PUBLIC SCHOOL ABUSE

[Froderik]

Programs are no different then any other organization dealing with populations of kids.

Is that your final answer? lol

[DannyB II]

Programs are no different then any other organization dealing with populations of kids.

Is that your final answer? lol

Frodie, what you should be tired of is acting like a reporter from Fox News. Instead of posting my whole comment, you take a excerpt and quote that.
Well here is my answer, "YES" for now.

[Whooter]

This is utter bull crap... You never hear of a public school system being abusive, However you hear about program abuse daily... Oh major king of spin, quit trying to rationalize your support of programs...

Here is just one example:

Here is a public school which is accredited, licensed, does background checks, is regulated.  Yet this school teacher managed to rape 70 children in 2 years.  None of the children reported it, used an abuse hotline, told their teachers or parents when they got home.  He admitted to it and says he is sorry.
Upon hearing this the school system decided to keep paying this guy indefinitely because he is such a nice guy.  So they wont even fire him.

Link to Article

An El Paso, Texas, high school dance teacher was jailed without bond Thursday on charges of sexual exploitation of minors and possessing child pornography, allegedly including 200 videotapes of himself having sex with as many as 70 children, some of whom were elementary school age.



...

[none-ya]

I should have known my comments on parenting would draw no intrest here,for two reasons.
1. It's just logical.  Better people make better people.
2. it's not one side attacking another. Which is all anybody does here.

[Whooter]

Pardon me, I would hate to be the voice of reason here, but I think the only thing we can agree upon is that it's just not safe to be a kid anywhere. Hell ,they make you get a license to drive a car or even own a dog.Programs? Schools? Hospitals? We need better parents.There was a time when "family values" was more than just a political or religious catchphrase.

We would have to determine the root cause.  I am not sure better parents would be the answer in all of the cases.  Better education would help to reduce the number of placements.  But what about the rest?  Maybe go back to the days where one person stayed home, but how can society do that?  The cost of living is based on two incomes now.

We would have to change what is presented on TV, taught in our schools, the availability of drugs.

A lot has changed since the days of old family values.  I think there would always be a need for a few placements and these schools would still exist.



...

[Eliscu2]

Pardon me, I would hate to be the voice of reason here, but I think the only thing we can agree upon is that it's just not safe to be a kid anywhere. Hell ,they make you get a license to drive a car or even own a dog.Programs? Schools? Hospitals? We need better parents.There was a time when "family values" was more than just a political or religious catchphrase.

We would have to determine the root cause.  I am not sure better parents would be the answer in all of the cases.  Better education would help to reduce the number of placements.  But what about the rest?  Maybe go back to the days where one person stayed home, but how can society do that?  The cost of living is based on two incomes now.

We would have to change what is presented on TV, taught in our schools, the availability of drugs.

A lot has changed since the days of old family values.  I think there would always be a need for a few placements and these schools would still exist.



...

LOL....Whooty ::OMG::
Yes g-d forbid mommy and daddy make a budget and downsize themselves...oh and define "family values" this sounds like spin!

[Whooter]

LOL....Whooty ::OMG::
Yes g-d forbid mommy and daddy make a budget and downsize themselves...oh and define "family values" this sounds like spin!

I think it goes beyond just downsizing or getting on a tighter budget.  Society is now designed around two incomes.  The average worker could not afford to support a wife and three kids.

In 1960 a school teacher made about $5,000 a year and you could buy a new 3 bedroom home for $8,000 to $10,000.  Now School teachers make $50,000 a year but housing is 4 to 6 times the salary ($200,000 to $300,000) and thats a small home.  Then you compare cost of transportation, education food etc.  It just isnt easily doable to support a family unless you are a director of a company or higher.

The average school teacher could not support a family of 3 kids in a three bedroom home as it is today.  Once the women started working the prices went up to support demand.  If both husband and wife worked in the 1960's they were looked down upon but they had lots of money to throw around because society was structured around only one income.

If we could get back to that and have one parent stay home it would go a long way in helping out our kids.  But I dont see it happening.



...

[Eliscu2]

LOL....Whooty ::OMG::
Yes g-d forbid mommy and daddy make a budget and downsize themselves...oh and define "family values" this sounds like spin!

I think it goes beyond just downsizing or getting on a tighter budget.  Society is now designed around two incomes.  The average worker could not afford to support a wife and three kids.

In 1960 a school teacher made about $5,000 a year and you could buy a new 3 bedroom home for $8,000 to $10,000.  Now School teachers make $50,000 a year but housing is 4 to 6 times the salary ($200,000 to $300,000) and thats a small home.  Then you compare cost of transportation, education food etc.  It just isnt easily doable to support a family unless you are a director of a company or higher.

The average school teacher could not support a family of 3 kids in a three bedroom home as it is today.  Once the women started working the prices went up to support demand.  If both husband and wife worked in the 1960's they were looked down upon but they had lots of money to throw around because society was structured around only one income.

