Ed Brayton is a journalist, commentator and speaker. He is the co-founder and president of 
It seems to me that it may be time to give all school administrators a course in remedial thinking. Here's another absolutely ridiculous case where a student was suspended from school after turning down drugs from another student.
The parents of a Kentuckiana seventh grade student say their young daughter was suspended from school for doing exactly what she's been taught to do for years - to just say no to drugs.The girl did not bring the prescription drug to her Jeffersonville, IN school, nor did she take it, but she admits that she touched it and in Greater Clark County Schools that is drug possession.
Here are the details:
Rachael Greer said it happened on Feb. 23 during fifth period gym class at River Valley Middle School when a girl walked into the locker room with a bag of pills."She was talking to another girl and me about them and she put one in my hand and I was like, 'I don't want this,' so I put it back in the bag and I went to gym class," said Rachael.
The pills were the prescription ADHD drug, Adderall. Patty Greer, Rachael's mother, said she and her husband are proud of their daughter for turning down drugs, just like she's been taught for years by DARE (Drug Abuse Resistance Education) instructors at school.
"I'm proud her conscience kicked in and she said, 'No, I'm not taking this. Here you can have it back,'" Patty Greer said.
But just saying no didn't end the trouble for Rachael. During the next period, an assistant principal came and took Rachael out of class. It turned out the girl who originally had the pills and a few other students got caught. That's when the assistant principal gave Rachael a decision.
"We're suspending you for five days because it was in your hand," said Rachael.
After hearing the news, Patty Greer went to school officials.
"He said she wrote it down on a witness statement and she had told the truth, he said she was very, very honest and he said he was sorry he had to do it but it was school policy," said Patty Greer.
According to Greater Clark County Schools district policy, even a touch equals drug possession and a one week suspension.
"The fact of the matter is, there were drugs on school campus and it was handled, so there was a violation of our policy," said Martin Bell, COO of Greater Clark County Schools.
We wanted to know what would have happened if Rachael had told a teacher right away. Bell said the punishment would not have been any different. District officials say if they're not strict about drug policies no one will take them seriously.
As if someone could or should take them seriously now? The kid did the right thing. She should be applauded, not punished.
Politics
Comments
Kids have a very finely honed sense of fairness and this stupidity will only serve to show students that authority is not fair and not to be trusted. Consequences will be worse than the cure. The more they try to justify this turning justice on its head, the worse it gets.
Posted by: MikeMa | March 10, 2010 9:18 AM
She passed it back? Hell, that's supply, charge that kid with dope-dealing right now!
Posted by: Granny Magda | March 10, 2010 9:21 AM
Another example of how zero-tolerance is an excuse for petty bureaucrats to not have to think, and not have to take real responsibility for their decisions.
Posted by: Eamon Knight | March 10, 2010 9:22 AM
So is there anything she could have done to avoid the suspension? Pulled her hand away super quick, used her super powers to levitate the pill so she never touched it, gone back in time to stop the other girl entering the school, anything?
Posted by: Matty | March 10, 2010 9:23 AM
Any readers here from River Valley? If so, please go shake this assistant principal's hand... while holding an Adderall pill. Lets see if he still thinks simply touching one is a violation after that. If a student gets a 5-day suspension, what's the punishment for a school employee?
Posted by: Abby Normal | March 10, 2010 9:24 AM
MikeMa, #1: ...this stupidity will only serve to show students that authority is not fair and not to be trusted.
Hey, that sounds like a very useful and valuable lesson!
But, if I may quote a refrain that is used to excuse another abuse of power on threads here dealing with a certain other topic: don't you think that if the school authorities are doing something that seems so stupid, then they must know something that we don't?
(Just in case someone doesn't get it, that's meant to be sarcasm.)
Posted by: Chiroptera | March 10, 2010 9:36 AM
What happened to the school officials who took the drugs away from the girl who got caught? I assume they get a week off without pay. Or they let her keep the drugs, knowing the school policy.
Posted by: Odie | March 10, 2010 9:55 AM
@ Matty: she would probably have been suspended just for being friends with someone who was dealing drugs. Or for being in the vicinity of prescription drugs. Or for attending a school in which drug use occurs.
Posted by: Sadie Morrison | March 10, 2010 9:56 AM
I was thinking that the real problem is that the girl didn't rat out her friends. But from the linked article:
We wanted to know what would have happened if Rachael had told a teacher right away. Bell said the punishment would not have been any different.
Man, even by the standards of typical authoritarianism, this is stupid. This reaches the level of Medievel Christianity stupid.
Posted by: Chiroptera | March 10, 2010 9:59 AM
What I should have done to get back at my high school enemies was slingshot pills at them. Each one is worth a five day suspension!
Posted by: FishyFred | March 10, 2010 10:15 AM
Zero tolerance = zero thinking. That's why those policies are in place.
Posted by: Troy | March 10, 2010 10:17 AM
Hmmmm, interesting. According to their district policies, 5131.6,
There isn't anything in their drug, alcohol, and tobacco policy statement that says it is a zero tolerance policy. In fact if it were, he would be processing her expulsion, but they aren't. Also, according to subsection B she could attend a drug counseling program and avoid the suspension.
It would be one (stupid) thing if the administration were stuck with a zero tolerance policy and had their hands tied, but this is pure idiocy, the policy states within that there is flexibility, that suggests that a student who refused the drugs (but didn't report the incident) could be (and should be) subject to a lesser penalty. Heck, as an educator I want to encourage the kids to report incidents like this one, this policy discourages kids above and beyond the whole "tattletale" label a kid would get. Now it isn't a fear that the other kids wont like you, it's a very real fear that simply seeing the drugs could get you into trouble.
Pure idiocy.
Posted by: dogmeatib | March 10, 2010 10:19 AM
I'm sorry, but I completely agree with the School administration in this case. The kid deserves a little punishment for leaving herself open like that - a 5 day suspension doesn't seem exaggerated for somebody who looks like she was interested in drugs.
She could have easily avoided the problem by constantly and proactively telling everyone she doesn't do drugs, or by wearing a Nancy Reagan t-shirt. In fact, with the proper upbringing and religious instruction, at her age she could easily have been so sanctimonious and annoying that her classmates wouldn't offer her a friendly word, let alone drugs.
I hope she learns her lesson.
