Though I haven’t specifically written it, I support the school board majority’s decision in tightening the zero tolerance drug policy to include alcohol cases.
I support the policy because it is one small step in eliminating the double standard society has for alcohol.
I support the policy because I support a safe school that does not tolerate students harming their own bodies with alcohol, much less potentially harming their sober classmates.
I support the policy because alcohol has no place in a professional environment, which is what school is and is what school prepares its students for. If you were drunk at work, you would likely be fired.
I support the policy because it calls for fairer justice than “administrative discretion.” It calls for a due process hearing.
I support the policy because it demands a fair, variable punishment: one day to permanent removal from the SOCIAL environment of school, while still receiving the EDUCATION every student is guaranteed, through homebound learning.
Students who are expelled can and do graduate or receive a GED on time. Students who are expelled can and do pursue higher education. Students who are expelled receive regular rehabilitation from the Drug & Alcohol Commission.
I support the policy because it secures the school district Safe Schools grant money.
I support the policy because students who are expelled are not repeat offenders.
And I support the policy because somehow, about 99.99 percent of the student body survives coming to school sober, without bringing in booze. They deserve an education free of illegal substances, which alcohol is, in an institution that entirely serves persons under 21.
Those are based on facts I’ve collected by listening to the administrators and board members at meetings, e-mailing them, and hearing from students who have been expelled.
In many ways, I view the policy as a dead issue that is not worth much debate and hype. There have been a few efforts reported on this blog to battle the extant policy, and–aside from stretching the facts–, they aren’t going to be effective at changing the policy because of the high-prioritized, firm position of the powerful school board.
And policy dissenters certainly aren’t going to alleviate the real societal problem at hand:
Drinking.
To solve that problem, we should all be working together on continuing to improve preventative and rehabilitation programs: not bickering policy that simply will not–and should not–change.
Posts
3 comments:
I feel the use of drug should not be supported.Most countries have legislation designed to criminalize some drug use.
====================
Taylor
http://www.alcoholtreatmentclinics.com
Ryan, Great discussion topic. While I agree that alcohol and drugs should be treated the same, as is the official board policy, I feel that there may be times when an alternative to expulsion is a better solution, and may be more likely to actually help the student and the community.
Taylor, please clarify your point.
As I posted last month on the PCYC site:
Bob Goldsack mentioned the "Surgeon General’s Call to Action to Prevent and Reduce Underage Drinking" http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/topics/underagedrinking/calltoaction.pdf in the August Board meeting. The Call to Action" has some interesting graphs in Section I (pg 9 has a country comparison graph on binge drinking). The "Call" has a number of goals that may reduce problem drinking (binge drinking, alcoholism, or other Alcohol Use Disorders (AUD's). The goals (pg 37, 38) include strategies for schools, communities, parents, etc. to reduce underage drinking. (For those interested in DVSD policy make sure to read pg 62, there is a strategy for schools: “sanctions for infractions of alcohol use policies should be developmentally appropriate and avoid unintended outcomes. For example, suspension from school may provide additional free time for drinking whereas required participation in student/ parent education programs and community service does not.”) The "Call" advocates communities develop alternative activities for youth. It also indicates that the more a involved a young person is in the community or school the less likely that person is to be involved in problem alcohol use. There are many things that parents can do to help their children make good choices. (pg 47) The "References" section (pg77) includes relevant literature.
One problem with the DVSD policy is that a student expelled at DV is encouraged by the district to go to school somewhere else until their expulsion expires. (Listen, exclusively on rbfordv, to the August Board meeting when Dr. Finan indicates that students sometimes go to live with an Aunt in Port Jervis until the expulsion is over.) Would DV accept a student that was expelled from another school? If so, aren't we just playing "musical schools?" How does this fix the students drug or alcohol issue? READ the surgeon's general "Call to Action" and any other fact based culmination of studies on the subject of alcohol and drug abuse in youth. Please send me a link for one that advocates expulsion for first offenders without exception. I have not found one yet.
Also note that even in the mandated expulsion for bringing a weapon to school Pennsylvania courts have found that the Superintendent must have some discretion to recommend alternatives to expulsion.
Feel free to post it here or email the link to wegreenlaw@gmail.com
Thank you, Ryan for your mature and well thought out comments regarding the Alcohol Policy. If only more parents of HS students shared your maturity things would be much easier for everyone. Shame on all those parents who allow the weekend binge drinking in their homes. Storing the kid's car keys in the bedroom is like the stupid ostrich who hides his head in the sand. Have you not heard of spare keys? Who's monitoring the chugging of straight vodka and can after can of beer! No one!
Post a Comment