No Changes To Fairfax County Public Schools Discipline Policy: MyFoxDC.com

FALLS CHURCH, Va. - Talks continue but there are no changes yet in Fairfax County School's zero tolerance discipline policy. The suicide of a 15-year-old student prompted a review of the system that critics say is too harsh.

On Monday, the school board reviewed a list of recommendations, but some parents are frustrated with the slow pace.

"As a parent, it is unbelievably frustrating to see how protracted it takes to get any type of meaningful reform," said Steve Stuban, whose son Nick took his own life, distraught over his suspension.

Stuban attended the school board work session, continuing his crusade since his son's death.

Nick Stuban was suspended almost five months ago and involuntarily transferred to another school for having a marijuana-like substance that although legal, violated school policy. Two and a half months ago, he took his own life.

His parents came forward to tell his story six weeks ago and have push for a change in the county's discipline policy, but so far it remains the same. Stuban wishes his only son Nick was here to fight for himself.

"Somehow in the school environment, there seems to be a unique environment and that a student doesn't have any rights, that a child isn't recognized as a human anymore," Stuban said describing his family's experience.

At the work session Monday, the Fairfax County School Board reviewed a list of recommended changes by the superintendent:

1. Refine guidelines on parent notification for potential suspensions and expulsions; and assist parent with preparation for the hearing process

2. Improve communication of S R and R for greater understanding by parents and students

3. Audio record all hearings

4. Shorten the timeline between discipline incident and disposition of decision

5. Provide instructional support during suspension and provide intervention education program if appropriate to offense

6. Authorize school principals to act as the Superintendent's designee for the purpose of conducting a preliminary review in individual cases at their schools where a student is found to be in possession of his or her own prescription medication

7. Develop data collection/process analysis to include academic success, recidivism and on time graduation

8. Create an exit survey for parents to complete at the end of disciplinary hearings

9. Review and reinforce training program for School Board members and staff to achieve consistent implementation of discipline process

10. Continue Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports program in all FCPS Schools

(Source: Fairfax County Schools)

The discussion went on more than three hours in a packed meeting room. The debate over school disciplinary policy has reached critical mass since Stuban's death.

Dante Verme, who was suspended too, knows how difficult it can be to cope with the stigma.

"They need to focus more on helping kids. Not punishing them. We're kids," Verme said.

In January, 2010, Verme was suspended from Chantilly High School for the remainder of the year. Just before school started again in the fall, he was informed he would be involuntarily transferred to W.T. Woodson High School.

"Before then I'd never gotten into trouble before," he said.

The suspension wasn't for drugs or anything violent. He spent a semester exiled to his home for spray painting smiley face graffiti.

"To me, I thought they treated me like a criminal just bashing you, bashing you," he recalled.

The school system wound up paying tutors more than 500 hours to teach him at home.

Some school board members suggested it's time the pendulum swing away from strict law and order prompting a rebuke about the need for consequences.

"You know 15 years ago, it was a five-day suspension for bringing drugs to school and so we had a lot of kids bring drugs to school. I don't want to go back to that," warned Stuart Gibson, who represents the Hunter Mill District.

The superintendent will address the board's concerns and come back again in May for another work session on the discipline policy.

The board as a whole appeared to support the recommended changes, but members differ on whether the policies need to be loosened even further. Stuban called it a good start, but said "I don't think it goes far enough. And I'm also disappointed that some of these reforms haven't been implemented immediately."

Recording hearings and parental notification would not take a board vote. Other measures, such as giving principals more discretion would require the board to sign off and in some cases allocate money at a time when support programs, like monitors for in school suspension, have been eliminated.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Boohoo, cry me a river.


I can't believe I'm actually agreeing with Gibson, wow.

==================================================================================================
"And if any women or children get their legs torn off, or faces caved in, well, it's tough shit for them." -2LT. Bert Stiles, 505th, 339th (On Berlin Bombardier Mission, 1944).

ThePackLeader Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Boohoo, cry me a river.
>
>
> I can't believe I'm actually agreeing with Gibson,
> wow.

I agree with you, agreeing with with Gibson.

> "Somehow in the school environment, there seems to
> be a unique environment and that a student doesn't
> have any rights, that a child isn't recognized as
> a human anymore,"

Society fought tooth and nail for years to rid schools (students, employees, and administration) of the entire first amendment set of rights (can't speak of religion, can't express political viewpoints, can't assemble independently). You forcibly took humanity out of the school and now there is none left. You got what you wanted, settling only for cold, hard, metallic secularism and rules, making everything even and fair.

