Drug Bust- Top Suburban High School

<p>The website for the Alternative Learning Center of Williamson County, TN can be found here:</p>

<p>[Williamson</a> County, TN - Official Site - ALC](<a href=“http://www.williamsoncounty-tn.gov/index.asp?NID=238]Williamson”>http://www.williamsoncounty-tn.gov/index.asp?NID=238)</p>

<p>A quote from the site:</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Sounds like an excellent way to get these students back on the right path to me.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Mini, you crack me up!!</p>

<p>mini - not all kids who smoke pot are “potheads”. Give me a break.
President Clinton smoked pot and he did OK.
President Obama did cocaine and he did OK.
They’re far from “druggies.” Just did some experimenting, made a mistake or two, and moved on.<br>
Not sure they would have reached their potential if they had this thrown at them.
I have lots of old friends who smoked pot once in a while and none of them went on to develop a habit. Most haven’t smelled the stuff for over 25 years. </p>

<p>I’m amazed that so many folks think about this is such black and white terms. Good and bad. Worthy and unworthy. Rules are rules…you break em, you lose. Affects your future? Too bad. Shoulda’ though about it then…
These kids made a STUPID mistake. Real stupid. Give them some realistic consequences and move on. They didn’t harm anyone.
Actually, in a recent national survey, a vast majority supporting loosening up the rules on pot. Some states have already made that move. Our prisons are crowded with these silly cases - forcing real criminals (like crazy drunk drivers and rapists) to be released. It’s time for a change. Uh oh…I sound like I’m on the political forum.</p>

<p>Yeah, and not all Brentwood students are “scholars”.</p>

<p>I’m for loosening rules, too. But these kids didn’t just smoke pot once. Or around their school. They went to an invitational event representing their school with 900 other students present, and got themselves caught. They faced no criminal charges, no probation, not even a slap on the wrist from the criminal justice system (which I think is great). </p>

<p>The school was embarrassed. They’ve been sending the “non-scholars” to ALC for years - that’s what it was set up for. And so they did what they would have done to the “non-scholars”. Seems extremely fair to me (actually, I think they likely got off easy, and that’s fine with me.)</p>

<p>(But I won’t be surprised to see their families “buy their early release” with a couple of good lawyers and threats.)</p>

<p>Get those lawyers on board fast to get a court injunction to keep them is school while the decision is still in the works with appeals, etc., stating that it would be detrimental to the child for their education to be interrupted. This is best route to keeping them where they are in the long run, force the school to keep them in the short run. (Trust me, this was a lawyer’s advice to me, after the fact, long ago.) Also, please tell all kids you know to refuse to be investigated/interrogated unless their parents are present. They DO have the right to refuse. I know too many schools that apply pressure on kids to give up information using scare tactics, and that info is usually used against someone else’s kid. That said, the school should at least be consistent. If this is the punishment metered out to ALL who break similar rules, it is fair. Smart kids, rich kids, poor kids, not so smart kids, should all be treated the same. The smart kids can use this to write an awesome college essay, and will be clever enough to mask the actual crime in their explanaiton due to their superior writing talent. And, if they were stupid enough to smoke pot on a school trip, and stupid enough to get caught, how smart are they, really??</p>

<p>If these were poor kids, or supposedly potential ALC kids, and embarrassed the school this way, they’d probably be suspended or expelled. (They might have been charged, too.)</p>

<p>mini - how do you know the kids are rich?</p>

<p>Because (as I noted), if they were poor kids, or supposedly potential ALC kids, and embarrassed the school this way, they’d probably be suspended or expelled.</p>

<p>Mini, my kids always felt there was a double-standard at their school. They very often felt that the high-achieving magnet kids (not rich but good students as a generalization) were given far more draconian punishments for very slight infractions than the poorer-performing non-magnet kids at their school (also not rich and also a generalization). It’s a lot easier to threaten and punish kids who actually care about their grades and school performance than ones who don’t.</p>

<p>Churchmusicmom, thanks for the link and quote.</p>

<p>Not how it works at Ss’ school. Zero tolerance. I’ve seen wealthy, contributing legacies expelled.</p>

<p>My kid’s went to private schools that were very easy to get kicked out of. Zero tolerance for any broken rule. We always made clear that if they had the urge to do something stupid or illegal, they needed to make sure not to do it at school. Replacing the school with one of equal quality would have been impossible.</p>

<p>I think most parents agree with zero tolerance where drugs are concerned until it’s their kid. I’m not sure how they keep a straight face protesting the punishment.</p>

<p>I do not agree with zero tolerance when drugs are concerned. Never did. The problem with zero tolerance is that it really makes it impossible to take into consideration some crazy situations that do occur. I dont agree with it for any reasons. You see some of the most horrible out of proportion punishments with zero tolerance. Federal drug laws are a good example of how this system can go haywire. Also it’s nuts that you lose federal financial aid for drug convictions, but murder, rape, assault, etc do not have that penalty.</p>

<p>Wow… just caught up on reading this whole thread, and there are some wonderfully wise people here, who, I think, if all put together in the same room, could reform the discipline system in our educational system. I’ve gone back and forth on this, and have this to add:</p>

<p>I agree with mini that most likely, this was not the first time most of these kids had smoked pot, but was the first time they were caught. </p>

<p>Secondly, I do believe that the school has the right to come down harsh on these kids. It’s an entirely different situation when kids attending a school function break the law than it is when kids break the law outside of school activities and school hours. As a parent who has spent MANY days and evenings chaperoning school trips (overnights included), it really began to hit me that I had a huge responsibility to make sure these kids didn’t get into any trouble. In fact, over time, as I realized kids were doing things that had borderline dangerous potential, I began to back out of chaperoning… I just didn’t want to put myself in the position of being sued, which I can easily see some parent doing, for not being diligent enough and responsible enough to keep the kids in line 24 hours a day. And I don’t limit this to alcohol or drugs… what about the kid who agrees to sneak into the hotel room of another kid from another school - then is sexually assaulted because they find out that kid wasn’t really a kid, but was someone posing as a student. </p>