Posted by: Phillip IV | March 10, 2010 10:24 AM
Wait... so a kid with a bottle of pills could shut down the entire school for a week, just by going around and chucking them at all the students? Great policy, guys!
Posted by: Tacroy | March 10, 2010 10:32 AM
I have to say, I really love the level of snark that Dispatches readers bring to the proverbial table.
...carry on. =)
Posted by: FastLane | March 10, 2010 10:33 AM
The ultimate game of dodgeball.... err pill!
Posted by: dogmeatib | March 10, 2010 10:40 AM
That will teach her to talk to the authorities.
Posted by: Johnny Clamboat | March 10, 2010 10:40 AM
Holy crap, I'm having a
"those were the days my friend, I thought they'd never end" moments...
I shudder to think how much school I would have lost.
Posted by: lilorphant | March 10, 2010 10:50 AM
There is an increasingly common mentality that says "People must be punished. The more people punished, the better. The harsher the punishment, the better. If you can't find anyone who deserves punishment, punish someone anyway."
Substitute the word "torture" for "punish" and you have the key to understanding the big picture.
Posted by: xebecs | March 10, 2010 10:52 AM
At my Lexington KY middle school I got detention for defending myself in a fight, as opposed to throwing my hands in the air, saying "you're being violent stop it!" and getting punched in the face. I grabbed the dudes' arms so he punched me in the chest instead of the face. I got detention.
The next year they changed the rules a wee bit after some well-placed complaints.
Posted by: Matthius | March 10, 2010 11:10 AM
Obviously the problem is that they waited until she touched a pill to punish her. By then it was far too late. Perhaps if they'd given her a week of detention before all this went down she'd have had the proper respect for authority and could have avoided the suspension altogether. Preemptive punishment, that's the key.
Posted by: Abby Normal | March 10, 2010 11:11 AM
This is nothing but a power trip. Some teacher or administrator gets an ego boost by bossing around a bunch of pre-teens. This is a case of being punished for being younger and having less power than your authorities.
Posted by: catgirl | March 10, 2010 11:16 AM
I wonder if this ignorant bully of an administrator ever received a traffic ticket. I'll bet he railed and screamed and shouted how unfair life was. Good. I hope he gets one he doesn't deserve real soon.
Posted by: MikeMa | March 10, 2010 11:22 AM
They just taught every kid at that school to never cooperate with authorities. Good job!
Posted by: plutosdad | March 10, 2010 11:29 AM
Wow, aint that the truth! LOL
Jess
www.real-anonymity.eu.tc
Posted by: Wee Soods | March 10, 2010 11:33 AM
I hope they take this girl to Disneyland for her 5 day suspension!
Posted by: Tim in USA | March 10, 2010 11:39 AM
So not only is this girl punished for doing the right thing, but she now has a "five-day suspension for drug possession" on her permanent school record? How is this even remotely sane?
Posted by: Don | March 10, 2010 11:41 AM
I am coming to this school, with only 1 illicit drug pill... and I am going to touch each and every student with the pill, wether they allow me or not... I will also brush the will up against teachers.
According to school policy, all students and teachers will be suspended! What a great way to give the entire school 1 week off!
I encourage students to gather together, grab a pill just for the purpose of showing how ridiculous this god forsaken school really is.
Posted by: jo | March 10, 2010 11:43 AM
So, if the school district has a zero tolerance drug policy does that mean that all the teachers and administrators have to give up coffee, non herbal tea, energy drinks, chocolate and not have smoking breaks? Last time I checked caffeine and nicotine are drugs. They're mood altering and can cause withdrawal symptoms if not used regularly. Or maybe the district is run by a bunch of hypocrites. Nah, it couldn't be that.
Posted by: Diane | March 10, 2010 11:47 AM
The great thing about this is its a week off for the student. I would have loved it if i could get suspended for a week and not have my parents yell at me for it. I would have considered it a reward in itself! That's the problem with suspending kids...for the most part, they enjoy the time off.
Posted by: Sarah | March 10, 2010 12:07 PM
Philip IV: you're kidding, right?
Posted by: Raging Bee | March 10, 2010 12:13 PM
Phillip IV, #13: The kid deserves a little punishment for leaving herself open like that - a 5 day suspension doesn't seem exaggerated for somebody who looks like she was interested in drugs.
Heh. The second paragraph was good.
But seriously, I wouldn't be too surprised if this was the intent of the rule. It usually is an aim of your typical Reign of Terror to prevent people from committing crimes by making them aware that they will be summarily and severly punished if they even look like that might commit the crime.
Posted by: Chiroptera | March 10, 2010 12:24 PM
The school administration has truly perfected the game of Cooties. Is a five day suspension really sufficient to get them all off of the poor dear?
Posted by: Mr. Upright | March 10, 2010 12:33 PM
If a Jeffersonville, IN middle school assistant principal had any brains, he or she probably wouldnt be a Jeffersonville, IN middle school assistant principal.
Posted by: Peps | March 10, 2010 12:37 PM
this would NEVER EVER happen in Canada. Utterly ridiculous!!!
I agree with the person above about the kids rallying together to oppose this retardness ... grab a pill from home, and go around and touch EVERY SINGLE STUDENT -- hell run up to a teacher and go 'boop! you're suspended too!'
This would be a great message to send to these complete morons running this school.
Posted by: Jade | March 10, 2010 12:43 PM
There is a big difference from being strict and fucking stupid. This is the latter.
Posted by: Truthism | March 10, 2010 12:45 PM
typically dumb school administrator wielding 'authority' without thinking. what a pathetic existence.
Posted by: epiphyte | March 10, 2010 12:47 PM
Lesson learned: If you touch a drug, take it, the penalty will be the same.
Posted by: name | March 10, 2010 12:51 PM
If the girl in the locker room had stabbed Rachael in the chest and school officials found her, bleeding, with a knife protruding from her, would they suspend her for possessing a weapon?
Posted by: Eric | March 10, 2010 12:57 PM
If that was my kid, I would think very seriously about procuring some weed (which I don't touch) and planting it on the principal in a frame job.
Posted by: K | March 10, 2010 1:02 PM
@Matty: Lie! Like others say, this only helps make students skeptical of their administrators and less likely to inform them of things they should hear about (such as kids walking around giving out pills).
Posted by: elforko | March 10, 2010 1:11 PM
When I hear stories like this one, it always makes me want to somehow hide a prescription drug in my hand, along with my car keys... then ask the school principal "Hold these for a moment, please" then drop the keys and the drugs into her hand.... then call the cops on her.
