MyAnimeList.net

Forums

Recent Posts | My Watched Topics | My Ignored Topics | Search

Honor student with two jobs gets jail time for missing school

Pages (2) [1] 2 »
#1
05-28-12, 11:15 AM

Offline
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 2863
So I found this interesting story today. What say you guys on this topic?

http://abcnews.go.com/US/texas-honor-student-jobs-jailed-missing-school/story?id=16437893#.T8O_QMWwUo4
Modified by TravSavage, 05-28-12, 11:30 AM
 
#2
05-28-12, 11:32 AM

Offline
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 1968
*sigh*

Sums up my thoughts. Instead of using force and threats, why not make school attractive instead?
I have my own anime blog. It's called Anime Viking. Hope you'll you read it!

 
#3
05-28-12, 11:33 AM

Online
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 12858
TravSavage said:
So I found this interesting story today. What say you guys on this topic?

http://abcnews.go.com/US/texas-honor-student-jobs-jailed-missing-school/story?id=16437893#.T8O_QMWwUo4


It depends. The article says that her father is working late. That means he also brings money to the family. So does she really need those two jobs? We don't know because we weren't there.
 
#4
05-28-12, 11:35 AM

Offline
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 1712
I feel so bad for her. I mean, I understand that they are required to have consequences for kids missing too much school, because they can get in a lot of trouble for overlooking truancy, but putting her in jail? I mean, she sounds like she works harder than anybody I know. She doesn't deserve that shit.

Lol, figures that the judge's name is Moriarty. It fits him.
 
#5
05-28-12, 11:39 AM

Online
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 12858
A law that puts you in jail for missing school is stupid though. Who the fuck thought of that? In the school i went missing school too much meant you stay in the same class next year not hanging out with criminals.
 
#6
05-28-12, 11:42 AM

Offline
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 300
Judge Moriarty told KHOU 11 News that he intended to make an example of Tran.
"If you let one run loose, what are you going to do with the rest of them? Let them go, too?" Moriarty asked the TV station.

Run loose? What, like an animal? A slave? Is the kid running away for home? No. :rolleyes: One of the journalists should question the language used by this "judge."

In addition to working at Elliot's wedding-planning venue, Tran works full-time at a dry cleaners. She has been supporting an older brother and a younger sister since her parents separated and her mother relocated out of state, Elliot said. Her father often works too late to come home, so she sometimes lives with Elliot's daughter.

Is that a kid "running loose"?

Just a reminder that everytime some lawmakers in the US pass a law in the pretense of "protecting the children," more often the laws would be used against the children.
 
#7
05-28-12, 11:49 AM

Offline
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 245
I don't think that they should have thrown her in jail. I can understand if they punished her by suspending her or something around the sort. But putting her in jail was completely unnecessary, especially with her current situation.
 
#8
05-28-12, 11:52 AM

Offline
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 2863
rodentqween99 said:
I don't think that they should have thrown her in jail. I can understand if they punished her by suspending her or something around the sort. But putting her in jail was completely unnecessary, especially with her current situation.


Not to mention she was also fined $100. This plus the fact that this little black mark will be with her the rest of her life is pretty awful.
 
#9
05-28-12, 12:04 PM

Offline
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 4380
Monad said:
TravSavage said:
So I found this interesting story today. What say you guys on this topic?

http://abcnews.go.com/US/texas-honor-student-jobs-jailed-missing-school/story?id=16437893#.T8O_QMWwUo4


It depends. The article says that her father is working late. That means he also brings money to the family. So does she really need those two jobs? We don't know because we weren't there.


How many people do you know who work 2 jobs if they don't need too?
"If you love someone
Follow your heart
Cause love comes once
If you’re lucky enough"
 
05-28-12, 12:04 PM

Offline
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 3078
Due to her circumstances, I would think the School would actually accommodate her—in that they give her more days to miss (definitely since she's a straight-A student), or at least allow her to make up those classes missed. The fact that she works two jobs is confusing, considering her father works as well. If the family is in such desperate need for monetary support, welfare is an alternative. Which leads me to believe her father's probably an alcoholic, and thus spends the majority of his earnings on alcohol.

Anyways, the world is laden with unfairness and inequality. It's a pretty rotten punishment—the fact that she was even punished is rotten itself—but you have to remember that the reality of this kind of attitude is shared amongst most of the global population in some way or another (I'm not going to say this behaviour is exclusive to America, because it isn't). The world is shit... Gotta deal with it ("^__^)
 
05-28-12, 12:13 PM

Offline
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 214
The judge was a dick. To put it bluntly.

He wanted to make an example of a student missing school, that's fine, but not her. Basically he's saying that you can't help family, that what she is doing is wrong. That is what the punishment looks like. You punish the ones who are doing something illegal, or just plain skipping because they don't like to go to school, or are in gangs, or whatever.

Punishing an Honor student who, as they said gets STRAIGHT A's, and still goes the extra mile and helps their own family get by. That's just being a dick for the hell of it. He abused his power, I don't care if there is a rule that means she must have been punished, he took it too far. Who in their right mind would punish her for this?

