7-year-old playing an imaginary game at school gets suspended for real

[SilentPanda]

http://kdvr.com/2013/02/04/7-year-ol...nded-for-real/

A 2nd grader has been suspended from school in Loveland for a make believe game he was playing.

The 7-year-old says he was trying to save the world. But school administrators say he broke a key rule during his pretend play.

“I was trying to save people and I just can’t believe I got dispended,” says Alex Evans, who doesn’t understand his suspension any better than he can pronounce it.

“It’s called ‘rescue the world,’” he says.

He was playing a game during recess at Loveland’s Mary Blair Elementary School and threw an imaginary grenade into a box with pretend evil forces inside.

“I pretended the box, there’s something shaking in it, and I go ‘pshhh.’”
The boy didn’t throw anything real or make any threats against anyone. He explains he was pretending to be the hero. “So nothing can get out and destroy the world.”

But his imaginary play broke the school’s real rules. The school lists “absolutes” designed to keep a safe environment. The list includes absolutely no fighting, real or imaginary; no weapons, real or imaginary.

[chown33]

When I imagine I'm saving the world, I imagine over-zealous school administrators lined up on the playground, receiving a lecture from 7-year olds on the difference between imagination and reality. Then I imagine those administrators being suspended for a month without pay, because adults should already know the difference, and should even be able to explain it to kids. And then all the kids use that pay to buy chocolate milk, because why not, it's only imaginary?

[citizenzen]

Originally Posted by SilentPanda

http://kdvr.com/2013/02/04/7-year-ol...nded-for-real/

Is that harsh? Yes.

But I'm sure the boy's parents were told about those rules.

And they should have impressed upon their son the importance to abide by them.

Suspension isn't the end of the word.

I doubt it will affect him getting into the college of his choice.

[CalWizrd]

I guess it could have been worse.

They could have cut off his balls to insure that no testosterone ever entered his system.

[eawmp1]

Well it is Loveland, Colorado and the kid is wearing camouflage.

Seriously, age-appropriate imaginary play is now a threat? Next up will come the thought police.

[Eraserhead]

Originally Posted by citizenzen

Is that harsh? Yes.

But I'm sure the boy's parents were told about those rules.

And they should have impressed upon their son the importance to abide by them.

Suspension isn't the end of the word.

I doubt it will affect him getting into the college of his choice.

For gods sake he's 7.

I think this is bad.

[Beeplance]

Isn't this a little too much? He didn't even hurt anyone, nor did he have any evil intentions.

I don't think his actions justify a suspension.

[Heilage]

This seems stupid.

[costabunny]

ouch

while I agree that helping children understand rules maatter; I think suspension is so over the top in this case.

Talk about draconian. Surely a good talk with the boy and having a proper 2-way dialog about real, imaginary, right, wrong and how they matter would have been far more productive. (and yes many seven year olds can comprehend these things).

What does suspension say to the child? don't be a hero? conform without thought?

sad day for all involved indeed.

[Puevlo]

The kid knew the rules and willingly broke them. In the good old days the kid would have been beaten by his teachers for his disregard for human decency. The real heroes of the world are those saving the environment from the evils of global warming.

[Happybunny]

Originally Posted by chown33

When I imagine I'm saving the world, I imagine over-zealous school administrators lined up on the playground, receiving a lecture from 7-year olds on the difference between imagination and reality. Then I imagine those administrators being suspended for a month without pay, because adults should already know the difference, and should even be able to explain it to kids. And then all the kids use that pay to buy chocolate milk, because why not, it's only imaginary?

Originally Posted by eawmp1

Well it is Loveland, Colorado and the kid is wearing camouflage.

Seriously, age-appropriate imaginary play is now a threat? Next up will come the thought police.

Originally Posted by Eraserhead

For gods sake he's 7.

I think this is bad.

Originally Posted by Beeplance

Isn't this a little too much? He didn't even hurt anyone, nor did he have any evil intentions.

I don't think his actions justify a suspension.

Originally Posted by Heilage

This seems stupid.

Originally Posted by costabunny

ouch

while I agree that helping children understand rules maatter; I think suspension is so over the top in this case.

Talk about draconian. Surely a good talk with the boy and having a proper 2-way dialog about real, imaginary, right, wrong and how they matter would have been far more productive. (and yes many seven year olds can comprehend these things).

What does suspension say to the child? don't be a hero? conform without thought?

sad day for all involved indeed.