Hey, possession!!! Arrest this person!!!
Posted by: kacyray | March 10, 2010 1:13 PM
Its crazy how young they are and already experimenting with drugs. Also crazy how she did the right thing and still got in trouble, it wasnt her fault that girl was a druggie.
Posted by: purtee | March 10, 2010 1:29 PM
Wow. If my high school had had a policy like this in place while I was there, what with all the "crystal Pepsi" and "apple Slice" and "7-Up Dark" we were drinking, I think there may have been three successive (and very drunk) classes that failed to graduate altogether.
That's not even counting the girls that tore the cotton out of tampon applicators and used them to smuggle in pills.
Posted by: Kate from Iowa | March 10, 2010 1:30 PM
Fuck, this hits a bit close to home. Just minutes before reading this I got a call from the Vice Principal of my middle-schooler. He was in the office because a classmate had offered him drugs, he hadn't taken up the offer but also hadn't reported it; the other student had been caught in another class. I was assured that he wasn't in trouble (for this, though they've been pretty dick-ish about some other things) but dang, I'm going to have to get more details tonight since the VP was pretty cagey. I wonder did we escape by the skin of our teeth simply out of luck that nothing was touched?
Posted by: anon for a reason | March 10, 2010 2:00 PM
She is getting a reward! One week vacation :)
Posted by: Linda | March 10, 2010 2:05 PM
These stories are a waste of space.
Do you have any idea of how many incredibley awesome things went down at a public school today?
Do freak incidents like this occur every now and then? Of course they do. But it's with the frequency of a shark attack. Maybe even less frequent.
Let your next headline read "Seven Year Old Introduced to and Understands Fractions".
Now that's something newsworthy.
You mudslingers need to go thank your high school teachers that gave you the tools to write this slanderous crap.
Posted by: oddjobdrummer | March 10, 2010 2:20 PM
If the girl would have taken a gun away from an armed student, would they have suspended her on "policy" grounds for having handled the gun? There is a time to adhere to policy, and a time to use common sense. This is likely a prime example of why GCS is so far behind.
I am proud to say i'm one of the minority who made it out of Greater Clark with an education. That was only because I had the common sense NOT to listen to many of my teachers. To me, GCS is a fine example of why America lags behind so many (less developed) countries in education.
Posted by: Matt | March 10, 2010 2:28 PM
People are not born hating governments.
Governments teach people to hate them.
When can we get a Zero Tolerance Policy for government corruption?
Posted by: Ugly American | March 10, 2010 2:38 PM
The only lesson learned from this will be: never ever tell the principal the truth again.
Posted by: Dave | March 10, 2010 2:42 PM
Hmm would look-alikes include Mike and Ike’s candies?
Posted by: Chilidog | March 10, 2010 2:48 PM
Take note, students: all you have to do is tape a few pills to every doorknob into the school building, and nobody will have to go to classes until the drugs have melted in the rain.
Posted by: sharky | March 10, 2010 2:59 PM
The right to bear arms starts to look quite appealing when one reads of such cases.
Posted by: bullfighter | March 10, 2010 3:27 PM
Hmm. The school administrator(s) who nabbed the drugs likely took them into his/her possession. Under the law then, they too are in illegal posession of prescription drugs. Arrest them and let them be fired at once! Pretty darn sure it's against their employment rules too!
If I were that girl's parents, I file a complaint with the local police.
Posted by: varangianguard | March 10, 2010 3:34 PM
I don't think that this article emphasizes the interesting aspect of the story. Instead, I think it misleads. The interesting aspect is the stupidity of the anti-drug policy. The act of touching a drug is punishable? Stupid!! The fact that the girl said "No" to drugs was only a detail in the story. The girl could have slipped and fallen face first onto the bag of pills and still be in the same situation. The act of touching the pills seems to be the interesting aspect.
Posted by: Martin Velez | March 10, 2010 3:36 PM
This is a good example of why our society and the authority that maintains it is going straight down the tube. In performing this "keeping of the rules" the authorities have taught this young person not to trust authority. It goes right on from there. We live in a sick society, I'm glad the young person has (or seems to have) good and loving parents.
Posted by: Norman | March 10, 2010 3:41 PM
Speaking of rampant authoritarianism, here’s a recent story of a Colorado teen who was arrested, thrown in jail, and had his car impounded for failing to return a DVD to his local library. Now I must be off. I’m late, I’m late, for a very important date!
Posted by: Abby Normal | March 10, 2010 3:46 PM
oddjobdrummer@47
I wonder, when your doctor tells you what is wrong with your body, do you lambaste him for not going over all the wonderful things going right?
"Doctor, why would you point out my bursting appendix when the rest of my body is such good shape?"
I agree that much good takes place at public schools, but those good things are what we *pay* for and expect from our educators. What we don't expect is poorly written policy that results in the improper handling of honest, responsible young people. Such policy is very destructive insofar as it *teaches* the young people not to trust their educators and adminstrators.
These are the things we *need* to have pointed out to us. We need to know what is wrong so that we (as a society) can help fix it.
We don't go to a mechanic to have him tell us what is right with our car. We go there so he can tell us what is wrong with it. Your criticism is misguided.
Posted by: kacyray | March 10, 2010 3:46 PM
Here's the email of the principal: [email protected] Have fun!
Posted by: Jim Richels | March 10, 2010 3:53 PM
You can protect yourself as well as you want.
Live in a bubble.
but is someone else decides to make your life hell, they just have to put the drug in your locker when you aren't looking.
This type of "protect you from yourself" policy is absolutely repressive and tyrannical.
It is a total abuse of the power, and severely contrary to the Constitution of the U.S.
The policy should be stricken from the books. Each case taken as it comes, using the "Rule of Law" as the primary basis for any action.
Posted by: we_the_people | March 10, 2010 4:37 PM
You know what I would do if I had a five day vacation? Probably a lot more drugs than I would do if I had to go to school. Actually, let me reword that. You know what I do when I have five days off? A lot of drugs.
Posted by: Alex | March 10, 2010 4:41 PM
Let your next headline read "Seven Year Old Introduced to and Understands Fractions".
Now that's something newsworthy.
Seven? Really, you think that would be newsworthy? I've been one and known several other kids that are able to work well with fractions at that age.
