http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/04/AR2009040402591.html

"If she had been caught high on LSD, heroin or another illegal drug, she found, she would have been suspended for five days. Taking her prescribed birth-control pill on campus drew the same punishment as bringing a gun to school would have."

curious Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic
> le/2009/04/04/AR2009040402591.html
>
> "If she had been caught high on LSD, heroin or
> another illegal drug, she found, she would have
> been suspended for five days. Taking her
> prescribed birth-control pill on campus drew the
> same punishment as bringing a gun to school would
> have."

Just another reason why the government should be severely restricted in their power do do *anything*. They could f*ck up an anvil.

A headless, faceless bureaucracy is not the sort of 'institution' that should be handing out punishments. Thus we end up with kids getting the same school-related punishment for aspirin as they do for meth.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/07/2009 09:01AM by trogdor!.

GOP 'just say no' program. No abortion, no birth control but guns and booze no problem. Twisted fuckers - I hope all their kids are teen mothers with drinking problems (S. Palin).

Democrat 'just say no' program. No school-choice, no right to bear arms, but abortionss and booze no problem. Twisted fuckers - I hope all of them are drunken adultresses murderous dads with drinking problems (Ted Kennedy).

cant we just agree that both democrats AND republicans are douches?

She was not suspended because she took a birth control pill on school grounds. She was suspended because neither she nor her parents notified the school that she was taking a prescription drug.

Had the school nurse been informed that the BC pills were prescribed and she would take them during school hours, this would have been a non-issue.

BC pills can be taken ANY time during the day. If she didn't want the school to know that she was taking BC pills, she could have easily taken the pill before or after school and avoided this confrontation.

This was a case of "the rules don't apply to me" and I'm going to take it to the media.

The rules apply to EVERYONE!!!!!!!

Again, it's illogical to use "the rules" as a substitute for reason (or as a justification of unreason). Your citation of "the rules" is question-begging; it presupposes several things, among them that the rules are infallible, that we agree with them and agree that others have the right to impose them on us. It does nothing to substantiate your argument that it was appropriate to suspend a student for taking a birth-control pill.

It does, however, betray a perhaps excessive regard for heirarchy and authority.

NegativeDreamStealer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Again, it's illogical to use "the rules" as a
> substitute for reason (or as a justification of
> unreason). Your citation of "the rules" is
> question-begging; it presupposes several things,
> among them that the rules are infallible, that we
> agree with them and agree that others have the
> right to impose them on us. It does nothing to
> substantiate your argument that it was appropriate
> to suspend a student for taking a birth-control
> pill.


The student was not suspended for taking a birth control pill, she was suspended for not notifying the school that she would be taking a prescription drug while on school grounds. This justifies the argument that it WAS appropriate to suspend her.

Very well: She was suspended for not notifying the school that she was taking a prescription pill. This does nothing to improve your argument, which appears to be that "the rules" are sufficient to override reason and justify throwing a girl out of school for a harmless act.

"I realize my daughter broke a rule," the mother said. But in an appeal to the school system, she reasoned, "the punishment does not fit the crime."

The mother KNEW this was a violation of the rules; she expected consequences - this was not a harmless act. Either it was a deliberate act to defy the rule or this student and her mom are incredibly stupid - in which case it's a good thing the school did step in and take action.

As I noted before, birth control pills do not have to be taken mid day. The student could have taken her pill before or after school and avoided this altoghether.

Ah, now we're getting somewhere. It was not a harmless act. Okay. Who did she harm?

I don't know anyone who universally agrees with everything in the SR&R, and this particular issue is one of the more vexing ones - how to provide some degree of control over illicit drug use without turning teachers and administrators into pharmacists so that they can easily distinguish Advil from Percocet. I think that the restrictions around clothing are a bit over the top, but without explicit guidelines you open everything to interpretation and having seen through my wife, an elementary school teacher, how quickly parents will engage a lawyer for the most trivial reasons, FCPS takes a more conservative approach to all of this. When you sign the SR&R you agree to it in its entirety...non-negotiable.

How is this different from telling a police officer when you are pulled over for going 33mph in a 25mph zone "Officer, I knew that I was driving above the limit, but there were no other cars around and I was being careful"? Accepting your driver's license means that you have agreed to abide by the driving laws.