We reap what we sow. I'm sorry this student and others like him, and their families, pay the price for these long-fought "rights" to have zero rights in schools.

Congrats to those who won all those battles to remove humanity from the schools, you won!

----------------------------------------

"She looks pretty good for 12, admit it." - WingNut, 04/24/2012

"I'm racist too. So what?" - Ellipsis 9/16/2011

"If you only knew who I was, and what I was working to do you would...have the decency to tell me I hated my nation and the way of life. I may not agree with...the government...I hate the "government"......" - Firrat 9/1/10

"there seems to be a queer...why? To try and further demean a defeated... dumb Tea party... I think we need more... far left folks on a regular basis - Louis Farakhan, Jesse Jackson...Al Sharpton" - Registered Voter, 8/19/2011

"If your computer is running slow, or you have any other problems, email me at with the problem and i am willing to fix it, for a price of course" - Taylor, spamming FFU on 04/12/2006. "N****rs as slaves again? I think so..." - Taylor, 09/20/2009

60 parents expressed their dissatifaction with the policy to the school board. The other 150,000 seem ok with it. Go figure

The other 150,000+ parents will be OK with it until their child is stripped of their educational rights and given no due process or civil rights in the railroad running them out of school.

69,000 kids have had a discipline incident in the last year in a system of 175,000 kids. That's 40%.

Most of the incidents happen at the secondary level. So it's reasonable to anticipate that 70%+ of junior high and high school kids will interact with the discipline system.

Parents are not satisfied. They also have jobs that prevent them from going to work sessions that start @ 8:30 on a Monday and run until mid-afternoon.

Gibson is a liar who takes delight in destroying kids lives.

Sounds like Fairfax might have a parenting problem....And so the school is at fault because 40 percent can.t behave but get called on it?

Duchess Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The other 150,000+ parents will be OK with it
> until their child is stripped of their educational
> rights and given no due process or civil rights in
> the railroad running them out of school.


You mean reassigning them to another school. I believe it is illegal not to provide an education. It just might not be where junior wants to be but we taxpayers will ensure it happens, try again. I knew the crying and whining would start again that all demands werent met at the board meeting.

funny how it's the school's fault all of a sudden. Much easier to do that than to examine the true causes to why a young man would rather take his own life than simply attend another school.

And what's really funny - the same ppl all upset at the school system for suspending the kid, would want to kill the kid themselves if he vandalized their car, their house, their property. Very same ppl..........................

and you'll lie about it - go right ahead. But if you went out to yr car this morning and say it all spray painted up, the VERY FIRST THOUGHT in yr head would be to kill the a-hole who did it.

Either way, the kid had more issues going on than just the suspension. And it's those issues that made him unfortunately choose the route he chose.

really? Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sounds like Fairfax might have a parenting
> problem....And so the school is at fault because
> 40 percent can.t behave but get called on it?
-----------------------------------------------------------

dont forget, it's MUCH MUCH easier to blame the school system instead of just parent and move on

LoLz

Duchess Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The other 150,000+ parents will be OK with it
> until their child is stripped of their educational
> rights and given no due process or civil rights in
> the railroad running them out of school.
-------------------------------------------------------------

or maybe they are the ones who talk to their kid's teachers, and work WITH them to help their kids grow into young adults

in other words, they are not this type of parent:
Attachments:

dika-dika Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Dante Verme, who was suspended too, knows how
> difficult it can be to cope with the stigma.
>
> "They need to focus more on helping kids. Not
> punishing them. We're kids," Verme said.
>
> In January, 2010, Verme was suspended from
> Chantilly High School for the remainder of the
> year. Just before school started again in the
> fall, he was informed he would be involuntarily
> transferred to W.T. Woodson High School.
>
> "Before then I'd never gotten into trouble
> before," he said.
>
> The suspension wasn't for drugs or anything
> violent. He spent a semester exiled to his home
> for spray painting smiley face graffiti.
>
> "To me, I thought they treated me like a criminal
> just bashing you, bashing you," he recalled.
>
> The school system wound up paying tutors more than
> 500 hours to teach him at home.


So the kid does a few hundred dollars worth a damage, and rather than make him clean it up and suspend him for a couple weeks (which costs virtually nothing), they piss away $25,000 grand on tutors (cost is about $50 an hr), god knows how much money on staff, lawyers, hearing office ppl.