It's also been much more common in my experience to find dumb school administration policcy enforcement. I personally was sent unattended to the parking lot because I had "taped" on my parking sticker to my car in high school. They gave me a razor blade to get it off. The rule was meant to keep you from switching cars with the sticker (it must have netted them about $20 each year to have this policy in place). Since they knew my sticker was only taped over the defroster cables and impossible to pull off, I got the razor blade, 40 minutes out of class and was charged $2 for a new sticker.
Posted by: Odie | March 10, 2010 5:09 PM
It seems the only safe action is to never, ever admit to any sort of wrong-doing at all. Don't admit to touching the pill, don't admit to seeing it, and don't sign any statements at all. If that means the student has to lie, so be it. The punishment would be the same if caught, and none if they can't prove it. It's a sad state of affairs when schools are teaching children that they can't trust authority.
The thing is, most school systems now have a strict policy about attendance. If the student misses a certain amount of days--for nearly any reason at all--then the student cannot pass to the next grade no matter how well she does in her studies. Furthermore, the limit is typically very small, so a five day suspension very well could mean the difference between passing to the next grade or repeating the current grade level.
But come to think of it, this could end up being a valuable life lesson for this student: never, ever trust the authorities to be on your side. Never. I just hope her suspension does not cause her irreparable harm.
Posted by: Bruce H | March 10, 2010 5:39 PM
You're right. It is always in your best interest to plead the fifth, even if you've done nothing wrong. I don't know if that was an option for the student, given the school setting, but I would have at least tried.
Posted by: Brandon | March 10, 2010 5:57 PM
Ummmm, what?
Unless you posted in the wrong thread, this makes as much sense as you popping in with "I like cheese."
Posted by: dogmeatib | March 10, 2010 6:49 PM
Actually, in middle school, even high school, pleading to the 5th doesn't work. There is a law stating that every student is under the supervision of the school authorities and therefore does not possess the right to not say anything. They will hit you with defiance and assume that you had something to do with it anyways. Still leading right to detention or suspension. Our education system is flawed, but nobody has the balls (or the authority) to fix it.
Posted by: Joe | March 10, 2010 7:09 PM
I smell a law suit.
Posted by: T Webster | March 10, 2010 7:09 PM
She is certainly guilty of trafficking in the eyes of the law. Drug laws are stupid. Anyone can plant something on your kid and ruin their life. It happens every day to black kids. If your child is nice enough to give a classmate a ride home, they may end up in jail for LIFE without parole. Legalize and regulate and educate and rehabilitate. I hope someone plants a pound of heroin on the principal. Planting drugs on authority figures seems to be the only way to go. Let them play their own game from the inside. It will get worse if parents don't stand up and DO something. Saying something or writing something does NOTHING. They are out to get your kids and seize your home.
Posted by: lee | March 10, 2010 7:13 PM
I hope this jackass gets fired.
Posted by: Moving Pictures | March 10, 2010 7:48 PM
I can't believe people are defending drug possession. Clearly, the death penalty is called for before this escalates.
Posted by: Iman Azol | March 10, 2010 8:56 PM
@ Eric If the girl in the locker room had stabbed Rachael in the chest and school officials found her, bleeding, with a knife protruding from her, would they suspend her for possessing a weapon?
Well, fifteen years ago now, in fourth grade, I was stabbed in the arm with a pencil, by a girl who was about 2 years older than me (she was still in 4th grade; to be fair, I was a grade ahead of my age group) and about two feet taller than me. It took two days to dig out the pencil lead, and I had the pencil lead tattoo in my arm for about three years.
Guess who the teacher wanted to suspend?
Me.
Because I had "aggravated" the girl by correcting her homework, when the teacher made everyone hand their homework to the person beside them for grading. And the correction was precisely word-for-word what the teacher had said the answer should be.
This stupidity isn't new. It's just being better reported.
That being said, can I help roast this jerk? Pretty please?
Posted by: Sidial | March 10, 2010 9:14 PM
unbelievable...we have completely lost the final shred of whatever basic common sense we once had these days...USE YOUR F-ING BRAIN PEOPLE!!! You don't have to follow the law to the letter like an idiot, you possess the basic ability to reason (or you SHOULD if you are a teacher), use your noodle
Posted by: snafu | March 10, 2010 9:42 PM
I'm a senior in high school and I can tell you these situations happen daily. I have a write-up note saved from getting ISS (In School Suspension) for eating a few potato chips in class. A lot of suspension are very petty offenses.
Posted by: Sebastian | March 10, 2010 10:08 PM
Sebastian - you appear to have failed whatever critical thinking curricula that was introduced to you. The seventh grade student that is the subject of this blog post committed no "petty offense" as you describe your own failure to adhere to the rules. If she had there'd be no reason to blog about this young lady. In fact your attempting to create a false equivalence between your behavior and the behavior of our seventh grade Kentuckian, I assume to justify your own behavior by falsely conflating it with her's.
Posted by: Michael Heath | March 10, 2010 10:23 PM
Sometimes it seems that the administrative behavior is worse than the behavior of the students.
Posted by: John | March 10, 2010 10:42 PM
This kind of "no thinking allowed" policy is a great example of what's wrong with this country.
Damn it! Thinking is good. Considering each case in context is a good thing. "No tolerance" is stupidity.
Posted by: Marvin | March 10, 2010 10:56 PM
It's policies like this that taught me that the rules didn't determine what was wrong and what was right. They taught me that rules are man made and therefore can be fallible.
I say silly 'unfair' policies should be left in place (so long as they're relatively harmless, like this one) to teach kids to truly question everything -- including the rules.
Posted by: The Extremist | March 11, 2010 1:14 AM
does this mean i can throw a pill at someone and they'll get suspended?
Posted by: small | March 11, 2010 2:32 AM
Rules are rules... but that is why we were given COMMON SENSE.
Victimise the innocent and they will not stay innocent for long. The school officials obviously fail to look at the big picture here. Also suspending all the drug touchers together has to be the most stupid decision! Who are they all going to hang out with when they are not at school??!
Educate these people, don't push them into a corner.
Posted by: Dee Kumar | March 11, 2010 3:01 AM
I always have my hand held out so anyone can put anything it it. This is how this went down.
Kid A: Here take this.
Kid B: Takes it and looks at it.
Kid B: "I don't want it."
w/e way you look at it she considered taking the pill unless we are saying the drug pusher grabbed her hand and forced the pill there.