NegativeDreamStealer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Again, it's illogical to use "the rules" as a
> substitute for reason (or as a justification of
> unreason). Your citation of "the rules" is
> question-begging; it presupposes several things,
> among them that the rules are infallible, that we
> agree with them and agree that others have the
> right to impose them on us. It does nothing to
> substantiate your argument that it was appropriate
> to suspend a student for taking a birth-control
> pill.

There is no presupposition of agreement here. She and her parents signed and agreed with the rules at the start of the school year. She deliberately disobeyed them. She got caught. She got punished.

Yeah, the punishment is extreme and out of line in comparison with the punishment assumed for heroin or LSD, but if she had been taking oxycontin would anyone be on her side? Both are prescriptions. The rules need some work. The community needs to understand what rules are in place and decide what's acceptable and what's not.

Yes, exactly. The punishment is extreme and out of line. The rules need some work.

Let's leave strawmen aside. The student was not taking oxycontin. Neither was she driving a motor vehicle at excessive speed. And suspension from school is not trivial.

I reject the argument that a rule, once made, is beyond scrutiny. Each application of a rule must stand the test of reason. In this case, it fails.

Unless, of course, you're an illegal

This is a fitting punishment; these teenage Jezebels need to taught about abstinance and not taking part in deviant practices that are unraveling the moral fabric of our country.

Shadow Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> There is no presupposition of agreement here. She
> and her parents signed and agreed with the rules
> at the start of the school year. She deliberately
> disobeyed them. She got caught. She got punished.

Did they really have much of a choice? I'm assuming that had she not signed the rules, she would not have been able to attend school. The parents could have complained about the rules, but there is little chance of them changing without something like this to push them into the spotlight.

Genevieve Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Did they really have much of a choice? I'm
> assuming that had she not signed the rules, she
> would not have been able to attend school. The
> parents could have complained about the rules, but
> there is little chance of them changing without
> something like this to push them into the
> spotlight.

What happened here is nothing new...this case and Josh Anderson's are in the news because parents have seen how a little bit of PR gets a lot of attention in this area. I agree that someone, anyone, should stand up and proclaim "we are not going to take this anymore", but people are afraid of retribution by "the system" as if FCPS has its own version of the NKVD under Stalin.

As for the people who argue that every violation of the SR&R should be judged on its own, do you really want FCPS to create an even larger, non-teaching bureaucracy around student behavior and punishment?

Jules: EVERYBODY! LISTEN! if there were no rules . . . everything would be CHAOS!

Genevieve Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Shadow Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > There is no presupposition of agreement here.
> She
> > and her parents signed and agreed with the
> rules
> > at the start of the school year. She
> deliberately
> > disobeyed them. She got caught. She got
> punished.
>
> Did they really have much of a choice? I'm
> assuming that had she not signed the rules, she
> would not have been able to attend school. The
> parents could have complained about the rules, but
> there is little chance of them changing without
> something like this to push them into the
> spotlight.


Technically, signing the page just says you understand the rules. It does not mean you agree to abide by them Becuase that would be signing a contract, which minors cannot do.

"Technically, signing the page just says you understand the rules. It does not mean you agree to abide by them Becuase that would be signing a contract, which minors cannot do."

This is incorrect. Minors can indeed enter into contracts and can demand specific performance of the contracted party or parties. They cannot, however, be held to the contract by the contracted party/parties.

KeepOnTruckin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Technically, signing the page just says you
> understand the rules. It does not mean you agree
> to abide by them Becuase that would be signing a
> contract, which minors cannot do.


I am 99.99% certain that both the student and parent need to sign the SR&R.

They need to but sometimes don't enforce signing it. Lately they seem more keen to it then before, but yeah, good example of how they forget they have power of kids with no power, if that went to court or anything they would get raped with a barbed wire condom

I always wondered, if on the first day of school you could beat the shit out of a kid and when they suspend you, say I didn't sign SRR yet, you cant do anything. If they said, you signed it last year, you could say "but is there any changes" and if something changed from last year than it would be invalid.

Speaking of changes, one thing I noticed was that now the principal or his designee is allowed to search desks, lockers, backpacks, and a witness is not require to be present. It used to be that one was required.

What would happen if the student and parents refuse to sign the SRR?