Forget the arguments on due process, etc. - this discipline process costs a fortune. There were 636 expulsions in 09/10. I would say graffiti would be a kind of middle of the road offense for expulsion. If this case is any way typical, that means FCPS is paying north of $15M a year in tutoring costs, plus the costs of running the hearing office.

Thomas More Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 69,000 kids have had a discipline incident in the
> last year in a system of 175,000 kids. That's
> 40%.
>
> Most of the incidents happen at the secondary
> level. So it's reasonable to anticipate that 70%+
> of junior high and high school kids will interact
> with the discipline system.
>
> Parents are not satisfied. They also have jobs
> that prevent them from going to work sessions that
> start @ 8:30 on a Monday and run until
> mid-afternoon.
>
> Gibson is a liar who takes delight in destroying
> kids lives.

Yeah, don't blame the little shits who are destroying their own lives due to their own piss poor decisions.

really? Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sounds like Fairfax might have a parenting
> problem....And so the school is at fault because
> 40 percent can.t behave but get called on it?


Some of the offenses definitely do not warrant the level of punishment that's being given. THAT"S the problem. These 'offenders' are kids, and kids make mistakes. Hell, YOU make mistakes. You want to go to jail for cal stopping that stop sign or getting caught at 45 in a 40mph? Of course not. The punishments should fit the offenses and they shouldn't change once they've been decided. THAT has happened and with NO warning.

The little girl that brought the acne medication violated a regulation. It was not a crime. Was she supposed to register/leave the drug with the nurse? Yes. Come up with a punishment that is appropriate for that. All of these posts about - well, she could have given it to her friend who was allergic, blah, blah, blah. None of that happened. Expelling someone for violating a regulation is just brainless, and taking every violation out to the most absurb possible conseqeunce and then drawing up the punishment from that is even more brainless.

That's like getting stopped for speeding and the judge saying - well, a little kid could have run across the road and you could have killed him. Yes, that could have happened, but it did not. You get punished for what you did, not the worst in the range of possibilities of what could have happened.

some intelligence, please Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The little girl that brought the acne medication
> violated a regulation. It was not a crime. Was
> she supposed to register/leave the drug with the
> nurse? Yes. Come up with a punishment that is
> appropriate for that. All of these posts about -
> well, she could have given it to her friend who
> was allergic, blah, blah, blah. None of that
> happened. Expelling someone for violating a
> regulation is just brainless, and taking every
> violation out to the most absurb possible
> conseqeunce and then drawing up the punishment
> from that is even more brainless.
>
> That's like getting stopped for speeding and the
> judge saying - well, a little kid could have run
> across the road and you could have killed him.
> Yes, that could have happened, but it did not.
> You get punished for what you did, not the worst
> in the range of possibilities of what could have
> happened.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
That doesnt hold water. Your statement is too general. For example, if the speeding was done on I-66, not much chance for a kid to be runnig across it, eh?

No, a better example would be that it's more like you speed thru a school zone and hit a child, do not really injure him seriously, but get charged with vehicular assault, same as if you had seriously hit him.

Which, of course, would be likely to happen to you if you did actually do something like that................

your "speeding" thesis has no child even remotely having a chance of being injured in it - that's the difference. Gotta be more specific if you want yr points to make sense.

The little girl violated a regulation about prescriotion drugs - said she "forgot" about them in her locker. So are you telling me that it would be ok to hit a kid while speeding thru a school zone just because you "forgot about it"?

Heck, even in yr original thesis, is it ok to speed just because you "forgot" that it was against the law?

C'mon now - use some intelligence, please.

It's not like she didnt know the rules - she only has herself to blame if she didnt take the pills to the nurse the first day or so.

