Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform > Hyde Schools
PS student expelled for pot brownie sale, gets sent to HYDE
Ursus:
Here are comments left for the above article in the OP, "Expelled kids face uncertain road back" (by Kelley Bouchard, Oct. 3, 2010; The Portland Press Herald), #s 1-20:
Confused said... October 3, 2010 at 12:17 AM
Hey, only gave a kid pot. According to all the pro pot people out there, nothing should have happened. It's only a weed right?Wyatt said... October 3, 2010 at 12:51 AM
What happened to the student that ate the brownie? He should have been expelled too.XPortlander said... October 3, 2010 at 5:56 AM
Give him a hug...signed I AM Liberal. Mrs. Bauman...first lesson you need to teach your son.....LIFE AIN'T FAIR.Pamela057 said... October 3, 2010 at 5:59 AM
Ok a little punishment is ok..but this is his 1st offense...he should have been suspended but not taken out of school....come on people....I thought you were here to help these students not break them for the rest of their lives...I say get a hold of our President and see what happens.lupinelover said... October 3, 2010 at 6:25 AM
This is tricky as I do believe in a rehab model but why should kids who do not choose substance abuse be forced to associate with those who do? Since school is compulsory I beleieve there should be 0 chances on this. What needs t change is the level of supervision of teens. They are generally not chaperoned and if a parent tries to insist that the school be more vigilant they are alled helicopter parents. The parent who wants to be included in their child's educational team in any menaing ful way is shunned and discouraged after the elementary level.violettaswan said... October 3, 2010 at 6:43 AM
What a surprise! Lyman Moore Middle School in Portland has almost twice the number of incidents of any school in Portland. That school is horribly disfunctional, and the staff is capable only of double talk. It's like trying to deal with Yogi Berra.Peetree said... October 3, 2010 at 7:41 AM
Ah, you have to admire the kid's entrepreneurial spirit. Although he brought it on himself, his predicament shines a light on bloated bureaucracy at its finest. Portland is lucky to have Dr. Morse.Peetree said... October 3, 2010 at 7:47 AM
Just for fun:D. bu·reauc·ra·cy –noun, plural -cies. 1. government by many bureaus, administrators, and petty officials. 2. the body of officials and administrators, esp. of a government or government department. 3. excessive multiplication of, and concentration of power in, administrative bureaus or administrators. 4. administration characterized by excessive red tape and routine.cHRsbmQyZnJwdA%3D%3D said... October 3, 2010 at 8:16 AM
Let's all shed a tear for the over privledged under supervised drug dealing son of wealthy parents. Nevermind the untold number of kids who are facing their own drug problem that was either prompted or enabled by this kid. Do you think he'll see the error of his ways as he endures a $47,000 private education? Boo hoo.DR_NO said... October 3, 2010 at 8:27 AM
This is a consequence of the zero tolerance policies everyone supported in the past.henryelm said... October 3, 2010 at 9:20 AM
I applaud Bouchard for providing a thorough and more importantly BALANCED view in these three articles She kept the spin to a minimum, although the headline writer did not. 1. A NO tolerance policy came with the Columbine( and subsequent) school shootings. No one in charge of buildings full of children were willing to take any chances. The community demanded that their children be safe and protected FROM their potentially dangerous peers. It was not a time to allow for second chances. Too much was at risk-- like other people's children. 2.It's always a balancing act and a heavy responsibility to keep ALL children safe. What if you make the wrong "call"? 3.Schools are where the children are---ALL of them , even the troubled ones.jack33 said... October 3, 2010 at 9:27 AM
All expelled students should be given a chance to return. No one should have the rest of their life screwed up for a civil-type crime or stupidity.henryelm said... October 3, 2010 at 9:42 AM
4.Schools have a hierarchy of disciple. The rules are clearly defined, discussed and well known. Knowing the rules ahead of time facilitates children following them. The first week of school EVERY classroom in America defines the classroom rules WITH the students participation. Kids aren't blindsided. The rules and consequences of breaking them are KNOWN. 5 The rules are reasonable and ALL students are capable of following them. Most of them do. 6 The school rules( and consequences of violating them) are sent home to parents in the school hand book annually, so parents can know the rules and support their children and the schools in following them. Parents aren't blindsided. 7 The hierarchy of offense and discipline is clearly defined. 8 Some students struggle with following the rules. They get help.1Keith1 said... October 3, 2010 at 9:44 AM
I've never heard of anyone going to the ER because of pot. Why was he taken there?Iwatch said... October 3, 2010 at 9:45 AM
Being an honor roll student, you'd think he would have had the judgement not to do this stupid thing, but kids are kids. Agree with the expulsion but perhaps there should be an alternate program (usually schools love programs)in which those enrolled have a stigma to overcome and not make it a big joke. As stated, not many can afford private school. I hope this kid learned his lesson and I hope the victim learned his.biddguy said... October 3, 2010 at 9:50 AM