It's a stupid policy anyway.
Posted by: ben | March 11, 2010 3:15 AM
Is this typical of some US schools or is it newsworthy because, thankfully, it is so rare.
Posted by: Just wondering | March 11, 2010 3:20 AM
Just goes to show that evolution should be taught extensively in our schools. The child's parents would then realize that certain generations of people tend to lose out in the genetic game where traits such as intelligence and common sense get lost due to mating with individuals that have active inferior genotypes. One can only hope that subsequent generations would mate with intelligent persons and eventually phase out the idiots.
Posted by: Guy | March 11, 2010 3:30 AM
If you can't change the bad decision of the school, change the end result. The whole family should spend her expulsion in Disneyland. That'll teach her!
Posted by: auntie ir0ny | March 11, 2010 3:32 AM
I am pretty sure the title of this article explains it all.
Posted by: Thomas | March 11, 2010 3:58 AM
So the teachers or the pricipal touched the bag of pills when taking it away from the kids? ... oh oh, 1 week suspension for then as well ! Or have they not touched it and let the kid use them...not following the fiduciary duty they have been infliced with...put the pricipal and teachers in jail !!
Posted by: laughing reader from Germany | March 11, 2010 4:32 AM
adderall is not an intoxicant, it's a drug that makes you want to do schoolwork. actually, it should be given for free to everyone because it would make everyone more productive and our country more prosperous. FACT
Posted by: hector | March 11, 2010 9:03 AM
another example of zero tolerance gone astray can be found here.
http://www.brainerddispatch.com/stories/022610/new_20100226003.shtml
Posted by: Truth Slinger | March 11, 2010 10:09 AM
@ Just Wondering
I can guarantee you that this is not an isolated incident in The States' public schools. The actual rule may be different, but the effect is the same. "Zero tolerance" really does mean zero thinking.
Some stuff that has affected me and people I've known:
1) Kid had a hatchet in his truck because he chopped wood for a living and was expelled: model student, hatchet locked up, they really had to have looked for it.
2) This one seems fairly common across public schools: by defending yourself or breaking up a fight, you are required to receive the same punishment as the aggressor. This one got me no less than 10 times. I went to a white-minority high school, and as a white guy, was pretty well razzed on a weekly basis. I don't know about a lot of people here, but I do not like being hit in the face repeatedly in front of a teacher who has no possibility of ending it, especially when the attackers come in groups.
3) By giving ANY medication: even over the counter, we were subject to very similar rules. I got this one when I gave a friend some ibuprofen while she was on her period.
In conclusion, this is not isolated. Any of you saying that it is either did not go to public school or did not attend one within the last 10 years, which is when this mode of authority really started taking hold. When you treat people like animals, they rebel. We did things in high school that I can't even talk about for fear of getting in trouble for it now. Nothing exactly illegal, but we made it very difficult for anyone in the administration to perform their "duties" effectively.
Posted by: Wall Of Death | March 11, 2010 10:12 AM
As a school administrator myself, I find the policy to be completely idiotic. That said, I don't find it to be evidence "that it may be time to give all school administrators a course in remedial thinking" any more than such a sloppy assertion is evidence of the need to give all journalist-blogger-author-radio hosts such a course.
I would also like to point out that administrators are an easy target, since like police officers we are the "street level bureaucrats" charged with implementing policies developed by people who rarely--if ever--seek our input. Administrators don't write policy: school boards write policy. Our job is to carry out that policy, whether we believe in it or not. To refuse to do so is to imperil our careers.
Are some policies unfair, and are some enforcements of said policies seemingly idiotic? Yes. But that is what due process is about. Anyone who doesn't like what I do is welcome to appeal my decision to the principal, then to the superintendent, then to the board. In those situations where I felt I had to do something that I didn't believe was right, I've made it a point of outlining those rights.
One more point before I give up the soapbox: situations like this are always unilateral warfare. A parent or student can go to the press and say *anything*. That is their right and exercising their right does not mean that they waive their FERPA rights, so the administrators, school district, etc. cannot reveal any specific information about the incident. All any of us have heard is one version--not side, but version--of the story. And we all know kids and parents *never* lie, right?
Posted by: Jon A | March 11, 2010 10:20 AM
Wow. So she gets the same punishment for simply touching a pill as she would've gotten if she had taken a handful of pills and tripped her a$$ off through the entire school day!
Posted by: Barb | March 11, 2010 10:20 AM
Jon,
I have to disagree with you somewhat on this one. The policy, at least in writing, isn't a zero tolerance policy. I have no idea if they have elements of their handbook, meetings, etc., that establish it as an unbendable zero tolerance policy, but from the outside, reading the district policies, it looks like they have leeway and that the administrator is the one who has gone beyond all reason in this case.
Posted by: dogmeatib | March 11, 2010 10:30 AM
This is dumbasshatastic.
Posted by: Reynold | March 11, 2010 11:19 AM
If the school policy is "touching drugs gets you suspended" then clearly she did not do the right thing.
The right thing is "See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil" and deny the hell out of everything. If someone has drugs in school, your goal should be to completely ignore it at all costs and deny, deny, deny if anyone brings it to your attention.
The school administrators clearly don't want to be bothered with this, and the student needs to learn that mentioning the presence of drugs in her school is a punishable offense. Once she understands the simple principle of plausible deniability, she'll benefit significantly.
I can say that the student with the Adderall also made a serious mistake in admitting to possession of any drugs at all. If she'd been smart, she'd have denied everything and insisted the drugs were planted. Then she'd have run for a lawyer and thrown up a giant fit about being the victim of a witch hunt.
Deny, deny, deny, and fight tooth and nail until it becomes more trouble to enforce the rule than to just ignore it. That's the moral of this story.
Posted by: Zifnab | March 11, 2010 11:30 AM
I love the logic that leads to a scenario where the student that brought in the pills could theoretically go around the entire school touching everybody with pills -- playing tag, essentially -- and could have the entire school suspended.
Posted by: Will Reinhardt | March 11, 2010 11:30 AM
SERVES HER RIGHT!
Posted by: Sarah Palin | March 11, 2010 11:42 AM
The school administrators who are enforcing this ridiculous situation should be publicly shamed, and then afterwards if they cannot explain exactly how it was wrong and stupid, they should be fired. That, and the girl should be publicly honoured with an apology (I mean in front of a crowd of people) from the teachers who punished her. Hopefully then she'll see that she really was right all along, and that even adults take absolutely stupid positions on things sometimes...