Gordon Blvd Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> some intelligence, please Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The little girl that brought the acne
> medication
> > violated a regulation. It was not a crime.
> Was
> > she supposed to register/leave the drug with
> the
> > nurse? Yes. Come up with a punishment that is
> > appropriate for that. All of these posts about
> -
> > well, she could have given it to her friend who
> > was allergic, blah, blah, blah. None of that
> > happened. Expelling someone for violating a
> > regulation is just brainless, and taking every
> > violation out to the most absurb possible
> > conseqeunce and then drawing up the punishment
> > from that is even more brainless.
> >
> > That's like getting stopped for speeding and
> the
> > judge saying - well, a little kid could have
> run
> > across the road and you could have killed him.
> > Yes, that could have happened, but it did not.
> > You get punished for what you did, not the
> worst
> > in the range of possibilities of what could
> have
> > happened.
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> -------------------
> That doesnt hold water. Your statement is too
> general. For example, if the speeding was done on
> I-66, not much chance for a kid to be runnig
> across it, eh?
>
> No, a better example would be that it's more like
> you speed thru a school zone and hit a child, do
> not really injure him seriously, but get charged
> with vehicular assault, same as if you had
> seriously hit him.
>
> Which, of course, would be likely to happen to you
> if you did actually do something like
> that................
>
> your "speeding" thesis has no child even remotely
> having a chance of being injured in it - that's
> the difference. Gotta be more specific if you
> want yr points to make sense.
>
> The little girl violated a regulation about
> prescriotion drugs - said she "forgot" about them
> in her locker. So are you telling me that it
> would be ok to hit a kid while speeding thru a
> school zone just because you "forgot about it"?
>
> Heck, even in yr original thesis, is it ok to
> speed just because you "forgot" that it was
> against the law?
>
> C'mon now - use some intelligence, please.
>
> It's not like she didnt know the rules - she only
> has herself to blame if she didnt take the pills
> to the nurse the first day or so.


The thesis is simple - We punish people for the crime, not 'what could have happened'. Not excusing any violation - just make the punishment fit the crime. Seems to me expelling a child for merely having a legal, prescribed drug, versus distributing, is not proportional. The concept of proportional punishment goes back a couple thousand years in a bunch of different cultures - hence people's comfort with it, and reaction when they see disproportional punishments.

some intelligence, please Wrote:

>
> The thesis is simple - We punish people for the
> crime, not 'what could have happened'. Not
> excusing any violation - just make the punishment
> fit the crime. Seems to me expelling a child for
> merely having a legal, prescribed drug, versus
> distributing, is not proportional. The concept of
> proportional punishment goes back a couple
> thousand years in a bunch of different cultures -
> hence people's comfort with it, and reaction when
> they see disproportional punishments.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

that's why I said the kid had nobody to blame but herself. As you say "We punish people for the
> crime, not 'what could have happened". It's unfortunate, but the reason the policies are in place are because ppl trade their legal prescription drugs EVERYDAY! That's the backbone of Oxy abuse that currently plagues this nation. And it's not like it's a hard rule to follow. I mean, if you have a drug, you take it to the nurse so the school knows what's up. It's no big deal.

Look, it's not like the kid is a hard-core criminal. I'm just saying that the huge blow-up that happend in her life could have simply been avoided if she could have been bothered long enough to simply follow the rules. She thought she was "better" than the rules, got caught, and had to deal with the system in place having to deal with rule breakers. It's not like she is going to jail, or her life is ruined, anything like that. Her parents wanted a transfer, according to the news story

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/fairfax-schools-discipline-under-scrutiny-after-teens-suspension-for-medication/2011/03/08/ABZBiZQ_story.html

and if she and her parents had just simply dealt with the FACT she violated the standing rule, she'd have gotten a one-month suspension and this would be no big deal by now.

You say "expelling a child for merely having a legal, prescribed drug, versus distributing, is not proportional."

I just mention that lotsa ppl have legal, prescribed drugs and ARE DISTRIBUTING them
http://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafety/prescription-drug-abuse-leads-to-spike-in-neglect-cases-child-protection/1157133

kids too, my friend

http://blogs.indystar.com/ypress/2011/04/05/rx-drugs-near-top-of-abuse-list/

and that's why the school system rules are in place.

That's why you gotta register yr drugs with the school nurse.

And again, I state that if the parents and the girl just simply owed up to the basic fact that she fked up in breaking the rule, then this would have gone away a million years ago

Gordon Blvd Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> funny how it's the school's fault all of a sudden.
> Much easier to do that than to examine the true
> causes to why a young man would rather take his
> own life than simply attend another school.

>
> Either way, the kid had more issues going on than
> just the suspension. And it's those issues that
> made him unfortunately choose the route he chose.

Good post. He took his own life. Ultimately, isn't it his fault?

