Go get 'em.
It would be a whole other story if one of the teachers was to strike one of
the students.....you wouldn't be able to keep the parent away from the
school and they would attend every meeting between their attorney and the
Well the parents should have thought of that before neglecting their
children. You child is more important than any job or rent. Where there is
a will, there is a way. If the parent gets fined because he cannot attend
to his child's needs he needs to do better parenting at home so that the
child does not require a parent teacher meeting.
The parents are responsible for their children and the schools are not baby
Why do you consider it so important that the parent appear at a
"school meeting"? Are you a teacher or something?
Personally I think that any teacher that can't handle the kids without
parental meetings should be fir^Hned.
More importantly a one on one with teacher and or principal. I am not a
teacher and believe that too many teachers are ineffective. If you fail to
see the revelance you are probably one of those people that always points
Where do you live, Dream land? What public school will let a teacher
actually discipline a child without fear of a law suite?
I see, you've made two attempt now to make this about me.
If that is what you see as the problem then you simply need to make it
lawful for teachers to discipline children without fear of a lawsuit
rather than fining parents for not kowtowing to teachers' demands that
they appear in a certain place at a certain time.
But you are actually introducing Constitutional issues here. By what
authority does a teacher have the power to order a parent to be in a
certain place at a certain time? Teachers are not police or judges,
they have no power to issue warrants. I suspect that the courts would
toss any such law in short order.
Now you are making sense. The teacher should be able to dicepline the kids
with out fear of a law suite just like a parent should be. If it goes too
far then they can be punished just like any one else.
Further, where did you get the notion that a teacher can demand that you
show up in a certain place at a certain time? Appointments are made to
suite both parties. If you make a commitment and do not show up then that
again is a personal problem and deserves the fine.
There you go assuming that the teacher can call all the shots again.
So why would a parent make the commitment to begin with and risk the
Someone is calling the shots. If the parent has the right to refuse
to make the appointment then what purpose is served by fining the
parent who for whatever reason manages to miss one? All you're
accomplishing is to guarantee that nobody in their right mind will
ever make such an appointment.
You keep saying "liberals this" and "liberals that". The hallmark of
liberalism is more and more laws that intrude more and more into our
day to day lives. If you want to espouse a _conservative_ solution
then ditch the forced bussing and the parent will be able to walk to
the school. But you're too busy trying to find new ways to harass
people who already have too much on their plate to be bothered with
doing anything like _that_.
The appointmant will not be optional but will be fair to both parites.
You assume that the parent will have the right to refuse that meeting. I
seriousely doubt that will be true. He will most likely be given the
benefit of attending that meeting when he can do so. The parent has to play
the gown up here and take responsibility for being a parent. What a
NO a liberal is one that wants more and more government and laws to cover
his butt, pay his way, and carry him along. A law requiring you to be a
responsible parent is not liberal thinking.
Go ahead and look the other way and throw stones at those trying to make a
change in this broken system.
So you're saying that the parent doesn't have the right to refuse to
attend and can be subjected to criminal penalties for failing to do
Make up your mind, can the teacher order the meeting and cause the
parent to be fined for failing to appear or can't she? You can't have
it both ways.
If the teacher can order it then the teacher is in effect issuing a
subpeona or arrest warrant, if the teacher can't order it then the
parent isn't going to risk the fine by agreeing to it.
So how are such "liberal" programs as Welfare and national health
insurance "covering the butt, paying the way, and carrying along" the
liberal Congresscritters who already _have_ all that?
Says the liberal trying hard to pretend to be a conservative.
If you want to fix the system, arresting parents is not the way to do
That is a HUGE part of the problem, not just for teachers, but many parents
are reluctant to punish their kids.
Scenario: Jack pulls into school parking lot with rifle in gun rack.
1956 - Vice Principal comes over, takes a look at Jack's rifle, goes
to his car and gets his to show Jack.
2006 - School goes into lockdown, FBI called, Jack hauled off to
jail and never sees his truck or gun again. Counselors called in for
traumatized students and teachers.
Scenario: Johnny and Mark get into a fist fight after school.
1956 - Crowd gathers. Mark wins. Johnny and Mark shake hands and end
up best friends. Nobody goes to jail, nobody arrested, nobody
2006 - Police called, SWAT team arrives, arrests Johnny and Mark.
Charge them with assault, both expelled even though Johnny started
Scenario: Jeffrey won't be still in class, disrupts other students.
1956 - Jeffrey sent to office and given a good paddling by
Principal. Sits still in class.
2006 - Jeffrey given huge doses of Ritalin. Becomes a zombie. School
gets extra money from state because Jeffrey has a disability.
Scenario: Billy breaks a window in his father's car and his Dad
gives him a whipping.
1956 - Billy is more careful next time, grows up normal, goes to
college, and becomes a successful businessman.
2006 - Billy's Dad is arrested for child abuse. Billy removed to
foster care and joins a gang. Billy's sister is told by state
psychologist that she remembers being abused herself and their Dad
goes to prison. Billy's mom has affair with psychologist.
Scenario: Mark gets a headache and takes some headache medicine to
1956 - Mark shares headache medicine with Principal out on the
2006 - Police called, Mark expelled from school for drug violations.
Car searched for drugs and weapons.
Scenario: Mary turns up pregnant.
1956 - 5 High School Boys leave town. Mary does her senior year at a
special school for expectant mothers.
2006 - Middle School Counselor calls Planned Parenthood, who
notifies the ACLU. Mary is driven to the next state over and gets an
abortion without her parent's consent or knowledge. Mary given
condoms and told to be more careful next time.
Scenario: Pedro fails high school English.
1956 : Pedro goes to summer school, passes English, goes to college.
2006 : Pedro's cause is taken up by state democratic party.
Newspaper articles appear nationally explaining that teaching
English as a requirement for graduation is racist. ACLU files class
action lawsuit against state school system and Pedro's English
teacher. English banned from core curriculum. Pedro given diploma
anyway but ends up mowing lawns for a living because he can't speak
Scenario: Johnny takes apart leftover firecrackers from the 4th of
July, puts them in a model airplane paint bottle, blows up a red ant
1956 - Ants die.
2006 - BATF, Homeland Security, FBI called. Johnny charged with
domestic terrorism, FBI investigates parents, siblings removed from
home, computers confiscated, Johnny's Dad goes on a terror watch
list and is never allowed to fly again.
Scenario: Johnny falls while running during recess and scrapes his
knee. He is found crying by his teacher, Mary. Mary, hugs him to
1956 - In a short time Johnny feels better and goes on playing.
2006 - Mary is accused of being a sexual predator and loses her job.
She faces 3 years in State Prison.
Is something wrong here????
If you can't pay the rent then you and your child get to live in a
cardboard box on a heating grate, if you're tough enough to chase some
other homeless person off the heating grate.
Sorry, but putting a roof over the kid's head is part of taking care
of the kid and failing to do so is neglecting the kid.
If fining the parent means that he and the kid end up living in that
box then how have you helped the kid?
No, the schools are not baby sitters, they are surrogate parents--that
is what the doctrine of "in loco parentis" means.
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.