It's a sick story. Were I the girl's father, I would have probably stayed at the school until they agreed to reverse the punishment. Sit on the principal's car if necessary and prevent the fool from going home until he agrees.
Posted by: nanibold | March 11, 2010 11:49 AM
There was a movie made about school administrators called "Flatliners"... or was it "Dumb & Dumber" ???
Posted by: jerry | March 11, 2010 11:58 AM
Just goes to show you that people who are unemployable anywhere else can get jobs as school administrators.
Posted by: Jake | March 11, 2010 12:01 PM
Flat out stupid. What if the drug dealing middle school girls dropped the pills as they were walking away. The student then picks up the pill and throws it in the trash. Suspension!!
The staff must of held the pills at some point and thus if city ordinance took the same stance then they would then be required to charge them. This rule makes no sense.
Posted by: Isaac | March 11, 2010 12:11 PM
So, according to the policy, touch a drug, even involuntarily, and you are suspended? So if a student wanted to get other students in trouble, he could just take a pill, run around touching to all his enemies, and those people would all be immediately suspended? That's not a real sensible policy.
Posted by: DovS | March 11, 2010 12:17 PM
No surprise here. For the past 20 years, the Schools of Education that churn out our teachers have attracted only the bottom of the intelligence barrel. Teachers graduate without the ability to perform basic kitchen math, lacking in any skills for logical critical thought, and with a head filled with touchy-feely PC crap that they then try and substitute for the subject matter they are failing to teach, due to a combination of laziness, inability, and just plain incompetence. Public eductaion in this country is a quagmire of mediocrity.
Posted by: Floyd DaBarber | March 11, 2010 12:18 PM
You are an idiot, even knowledge of illegal activity is grounds for suspension and she admitted she knew and told no one.
Posted by: bob | March 11, 2010 12:23 PM
i came to the conclusion a long time ago.that sh*t isn't fair.So just do what ever the hell you want.If it that important to you,you'll know how not to get caught.if you want something,take it.you could get arrested and go to jail.but you might not.and if you don't than it was free.and if the people really cared about said thing.it wouldn't have been so easy to take.
Posted by: chris | March 11, 2010 12:30 PM
No Bob, your the idiot, to the parents of this girl, you should commend her for doing the right thing. and as for the teacher or principle or whoever it was that suspended this girl you are an uneducated backwoods dumb ass. obviously you touched these drugs as well to see what they where , So why are you not suspended if it's Zero tolerance, you did exactly what this young girl did, Shame on you! you must have taken some of those drugs for yourself to make that bullshit decision and I think they should fire your ass for doing so.
Posted by: Dean | March 11, 2010 12:37 PM
Any one that agrees with the school on this has no brain. The young adult did the right thing and turned down the pill.
I know they can not give the class time back to the student now. But I am thinking that a lawyer should get involved to have it removed from the girls record and we all know these days that could hurt her in the future.
When we start to punish people for doing the right thing we have very real issues here.
This is getting very much like a police state type of situation. communistic in my opinion.
even the courts pretend you are innocent until proven guilty.
and when the scholl says it has no choice that is a flat out LIE they do have a choice to do the RIGHT thing.
instead they are teaching the youths it is ok to do the wrong thing if you pretend it is the right thing to do.
But what do I know.
Posted by: anon | March 11, 2010 12:44 PM
Why weren't the school Superintendent, principle, and teachers suspended for allowing a student to bring narcotics into the school and putting this student in harms way. If the children were properly supervised this would not have happened. Obviously the school administration needs a refresher course on how to supervise their students.
Posted by: jsc1 | March 11, 2010 12:46 PM
Score another one for zero tolerance rules. Anytime you take human judegment out of the equation you get stuff like this
Posted by: ACD224 | March 11, 2010 12:54 PM
So by that logic if i were to stab the principal in the face with a knife I could have him charged with weapon possession cause technically his face now possesses said knife even though initially he told me he would not like to have a knife stabbed in his face.
Posted by: yocdub | March 11, 2010 12:55 PM
Well at least she learned a valuable lesson. You can't trust anyone and the lie will set you free. It's a hard lesson to learn but in this day and age it's one you must learn.
Posted by: C | March 11, 2010 1:03 PM
Want a closer look at this??
http://ingunowners.com/forums/general_political_discussion/78193-my_daughters_problem.html
Posted by: mettle | March 11, 2010 1:13 PM
Zero Tolerance is 100% wrong.
Posted by: Michael | March 11, 2010 1:18 PM
My wild guess if the VP fears that, if he suspends ADDie for "transmitting" amphetamine (Adderall, for which she likely has an Rx) but not Rachel for "handling", he will get sued by ADDie's parents for singling her out. Maybe they are that unreasonable. Maybe he is reacting to an overreaction that hadn't happened and trying for the lesser of two evils. Missed it by thaaat much...
Posted by: Rich | March 11, 2010 1:23 PM
SWEET! A week of vacation! Looks like they did reward her for good behavior.
Posted by: t-rad | March 11, 2010 1:27 PM
She probably got suspended because the administrators are the ones providing the kid with the drugs to sell and it cut into their profits.
Posted by: Tyler | March 11, 2010 1:31 PM
Any administration that adopts zero tolerance policies should be fired for trying to take such an easy way out.
Posted by: Gary | March 11, 2010 1:42 PM
please send him your own hate mail the ass. pricapals email is [email protected]
Posted by: me | March 11, 2010 1:44 PM
This is bullshit. Just another example of power corruption. The school officials need to be ousted in favor of competence.
Posted by: Tyson | March 11, 2010 1:48 PM
FIRE this moron! The kid did exactly the right thing. Why does it seem that everyone in power is retarded? Do you have to be an imbecile to get elected?
Posted by: Mr Fife | March 11, 2010 2:20 PM
Stupid is what stupid does. Enough said--Bob
Posted by: Bob | March 11, 2010 2:53 PM
Speaking of schools doing stupid things, anyone had a look at this yet?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100311/ap_on_re_us/us_lesbian_prom_date
Rather than allow a lesbian to go to prom with a female date, and wear a tux, the school cancelled the senior prom. The school principle claims that everyone is on the school's side. The girl in question says "she felt some hostility toward her." Really, ya think?