Gordon Blvd Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> some intelligence, please Wrote:
>
> >
> > The thesis is simple - We punish people for
> the
> > crime, not 'what could have happened'. Not
> > excusing any violation - just make the
> punishment
> > fit the crime. Seems to me expelling a child
> for
> > merely having a legal, prescribed drug, versus
> > distributing, is not proportional. The concept
> of
> > proportional punishment goes back a couple
> > thousand years in a bunch of different cultures
> -
> > hence people's comfort with it, and reaction
> when
> > they see disproportional punishments.
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----------------------
>
> that's why I said the kid had nobody to blame but
> herself. As you say "We punish people for the
> > crime, not 'what could have happened". It's
> unfortunate, but the reason the policies are in
> place are because ppl trade their legal
> prescription drugs EVERYDAY! That's the backbone
> of Oxy abuse that currently plagues this nation.
> And it's not like it's a hard rule to follow. I
> mean, if you have a drug, you take it to the nurse
> so the school knows what's up. It's no big deal.
>
> Look, it's not like the kid is a hard-core
> criminal. I'm just saying that the huge blow-up
> that happend in her life could have simply been
> avoided if she could have been bothered long
> enough to simply follow the rules. She thought
> she was "better" than the rules, got caught, and
> had to deal with the system in place having to
> deal with rule breakers. It's not like she is
> going to jail, or her life is ruined, anything
> like that. Her parents wanted a transfer,
> according to the news story
>
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/fair
> fax-schools-discipline-under-scrutiny-after-teens-
> suspension-for-medication/2011/03/08/ABZBiZQ_story
> .html
>
> and if she and her parents had just simply dealt
> with the FACT she violated the standing rule,
> she'd have gotten a one-month suspension and this
> would be no big deal by now.
>
> You say "expelling a child for merely having a
> legal, prescribed drug, versus distributing, is
> not proportional."
>
> I just mention that lotsa ppl have legal,
> prescribed drugs and ARE DISTRIBUTING them
> http://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafety/prescrip
> tion-drug-abuse-leads-to-spike-in-neglect-cases-ch
> ild-protection/1157133
>
> kids too, my friend
>
> http://blogs.indystar.com/ypress/2011/04/05/rx-dru
> gs-near-top-of-abuse-list/
>
> and that's why the school system rules are in
> place.
>
> That's why you gotta register yr drugs with the
> school nurse.
>
> And again, I state that if the parents and the
> girl just simply owed up to the basic fact that
> she fked up in breaking the rule, then this would
> have gone away a million years ago


Actually, no it wouldn't have. That's part of the problem with the way discipline is being handled right now. They aren't more lenient if you admit guilt and say you are sorry, etc. They still hang you, so to speak. This kid and her mother were stupid, but it doesn't really matter that OTHER people distribute drugs, all that matters is what SHE did or didn't do. Should we throw you in jail for speeding because other people have killed people when they were speeding? Of course not. But that's the pattern this system has demonstrated. It needs to be changed.

I don't want those that screwed up to get off without no punishment, but the punishment should fit the crime.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/06/2011 09:40AM by Shadow.

Shadow Wrote:

>
> Actually, no it wouldn't have. That's part of the
> problem with the way discipline is being handled
> right now. They aren't more lenient if you admit
> guilt and say you are sorry, etc. They still hang
> you, so to speak. This kid and her mother were
> stupid, but it doesn't really matter that OTHER
> people distribute drugs, all that matters is what
> SHE did or didn't do. Should we throw you in jail
> for speeding because other people have killed
> people when they were speeding? Of course not.
> But that's the pattern this system has
> demonstrated. It needs to be changed.
>
> I don't want those that screwed up to get off
> without no punishment, but the punishment should
> fit the crime.
-----------------------------------------------------------------

didja even read the article? States right there that:


"In Fairfax, Hayley’s case went to a hearing and her suspension was prolonged because it occurred near the end of a school year, when the small staff in the hearing office is particularly busy. “The punishment was exactly what her parents had asked for in the hearing,” Regnier said, noting that the Russells had requested a transfer.

Hayley’s parents say they did so because of the vitriol that followed her suspension and because they were told by an assistant principal and their attorney that a transfer was inevitable."


It was WAAAAAY more the fact she and her fam appealed the initial fact she violated school policy than the initial drug possesion which caused her to miss school. And if she had simply followed the rules that she MUST have known about:

"chool officials say students are reminded about prohibitions on prescription drugs and take a test to show that they understand concepts in the Student Responsibilities and Rights handbook. "


then none of this would have happened.

Used to be parenting meant teaching kids about being responsible for yr actions, not trying to buck the system cause you are more "special" than other ppl :(

"In Fairfax, Hayley’s case went to a hearing and her suspension was prolonged because it occurred near the end of a school year, when the small staff in the hearing office is particularly busy. “

This is a major part of the problem. The kids have been punished by sitting out of school for 2 or 3 months and then they FINALLY get transferred (another punishment) or put into an alternative school. The kid loses at least a quarter of school and many never recover and lose the whole year. They suffer academically as well as socially. Some even go on to drop out of school because the whole episode leaves them behind and embittered. It's kind of like when people go to prison and come out worse. The excessively punitive nature of the whole process leaves people very alienated. This is especially true when you are talking about adolescents---who can be pretty emotional beings.