"If she had been caught high on LSD, heroin or another illegal drug, she found, she would have been suspended for five days. Taking her prescribed birth-control pill on campus drew the same punishment as bringing a gun to school would have."

I just think the punishment doesn't fit the crime. Another example of PC gone ary- Couldn't the principal be allowed more discretion in his/her response? I agree with the premise that prescription pills should not be allowed in student's possession on school grounds- however, two week's suspension? Please-

No matter that it was birth control pills- that detail is just salacious-

Originally, the SR&R required parents to sign that they AGREED with it and would be fined $50 if they didn't sign it. The ACLU threatened to file a class action lawsuit. The Virginia Attorney General backed down. Now, you only have to sign that you RECEIVED it, and there is an explicit line that states you retain your Constitutional rights.

HOWEVER, the school system intimidates, harasses, dehumanizes, separates, and does everything in its bureaucratic power to make sure there is no tolerance and no due process, that anybody caught in the system learns as little as possible about the few "rights" they could grasp onto if they had a chance, that recommendations for expulsions are nearly 100% upheld, and that nearly all appeals fail. (You have to file a FOIA to get that information, BTW.)

So even though signing the document -- which references dozens of law codes that are not included and are hard to find -- does not mean you agree with anything, you're still stuck in the nighmarish zero-tolerance labyrinth grown, fed, watered, and thrust down our throats by Les Miserable's Fairfax Javerts.

Them's the Truth.

Hello Quantum and Thomas More. Missed ya!

I never signed and returned the SR+R booklet. Nobody gives a shit about it, honestly.

The rules haven't change since I was in FFX high school in 1981. Every kid knew that taking drugs outside of the nurses office was VERY BAD and there could be punishment.

In this case I am betting there is a hell of lot more involved then the sensational news story this post reporter is spinning.

Jules Sucks Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Jules: EVERYBODY! LISTEN! if there were no rules .
> . . everything would be CHAOS!

but it would be fun. :)


"the wisdom of the wise will perish, the intelligence of the intelligent will vanish."



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/09/2009 12:14PM by Gravis.

Good for the teen and her family to take preventative measures. Does anyone know the name of the assistant principal who disciplined the student or was it a John Banbury (the principal) decision? Wasn't it obvious that the pill was from a birth control dispenser? Couldn't the young lady be pulled aside privately and be given the opportunity to take it in the nurse's office... or dare I suggest that the school could have contacted the parent or the prescribing doctor if need be to confirm that the prescription was valid? Instead... the story ends up in the Washington Post. Good choice...

Does anyone with common sense go into school administration? Nice job, Oakton HS administrators. You look like a bunch of idiots and everyone who read the Sunday Post knows it...

PS Oakton HS has sucked ever since the principal Charlie Ostlund retired...

I went to Oakton and the old principal Charlie Ostlund was the best. Always visible at school events (sports, plays, concerts, science fairs,everything). My brother goes there now and has never even seen the new principal- he just hides in his office. The principal probably wasn't even involved with the situation-it was probably "the security staff" that busted the girl.

Just wondering though, will FCPS have to pay out if the girl gets knocked up?
and-
What is the penalty if you carry a condom to school , or will the nurse hand those out?

If you break the rules you deserve the punishment for it. The girl admitted she knew it was against the rules. She said that she was trying to be discreet. She had been breaking the rule for months!

How hard is it to change the time of day that you take a pill? With birth control- at least the one I take- you don't take it for seven days each cycle. It is easy to change at that point if no other time.

There is no way that anyone other than the girl can know what she took. She could have been taking an illegal drug or a drug prescribed to someone else. We only have her word that she was taking the birth control pill. Maybe she did take her birth control pill at another time of day and was taking an oxy that she had gotten at school. How can the administration know?

I don't have a problem with this rule but if you do then work with your legislators and school board members to change it. Don't say "the punishment doesn't fit the crime that I committed- and, by the way, I committed it about a hundred times this year".

I got stopped for speeding the other day. I was speeding. I don't believe I was driving recklessly. In fact, I was going with the flow of traffic. I don't know why I was the lucky one to get stopped for 52 in a 45. But, I accept my ticket and the punishment that comes with it. I did it. I actually drive about that same speed through that area several times a week as do many other people. If ticketed again, I will accept that one also. People need to stop blaming others and take responsibility. if you don't like the rules or laws, work to change them. Otherwise, accept your punishment for breaking them.

to put birth control in the same category as illegal drugs or handguns stigmatizes responsible behavior- quote by Deb Hauser of Advocates for Youth, Wash Post, 4/5/09

Well stated, Deb!

responsible behavior is knowing the rules, and abiding by them. not discreetly breaking them.