<p>It is a huge responsibility for school staff and chaperones to take students into a situation where they absolutely cannot be monitored 24 hours a day. And I think it requires a different set of consequences in order to scare the crap out of them. You just don’t have the control over them like you do when they’re in the school building.</p>

<p>That being said, I do think the consequences were too harsh in the situation. There are so many options between doing nothing at all, and what they chose, that it makes me doubt the intelligence of those who set the rules. If your school is having an abnormally high incidence of drug use, then you’d better darn make sure you repeat again and again that the consequences will be harsh before you leave, and the administration will stop at nothing of making an example out of anyone who breaks the rules. </p>

<p>Like I said, I do think the schools need to cover their butts due to sue-happy parents. If kids want to smoke pot (or whatever) after school hours or at non-school events, fine, go for it, and face the consequences of your community’s laws if you’re caught. Their engaging in this activity in this context are not putting a whole school and volunteer chaperone parents at risk for being sued.</p>

<p>(btw… can you tell I have obvious leftover anger issues from my days of chaperoning for a teacher who could care less what the kids did?)</p>

<p>At the public high school two of my kids attended we received a huge pile of papers 10 days before the first day of school. About 4 days before school begins you must return the signed papers to school at an assigned time. You turn over your papers you get your class schedule. The pile is probably 2 inches think. Included are what seems like dozen’s of pages to sign and return. Everything from internet policy to the school district’s pesticide use policy. Included is also the school district disciplinary policies. This is quite a lengthy document. This needs to be signed by both student and parent. By signing you are acknowledging that you have read the policy. I think the majority of students and parents do not read the policy closely if at all. Most have been filling out that stack of forms for 10 yrs each Sept. I think you do it by rote. Especially if you are not expecting your child to ever need to be disciplined.
I did stress with all my children the no tolerance for any sort of drug on campus. And coming out of a private school where a female could have Midol in her backpack and take it at any sign of cramps my kids needed some reminders that they were now in public school. When my oldest entered the public high school they did not want to let her have an inhaler on her person. She had to go to the office. They also at first did not want to let her have the epipin. She had to have a signed Dr’s note for the office to keep a bottle of Midol in the office for her. 3 yrs later when my son went they were willing to let him have his Adderall on his person. Different school nursing staff. I told the office that was the most crazy thing I had heard. I did not want my son walking around with a bottle of Adderall.
I also don’t chaparone high school kids at the public school for the same reason’s as Teriwtt.</p>

<p>perhaps harsh, but if the policy is written, as it is in our school, you are fully aware of the punishment prior, and one decides to take the chance, you can’t cry uncle if your caught. One kid at our school lost her cell phone. Teacher found it searched the phone to find out who owned it. many texts in regards to pot buying and names mentioned or # with texts. Said kids were tracked down, lockers searched paraphenalia of sorts found—>all out os school suspensions, some in alt schooling/night classes and other rehab stuff. One kid out for the remainder of the school year.</p>

<p>Haven’t read all the posts, probably won’t as I’m off to do something else… but a little perspective for those who are saying that a one-year suspension is harsh… at geek_son’s school, a student in possession of pot or other illegal substance would be removed from the premises that day, with a police report and a pending expulsion hearing. A student in possession of a weapon, same thing where appropriate (a gun would result in a police report, a hunting knife might not). Those are all health/safety issues – the weapon because of potential violence, the drugs because of potential sharing. In our state, no school is required to take a student who was expelled for cause.</p>

<p>It’s not arbitrary; it’s the school policy, applied evenly with only one exception in the history of the school (I can’t share the details, but can say it was the kid’s innocent mistake and he paid dearly for it all the same). We all sign onto it; the kids all know it; most parents are smart enough not to appeal it. This year’s drug case did have an appeal – a kind relative who was trying to get the very best for the girl, and sadly was in way over his head with her. As an individual, I suggested online education or home-schooling; this kid needed constant supervision.</p>

<p>If you want to use drugs, our school is not the place for you. If the only thing holding you to the Code is the fear of getting caught (combined with the ability to anticipate getting caught), again, not the place for you. Kids can meet high expectations, but it’s a lot easier for them to do so if they live with a culture of accountability. Believe me, every new class of kids learns plenty from the “annual drug case” … and they learn most of it from one another.</p>

<p>The argument for lenience because “their brains are still forming” doesn’t get too far with me. That’s exactly why the rules have to be very clear, enforced very evenly, and strict enough to make an impression. Because their brains /are/ still forming, and every incident creates an enduring neural pathway. Confusing kids with mushy rules (you have good test scores, so the rules don’t apply to you) doesn’t do much to help those developing brains.</p>

<p>I don’t think anyone is arguing for leniency. The issue is whether the sentence is a reasonable consequence. I don’t believe it is. Others do.</p>

<p>At what point would you approve of letting the guilty kids back into the school? What period of removal would you think appropriate?</p>

<p>In light of the fact that 2 posters to this thread won’t chaperone because of liability concerns, what punishment for rule breaking would you consider appropriate (to keep order and protect innocent kids on school trips, and keep quality chaperones participating)?</p>

<p>I just don’t see this punishment as all that severe. Coloring my opinion is the assumption that these kids have been getting away with rule breaking forever - which is why they would smoke on a school trip with assumed impunity.</p>

<p>From the ALC’s website (the facility to which these kids are being sent for up to one year):</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>to add to treetopleaf’s questions, what about involvement in this program is not “a reasonable consequence” for these kids, MOWC?</p>