Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by citizenzen, Apr 17, 2012.
I know kids are a handful ... but, c'mon.
The child was restrained in steel handcuffs.
What is this I don't even...
At least they didn't pepper spray her.
It's asinine to put a 6-year old in handcuffs.
It's asinine for a Washington Post reporter to phone in this op-ed piece on what is otherwise an important situation/matter.
Not trying to be douche, but that "article" is so horribly written it usurps the event/issue it purports to blow the lid on.
Downvoted before someone can finish reading. Love it.
You're not being a douche.
I thought I was being somewhat responsible for citing the Washington Post. Maybe I should have opted for the Christian Science Monitor.
And people, please don't downvote posts. Use your words.
Anyway, sounds like a horrible thing that happened. Nothing good will come of it.
I just google and pulled up a different news outlet's "article" on this. Exact same. No one researches and reports on original findings any more.
Less bias, maybe?
Here's my question ...
You have to use physical force on the girl to arrest her. Why not use physical force to remove her from the class room into a private office or room?
Arrest seems so unnecessary. And I believe the school is abandoning it's duty to look after the children. Her tantrum might be an indicator of something wrong with herself, or at home. She needed to be helped, she at least needed to be observed, but she certainly didn't need to be handcuffed and arrested.
I agree. But I will stop short of saying that removing her from the classroom and putting her in a private office/room is an end of the punishment/restraint. Simply agree that removing her from the classroom and putting her in a private office/room is a strong first-logical-and-reasonable-step.
I agree that arrest seems so unnecessary, based on how the op-ed was written.
It is not the or even a duty of a school to "look after children."
To be sure.
By whom? Who had the legal duty to "help" her?
By whom? Who had the legal duty to "observe" this six-year old?
I agree, based upon the op-ed.
I knew that when I said it. I was admittedly being overly dramatic.
Perhaps sentimental too.
Because I remember the day (said the old man, shaking his impotent little fist at the sky) when teachers looked after their students. Sure they'd throw them against walls sometimes, but that's just because they loved them.
Times have changed.
The drama comes not from your shaking fist (though I did enjoy the imagery - seriously), but from your unsupported, contrarian-by-choice view that teachers "now" don't look out for their students like they did "then."
It's my understanding that public schools are limited in what they can and can't do in the way of disciplining unruly students, and those limits keep getting tighter and tighter. Not suggesting we go back to paddling or anything quite so draconian, but there comes a point where there's not much the school can do other than involve the authorities.
Then again, I suppose better parenting is too much to ask for.
Blame it on sentiment.
Mrs. Jones would have never called the cops on me.
I know it in my heart.
"No one" is an unfair generalizationif I used unnamed sources as much as the WaPo did I'd be done with my latest article.
I think you're right about limitations for discipline, but that should have led to the police's involvement, that they used handcuffs tells another equally interesting story.
At what point does an adult take some responsibility for the child currently in their care? And, does handcuffing that child break that trust? I think it's a failure of the entire system and a mark of the inability of police to deal with people without resorting to some kind of force.
Make the parents miss work to come pick up their ********s, the tantrums will quickly stop.
Not defending the police about cuffing a 6 year old, but it was stated that it is their policy to cuff everyone. Was the child so out of control that restraint might have been necessary?
One thing I have observed in recent years is a shifting of how parents usually react when it comes to issues with their children, from taking the teacher's side (and usually working through the problem) to taking the child's side (and denying the problem exists).
Similarly, we keep taking disciplinary tools away from schools, then get upset when they run into trouble. If I'm paying you to build a house, I'm not about to take away your hammer and then complain when you can't put any nails in. It seems as though calling in police to deal with the unruly is about the only choice a school has left. The alternative is for the school to handle it as they see fit, and then get sued when little Timmy goes home to complain.
Hiding behind policy the police department shows an inability to deal with the public (including first graders). Even if she was a whirling dervish of sugar-fueled fury, hand-cuffing her was still ridiculous.
I won't disagree with you. Parents have to be involved enough with their school that they trust the teachers and administrators and they have to be willing to let their children be disciplined and face consequences.
Freaking pathetic. The fact citizens nationwide don't stand united against this abuse of authority ... handcuffing s 6 year olds ... c'mon .... To many people aren't right in the head nowadays. Absolutely no way is this acceptable ... hope the parents go ballistic over this.
Maybe this is just a case of that 'American Exceptionalism' we are always being told about.
I've seen some 6-year-olds that could put me down with a punch in the junk.
LOL! (in a very sad way)
This is quite bizarre, if there is nothing more to the story. The reason that you don't hear about it very often is that usually there are teachers around who are trained in dealing with these issues, and most schools do consider it their business to deal with it or get the parents. SOP is to call a parent/guardian to come get the child ASAP. The child may need to be restrained if having a very bad tantrum until mommy gets there. (The school may be unwilling to do this due to general paranoia about "abuse".) The child may just be too immature to be in school. Or, may be suffering from a disorder, and needs to be assessed by a school psychologist.
IF the child was having an ordinary tantrum, the logical conclusion would be to assume the school is incompetent to perform its basic function.
This is a really weird story, but it makes me wonder if they're lacking a suitable method of dealing with such a situation if the kid won't listen, and they do need an acceptable procedure for such situations.
Part of my job as public defender was representing children in Juvenile Delinquency cases. I can tell you that the studies in which the "unnammed sources" are correct. The use of police in situations where a paddle would have been used in the past is all too common. Parents are very litigious, and it is safer for the school district to use the police, DCFS or any other third party to remove a child who is acting out (beyond what the school can handle).
We are at the intersection of bad parenting, a litigious society, overly cautious school administrators and understaffed schools.
Sure, they can put her in a bag.
This. What would you have like the police to have done? First off, they shouldn't have been called in the first place, but like mcrain said, schools are pretty much a hands off let the authorities handle this. Second, sometimes physical restraint is necessary, the police are not going to paddle the kid nor are they going to smack the kid. They are going to hand cuff him/her stick them in the back seat take them to the station and call the parents. Or they will hand cuff, take the kid out of school, back seat and call the parents.
Can you believe the outrage if the kid was smacked on the bottom by the police. Good lord, the outrage over police abuse would be huge.
Parents can sue the cops all they want, file a complaint etc, nothing of this will come about other then what we are seeing now.