I once saw a girl come out of a hearing (back at Burkholder---pre Gatehouse,etc.). She was sobbing so hard that her dad practically had to carry her out of there. It was appalling. I could not imagine what had happened in that room. Those were no crocodile tears that I saw in that parking lot.

for those who can't feel it Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "In Fairfax, Hayley’s case went to a hearing and
> her suspension was prolonged because it occurred
> near the end of a school year, when the small
> staff in the hearing office is particularly busy.
> “
>
> This is a major part of the problem. The kids
> have been punished by sitting out of school for 2
> or 3 months and then they FINALLY get transferred
> (another punishment) or put into an alternative
> school. The kid loses at least a quarter of
> school and many never recover and lose the whole
> year. They suffer academically as well as
> socially. Some even go on to drop out of school
> because the whole episode leaves them behind and
> embittered. It's kind of like when people go to
> prison and come out worse. The excessively
> punitive nature of the whole process leaves people
> very alienated. This is especially true when you
> are talking about adolescents---who can be pretty
> emotional beings.
>
> I once saw a girl come out of a hearing (back at
> Burkholder---pre Gatehouse,etc.). She was sobbing
> so hard that her dad practically had to carry her
> out of there. It was appalling. I could not
> imagine what had happened in that room. Those
> were no crocodile tears that I saw in that parking
> lot.

------------------------------------------------------

and what was she in in there for?

I mean, I've seen ppl on trial for murder cry before being sentenced, so that's kinda not a valid point unless we know why the kid was there. For all you know, she was just crying because her action had caught up to her. I'm not trying to demean you or her, nor necessarily defend the zero tolerance policy on this particular point, at least - I'm just saying just cause the kid you saw was crying, doesnt really mean crap unless we know the story behind it.

If Hayley had followed the rules that she KNEW about, then none of this would have happened to her. The rules are in place cause as we ALL know by now, there is a problem with some kids dealing in prescription drugs in school.

The girl and her family CHOSE to fight the suspension (which is their right), and that is what led to the 2-3 month issue, NOT the actual drug possession.

Does this review process need improvement? Yes. But to blame the policy instead of the kid VIOLATING SAID POLICY is absolutely nuts - it's not something the kids dont know about - and it's not something the kids cant simply avoid BY REGISTERING THEIR DRUGS WITH THE FRIGGIN SCHOOL NURSE!

I mean, it's really not that hard to do. Five minutes out of yr OH SO BUSY schedule.................................

I doubt they were fighting the suspension---wasn't it over before the 2-3 month point? How can you fight a punishment that has already been received? Are you saying that she would have been back in school much sooner if she had not fought the suspension? This makes no sense.

Maybe you meant that she was fighting some other punishment? It sounds like a student cannot attend school because of an appeal? Anywhere? So . . . do they send out tutors in the meantime (at a price)??

If nothing else, this part of the process sounds like it needs review.

how does this work Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I doubt they were fighting the suspension---wasn't
> it over before the 2-3 month point? How can you
> fight a punishment that has already been received?
> Are you saying that she would have been back in
> school much sooner if she had not fought the
> suspension? This makes no sense.
>
> Maybe you meant that she was fighting some other
> punishment? It sounds like a student cannot
> attend school because of an appeal? Anywhere? So
> . . . do they send out tutors in the meantime (at
> a price)??
>
> If nothing else, this part of the process sounds
> like it needs review.
-------------------------------------------------------

read on, bro(or sis), read on.....

http://www.fairfaxtimes.com/cms/story.php?id=3227

and yeah, of course it needs review LoLz

Gordon Blvd Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> how does this work Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I doubt they were fighting the
> suspension---wasn't
> > it over before the 2-3 month point? How can
> you
> > fight a punishment that has already been
> received?
> > Are you saying that she would have been back
> in
> > school much sooner if she had not fought the
> > suspension? This makes no sense.
> >
> > Maybe you meant that she was fighting some
> other
> > punishment? It sounds like a student cannot
> > attend school because of an appeal? Anywhere?
> So
> > . . . do they send out tutors in the meantime
> (at
> > a price)??
> >
> > If nothing else, this part of the process
> sounds
> > like it needs review.
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> read on, bro(or sis), read on.....
>
> http://www.fairfaxtimes.com/cms/story.php?id=3227
>
> and yeah, of course it needs review LoLz


but all I'm saying is that the kids know the rules about drugs, at least - and this girl Hayley chose to avoid following the rules, and her parents decided to back her decision to avoid following the rules - and that's just piss-ass poor parenting, to me - acting like she is better than the rules.

