sue the school that doesn't make sure you go?
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,919
Likes: 0
From: Western Massachusetts
sue the school that doesn't make sure you go?
There is a lawsuit just filed in my city. Apparently the suit is on behalf five students who have been removed from rolls because they've missed one hundred of the one hundred-eighty day school year. The suit is trying to get them reenrolled, and perhaps monitaty compensation. Some details can't be discussed yet.
I'm curious what some of you think of a situation like this. I'm a tax payer in this city. I don't think defending the city in court or paying some lowlife teenager is what our tax dollars should be spent on.
Do you think it's the city and states responsibility to make sure that kids get to school every day? Do you think that the parents should be at all responsible for getting their kids to school every day?
Is this worthy of disscussion?
I'm curious what some of you think of a situation like this. I'm a tax payer in this city. I don't think defending the city in court or paying some lowlife teenager is what our tax dollars should be spent on.
Do you think it's the city and states responsibility to make sure that kids get to school every day? Do you think that the parents should be at all responsible for getting their kids to school every day?
Originally Posted by The Republican
Councilor seeks help with suit
Wednesday, October 18, 2006
By MIKE PLAISANCE
mplaisance@repub.com
SPRINGFIELD - A city councilor is asking the state and courts to help with an unusual lawsuit filed against the city.
The suit contends the city is at fault for removing from the eligible student list the names of five juveniles who each missed more than 100 days in the 2005-2006 school year. The entire school year is 180 days.
Councilor Timothy J. Rooke wants the Department of Social Services to inspect the homes of the five juveniles to see why parents or guardians so often failed to get them to school.
He also has asked the city Law Department to study whether the gross truancy problem can be dealt with by filing Child In Need of Services petitions in court.
"It is not the city's fault that they're dropped from the rolls. They're dropped from the city's enrollment if they missed 100 days out of 180 days. There has to be some personal responsibility among the students and the guardians," Rooke said on Monday.
The suit filed in August in U.S. District Court asks the court to stop the School Department practice of deleting from the rolls the names of truant students who are absent for 15 straight days.
The suit names as defendants the city, the public schools, the School Committee and Superintendent Joseph P. Burke.
Bryon K. Clauson, the West Springfield lawyer who filed the suit, said Rooke's ideas are both good, but he questioned why the city and the state have let the truancy problem get so big.
The law requires that juveniles attend school.
But the accumulation of more than 100 missed school days proves that the School Department's procedure for dealing with such truancy, including home visits and contacting guardians, is at best incomplete, Clauson said.
Lack of follow-through on truancy cases is a problem, and a common complaint is the Department of Social Services doesn't do anything, Clauson said. "Well, make them do something."
Clauson said he was unable to discuss specifics of the case, including who prompted him to file the suit and whether he is getting paid or doing it pro bono. The reason is the court determined the case is confidential, because the plaintiffs are juveniles.
Denise Monteiro, spokeswoman for the Department of Social Services, said the department could get involved in the case and might already be involved, but she was unable to say without the juveniles' names.
Wednesday, October 18, 2006
By MIKE PLAISANCE
mplaisance@repub.com
SPRINGFIELD - A city councilor is asking the state and courts to help with an unusual lawsuit filed against the city.
The suit contends the city is at fault for removing from the eligible student list the names of five juveniles who each missed more than 100 days in the 2005-2006 school year. The entire school year is 180 days.
Councilor Timothy J. Rooke wants the Department of Social Services to inspect the homes of the five juveniles to see why parents or guardians so often failed to get them to school.
He also has asked the city Law Department to study whether the gross truancy problem can be dealt with by filing Child In Need of Services petitions in court.
"It is not the city's fault that they're dropped from the rolls. They're dropped from the city's enrollment if they missed 100 days out of 180 days. There has to be some personal responsibility among the students and the guardians," Rooke said on Monday.
The suit filed in August in U.S. District Court asks the court to stop the School Department practice of deleting from the rolls the names of truant students who are absent for 15 straight days.
The suit names as defendants the city, the public schools, the School Committee and Superintendent Joseph P. Burke.
Bryon K. Clauson, the West Springfield lawyer who filed the suit, said Rooke's ideas are both good, but he questioned why the city and the state have let the truancy problem get so big.
The law requires that juveniles attend school.
But the accumulation of more than 100 missed school days proves that the School Department's procedure for dealing with such truancy, including home visits and contacting guardians, is at best incomplete, Clauson said.
Lack of follow-through on truancy cases is a problem, and a common complaint is the Department of Social Services doesn't do anything, Clauson said. "Well, make them do something."
Clauson said he was unable to discuss specifics of the case, including who prompted him to file the suit and whether he is getting paid or doing it pro bono. The reason is the court determined the case is confidential, because the plaintiffs are juveniles.
Denise Monteiro, spokeswoman for the Department of Social Services, said the department could get involved in the case and might already be involved, but she was unable to say without the juveniles' names.
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 705
Likes: 42
Now that is some crazy crap...
Throw the parents in jail for the 100 days the kids missed, then allow the kids back in school. We used to have reformatories for such delinquents, now you can't send them "up the river" for non-attendance. Somehow the law needs to link the parents to the kids behavior.
Throw the parents in jail for the 100 days the kids missed, then allow the kids back in school. We used to have reformatories for such delinquents, now you can't send them "up the river" for non-attendance. Somehow the law needs to link the parents to the kids behavior.
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,919
Likes: 0
From: Western Massachusetts
It just seems a little ironic. We're in a day and age where people are complaining that their civil liberties are being violated. People complain about "illegal" domestic spy programs. People protest the "powers that be" left and right because of what they are doing to "hold us down". Then, on the local level, we have people complaing that the city and state didn't "interfere" enough to get these kids to go to school. If fact, this suit contends that the city and state are liable.
Can we have it both ways? I don't see how it can work.
I hope that this gets laughed out of court but this is Massachussetts. The hearts bleed here. I guess we'll see.
Can we have it both ways? I don't see how it can work.
I hope that this gets laughed out of court but this is Massachussetts. The hearts bleed here. I guess we'll see.