a girl from putting narcotics in birth control dispenser? So I am not sure it's a bad policy to ban this, my problem is more with the extent of the punishment.

How does a Zero Tolerance policy stop someone from bringing narcotics on campus if they wanted?


Why not punish the people who bring narcotics on, and not the people with a legitimate purpose? Why one-size-fits-all?

Because teachers and school administrators have no real way of knowing the difference between legit and non-legit, and therefore have to treat them the same. While I think 3chordcharlie's proposal is superior, it could be cost/time prohibitive, and definitely puts more burden on the school to administer. The real discussion should be about whether that is an appropriate burden for the school to carry. I say yes.

 

[imported_Lothar]

Originally posted by: OCguy

Originally posted by: senseamp
The problem is that if some kid brings some illegal drugs into school and ODs or passes them along, the school could be hit with a major lawsuit, regardless of whether it is private or public school.
Hence the zero tolerance policies. What is to stop a girl from putting narcotics in birth control dispenser? So I am not sure it's a bad policy to ban this, my problem is more with the extent of the punishment.

How does a Zero Tolerance policy stop someone from bringing narcotics on campus if they wanted?


Why not punish the people who bring narcotics on, and not the people with a legitimate purpose? Why one-size-fits-all?

Because zero tolerance policies prevent the school from being involved in a lawsuit.

 

[Colt45]

jesus christ, come on america. wtf.