And that, NOT the actual drug possesion, was the reason for her particular issue - that's all I'm saying.

it's the school. and what's happening in school... craziness , fights , drugs, etc.
Whats in store for us?

i will too... Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> it's the school. and what's happening in school...
> craziness , fights , drugs, etc.
> Whats in store for us?
----------------------------------------------

real life. That's what's in store for you. I.E. craziness , fights , drugs, etc.

Shadow Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> really? Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Sounds like Fairfax might have a parenting
> > problem....And so the school is at fault
> because
> > 40 percent can.t behave but get called on it?
>
>
> Some of the offenses definitely do not warrant the
> level of punishment that's being given. THAT"S
> the problem. These 'offenders' are kids, and kids
> make mistakes. Hell, YOU make mistakes. You want
> to go to jail for cal stopping that stop sign or
> getting caught at 45 in a 40mph? Of course not.
> The punishments should fit the offenses and they
> shouldn't change once they've been decided. THAT
> has happened and with NO warning.


The punishment does fit the crime, because as adults, these students would be fired from a paying job, and/or locked up in jail and appearing in front of a real court of law.

==================================================================================================
"And if any women or children get their legs torn off, or faces caved in, well, it's tough shit for them." -2LT. Bert Stiles, 505th, 339th (On Berlin Bombardier Mission, 1944).

Gordon Blvd Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> that's why I said the kid had nobody to blame but
> herself. As you say "We punish people for the
> > crime, not 'what could have happened". It's
> unfortunate, but the reason the policies are in
> place are because ppl trade their legal
> prescription drugs EVERYDAY!

That's not what happened. She brought in acne medication and never gave it to anyone else. So while the POTENTIAL to distribute is there, it did not ocur. Again, punish the offense, not the potential offense.

> That's the backbone
> of Oxy abuse that currently plagues this nation.
> And it's not like it's a hard rule to follow. I
> mean, if you have a drug, you take it to the nurse
> so the school knows what's up. It's no big deal.

I agree it's not a hard rule to follow. But put yourself in the shoes of a teenage girl - would you be excited to go check in your birth control pills or your acne medication, something you are already probably very sensitive about? I'm not saying that excuses the offense - but it should give some perspective to the school in deciding punishment. She should be punished for violating the rule, I agree. But an administrator with some sense might find a way short of expulsion to punish her.

>
> Look, it's not like the kid is a hard-core
> criminal. I'm just saying that the huge blow-up
> that happend in her life could have simply been
> avoided if she could have been bothered long
> enough to simply follow the rules.

Agreed. But we're not talking about the rule breaking, we're talking about the FCPS reaction to it. If your teenager takes the car without permission, and you beat the crap out of the kid when he comes home, who's the one in trouble? We expect parents and FCPS to react proportionally to the offense.

> She thought
> she was "better" than the rules, got caught, and
> had to deal with the system in place having to
> deal with rule breakers. It's not like she is
> going to jail, or her life is ruined, anything
> like that. Her parents wanted a transfer,
> according to the news story

Her parents capitulated to FCPS - essentially the 'you can't fight city hall' approach. I send in my check to IRS every year - doesn't mean I enjoy it or 'want' to do it.

> and if she and her parents had just simply dealt
> with the FACT she violated the standing rule,
> she'd have gotten a one-month suspension and this
> would be no big deal by now.

So by your calculation, we should all just agree to whatever FCPS hands out, never question it, never appeal, never disagree with what you think is unfair? Some may do that, and I'll admit I hold my tongue on quite a bit of what I see coming home from school, but as a parent I think someone fighting a 1 month suspension for something as minor as acne medication is well within their rights.

>
> You say "expelling a child for merely having a
> legal, prescribed drug, versus distributing, is
> not proportional."
>
> I just mention that lotsa ppl have legal,
> prescribed drugs and ARE DISTRIBUTING them
> http://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafety/prescrip
> tion-drug-abuse-leads-to-spike-in-neglect-cases-ch
> ild-protection/1157133

So what? Lots of people have guns - we don't lock them up because some people use them illegaly. Again, we punish the offense, not the potential offense. By your logical, everyone who has a drink is a DWI, everyone who owns a gun is a murder.

