• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Zero Tolerance for Zero Tolerance

No it doesn't. Because if they let that slide how is a teacher to know that a kid isn't filling her Midol bottle with Extacy or however you spell it?

Why is "in loco parentis" so difficult for people to grasp.

A school is not "society" it almost always multiples the liability issues you'd face as a regular person.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_loco_parentis
 
truethat said:
No it doesn't. Because if they let that slide how is a teacher to know that a kid isn't filling her Midol bottle with Extacy or however you spell it?

Why is "in loco parentis" so difficult for people to grasp.

A school is not "society" it almost always multiples the liability issues you'd face as a regular person.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_loco_parentis
Click to expand...

For that matter, how does a teacher know that a container of mustard in a kid's lunch isn't laced with PCP? If there's a reasonable fear involved, confiscating the Midol and testing it should work. What would you say to the idea that the girls have to bring with them a note from and signed by their parents that they are allowed to have Midol and that the parents state that the bottle actually contains Midol?

As to in loco parentis, school authorities have been practicing that far longer than they've been practicing zero tolerance policies. They were apparently able to act in loco parentis quite well before those policies were instituted. Do you have any evidence that lawsuits against schools or school districts have increased dramatically or that they were the cause of instituting zero tolerance policies? Are you sure these policies are either necessary or effective? I'm willing to change my opinion on this issue if you can provide positive answers for these questions.
 
Last edited:
Is the Midol story even real? If so, it's pretty old. I remember hearing it when I was in high school, and that was twenty years ago. Either this "zero tolerance" is the worst thing ever that's been around for a very long time already, or people are recycling the same urban myth.
 
truethat said:
No it doesn't. Because if they let that slide how is a teacher to know that a kid isn't filling her Midol bottle with Extacy or however you spell it?
Click to expand...

The correct approach to cases like this is weigh up the costs and the benefits of allowing kids to have Midol, versus the costs and the benefits of a zero tolerance policy with regard to off-the-shelf medicine.

Just repeating that there is a potential downside to allowing kids to have Midol is ignoring three-quarters of the question.
 
By me, they should have Midol. Period, end of story. No questions asked.

If you wanted to ban containers because they might have some other substance in them, you'd have to ban pencil cases, lunch boxes, the boxes they carry art supplies in and makeup kits, too.

If the kid is behaving as though he or she might be on heroin or something else, then by all means confiscate their pill bottles for testing.

But otherwise, assume they are telling the truth and it really is Midol. Confiscating it creates a bigger issue than the pills themselves ever could.

The school making a 12-year-old child suffer from cramps that could bring an elephant to its knees- that's a bigger neglect of a minor's well-being by the adults in charge of her than letting her bring OTC drugs to school is!
 
Last edited:
Does anyone have any evidence, one way or the other, on the effectiveness of zero tolerance policies in reducing drug use among teenagers? That would be objective evidence.

According to this article, these policies are not effective (from the article's conclusion):

Ultimately, an examination of the evidence shows that zero tolerance policies as implemented have failed to achieve the goals of an effective system of school discipline.

This article agrees (from the article's conclusion):

Yet faced with an almost complete lack of evidence that zero tolerance is among the strategies capable of accomplishing that objective, one can only hope for the development and application of more effective, less intrusive alternatives for preserving the safety of our nation’s schools.
 
Last edited:
EeneyMinnieMoe said:
By me, they should have Midol. Period, end of story. No questions asked.

If you wanted to ban containers because they might have some other substance in them, you'd have to ban pencil cases, lunch boxes, the boxes they carry art supplies in and makeup kits, too.

If the kid is behaving as though he or she might be on heroin or something else, then by all means confiscate their pill bottles for testing.

But otherwise, assume they are telling the truth and it really is Midol. Confiscating it creates a bigger issue than the pills themselves ever could.

The school making a 12-year-old child suffer from cramps that could bring an elephant to its knees- that's a bigger neglect of a minor's well-being by the adults in charge of her than letting her bring OTC drugs to school is!
Click to expand...

This. Midol is an over-the-counter analgesic which anyone and everyone, including underage students, absolutely have the right to carry and use. Any counter-argument is an absurd overreaction.
 
Kevin_Lowe said:
The correct approach to cases like this is weigh up the costs and the benefits of allowing kids to have Midol, versus the costs and the benefits of a zero tolerance policy with regard to off-the-shelf medicine.