Posted by: Luna_the_cat | March 11, 2010 3:22 PM
Luna, my understanding is that the prom isn't really cancelled. In the background, they are just merely planning to move the prom to a different, privately-owned venue, where they're allowed to discriminate to their hearts content.
Of course, the school officials are only aware of the cancelling part of the old prom *nudge, nudge, wink, wink* ... it's just random strangers in the community who are making arrangements for the new gay-free prom.
Posted by: doctorgoo | March 11, 2010 3:34 PM
If I were a parent of this child (and I am certainly hoping that they read this comment) I would hire a private investigator and have thorough criminal and motor vehicle background checks (or through any other legal investigative means) run on each and every one of the "Holier Than Thou" administrators involved in this decision. I would then freely share any relevant information obtained with all parents and other members of this community. Of course this would be done for “the good of the school” so each of these administrators involved would surely approve of such action. In fact I would attend the next School Board meeting with as many concerned parents as possible and make a strong suggestion that the aforementioned series of investigative background checks be performed on an annual basis for ALL school administrators AND board members.
Posted by: Thomas Payne | March 11, 2010 3:38 PM
I could see the benefit of suspending the girl that only touched the drug to influence all the students to have no association with drugs dealers which would decrease the likelihood of students even becoming drug dealers. I assume some students become drug dealers to become more popular due the common themes in hip hop culture and its rising popularity. Also, after being wrongfully suspended, maybe the innocent student would influence other students to hate the drug dealer; which would decrease the drug dealer’s popularity and possibly the popularity of other drug dealers which would decrease the likelihood that students become drug dealers in the first place. When other students find out that this girl got suspended for just touching the drug, the students who were associates/friends of the drug dealer would likely see that their education is in jeopardy, due the risk of also being suspended for something so small, and would choose to either stop being associated with the drug dealer or at least encourage her to stop dealing.
So sure, this one student’s well-being might’ve been compromised, but it would benefit the greater good as a deterrent for other students to become a drug dealer and associating with drug dealers.
Also, if she got away without punishment, it would be likely that other students would use the same excuse and also get away with it. It is hard to prove her innocence here. To get away without punishment due to lack of evidence would increase the likelihood that students do not take the policy as seriously as if she had received punishment. What if other students who actually bought the drug said that they only touched it and had friends and parents say the same thing? How could the difference be proven?
Posted by: Daniel | March 11, 2010 3:45 PM
I've worked in public schools for decades and known many administrators, and I've yet to know one who wasn't a CYA-obsessed idiot. Power truly corrupts.
Posted by: Daniel Davis | March 11, 2010 4:30 PM
Consider:
If you held out your hand and I put anything into it that you did not expect and it harmed you, (ie: rattlesnake, lave, black widow, etc) I could be prosecuted. That little girl was harmed when the pill was illegally put into her hand.
Also, if I throw a pill at you and it touched you, are you guilty of possession? How about if someone robs a bank and as they run away they throw the bag of money and it hits you. Are you now an accomplice since you now have possessed the stolen money? This school's lawyers need to be educated (how ironic).
Posted by: Jim | March 11, 2010 4:33 PM
Ummmm Daniel? (3:45 PM)
So if are hanging out in the break room at work, and a shady colleague sidles up to you, hands you a McDonalds bag which you reflexively take, but which you quickly throw to the ground when you realize this turd is trying to sell you pot, you'd be OK with the police arresting you and putting you in jail for 6 months, right? I mean, it would totally encourage people to do the right thing, which is not ever talk to anyone you don't know and avoid social interactions like the plague unless they have papers signed by the president attesting to their trustworthiness.
Even though YOU did absolutely nothing wrong, your life would be ruined, you would lose your job, your wife would divorce you, and your friends would never again want to be seen in public with you. But that would totally be OK with you if it taught your coworkers a vague philosophical lesson, right?
(I hope your post was failed irony).
Posted by: Heather | March 11, 2010 5:14 PM
HAHAHA Only in the United States man. That's hilarious.
Talk about lemming syndrome... my god. You think that what? because a kid TOUCHED the drug she's an accomplice? Maybe if she was trafficing I would agree... but she simply refused... she did the right thing. I can understand Zero tolerance, but that's just Zero Intelligence.
Posted by: Justin | March 11, 2010 5:15 PM
So.. When the kids got caught..
Doesn't that mean that a teacher or school personnel touched the drugs too?
So.. shouldn't they all be suspended?
I don't find the logic behind this.. :/
Posted by: Nywles | March 11, 2010 6:53 PM
The "drugs" in question were most likely introduced into the school because the "drug dealing" child's parents were forced by the school system to be treated for ADHD because some teacher did not want to deal with a difficult child.
Posted by: James | March 11, 2010 9:13 PM
Philip IV (comment 13....how appropriate) is as big a moron as the stupidvisor that suspended the young lady. In his world "looking" like you're interested is grounds for punishment. I guess every student that looks at a nice car should be suspended for grand theft auto. Every boy that looks at a girl and every girl that looks at a boy should be suspended for lewd and lacivious acts at school. And what about sports? Does a football player get suspended for violence if he makes a hard tackle? Phillip IV you really need to get your head out of that dark smelly place and step into the real word. We're not living in the dark ages where people were guilty until proven innocent. We don't wrap women in chains and toss them in the water to see if they will float or drown to prove they are or are not witch's.....though it seems you'd probably think that a proper course of action. >.
Posted by: Dennis M. | March 11, 2010 9:31 PM
@Heather:
I believe that influencing the kids while they're young has more of an impact on the decisions they make in the future than trying to influence an adult of the same ideas that I've mentioned in my above post.
https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://www.actforyouth.net/documents/may02factsheetadolbraindev.pdf
Also, since she is not of legal age yet it would be better to enforce these punishments when they're younger so that they'd be less likely to make such decisions later in life because at legal age they can goto jail.
What if she actually bought the drugs (maybe even for the purpose of selling them herself), then got away with it? It would show that she has easily gotten away with a crime and perhaps encourage other people to buy/sell drugs due to conceived low risk.
This article seems biased w/o an explanation from the school. I would defer judgement until I get their side of the story.
Posted by: Daniel | March 11, 2010 11:09 PM
The administrators overseeing this situation seem entirely too focused on self-image, and on appearing "tough" on misconduct, to make rational decisions
VOICE YOURSELF.
