WHAT IS WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE?
An elementary school teacher threatens to take away a child’s lunch since the child is playing with the food rather than eating the food.
The child objects and, according to police reports, hits, kicks, and bites the teacher and pulls her hair.
This child is arrested, cuffed, and “Baker acted”1.”
The child’s parents start looking for an attorney to sue the school.
AND IN THE NEXT day's news, it turns out the child whose parents threaten to sue, is a recidivist! A 7 year-old recidivist.
WHAT HAPPENED TO PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITY?
If the 7 year old learns anything from this incident it is that his parents will defend him no matter how dangerous he is – to himself and others.
Meanwhile, the teacher is threatening to file a criminal complaint.
The child is not, at least according to the tv news 2, above average in height and weight. Surely the teacher could have subdued the child, but then the parents would be filing a criminal complaint against the teacher as well as looking to sue the teacher and school system (taxpayers).
Many organizations consider that a child at age 7 has reached a level of reasoning. This child’s reasoning, apparently, is that it is OK to assault and batter3anyone who dares discipline him.
That is a learned trait.
Too many adults and children seem to think they are “entitled” to do whatever they wish whenever they wish, regardless of the consequences for someone else.
Recidivists who continue to drive “under the influence.” Who continue to assault and batter others in response to real or imagined insults.
Leaned traits.
How are the traits learned? Through parental failures.
When parents rush to their child’s defense and threaten the victim, something is wrong.
This is nothing new.
In 1970 a child stole my car.
The car was recovered – and impounded.
I happened to be at the police station when the child was brought in with his father.
The father told me “Nothing will be done to the boy.”
I never found out if the father was right (probably), but I did have to pay to get my car back.
I wonder if the young auto thief graduated to bigger and better things – assault and battery, murder?
His father gave no indication that he was displeased with his son’s joy ride in my car.
Defending a child’s misdeeds is NOT a parent’s job. Teaching the child that anti-social behavior is not acceptable IS a parent’s job.
It also is a parent’s job to defend the child against injustices to the child from any source: another child or an adult, or even “the system.”
At 7 years old, a child should have some idea of respect for others; if nothing else, the child who was hauled away in handcuffs lacked respect for others.
No one ever said being a parent was easy.
Blaming others for a child’s behavior only encourages the child to continue his or her anti-social path.
I’m sure the “Baker acted” child’s parents will find a lawyer to sue “the world” – the teacher, the school administration, the school board, the cops, and maybe even the company that made the car in which the child was transported.
Meanwhile the teacher who was battered may want to consider a civil suit for physical and mental injuries caused by the “entitled” child.
Resources
1. Baker act: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_Mental_Health_Act (Most states have similar laws)
2. TV report & video: http://tinyurl.com/y8nqx2o4
3. Assault & battery:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/assault_and_battery
PLAGIARISM is the act of appropriating the literary composition of another, or parts or passages of his writings, or the ideas or language of the same, and passing them off as the product of one’s own mind.
No comments:
Post a Comment