Right pal. And I'm sure you never go more than 55mph on the Beltway. Gimme a break, huh? Really, who are you holier-than-thou frauds trying to kid?

Yeah, you accepted your ticket. Now how about it instead of a ticket, your license was suspended for two years for going 52 in a 45? Don't think you'd be so high-and-mighty "I accepted my ticket blah blah blah" then. And that's what zero toolerance is; massive overkill

FCPS Grad '81 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The rules haven't change since I was in FFX high school in 1981. Every kid knew that taking drugs outside of the nurses office was VERY BAD and there could be punishment.< <

Actually, that's wrong. The zero tolerance policy did not exist in 1981. It was adopted later and has been ratcheted up continuously every year since.

HU Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yeah, you accepted your ticket. Now how about it
> instead of a ticket, your license was suspended
> for two years for going 52 in a 45? Don't think
> you'd be so high-and-mighty "I accepted my ticket
> blah blah blah" then. And that's what zero
> toolerance is; massive overkill


+1

FCPS Grad '81, you obviously didn't go to Langley then. Back then a candy truck arrived seemingly every day at lunchtime and parked at the curb nearest the smokers' ramp. The toothless dude in the pass-through window did sell candy to those naive enough to ask for it. But what he was really there to sell were street drugs. He had quite a brisk trade among the students.

Where is personal responsibility? Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If you break the rules you deserve the punishment
> for it. The girl admitted she knew it was against
> the rules. She said that she was trying to be
> discreet. She had been breaking the rule for
> months!

it's a little something called "the spirit of the law" but by all means, live in your little bubble world of black and white.


"the wisdom of the wise will perish, the intelligence of the intelligent will vanish."

To "R"- if a two year suspension was the known punishment for 52 in a 45 then I wouldn't do that. It is about making choices and living with the consequences.

To "Gravis"- the spirit of the law in this case is pretty clear. Any drug- prescription, over the counter, legal or illegal- is not allowed on school grounds without being registered with the school nurse. What is unreasonable about that? How do you or anyone else know what she took? We only know what she admits to having taken. Even if we believe her- and I do- she still admits she knew the rules and violated them for months for her convenience. Not out of medical necessity. If she had changed the time of day of taking her pill to before or after school then she would not have had to break the rules. Why should she get special treatment for being too lazy, set in her ways, or believing rules don't apply to her????????

Where is personal responsibility?,
   you need a prescription of common sense.


"the wisdom of the wise will perish, the intelligence of the intelligent will vanish."

"To "R"- if a two year suspension was the known punishment for 52 in a 45 then I wouldn't do that. It is about making choices and living with the consequences."


Bovine Scatoloy. Who exactly,are you trying to fool? Are you really trying to have us believe that you never drive over 55 mph on the Beltway, and if you do, you immediately drive to the police station, turn yourself in, and demand a ticket be issued to you for your lawbreaking? Surely,one so pure and righteous could take no other course of action when you break the law.

I see, so it seems that the "known punishment" is the key to this issue. Well now, the "known punishment" for a slave caught escaping in antebellum Virginia was thirty lashes. So just shut the hell up you whining slaves, you got what you deserved and you had no right trying to escape. The punishment for doing so was "known".

Ummm maybe it was just in a birth control case but was really X?

Ummmmmmm maybe it was just in a birth control case but was really only candy

Lop Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ummm maybe it was just in a birth control case but
> was really X?

of course! im sure nobody would notice that she's rolling (a term used when one is high on ecstasy) everyday after lunch!


"the wisdom of the wise will perish, the intelligence of the intelligent will vanish."

"What is the penalty if you carry a condom to school , or will the nurse hand those out?"

Good Point.

There's nothing wrong with bringing a condom to school. It's a contraceptive device, not a drug. Unless the spermicide and whatever desensitizing agents that are on it are considered drugs.

NOVA is one totally messed up place. Who votes for crap like this?

Libertarian1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> NOVA is one totally messed up place. Who votes
> for crap like this?