I never supported any rule for attendance. It's silly. If you can ace the class without attending it then is it really your fault for not attending? College luckily moves away from that idea.

Attendance is just a method to keep the people who would otherwise fail, or drop out, in school. I always thought it was stupid to fail a class because you didn't attend although having perfect grades, while someone who attended every class could pass with the lowest passing grades (in my school it was a D).

There was little sense when that rule was created.
 
05-28-12, 12:14 PM

Offline
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 2390
TravSavage said:
rodentqween99 said:
I don't think that they should have thrown her in jail. I can understand if they punished her by suspending her or something around the sort. But putting her in jail was completely unnecessary, especially with her current situation.


Not to mention she was also fined $100. This plus the fact that this little black mark will be with her the rest of her life is pretty awful.


I thought your slate gets cleared when you turn 18.
Modified by Scooch, 05-28-12, 12:18 PM
 
05-28-12, 12:15 PM

Offline
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 2602
Jail time for school absences is ridiculous to begin with. I mean, seriously?
Is school even mandatory at age 17 in Texas?
 
05-28-12, 12:17 PM

Offline
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 3078
Bork said:
TravSavage said:
rodentqween99 said:
I don't think that they should have thrown her in jail. I can understand if they punished her by suspending her or something around the sort. But putting her in jail was completely unnecessary, especially with her current situation.


Not to mention she was also fined $100. This plus the fact that this little black mark will be with her the rest of her life is pretty awful.


I thought your slate gets cleared when you turn 18.

They do. Rodent doesn't know what he's talking about :P
 
05-28-12, 12:34 PM

Offline
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 1488
Justice in its brightest light...
 
05-28-12, 12:38 PM

Online
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 1831
Kinda retarded. When one is skipping school too much only kicking out of school the the person who is doing that comes to mind, but hey, here they jailed someone for it....
 
05-28-12, 12:43 PM

Offline
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 3765
That's what you get when you don't pay taxes.
 
05-28-12, 12:50 PM

Offline
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 2863
lucjan said:
Bork said:
TravSavage said:
rodentqween99 said:
I don't think that they should have thrown her in jail. I can understand if they punished her by suspending her or something around the sort. But putting her in jail was completely unnecessary, especially with her current situation.


Not to mention she was also fined $100. This plus the fact that this little black mark will be with her the rest of her life is pretty awful.


I thought your slate gets cleared when you turn 18.

They do. Rodent doesn't know what he's talking about :P


Yup, you're right. My error, haha.
 
05-28-12, 12:54 PM

Offline
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 245
lucjan said:
Bork said:
TravSavage said:
rodentqween99 said:
I don't think that they should have thrown her in jail. I can understand if they punished her by suspending her or something around the sort. But putting her in jail was completely unnecessary, especially with her current situation.


Not to mention she was also fined $100. This plus the fact that this little black mark will be with her the rest of her life is pretty awful.


I thought your slate gets cleared when you turn 18.

They do. Rodent doesn't know what he's talking about :P

Please, if you are going to refer to me, at least get what I said right.
"This plus the fact that this little black mark will be with her the rest of her life is pretty awful" was not said by me.
No offense to who said it, I am just stating that it wasn't said by me.
 
05-28-12, 12:54 PM

Offline
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 3389
How will she go to school if she's in jail?
 
05-28-12, 1:21 PM

Offline
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 1307
A 24 hour jail... may be on weekend.
 
05-28-12, 1:47 PM
Forum Moderator
Offline
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 10922
The fug? Incarceration is unacceptable for such a petty "crime".

Just let her do community service. :/
 
05-28-12, 1:55 PM

Offline
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 4915
I Hate America for these kinds of things. Oh, and rick perry. Idiots.

For those of you in the U.S with a sense of intelligence, I hope you one day manage to change your rotten society.
 
05-28-12, 1:55 PM

Offline
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 1712
Tachii said:
The fug? Incarceration is unacceptable for such a petty "crime".

Just let her do community service. :/


Even that is too much, considering she hasn't really done anything wrong.
 
05-28-12, 2:13 PM

Offline
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 3402
TravSavage said:
This plus the fact that this little black mark will be with her the rest of her life is pretty awful.
That little black mark will go away when she turns 18.



And someone already said the same thing...


 
05-28-12, 2:20 PM

Offline
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 2343
The law is the law. She'd already been warned before not to miss anymore school. And really, you have to question whether or not she really needed those two jobs because all the details of her family life aren't given. Maybe she did, but then again her father was working also, and she did have a relative that she could rely on from time to time.

Not to mention it was only 24 hours and it'll be cleared from her record in about a year. The judge probably did want to make an example, and it the best example to make of a situation is to use someone that people wouldn't expect, right?

Call me heartless or whatever-- but as far as I'm concerned, the court nor the school is in the wrong here. Schools can't just ignore truancies. In my state it's 15 truancies before you get the cops at your doorstep. It just happened to some girl at my school last week I think.

G-O-L-F-dub-A-N-G
 
05-28-12, 2:20 PM

Offline
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 357
Just goes to show; people are haters.
The judge was only enforcing said law on the girl to make himself feel powerful, and the only one hurt here is said girl.