ThePackLeader Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Shadow Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > really? Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Sounds like Fairfax might have a parenting
> > > problem....And so the school is at fault
> > because
> > > 40 percent can.t behave but get called on it?
> >
> >
> > Some of the offenses definitely do not warrant
> the
> > level of punishment that's being given. THAT"S
> > the problem. These 'offenders' are kids, and
> kids
> > make mistakes. Hell, YOU make mistakes. You
> want
> > to go to jail for cal stopping that stop sign
> or
> > getting caught at 45 in a 40mph? Of course not.
>
> > The punishments should fit the offenses and
> they
> > shouldn't change once they've been decided.
> THAT
> > has happened and with NO warning.
>
>
> The punishment does fit the crime, because as
> adults, these students would be fired from a
> paying job, and/or locked up in jail and appearing
> in front of a real court of law.


Really? You'd be fired from your job for bring your legally prescribed medication to work?

@ some intelligence - well no, - the logic is more like everyone who has a drink and drives is a potential murderer, hence you get a DWI when you get caught. Same as some kid on campus with an unregistered drug (even a legal prescription one) is a potential dealer, so you get punished when you get caught.

@ really? - if it's against company policy, then yeah, you could. School has a policy the kids sign up to. The violate it, they get punished. Same as when you work. You can be fired for violating policy, plain and simple

not really that hard, folks...................

Re Verme kid: That is a lot of money, per kid, that could be used to have full-time kindergardens, art and music program, laptops, etc.

In my times, if we did graffiti, we had to clean it up; clean the school gym; rake the leaves; and write 1,000 "I will not do graffiti" ... simple and inexpensive. Believe me, we never did it gain.

unicorn Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Re Verme kid: That is a lot of money, per kid,
> that could be used to have full-time
> kindergardens, art and music program, laptops,
> etc.
>
> In my times, if we did graffiti, we had to clean
> it up; clean the school gym; rake the leaves; and
> write 1,000 "I will not do graffiti" ... simple
> and inexpensive. Believe me, we never did it
> gain.


But that approach doesn't get you a 20-person empire at Gatehouse.....

Conform to the minority of those who can not follow the rules or redirections. Resistance is futile.

Fairfax county should put parents in jail or pay a huge fine if their kid is a fuck up.

unicorn Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> In my times, if we did graffiti, we had to clean
> it up; clean the school gym; rake the leaves; and
> write 1,000 "I will not do graffiti" ... simple
> and inexpensive. Believe me, we never did it
> gain.


Seems like the 'common sense' of parents and teachers back in the day is long gone.
Kid does something wrong, make them 1) clean it up and 2) do some labor that serves the greater good and imprints on them 'gee, this sucks' - and guess what? they learn a lesson.
Imagine that.
These school administrators and school board are dumb & evil. Bad combo.
Fire them & hire normal people with a smidge of common sense and the kids & all of us will be a lot better off.

Ya' think? Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> unicorn Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > In my times, if we did graffiti, we had to
> clean
> > it up; clean the school gym; rake the leaves;
> and
> > write 1,000 "I will not do graffiti" ... simple
> > and inexpensive. Believe me, we never did it
> > gain.
>
>
> Seems like the 'common sense' of parents and
> teachers back in the day is long gone.
> Kid does something wrong, make them 1) clean it up
> and 2) do some labor that serves the greater good
> and imprints on them 'gee, this sucks' - and guess
> what? they learn a lesson.
> Imagine that.
> These school administrators and school board are
> dumb & evil. Bad combo.
> Fire them & hire normal people with a smidge of
> common sense and the kids & all of us will be a
> lot better off.


You mean fire the "liberal and gay" teachers, superintendent, adminstrators that run FCPS? You mean bring conservsatism back to FCPS? it would work for me but not here. You must be out of your "sane" mind. The FCPS will make nothing but whimps, punks, faggots, whores, cry babies, pregnant young stupid bitches graduates and then the FCPS will be ran and taught by the next generation of them.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fairfax county should put parents in jail or pay a huge fine if their kid is a fuck up.




That would be great if we had jail space and money to spend putting them in jail. The fine would be great if they would pay it and we didn't have to keep sending them notices to pay it or go to court to garnish their wages (all that costs money). I think the better ideas are the common sense ones---like make them clean up the school, etc. Better yet, have them picking up OUTSIDE the school where other parents can see them. Clean the parks and highways is another. We need those chores done anyway.

This county is so full of Pansie kids and parents it's not even funny. I'm surprised the county is even allowed to teach kids, God forbid telling them they spelled a word wrong might hurt their feelings.

very sad