Oh, wait; it already is:
Not enough information provided by the newslink for me to have an opinion one way or the other.
The mother claims that the child wet herself in fear, the school claims she did it as part of an ongoing disciplinary problem. Oh, and even though she is a ‘special ed’ student, it doesn’t determine what sort: is she developmentally delayed, or does she have behavioural issues only?
Not buying into this one. The mother might be justifiably indignant, or the school might have done the most appropriate thing under the circumstances.
OK, let’s assume she did it on purpose. How is calling the police appropriate for willful urination? School administrators do not get the luxury of being “at wit’s end”. That is their job. Calling the police should be reserved for violent offenders or destruction of property. By no stretch of the imagination is willful pants-peeing either of those. The should find other employment if dealing with this situation without calling the cops is beyond them.
As the parent of two kids with “issues,” I disagree with this statement. It is not “their job” to deal with every single possible event perpetrated by the child.
As to this story, I still go with not enough information. If left to sit in her urine, would the child then become a cause célèbre for accusations of abuse or neglect by the staff? If the staff attempted to get her to change into dry clothing, would she then (or, perhaps, did she) become violent?
I would agree with a general statement that a lot of schools seem to be really ready to dial 911, these days. On the other hand, lawsuits have made it dangerous (financially for schools, professionally for staff) to handle abusive kids in ways that would have been expected even a decade ago.
Without a solid understanding of the child’s capabilities, the history of child and staff interaction, and some neutral reporting of the events that took place, I would not venture a guess as to whether the staff acted correctly or incorrectly.
Without knowing any other facts, I’m inclined to side with the mother here. A school administrator who calls the cops to come deal with an apparently non-violent 12-year-old pants-wetter sounds like a school administrator who is big into heavy-handed intimidation.
Interesting assumption you’ve made: That the police were called solely because of her urination.
I’m with kambuckta. Let’s get some more facts before we crucify anyone. As far as this story goes, it is not particularly long, does not give much backstory, and is decidedly slanted against the principal.
The confrontation between the two could have been minutes long, or hours long. If she is a behavioral issue, she does not have to be violent to be a disruption. If she’s simply oppositionally defiant, she may just dig her heels in and refuse to cooperate for a variety of reasons that don’t make much sense to you or me, but make it nearly impossible to deal with her.
Or, the principal could be an asshole. I am in no way saying that this can’t be the case. I just want to know more before I get on the bandwagon to start calling for the resignation of teachers / administrators over a 216 word article. (With an average word length of 5.03)
And how are the police better equipped to deal with these problems? Tasers?
They only use the tasers if the perp dropped a deuce.
What’s the relative conductive ability of pee vs poop?
Urine trouble now.
Here is some more info:
http://www.centredaily.com/mld/centredaily/news/politics/16386213.htm
Jim
Depends.
They are probably not better trained to deal with MR or DD kids. However, in a situation where a person is deemed “out of control,” they are society’s default agency to deal with the person.
I do not necessarily think this is a good thing; I only note that it is our current situation. I have known MRDD kids of twelve who could seriously harm a much larger person in a physical confrontation. Police are (one supposes) trained to deal with rowdy drunks, nutcases hyped on meth, and similar violent people and in the midst of a struggle, these kids often display the same violence and strength.
Now, it is entirely possible that calling the police was an overreaction. (and What Exit?'s link puts even a different spin on the situation).
My only concern is that we do not jump up to judge the people involved with only bits and pieces of the event and no backstory, at all.
I have known staff who would accuse a kid of “deliberately” doing something because that person had not tried to discover what had prompted an action.
I have known parents who would insist that their child was never aggressive while yelling at bruised and bleeding staff.
Most of these situations are sufficiently distressing to everyone involved that I am just really reluctant to play guessing games to choose sides. (I’ve been known to refrain from choosing sides when my own kids were involved, just because I knew that both sides were credible from their own perspectives. In schools as in the workplace, finding ways to get past the event and finding ways to reduce the possibility of repeating the event is much more important than looking around for who gets to take the blame.)
How on earth could you know whether someone wet her pants deliberately or accidentally? Do they read minds? Unless she said, “I am now going to deliberately urinate”, which I see no indication of her having said.
Again, the news report was scant on details. Who knows whether this child has a history of pissing her pants in defiance.
I’m (at least at this stage) prepared to give the school authorities the benefit of the doubt here.
I’ve worked with a couple of kids who would piss on themselves just to…er…piss me me off. Usually they would do something to indicate that they were doing it on purpose- usually a taunt of some sort (“come and get it!” "Go get your gloves on and a biohazard bag, this is going to get messy! or “you can’t restrain me now- B*tch!” At the very least they would give me a sly smile.
In most school districts around here, the staff are trained to deal with unruly students when it comes to them harming themselves or others. However, schools are relying more and more on police intervention with behaviors that could be considered breaking the law. Most 7th grade and above schools around here have a local cop on campus at least part of the time. They are handy for breaking up fights and searching lockers- this allows the courts to handle these things rather than the school (which of course places them in alternative school if found guilty)- for better or for worse.
Reading the last article, it seems that the school is backing off their original response- maybe because of community pressure or maybe because they realize that they should have taken a different approach with this particular kid.
Calling the police on a non-violent, non-threatening student? Where the hell did these people get their teaching degrees?
How many details do you need? It is possible for a person to wet her pants accidentally. The mother says it’s accidental. The school authorities can’t possibly know for a fact that it was deliberate unless they can read her mind. Do you believe they can read her mind?
She does have a history of wetting her pants; that doesn’t prove it’s deliberate.
I mean, what exactly is observably different about a urine stream that comes out accidentally vs. one that comes out on purpose?
I don’t want to know.
What the heck was the policeman supposed to do? (I would lecture the person who took a policeman out of service. But that is just me.)