Tough call. Although I tend to agree about zero tolerance, every case is different, and past behaviors should be taken into account. It's not easy finding the balance. If these kids don't have an avenue for return and drop out, we've failed them. And they'll become a drag on all us in the future, i.e., life of crime, welfare, etc.biddguy said... October 3, 2010 at 9:50 AM
Tough call. Although I tend to agree about zero tolerance, every case is different, and past behaviors should be taken into account. It's not easy finding the balance. If these kids don't have an avenue for return and drop out, we've failed them. And they'll become a drag on all us in the future, i.e., life of crime, welfare, etc.Orly said... October 3, 2010 at 10:03 AM
She had enrolled him in drug counseling six months earlier...............Mkay looks like all the facts are hidden some place to me.Merv said... October 3, 2010 at 10:04 AM
Goes to the hospital. For a pot brownie. Clearly there's more to this story, which is so often the case in a situation like this - the school is basically prohibited from telling THE TRUTH, meanwhile the parents run roughshod over the situation and the press eats up their sanitized version.homeboy said... October 3, 2010 at 10:22 AM
I'm not sure what caused the writer to comment on Lyman-Moore Middle School, but my experience there with Mr. Crocker and his staff was completely the opposite of what was described. My child receieved a very good education, and each and every one of the people with whom we had dealings was professional and helpful. Quite frankly, I would have had my child stay there for high school if I could have! Sounds to me like the writer is the parent of one of those expelled! If your child acts up beyond a point whereby they become a danger to themselves and their school, then the adminsitration has no choice but to remove them for the safety of everyone. I am less concerned about the return of the offending student than I am about the population as a whole. My alma mater just had two students terrorize a classmate with a camera, which resulted in the young man committing suicide. Who really wants those two back at that institution---ever? Certainly not me, nor most Rutgers graduates.
Copyright ©2010 MaineToday Media, Inc.
none-ya:
I guess I'm not alone.
DannyB II:
--- Quote ---cHRsbmQyZnJwdA%3D%3D said... October 3, 2010 at 8:16 AM
Let's all shed a tear for the over privledged under supervised drug dealing son of wealthy parents. Nevermind the untold number of kids who are facing their own drug problem that was either prompted or enabled by this kid. Do you think he'll see the error of his ways as he endures a $47,000 private education? Boo hoo.
henryelm said... October 3, 2010 at 9:20 AM
I applaud Bouchard for providing a thorough and more importantly BALANCED view in these three articles She kept the spin to a minimum, although the headline writer did not. 1. A NO tolerance policy came with the Columbine( and subsequent) school shootings. No one in charge of buildings full of children were willing to take any chances. The community demanded that their children be safe and protected FROM their potentially dangerous peers. It was not a time to allow for second chances. Too much was at risk-- like other people's children. 2.It's always a balancing act and a heavy responsibility to keep ALL children safe. What if you make the wrong "call"? 3.Schools are where the children are---ALL of them , even the troubled ones.
--- End quote ---
Nope, your not alone.
none-ya:
We wouldn't even know about this I it were not a kid.Think about it. A high school pot bust? First offence?
WHAT THE FUCK!!!
I have nothing more. I'm gonna blow a gasket.
Anne Bonney:
--- Quote from: "DannyB II" ---cHRsbmQyZnJwdA%3D%3D said... October 3, 2010 at 8:16 AM
Let's all shed a tear for the over privledged under supervised drug dealing son of wealthy parents. Nevermind the untold number of kids who are facing their own drug problem that was either prompted or enabled by this kid. Do you think he'll see the error of his ways as he endures a $47,000 private education? Boo hoo.
--- End quote ---
I know.....GATEWAY DRUG......watch out!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
This could have been under the category "More Zero Tolerance Fun".
--- Quote ---henryelm said... October 3, 2010 at 9:20 AM
I applaud Bouchard for providing a thorough and more importantly BALANCED view in these three articles She kept the spin to a minimum, although the headline writer did not. 1. A NO tolerance policy came with the Columbine( and subsequent) school shootings. No one in charge of buildings full of children were willing to take any chances. The community demanded that their children be safe and protected FROM their potentially dangerous peers. It was not a time to allow for second chances. Too much was at risk-- like other people's children. 2.It's always a balancing act and a heavy responsibility to keep ALL children safe. What if you make the wrong "call"? 3.Schools are where the children are---ALL of them , even the troubled ones.
--- End quote ---
Yes, because pot led to the Columbine tragedy. ::)
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version