I think they should string that judge up by his toes and make him apologize to the whole family for messing with their way of life.

Butt the hell out.

It should be law that you can't punish a straight A student for not attending school.
 
05-28-12, 2:29 PM

Offline
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 2144
pendragonuzumaki said:
Schools can't just ignore truancies.


Indeed not; they need to inquire about the causes of truancy, explain to the child the benefits of education, consult with the parents about the situation, see if there are special circumstances that prevent the child from going to school and make a plan on how to deal with them, call relevant social services if the family is dysfunctional and work together with them to ensure the child's well being and provide shelter and understanding in case nothing else can be done.

Or yes they can throw the child in jail.
 
05-28-12, 2:38 PM

Offline
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 2195
To be honest, I find myself siding with the decision of the judge here.

Think about it, if this girl is working two jobs at once she might actually raise enough money to pay her own way through college or university; and since she is getting A grades it's unlikely she'll be unable to get into university either.

We can't be letting a poor person get into an American university. We can't have people climbing the social ladder, we need to perpuate a system whereby your entire life is effectively determined by the position of your parents. Giving people the opportunity to actually work there way upwards would destroy the fabric of our society.

I am a white male without much in the way of initiative or ability. But thanks to my birthright as a white male of middle class background, it doesn't matter much, because I can still have my dad call in favours or find loopholes to ensure my place at the top of the social foodchain. It's people like her who are making my life that little bit more difficult and putting the pressure on me to actually acheive something with my life that makes me fear for the future. Sure, there are numerous advantages I have over her in every single aspect of my life and she has still managed to outperform me, but while i have the expectation to acheieve everything in life, she doesn't.

By robbing me of that, she will enjoy her own prosperity, but at the cost of making my life a misery. While if we maintain the status quo, I get what I want and she gets what she expected. When we consider all the options, surely we all agree that is the fairest option available?

So I hope they throw the book at her, a brat like her ought to know her place. Long live the era of status as a means of social discrimination, and may we never have to experience an age where merit determines where you end up in life.
 
05-28-12, 2:42 PM

Offline
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 2343
hentai_proxy said:
pendragonuzumaki said:
Schools can't just ignore truancies.


Indeed not; they need to inquire about the causes of truancy, explain to the child the benefits of education, consult with the parents about the situation, see if there are special circumstances that prevent the child from going to school and make a plan on how to deal with them, call relevant social services if the family is dysfunctional and work together with them to ensure the child's well being and provide shelter and understanding in case nothing else can be done.

Or yes they can throw the child in jail.


And do that for every student with x amount of truancies? At what number is it the time to implement those steps? At 5 times? 7? And what about the kids who miss the same amount of school as Tran, but are smart enough to simply call in and excuse themselves within the 72 hour period so that they aren't marked truant? Does the school have a responsibility to them too?
And just so you know, schools cant call in social services like CPS unless the student explicitly expresses that something is wrong in their home life, whether through journal entries that they know a teacher will read or by talking to someone a part of the staff about it.

Students are made aware of the consequences from reoccuring truancy. They're readibly available by more than one means. If the school provides planners, all policies are in there. They're also online, in the attendance office, not to mention that before the school actually goes to file in court, letters are sent to students prior to the max number of truancies WARNING that the next step will be filing in court. It's more than likely that this student knew about the consequences that she was facing.

G-O-L-F-dub-A-N-G
 
05-28-12, 2:49 PM

Offline
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 15086
Lol, I was expecting this to be about North Korea or something when I read the title. I knew America has some really questionable laws, but this one is just hilariously retarded. Talk about disproportionate intervention in the personal sphere. Human rights courts would have a field day with this.

Eigi man ek þá lǫg jómsvikinga ef ek kviði við bana eða mæla ek æðruorð. Eitt sinn skal hverr deyja
 
05-28-12, 2:52 PM
Forum Moderator
Offline
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 10922
ycart59 said:
Tachii said:
The fug? Incarceration is unacceptable for such a petty "crime".

Just let her do community service. :/


Even that is too much, considering she hasn't really done anything wrong.
Well, I'm just saying the most they should be able to do is community service. Anything else hardly makes any sense, no matter what her situation was.
 
05-28-12, 2:54 PM

Offline
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 3078
AnnoKano said:
To be honest, I find myself siding with the decision of the judge here.

Think about it, if this girl is working two jobs at once she might actually raise enough money to pay her own way through college or university; and since she is getting A grades it's unlikely she'll be unable to get into university either.

We can't be letting a poor person get into an American university. We can't have people climbing the social ladder, we need to perpuate a system whereby your entire life is effectively determined by the position of your parents. Giving people the opportunity to actually work there way upwards would destroy the fabric of our society.

I am a white male without much in the way of initiative or ability. But thanks to my birthright as a white male of middle class background, it doesn't matter much, because I can still have my dad call in favours or find loopholes to ensure my place at the top of the social foodchain. It's people like her who are making my life that little bit more difficult and putting the pressure on me to actually acheive something with my life that makes me fear for the future. Sure, there are numerous advantages I have over her in every single aspect of my life and she has still managed to outperform me, but while i have the expectation to acheieve everything in life, she doesn't.

By robbing me of that, she will enjoy her own prosperity, but at the cost of making my life a misery. While if we maintain the status quo, I get what I want and she gets what she expected. When we consider all the options, surely we all agree that is the fairest option available?

So I hope they throw the book at her, a brat like her ought to know her place. Long live the era of status as a means of social discrimination, and may we never have to experience an age where merit determines where you end up in life.

 
05-28-12, 3:00 PM

Offline
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 2144
pendragonuzumaki said:
hentai_proxy said:
pendragonuzumaki said:
Schools can't just ignore truancies.


Indeed not; they need to inquire about the causes of truancy, explain to the child the benefits of education, consult with the parents about the situation, see if there are special circumstances that prevent the child from going to school and make a plan on how to deal with them, call relevant social services if the family is dysfunctional and work together with them to ensure the child's well being and provide shelter and understanding in case nothing else can be done.

Or yes they can throw the child in jail.


And do that for every student with x amount of truancies? At what number is it the time to implement those steps? At 5 times? 7? And what about the kids who miss the same amount of school as Tran, but are smart enough to simply call in and excuse themselves within the 72 hour period so that they aren't marked truant? Does the school have a responsibility to them too?
And just so you know, schools cant call in social services like CPS unless the student explicitly expresses that something is wrong in their home life, whether through journal entries that they know a teacher will read or by talking to someone a part of the staff about it.

Students are made aware of the consequences from reoccuring truancy. They're readibly available by more than one means. If the school provides planners, all policies are in there. They're also online, in the attendance office, not to mention that before the school actually goes to file in court, letters are sent to students prior to the max number of truancies WARNING that the next step will be filing in court. It's more than likely that this student knew about the consequences that she was facing.


So you are saying that since schools do not have the resources to do the right thing, they should adopt an arbitrary punishment like throwing the kid in jail? If some measure needs to be taken to reform (not 'punish') the student, I think repeating a year is reasonable enough. I do not know much about the educational system in the US, but linking truancy to a prison sentence (even if it is just a day) seems to me silly at best. Mechanisms from within the education establishment should deal with these issues.

Next, you say that students are made aware of consequences. I never claimed otherwise. On the contrary, since the student is indeed aware of the consequences but still chooses to be truant, there is even greater need to look closely at the situation. If some psychological condition or family situation or character trait causes the kid not to go to school, will a prison sentence fix what is wrong?

By the way, since I don't have any experience with the US education system, what happens if the kid continues to be truant after jail?
 
05-28-12, 3:16 PM

Offline
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 824
@hentai We're talking state laws here, there is no federal mandate. Take my state of Washington for example the state law is that you have to be in school if under 18, but there are three area's outlined in the law that can excuse you from attendance.

1.Are incapable of attending school due to medical or mental reasons.
2.Are at least 16-years old and are regularly employed, and have the permission of a parent/guardian to work in lieu of attending school.
3.Have met the educational requirements (GED, or other means found acceptable to the Superintendent).

Had she lived here she would have potentially fallen under #2.
As far as punishment the law is listed as

Children found to be in violation of the Compulsory Attendance law may be subject to a truancy petition filed with the Superior Court. The Court may order a child to attend school, and if the child willfully violates the Court's order, the Court may take whatever actions necessary to insure compliance and regular school attendance. These actions may include community service, wearing an ankle monitor, participating in a work crew, or even detention in a juvenile detention facility.


The state in question here though (Texas) laws are similar although it does not allow for #2, so there really wasn't any defense for her to use legally, although as many have already said, there should have been an allowance made for her circumstances regardless.

 
05-28-12, 3:23 PM

Offline
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 2343
hentai_proxy said:
pendragonuzumaki said:
hentai_proxy said:
pendragonuzumaki said:
Schools can't just ignore truancies.


Indeed not; they need to inquire about the causes of truancy, explain to the child the benefits of education, consult with the parents about the situation, see if there are special circumstances that prevent the child from going to school and make a plan on how to deal with them, call relevant social services if the family is dysfunctional and work together with them to ensure the child's well being and provide shelter and understanding in case nothing else can be done.

Or yes they can throw the child in jail.


And do that for every student with x amount of truancies? At what number is it the time to implement those steps? At 5 times? 7? And what about the kids who miss the same amount of school as Tran, but are smart enough to simply call in and excuse themselves within the 72 hour period so that they aren't marked truant? Does the school have a responsibility to them too?
And just so you know, schools cant call in social services like CPS unless the student explicitly expresses that something is wrong in their home life, whether through journal entries that they know a teacher will read or by talking to someone a part of the staff about it.

Students are made aware of the consequences from reoccuring truancy. They're readibly available by more than one means. If the school provides planners, all policies are in there. They're also online, in the attendance office, not to mention that before the school actually goes to file in court, letters are sent to students prior to the max number of truancies WARNING that the next step will be filing in court. It's more than likely that this student knew about the consequences that she was facing.


So you are saying that since schools do not have the resources to do the right thing, they should adopt an arbitrary punishment like throwing the kid in jail? If some measure needs to be taken to reform (not 'punish') the student, I think repeating a year is reasonable enough. I do not know much about the educational system in the US, but linking truancy to a prison sentence (even if it is just a day) seems to me silly at best. Mechanisms from within the education establishment should deal with these issues.

Next, you say that students are made aware of consequences. I never claimed otherwise. On the contrary, since the student is indeed aware of the consequences but still chooses to be truant, there is even greater need to look closely at the situation. If some psychological condition or family situation or character trait causes the kid not to go to school, will a prison sentence fix what is wrong?

By the way, since I don't have any experience with the US education system, what happens if the kid continues to be truant after jail?


Well one, that's not what I said at all.. I don't think I ever mentioned that the school didn't have the resources to do those. But rather, they don't have that responsibility. Schools do have guidance counselors, but adopting a school policy for (for lack of a better word) dealing with every truant as you've suggested is too much of a hassle. That's not to say that schools don't care about the well being of their students--I've seen first hand that they do. Teachers that are concerned about their students or anyother staff will notify the guidance councelor and they'll speak with the students. Or if the student reaches out, then they won't be ignored. But to treat every truant with those measures is resource and time consuming when the bottom line--that truancy will be punished--- has been made clear in numerous ways.

And two, the girl was NOT thrown in prison. It was jail. There is a big difference. State and federal prisons are for people who commit crimes above misdemeanors and serve for over a year. They are much worse in terms of inmates and in terms of general inmate security. Someone in jail is a lot less likely to be harmed by another jail inmate versus two prison inmates.

And it seems you are mistaken. Not every truant who actually gets to the court stage goes to jail. This judge threw the book at her, and that's why she went to jail. Mostly people will receive fines, or punishment.

G-O-L-F-dub-A-N-G
 
05-28-12, 3:55 PM

Offline
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 10754
Here are the main fundamentals that intrigues me

Tran, 17, had already been warned not to miss any more time at her Houston-area school,

She ignored a warning from the government/school that they would punish her if she misses anymore lessons again, to which she did

She has been supporting an older brother and a younger sister since her parents separated and her mother relocated out of state, Elliot said. Her father often works too late to come home, so she sometimes lives with Elliot's daughter.

That is an unfortunate circumstance that she is in, however the family have to share the blame on her task of looking after the siblings, surely it would be justified to have one sibling going with their mother? There is no other choice if that occurs

he sent her to jail for 24 hours Wednesday

24 Hours is only for one whole day, it's not like she was sentenced to month or longer. But now she must re-think her lifestyle because of this, surely she won't be able to maintain herself in her circumstances whatsoever.. Being an honour student or not doesn't change a thing. She is still human after all.

When those close to Tran suggested she switch to home schooling, Tran refused because she wanted to be named among the top-10 students in her class just like her brother, Elliot said.

That to me seems selfish from her side, surely home school is her best option which still abides by the law. To be attending just for recognition for top 10? That is nonsense considering her position

Sadly law is law, when it says you must attend compulsory education I'm afraid we must abide by it

In my view though I don't think she thought things through well, But the law is a bit outrageous and you got to admire her commitment and effort to her cause. However if she continues like this, it won't be good for her mental health. I think she must change her lifestyle a bit, treating her education and her duties of looking after her siblings the same equality.
 
05-28-12, 3:57 PM

Offline
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 2144
pendragonuzumaki said:


Well one, that's not what I said at all.. I don't think I ever mentioned that the school didn't have the resources to do those. But rather, they don't have that responsibility. Schools do have guidance counselors, but adopting a school policy for (for lack of a better word) dealing with every truant as you've suggested is too much of a hassle. That's not to say that schools don't care about the well being of their students--I've seen first hand that they do. Teachers that are concerned about their students or anyother staff will notify the guidance councelor and they'll speak with the students. Or if the student reaches out, then they won't be ignored. But to treat every truant with those measures is resource and time consuming when the bottom line--that truancy will be punished--- has been made clear in numerous ways.

And two, the girl was NOT thrown in prison. It was jail. There is a big difference. State and federal prisons are for people who commit crimes above misdemeanors and serve for over a year. They are much worse in terms of inmates and in terms of general inmate security. Someone in jail is a lot less likely to be harmed by another jail inmate versus two prison inmates.

And it seems you are mistaken. Not every truant who actually gets to the court stage goes to jail. This judge threw the book at her, and that's why she went to jail. Mostly people will receive fines, or punishment.


First of all, I used prison and jail interchangeably, sorry; I meant jail, of course.

You say 'that is not what I said at all' and then you conclude the paragraph by saying "But to treat every truant with those measures is resource and time consuming when the bottom line--that truancy will be punished--- has been made clear in numerous ways." which describes exactly the refusal to allocate resources that I was criticizing.

You say 'they have no responsibility'; then why do they have the power to punish a truant student in this form? In the first place, who is the student harming other than themselves by not going to school? If this punishment is designed to prevent a student from harming themselves, they are implicitly assuming responsibility anyway; and since they are doing so, it is perfectly valid to examine the effectiveness of the measures they are taking. I am finding these measures horribly ineffective and so far I have not seen a counterargument.

'Schools do have guidance counselors, but adopting a school policy for (for lack of a better word) dealing with every truant as you've suggested is too much of a hassle.' And again that is my criticism: throwing them in jail is not too much of a hassle, so let's do that. That is not a defense of the practice in any way. And I acknowledge that individuals do try to help; but such an attitude by the establishment certainly does not help them help the students.

Finally, I never said that every truant goes to jail. I am criticizing the existence of this treatment as well as its enforcement in this particular case; and I would like to see a positive argument showing that jail time is either effective or reasonable.

I still have not received an answer: what happens if, after jail time, the student keeps being truant?

rekindledflame said:

As far as punishment the law is listed as

Children found to be in violation of the Compulsory Attendance law may be subject to a truancy petition filed with the Superior Court. The Court may order a child to attend school, and if the child willfully violates the Court's order, the Court may take whatever actions necessary to insure compliance and regular school attendance. These actions may include community service, wearing an ankle monitor, participating in a work crew, or even detention in a juvenile detention facility.


I don't really understand the idea behind those punishments. But I do see a gradation, and it seems to me that the nastier punishments like detention were designed to deal with students who do much more than being truant, but cannot be charged for anything else; something like a little loophole allowing the court some flexibility in case of very badly behaving students. But 1) this is not the case here and 2) even if these harsh punishments are meant to deal with very nasty students, they are still a feeble substitute for a proper supervisory and counseling system.

rekindledflame said:

The state in question here though (Texas) laws are similar although it does not allow for #2, so there really wasn't any defense for her to use legally, although as many have already said, there should have been an allowance made for her circumstances regardless.


Yes, I understand, but I am criticizing the law itself as well as its enforcement in this case. 'A law is a law' until a better law replaces it. Doubting the merits of a law is not heresy, especially when more reasonable alternatives like repeating a year, changing schools, fining parents, contacting social services etc. exist. It is not too much of a hassle: most of Europe uses such measures to deal with truancy.
Modified by hentai_proxy, 05-28-12, 4:20 PM
 
05-28-12, 4:18 PM

Offline
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 2441
LOL funny news i read in a while... and The most Retarded award goes to Judge Moriarty.
 
05-28-12, 4:20 PM

Offline
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 15086
Alfyan said:
24 Hours is only for one whole day, it's not like she was sentenced to month or longer. But now she must re-think her lifestyle because of this, surely she won't be able to maintain herself in her circumstances whatsoever.. Being an honour student or not doesn't change a thing. She is still human after all.
Actually, incarceration of any kind is still a pretty harsh punishment. There's been cases (Think it was in the ICJ) where the national government in question lost the case after the police had put some drunk person in arrest in order to sober up, for a mere 15 minutes over the legally allotted time (which would have been 6 hours or so if I recall). Obviously there weren't any reports of illegally extended incarceration here, but the example shows how serious incarceration is viewed.

Not to mention that in most every case the idea is that the breaches of the personal autonomy have to be proportionate to to the persons' offence. Now, I'm sure we can all make sense of putting a especially obnoxious drunk behind bars for some hours until he sobers up, or detain a dangerous suspect of a violent crime while awaiting trial, but what purpose does something like this serve at all? It does in no way help with the root of the problem, as there is no way of ensuring the trauntee in question actually does keep the schedule after those 24 hours. And that same limited time also clearly cuts down the effectiveness of individual prevention, as someone that purposefully skips school would be unlikely to give a shit at all. Similarly, the fear of 24 hours behind lock probably wouldn't scare the ones that are inclined to skip school because they don't give a shit.
Son I really can't see any logical reason for such a law, it seems like it would only punish people that make mistakes or are in a bad position, whilst the actually problematic and purposeful trauntees scoff at the whole thing.
Modified by Baman, 05-28-12, 4:27 PM

Eigi man ek þá lǫg jómsvikinga ef ek kviði við bana eða mæla ek æðruorð. Eitt sinn skal hverr deyja
 
05-28-12, 5:02 PM

Online
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 12858
NicoleB said:
Monad said:
TravSavage said:
So I found this interesting story today. What say you guys on this topic?

http://abcnews.go.com/US/texas-honor-student-jobs-jailed-missing-school/story?id=16437893#.T8O_QMWwUo4


It depends. The article says that her father is working late. That means he also brings money to the family. So does she really need those two jobs? We don't know because we weren't there.


How many people do you know who work 2 jobs if they don't need too?


Well i know people that work from day to night and they don't even need to work so who knows. Maybe she wants extra money and stuff. The thing is that i can't really say the judge is stupid without knowing what evidence were presented in-frond of him.
More ridiculous is the law by itself. Jail for missing school? Aren't jails supposed to be for criminals?
Modified by Monad, 05-28-12, 5:06 PM
 
05-28-12, 7:39 PM

Offline
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 2343
hentai_proxy said:

First of all, I used prison and jail interchangeably, sorry; I meant jail, of course.

You say 'that is not what I said at all' and then you conclude the paragraph by saying "But to treat every truant with those measures is resource and time consuming when the bottom line--that truancy will be punished--- has been made clear in numerous ways." which describes exactly the refusal to allocate resources that I was criticizing.

You say 'they have no responsibility'; then why do they have the power to punish a truant student in this form? In the first place, who is the student harming other than themselves by not going to school? If this punishment is designed to prevent a student from harming themselves, they are implicitly assuming responsibility anyway; and since they are doing so, it is perfectly valid to examine the effectiveness of the measures they are taking. I am finding these measures horribly ineffective and so far I have not seen a counterargument.

'Schools do have guidance counselors, but adopting a school policy for (for lack of a better word) dealing with every truant as you've suggested is too much of a hassle.' And again that is my criticism: throwing them in jail is not too much of a hassle, so let's do that. That is not a defense of the practice in any way. And I acknowledge that individuals do try to help; but such an attitude by the establishment certainly does not help them help the students.

Finally, I never said that every truant goes to jail. I am criticizing the existence of this treatment as well as its enforcement in this particular case; and I would like to see a positive argument showing that jail time is either effective or reasonable.

I still have not received an answer: what happens if, after jail time, the student keeps being truant?


That's not what I said at all Bbecause I didn't say that schools don't have the resources to use. Obviously they have staff, but staff is busy the entire day already and usually there are only one or two guidance counselors on campus. Two isn't enough to handle all of the habitually truant and those that are constantly excused-absentees. Despite having staff members, the school shouldn't have to devote anymore of them who aren't guidance counselors and who already have busy schedules, nor should they have to hire any new counselors on their low budgets when students are already aware of the consequences and of their actions. That is my argument.

Punishments need to be given out because what is the law without punishment or damages to it?
It is the law that all minors go to school unless they meet one of the few exempting circumstances that their state deems acceptable, and if they are habitually, there is a set of procedures that public schools must follow because they are under the jurisdiction of the state.

" And again that is my criticism: throwing them in jail is not too much of a hassle, so let's do that. "
Except that this ISN'T common practice. Throwing a truant student in jail since it's "not a hassle" isn't something that has been done in the past, not will it be frequently used in the future. Like I've stated before, and like the Judge his/herself has said, it was to make an example of this truant student to discourage anyone else. If people think that since this "honor" student can play truant anytime they want, then it'll be fine for anyone too.
Furthermore, since I've never heard of someone getting any jail time, I wouldn't know what the next punishment would be. I am not a judge nor am I a Texan. I only know that in my state, usually fines or community service is what's awarded, but there's also more severe punishments like a truancy prevention program (which I imagine would be like a DUI traffic program--hell) and a revocation of any driver's license or permits.

G-O-L-F-dub-A-N-G
 
05-28-12, 7:58 PM

Offline
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 2144
pendragonuzumaki said:
the school shouldn't have to devote anymore of them who aren't guidance counselors and who already have busy schedules, nor should they have to hire any new counselors on their low budgets when students are already aware of the consequences and of their actions. That is my argument.


When I said 'resources', of course I meant a comprehensive counselling and monitoring system and in this paragraph you explicitly state that they refuse to allocate such resources: " nor should they have to hire any new counselors on their low budgets when students are already aware of the consequences and of their actions". If they can effectively deal with the problems by enforcing those 'consequences' (and without creating other problems along the way!), then by all means you are right. But can they?

pendragonuzumaki said:

Punishments need to be given out because what is the law without punishment or damages to it?.


We (Baman, I, Monad, others above) are questioning the soundness and effectiveness of the law itself here. And we still see no counterarguments proving that this law is reasonable or effective.

In your wording: you talk about consequences. We are questioning the effectiveness and soundness of those consequences. Baman wrote down in detail some of the flaws in the law itself and I listed several alternative measures that can and are being used.

Edit: bad edit erased half the post :( sorry. Feel free to quote any previous versions that you may have read before this one.
Modified by hentai_proxy, 05-28-12, 8:33 PM
 
05-28-12, 8:39 PM

Offline
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 2343
I believe I did answer your argument. The schools have the power to because they are required to do so. It is that simple. Public schools are under the jurisdiction of the state. They cannot ignore state mandates. I cannot be more concrete about it.

And the truant student IS harming everyone who works under the school district. Not phsysically, but in a matter of the same degree. Do you know why schools stress attendance so much? For every student who attends school, daily, the school recieves money from the state. And for each and every student who doesn't come to school each and everyday, the school loses money. That money funds teacher work pay, school supplies, district employee payments, so it's a very important source. In the economy of today and the past, public schools are amoung the institutions that are suffering the most. Last year so many teachers at my high school recieved pink slips, and many new measures have been put in place to save money.
THIS is why it's such a big deal. Those students who don't go to school are costing the school money that's ultimately in the end, going towards benefiting all the kids who are sitting in school for an education. I might be wrong, but I think it's $80 per student per day in my school district.

edit: 80, not 800.
Modified by Emmrys, 05-28-12, 8:42 PM

G-O-L-F-dub-A-N-G
 
05-28-12, 8:50 PM

Online
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 3376
Alfyan said:
That to me seems selfish from her side, surely home school is her best option which still abides by the law. To be attending just for recognition for top 10? That is nonsense considering her position

Yeah, how dare she strive to be recognized as one of the best despite her tough situation. What a selfish woman.

Sadly law is law, when it says you must attend compulsory education I'm afraid we must abide by it

Law isn't absolute, why do you think we have judges? The judge could have given her leniency considering the circumstance, but chose not to.

When the law isn't serving it's purpose of protecting the innocent, then "law is law, what can ya do?" is not an excuse.
 
05-28-12, 8:54 PM

Offline
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 166
Read this on TL, it's a very rare situation that should be dealt with individually. Yes something should be done about it because it is true that you can't just let a truant be a truant, that's being inconsistent with the rules.

Something should be done, but I don't understand how this retarded judge thinks fining her $100 and putting her in jail for a night will solve anything.

-edit- There's a donation thing running for her that already raised like $30k and a ton of signatures so I wouldn't worry about her, she'll be fine, which is good because someone who works that hard for someone else definitely deserves it.
 
05-28-12, 8:59 PM

Offline
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 5193
Well as unfortunate as it is, it's the State law so can't do much about that.
Apparently they wanted to make an example out of her. Harsh. . . I guess it's kind of saying "Look don't skip school this girl skipped school and had good intentions for it, but the law bends for no one." I mean hell if I was ditching school for bad reasons and find out a student in my class who went to jail for ditching but had good intentions I'd probably sit my ass back in class.

Even though it's for her siblings it is TO MUCH for a 11th grade high schooler in my opinion. In a lot of the high schools where I live you have to have a decent GPA and tell the school you will be working and can only work a certain amount of hours. Also I thought minors were not allowed to work so many excessive hours?

I hope she might at least drop one job if anything. She may be doing fantastic in school still, but it doesn't mean she gets to skip/be late to class. By the looks of it she runs almost on no sleep at all. I think she's taking to much of the burden for her family as a high school student. It's amazing to see how much devotion she has though. I think one job would be enough I'm sure her dad doesn't work from morning to late at night for nothing.
Touch me, you filthy casual~
 
05-28-12, 8:59 PM

Offline
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 14804
It's unfair/ discussion.

More importantly, I love these threads that just sound like someone is plugging words into an outlandish story generator.

"____ with ______ gets ____ for ______"
 
05-28-12, 9:00 PM

Offline
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 2144
pendragonuzumaki said:
I believe I did answer your argument. The schools have the power to because they are required to do so. It is that simple. Public schools are under the jurisdiction of the state. They cannot ignore state mandates. I cannot be more concrete about it.

And the truant student IS harming everyone who works under the school district. Not phsysically, but in a matter of the same degree. Do you know why schools stress attendance so much? For every student who attends school, daily, the school recieves money from the state. And for each and every student who doesn't come to school each and everyday, the school loses money. That money funds teacher work pay, school supplies, district employee payments, so it's a very important source. In the economy of today and the past, public schools are amoung the institutions that are suffering the most. Last year so many teachers at my high school recieved pink slips, and many new measures have been put in place to save money.
THIS is why it's such a big deal. Those students who don't go to school are costing the school money that's ultimately in the end, going towards benefiting all the kids who are sitting in school for an education. I might be wrong, but I think it's $800 per student per day in my school district.


I do not entirely understand how this system works and why exactly the school is losing money through truant students. So if a student comes to class on day A, we get $800. If they don't come, we don't get $800 that day. But what is that $800 for? If it is for the student, then the lack of these resources do not harm anybody else. If it is not just for the student, then why link all this money to the attendance or lack thereof of the specific student at the specific day? And withhold them if they don't come on that specific day? This method of funding seems to me bizarre to say the least. But your post clearly proves that, under that bizarre funding system, more people are harmed than just the student, I acknowledge that.

And here we come to the question which by now I am tired asking and still don't have an answer: do you have a counterargument showing that the law to deal with this problem is effective or reasonable? That is everybody's main complaint and nobody is coming up with a defence. I gave some alternatives and Baman gave (some of the) flaws and inconsistencies. I would go further as to how this punishment not only misses the root of the problem, but obscures it and acts as a placebo while the real issues fester underneath.
 
05-28-12, 9:03 PM

Offline
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 2343
Narmy said:
Alfyan said:
That to me seems selfish from her side, surely home school is her best option which still abides by the law. To be attending just for recognition for top 10? That is nonsense considering her position

Yeah, how dare she strive to be recognized as one of the best despite her tough situation. What a selfish woman.

Sadly law is law, when it says you must attend compulsory education I'm afraid we must abide by it

Law isn't absolute, why do you think we have judges? The judge could have given her leniency considering the circumstance, but chose not to.

When the law isn't serving it's purpose of protecting the innocent, then "law is law, what can ya do?" is not an excuse.

The law isn't there to protect the innocent. That's an attorney's job. The law is there to govern society.
And lol... this girl isn't innocent. She was conscious of her truancy.

And well, alfyan does have a point. It might've made more sense if she said valedictorian or saluatorian or even top ten percent. But either way if her situation were so dire that she needed to work two jobs, the best thing to do would have been to be to switch to homeschooling, or get a GED.

G-O-L-F-dub-A-N-G
 
Top
Pages (2) [1] 2 »