I completely agree with all the above posters, this for me is one of those "Only in America" moments.

[eric/]

Originally Posted by Puevlo

The kid knew the rules and willingly broke them. In the good old days the kid would have been beaten by his teachers for his disregard for human decency. The real heroes of the world are those saving the environment from the evils of global warming.

Sarcasm?

If not, perhaps my little brother should have been put on probation when he walked out of a store with a $.99 bag of Cheetos when he was 7.

[Technarchy]

When I was a kid I pretended to be Luke Skywalker with a pretend light saber...you get suspended for that these days? Emasculating...

[SilentPanda]

I think the rule is absurd (well the imaginary part) and if they're going to insist on keeping it they should at least go to an escalation policy. Did the kid know? Maybe. Did the parent know? Probably. Did the kid remember from the beginning of the school year (Aug 2012) when it was probably told to him? Doubtful. What could the parent do about it while the kid is at school? Nothing.

[citizenzen]

Originally Posted by Eraserhead

For gods sake he's 7.

I think this is bad.

I said it was harsh.

However, re-read the quote from the OP ...

But his imaginary play broke the school’s real rules. The school lists “absolutes” designed to keep a safe environment. The list includes absolutely no fighting, real or imaginary; no weapons, real or imaginary.

The school had established and posted this "absolute" ban. That means it's very important for parents and children to be aware of and not break this rule.

If the parents and child were properly notified of this rule and the child still violated it, how is the schools at fault for punishing the child?

----------

Originally Posted by SilentPanda

What could the parent do about it while the kid is at school? Nothing.

The parents can remind their children.

They did that to me when I was growing up.

Little Johnny: [making exploding noises]

Mom: Remember Little Johnny, you can't make those noises at school. You'll get sent home.

Little Johnny: Aw. Gee whiz, mom.

[eric/]

The first problem here is banning imaginary things.

threw an imaginary grenade into a box with pretend evil forces inside.

Just hilarious.

They need to throw the rule out

[citizenzen]

Originally Posted by eric/

The first problem here is banning imaginary things.

They need to throw the rule out

Could the child have imaginary sex?

If he's giving an imaginary blowjob would that be okay?

[PracticalMac]

This is beyond idiotic. No words describe the level of stupidity.

The correct action was find other "hero" activities, like fireman or medical scientists, saving people in other ways.

Reams of books say this is how it needs to be done.

[elistan]

Originally Posted by citizenzen

The school had established and posted this "absolute" ban. That means it's very important for parents and children to be aware of and not break this rule.

No, it means the rule should be abolished and whoever approved the rule should be suspended.

If the parents and child were properly notified of this rule and the child still violated it, how is the schools at fault for punishing the child?

It's the school's fault for having the rule in the first place.

Just like it wasn't Alan Turing's fault he was punished with stilboestrol injections for indecency - it was Britain's fault for having Section 11 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act 1885. Just because Turing knew of the law when he broke it doesn't mean he did wrong.

[citizenzen]

Originally Posted by PracticalMac

The correct action was find other "hero" activities, like fireman or medical scientists, saving people in other ways.

The problem is you're then asking teachers or administrators to judge what is "heroic" vs. merely violent. That IMO is why they made the rule an "absolute' rule, because they did not want to become arbiters of appropriate vs. inappropriate violence. They simply wanted to say that no violence was acceptable.

----------

Originally Posted by elistan

It's the school's fault for having the rule in the first place.

So take them to court.

Or appeal to the superintendent. (or whatever governing board there might be)

[Teh Don Ditty]

I weep for my child's future schooling.

[eric/]

Originally Posted by citizenzen

Could the child have imaginary sex?

If he's giving an imaginary blowjob would that be okay?

Because 7 year olds are so familiar with the concept of a blowjob. Must be all the porn they watch on TV.

[mcrain]

I think the parents should sue and demand the school produce the evidence that the child threw an "imaginary" grenade. It might have been an imaginary cream-puff.

[elistan]

Originally Posted by citizenzen

So take them to court.

Or appeal to the superintendent. (or whatever governing board there might be)

Yep, the parents absolutely should.

[eric/]

Originally Posted by mcrain

I think the parents should sue and demand the school produce the evidence that the child threw an "imaginary" grenade. It might have been an imaginary cream-puff.

I wonder what exactly constitutes an "explosive sound". Maybe the kid just had some gas?