The voters! Did you vote?

Like the VOTERS voted for slavery in the Old South! The VOTERS VOTED SLAVERY baby, the VOTERS!

curious Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "What is the penalty if you carry a condom to
> school , or will the nurse hand those out?"
>
> Good Point.

What point are you referring to?

MoralHighHorse Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This is a fitting punishment; these teenage
> Jezebels need to taught about abstinance and not
> taking part in deviant practices that are
> unraveling the moral fabric of our country.


There are other uses for birth control pills other than preventing pregnancy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combined_oral_contraceptive_pill#Non-contraceptive_uses

advocates for youth Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> to put birth control in the same category as
> illegal drugs or handguns stigmatizes responsible
> behavior- quote by Deb Hauser of Advocates for
> Youth, Wash Post, 4/5/09
>
> Well stated, Deb!


Are you saying handguns are bad? Why are they being categorized as bad like illegal drugs?

It's responsible to HAVE a gun to protect yourself and your family.

My Name Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> advocates for youth Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > to put birth control in the same category as
> > illegal drugs or handguns stigmatizes
> responsible
> > behavior- quote by Deb Hauser of Advocates for
> > Youth, Wash Post, 4/5/09
> >
> > Well stated, Deb!
>
>
> Are you saying handguns are bad? Why are they
> being categorized as bad like illegal drugs?
>
> It's responsible to HAVE a gun to protect yourself
> and your family.

Not in school, however.

SBS Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> My Name Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > advocates for youth Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > to put birth control in the same category as
> > > illegal drugs or handguns stigmatizes
> > responsible
> > > behavior- quote by Deb Hauser of Advocates
> for
> > > Youth, Wash Post, 4/5/09
> > >
> > > Well stated, Deb!
> >
> >
> > Are you saying handguns are bad? Why are they
> > being categorized as bad like illegal drugs?
> >
> > It's responsible to HAVE a gun to protect
> yourself
> > and your family.
>
> Not in school, however.


Unless you're not a student.

Junes
Yes I realize the VOTERS as well as the non-voters are responsible. Hence the question. Yes I do vote. No I do not vote for zero tolerance candidates. Who would and why?



Junes Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Libertarian1 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > NOVA is one totally messed up place. Who votes
> > for crap like this?
>
>
> The voters! Did you vote?

Did the girl ever get an answer on her hearing? Did she get expelled?

Where is personal responsibility? Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If you break the rules you deserve the punishment
> for it. The girl admitted she knew it was against
> the rules. She said that she was trying to be
> discreet. She had been breaking the rule for
> months!
>
> How hard is it to change the time of day that you
> take a pill? With birth control- at least the one
> I take- you don't take it for seven days each
> cycle. It is easy to change at that point if no
> other time.
>
> There is no way that anyone other than the girl
> can know what she took. She could have been
> taking an illegal drug or a drug prescribed to
> someone else. We only have her word that she was
> taking the birth control pill. Maybe she did take
> her birth control pill at another time of day and
> was taking an oxy that she had gotten at school.
> How can the administration know?
>
> I don't have a problem with this rule but if you
> do then work with your legislators and school
> board members to change it. Don't say "the
> punishment doesn't fit the crime that I committed-
> and, by the way, I committed it about a hundred
> times this year".
>
> I got stopped for speeding the other day. I was
> speeding. I don't believe I was driving
> recklessly. In fact, I was going with the flow of
> traffic. I don't know why I was the lucky one to
> get stopped for 52 in a 45. But, I accept my
> ticket and the punishment that comes with it. I
> did it. I actually drive about that same speed
> through that area several times a week as do many
> other people. If ticketed again, I will accept
> that one also. People need to stop blaming others
> and take responsibility. if you don't like the
> rules or laws, work to change them. Otherwise,
> accept your punishment for breaking them.



You idiot, it can be easily found out what drug she was really ingesting--drug test.
And illegal drug would have shown up.....
Idiot.
And yes, rules should be followed, but not stupid ones, and they should especiallyt be bent every once in a while.

Just like the rule is, no eating in classrooms--why'd they make the rule? Because students leave trash and food. BUT, if the students prove to the teacher they will be tidy, then most teachewrs let them eat in class. Why? Because the rule should only be applied if the students are messy. It's bending a rule.