Anonymous commenting gets you nowhere.
If you care to CONTACT the Greater Clark County School Board, in Jeffersonville, Indiana, the addresses are below.
______________________
CONTACT
Greater Clark County School Board
http://www.gcs.k12.in.us/content.asp?q_areaprimaryid=5
Martin Bell, Chief Operating Officer- 812 283-0701 x305
[email protected] -- who seems to have been the decider and enforcer of the girl's punishment
Dr Stephen Daeschner, Superintendent- 812 283-0701 x323
[email protected]
(Mr. Bell's superior)
Dr. Michael Denny, School Principal- (812) 288-4848
(I'm not sure of his stance)
[email protected]
Posted by: Elle | March 12, 2010 12:00 AM
What if she had handed it to a teacher ? Would the teacher be suspended for touching the drugs ? Did the principal touch the drugs ? Were police called and did they touch the drugs ? What about the pharmacist, the doctor, the manufacturer? Come on people !!!! I took a leak this morning but did I expose myself ? I glanced at my secretary's ass, did I sodomize her ? This is absurd. What is happening to this country ?
Posted by: j martin | March 12, 2010 12:14 AM
Hell, the way their policy reads, anyone taking medication in school at all is going to be suspended. I take barbituates daily in order to function properly. So, by their standards, if I take my medication and come to school, I can be suspended. That's...logical.
This story almost makes me glad that you could pretty much shoot up in the lobby of my high school and face no repercussions. They simply told to you go down to the nurse's office and dispose of the needle in the sharps jar..
Posted by: Kitty | March 12, 2010 1:41 AM
This only makes sense if they were punishing her for not turning in her classmates. I went to a private school with a strict zero tolerance policy. I remember one year about 20 kids were expelled all at once. Only two students were actually doing drugs on campus; the rest simply knew about it and were punished for not speaking up. It is harsh, but there's some reasoning to it. Kids will be aware of the fact that their classmates who know about or witness them doing drugs on campus will be more likely to turn them in, and that discourages the behavior even more.
Considering this girl would have received the same punishment even if she had turned in her classmates, this is pure stupidity. My school's administrators were strict, but they retained the ability to use their brains and think - they would never have punished a student for someone else putting the pill in contact with his skin, especially since the girl made the correct decision and gave the pill back. Sounds like a case of power-hungry vapid administrators who will jump on any excuse to stroke their egos.
Posted by: Mark | March 12, 2010 3:26 AM
Zero tolerance is really a no tolerance policy for our own human frailties. However, the zero tolerance statutes do allow administrators to evaluate cases individually. Administrators who can't think or apply logic and reason really should be removed from the system as they do more harm than good. As well the policy should be rewritten and the word "handles" needs to be defined. I would interpret handling in this case to mean receiving drugs with the intent of ingesting. If she gave it back obviously she had no intention of taking it. For the purpose of influencing this child so that she does not entertain the idea I think she should have a consequence. She must have been entertaining the idea or she would not have received the drug in the first place. She could have held her hand back. While there should be a consequence she should not be excluded from the opportunity to learn and certainly not for five days. We know that children who can not compete academically are at risk for the juvenile justice system, the criminal justice system or the department of vital statistics and missing out on opportunities to learn puts children at risk for anyone of the above. We have got to get smarter and wiser as adults about the decisions we make and the overall impact they have on society. Check the stats regarding Zero Tolerance which schools quickly adopted after the Columbine tragedy. Has it made a difference? At face value I would say no but it would be interesting to know. By the way I am a Masters Level Social Worker, working on an ED.S in School Administration, former school board member and consultant and have studied the Zero Tolerance Laws so I am not just making statements with no reference point.
Posted by: Linda E. MSW,LICSW | March 12, 2010 4:02 AM
My brain hurts! Ow!
Posted by: Richard H | March 12, 2010 8:53 AM
Hey, Linda E., does School Administrator training consist of hitting you in the head with a tack hammer? Because your suggestion that the girl must have been "entertaining" the idea of taking the drug is as retarded as the actions of these school officials.
What is it about entering "Administration" that makes people lose their damn minds?
Posted by: Michael Cozens | March 12, 2010 9:11 AM
@Daniel,
I reiterate, THE GIRL DID NOTHING WRONG. "Influencing them on the impact of their decisions" or "enforcing punishments" only works if there was actually a transgression! You are implying that this is somehow 'good' because the kids are young and impressionable, but all it does is teach the kids that laws are arbitrary, authorities are corrupt and irrational, and that they are actually better off breaking the law because they are going to be punished whether they abide by it or not! Why do you think this country is so cynical? Precisely because we DO learn these lessons young.
You are completely missing the point here. There is no learning opportunity here except "doing the right thing" doesn't matter. As a previous poster asked, is there ANYTHING she could have done to avoid suspension in this case? NO! Therefore, the lesson she has probably learned from all this is that she should have just taken the drugs, considering she'd be punished whether or not she did. And we do know the school's side of the story: they admitted they suspended her even though her only crime was touching something.
Posted by: Heather | March 12, 2010 10:10 AM
I would use the suspension and take my daughter to Disney or Cedar Point. Use it to her benefit. School officials are on a power trip, someone needs to humble them. Anyway, I would reward my daughter on her suspension just to let her know she did the right thing!
Posted by: Josh | March 12, 2010 11:37 AM
The zero-tolerance policy for rule breakers must be enforced every time to preserve the children's respect for the public school's policy makers. I have recently learned that many municipalities have traces of a wide variety of prescription drugs in their water supplies. Obviously, all public schools in those areas should be vacated immediately and permanently because it is very unlikely that all traces of those drugs can ever be completely eliminated. Besides ... it seems obvious that the people in this country behaved much more intelligently before the government decided that it needed to get involved in education.
Posted by: dave | March 12, 2010 1:27 PM
Wow. That'll teach her to not just take the damn drugs next time! May as well, gonna get in trouble for it anyways. That pill wouldn't make the stupid go away, but it sure will help make it a lot more tolerable. That's why parents feed their kids those bs chemicals in the first place. What a sorry bunch of ass-scratching monkey officials. I hope the parents reward her. She deserves it, turn that suspension into a reward. Make lemonade.
Posted by: tHe dOll | March 12, 2010 5:16 PM
LAWSUIT! Sue that stupid school out of existence. You cannot lose.
Posted by: Scott | March 12, 2010 7:23 PM