Just repeating that there is a potential downside to allowing kids to have Midol is ignoring three-quarters of the question.
Click to expand...

And they have. And the protocol is to leave it with the nurse that way when a student is taking medication on school grounds, they are being supervised by a medical profession.

You know, a GOOOD solution.............:rolleyes:
 
truethat said:
And they have. And the protocol is to leave it with the nurse that way when a student is taking medication on school grounds, they are being supervised by a medical profession.

You know, a GOOOD solution.............:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Over the counter medication requires no professional medical supervision in any place except on overreacting "zero-tolerance" public school campuses, where everyday rights are subordinate to the district's irrational fear of litigation.
 
truethat said:
And that's why you don't run the schools.
Click to expand...

Those running schools can simply confiscate the Midol and give the girl a bit of detention, rather than suspension. Punishment doesn't have to be so harsh. In any case, these same authorities would have no way of stopping the girls from going to any drug store and buying more Midol once school lets out.
 
TimCallahan said:
Those running schools can simply confiscate the Midol and give the girl a bit of detention, rather than suspension. Punishment doesn't have to be so harsh. In any case, these same authorities would have no way of stopping the girls from going to any drug store and buying more Midol once school lets out.
Click to expand...

Once shool let out she's no longer the liability of the school. Zero tolerance sends the message that it intends to send. You cannot do it. Period the end.

Whenever I see these conversations spin out, I see lots of drama and very little logic.

What is the harm in a student leaving the medication with the nurse and taking it in front of the nurse? :boggled:
 
truethat said:
Once shool let out she's no longer the liability of the school. Zero tolerance sends the message that it intends to send. You cannot do it. Period the end.

Whenever I see these conversations spin out, I see lots of drama and very little logic.

What is the harm in a student leaving the medication with the nurse and taking it in front of the nurse? :boggled:
Click to expand...

I see nothing wrong with that as a way to avoid girls being busted for having it in their purses. However, this might result in a logistics nightmare. Consider Burbank High School in Burbank, CA. It has an enrollment of about 2,800 students. If we assume about half are female, i.e. 1,400, then if we can get a rough figure of how many of the them are menstruating at any given time we could see how many might be going to the nurse's office. According to this website (and I'm not sure of its accuracy) about 25% of the female population is menstruating at any given time. Divide 1400 by 4 and you get 350. if we assume this 350 includes girls at all stages of their menstrual cycles and further assume that the girls only come in to see the nurse on the first day of their cycles, then we could dived 350 by 7 to get 50. So, every school day we may have up to 50 girls having to visit the school nurse.

Another problem I could see developing in such a program is that girls might fear being "outed," i.e. they might feel too self conscious about going to the nurse and having everyone know it's their time of month.

Of course, I'm speaking of this as an old male. If any of the women on this thread would care to weigh in on this subject, I, for one, would appreciate their insights.
 
Last edited:
TimCallahan said:
I see nothing wrong with that as a way to avoid girls being busted for having it in their purses. However, this might result in a logistics nightmare. Consider Burbank High School in Burbank, CA. It has an enrollment of about 2,800 students. If we assume about half are female, i.e. 1,400, then if we can get a rough figure of how many of the them are menstruating at any given time we could see how many might be going to the nurse's office. According to this website (and I'm not sure of its accuracy) about 25% of the female population is menstruating at any given time. Divide 1400 by 4 and you get 350. if we assume this 350 includes girls at all stages of their menstrual cycles and further assume that the girls only come in to see the nurse on the first day of their cycles, then we could dived 350 by 7 to get 50. So, every school day we may have up to 50 girls having to visit the school nurse.

Another problem I could see developing in such a program is that girls might fear being "outed," i.e. they might feel too self conscious about going to the nurse and having everyone know it's their time of month.

Of course, I'm speaking of this as an old male. If any of the women on this thread would care to weigh in on this subject, I, for one, would appreciate their insights.
Click to expand...

Not sure every woman needs midol every period.
 
beren said:
Not sure every woman needs midol every period.
Click to expand...

Okay, that's a good point. However, I suspect the cramping is worse initially in the teen years. Even if only 25 girls are going to the nurse's office a day, that would add quite a strain.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom