Author: Chickenjuggler
Monday, May 14, 2007 - 1:57 am
|
|
http://www.cnn.com/2007/EDUCATION/05/13/faked.attack.ap/index.html I can accept that it was a bad idea. What I cannot accept is that is was ever thought to be a GOOD idea. I would be talking to a lawyer if this were my kid.
|
Author: Brianl
Monday, May 14, 2007 - 7:43 am
|
|
Well CJ, it IS Tennessee we're talking about ...
|
Author: Skybill
Monday, May 14, 2007 - 9:27 am
|
|
Here's another example of a poor decision by a teacher; Chicago Board of Ed Sued for Teacher Allegedly Showing 'Brokeback Mountain' in Class Sunday, May 13, 2007 CHICAGO — A girl and her grandparents have sued the Chicago Board of Education, alleging that a substitute teacher showed the R-rated film "Brokeback Mountain" in class. The lawsuit claims that Jessica Turner, 12, suffered psychological distress after viewing the movie in her 8th grade class at Ashburn Community Elementary School last year. The film, which won three Oscars, depicts two cowboys who conceal their homosexual affair. Turner and her grandparents, Kenneth and LaVerne Richardson, are seeking around $500,000 in damages. "It is very important to me that my children not be exposed to this," said Kenneth Richardson, Turner's guardian. "The teacher knew she was not supposed to do this." According to the lawsuit filed Friday in Cook County Circuit Court, the video was shown without permission from the students' parents and guardians. The lawsuit also names Ashburn Principal Jewel Diaz and a substitute teacher, referred to as "Ms. Buford." The substitute asked a student to shut the classroom door at the West Side school, saying: "What happens in Ms. Buford's class stays in Ms. Buford's class," according to the lawsuit. Richardson said his granddaughter was traumatized by the movie and had to undergo psychological treatment and counseling. In 2005, Richardson complained to school administrators about reading material that he said included curse words. "This was the last straw," he said. "I feel the lawsuit was necessary because of the warning I had already given them on the literature they were giving out to children to read. I told them it was against our faith." Messages left over the weekend with CPS officials were not immediately returned.
|
Author: Andrew2
Monday, May 14, 2007 - 10:08 am
|
|
While no 12-year-old school kids should be shown any R-rated movie without parental consent, I worry about what a sheltered life poor Jessica must be leading if she's never been exposed to "curse words" or a movie about a gay romance. More likely, Jessica has been exposed to far more graphic and lewd content on MySpace or among her friends. So I take it, SkyBill, that you support the ambulence-chasing lawyers on this one? Andrew
|
Author: Nwokie
Monday, May 14, 2007 - 10:10 am
|
|
The first was a really bad idea, in Tennessaee, one of those kids was liable to have a .22 or .25 tucked away somewhere, and started plucking away. The Chicago one was less bad, but still bad, it was a gross violation of parents rights.
|
Author: Skybill
Monday, May 14, 2007 - 10:45 am
|
|
Andrew, I support her grandparents and if I was in the same situation would probably take the school district to task also. I know the district we are in won't even show a PG-13 movie to the kids without parental notification. My son, who is a senior and 18, brought a note home a couple of months ago for permission to see a PG-13 movie! I think it is better to err on the side of caution. Ambulance chasing lawyers don't benefit anybody but themselves so no, I don't support them. Although in some cases lawyers are a necessary evil. (Not the ambulance chasing kind though)
|
Author: Andrew2
Monday, May 14, 2007 - 10:54 am
|
|
So you think it's appropriate to sue the Chicago Board of Education for $500,000? You know that if they win, the lawyers take about 30% or more of that award for themselves, right? Or maybe, just maybe, the substitute teacher should be fired from ever working for the school again, instead of trying to cash in for "damage" the girl may have "suffered?" Andrew
|
Author: Missing_kskd
Monday, May 14, 2007 - 11:08 am
|
|
I'm totally in favor of the latter. Get the sub fired and move on.
|
Author: Nwokie
Monday, May 14, 2007 - 11:49 am
|
|
I'm not in favor of firing someone because they make a mistake, do it again and your gone, but counseling and maybe a suspension. The idiot in the first example, that is seriously enough for firing.
|
Author: Andrew2
Monday, May 14, 2007 - 11:52 am
|
|
So you agree, Nwokie, that the $500,000 lawsuit against the school district is ridiculous, right? Andrew
|
Author: Nwokie
Monday, May 14, 2007 - 12:03 pm
|
|
yep, this is just another example of why we need tort reform.
|
Author: Warner
Monday, May 14, 2007 - 1:29 pm
|
|
In Tennesee, one teacher was quoted as saying "That there's funny, I don't care who you are."
|
Author: Chickenjuggler
Monday, May 14, 2007 - 2:32 pm
|
|
I'll wait to hear more about it as it comes out. But one of the first questions I have is " How is this legal? "
|
Author: Skeptical
Monday, May 14, 2007 - 2:53 pm
|
|
what a bunch of hillbillies back there in tennessee. hee-haw. i'd like to see this go to the supreme court though, just to see what kind of ruling gets handed down. ps: my family tree has a branch that goes up the hills of tennessee. y'all have a nice day now,
|
Author: Warner
Monday, May 14, 2007 - 2:55 pm
|
|
Hey Skep: Does that branch then circle back into the tree trunk, if you know what I mean?
|
Author: Skeptical
Monday, May 14, 2007 - 3:09 pm
|
|
ahem, I'm afraid so!
|