If we could get back to that and have one parent stay home it would go a long way in helping out our kids.  But I dont see it happening.



...

So sending your kid to Public School in Hellpaso is one alternative(Mom stays home with Gun)....how safe is Foster Care? :flip:

[Whooter]

So sending your kid to Public School in Hellpaso is one alternative(Mom stays home with Gun)....how safe is Foster Care? :flip:

I dont follow you.  I was saying on say a teachers salary it would be difficult to raise a family of three kids and support a wife staying home.  The public school would not matter because it is free the same as it was in 1960.  But the cost of living is just so much higher now as compared to back then.
Do you think most families can afford to have one spouse stay home?


...

[DannyB II]

I should have known my comments on parenting would draw no intrest here,for two reasons.
1. It's just logical.  Better people make better people.
2. it's not one side attacking another. Which is all anybody does here.

Hey I apologize, I happen to take everything you say rather serious. This topic though baffles me. Because as a country we are getting worse at raising are young kids. It seems today that kids are a inconvenience and parents lack tolerance.  
In many cases kids are just left on their own to fend for themselves. I have acquaintances right now in my life that do this, their son and daughter are 13 and 14 respectively, they brag about how responsible they are. They are not, they struggle mightily in school and with their peers.
Last but not least None Ya this is not on topic, really.

[RobertBruce]

This is utter bull crap... You never hear of a public school system being abusive, However you hear about program abuse daily... Oh major king of spin, quit trying to rationalize your support of programs...

Here is just one example:

Here is a public school which is accredited, licensed, does background checks, is regulated.  Yet this school teacher managed to rape 70 children in 2 years.  None of the children reported it, used an abuse hotline, told their teachers or parents when they got home.  He admitted to it and says he is sorry.
Upon hearing this the school system decided to keep paying this guy indefinitely because he is such a nice guy.  So they wont even fire him.

Link to Article

An El Paso, Texas, high school dance teacher was jailed without bond Thursday on charges of sexual exploitation of minors and possessing child pornography, allegedly including 200 videotapes of himself having sex with as many as 70 children, some of whom were elementary school age.



...

Whooter I'm genuinely impressed, it's so rare that you ever even attempt to back up one of your claims. Unfortunatly however this one doesn't fit the parameters. See we were looking for instances of abuse from public school staff to their students at school or duing school functions. This guy didn't abuse his own students or even students at his own school. The kids he did abuse attended a different school. That being the case this really has nothing to do with public school safety.

I am glad to see that you're trying though. Keep up the good work buddy!

[Whooter]

How do we stop people like this?
What amazes me is that this guy Alferez  moved around from school to school within the El Paso school district and managed to raped, videotape kids for almost a decade.  His resume indicates he has been working within the El Paso school district as far back as 2003.

Link

Prior to being hired each time he was subjected to and passed an extensive bad ground check.  He has admitted to the allegations in court yet the school district is still paying him.

If I were a parent in El Paso I would be asking the school district to stop payment and put this money aside to be put towards helping some of these kids and their families.  



...

[Che Gookin]

I'm confused by the questions on this poll. If I'm reading it properly I'm being asked which abuse is worst, abuse in a public school or abuse in a program? I guess my answer would be it doesn't really matter where it takes place, abuse is abuse and it is a horrible thing no matter where it takes place.

So is this recent feud about location or is it another rehash of the absurd numbers argument? Because if it is a rehash of the numbers argument I don't have much to say about that other than abuse is tragic no matter what the location and the kids who get abused in public schools have just as much empathy and so forth from me as the kids abused in programs. I just happen to chose to focus on programs, but if presented with a chance to help out a kid who is abused in a public school he/she will certainly have whatever I can contribute.

[Anne Bonney]

Public Schools are far and above programs for abuse. The potential for abuse from peers, older kids, teachers, bus drivers, ect is there.
For everyone who believes kids can not be censored in public schools are wrong, especially with parents that have lost trust with their kids.
Parents are much more involved with kids in programs today then when most of us here went 20-30 years ago.

So because you believe the potential for abuse is higher, not actual incidents, that in your mind means programs are safer?

You are of course ignorning the fact that no matter how much more parents are involved with kids in programs then they were in the past (they're not, youre wrong again) it doesnt change the fact that communication is always restricted whenever the programs deem it approrpriate. In public schools even if a situation arose where a school would not allow a child to use a phone for an entire school day, or go home early (impossible situation that is not going to happen) at the end of the day a child is free to go home and report to their parents any incidents that occur. Programs prefer zero oversight, and zero accountability. For that reason alone public schools are safer. They have oversight and accountability to the hilt.

Yep.....that's a huge difference between public schools and programs.  If a kid is abused in a public school (as I was, although not nearly as bad as in Straight because my father did something about it and the teacher was fired and his license permanently revoked), the kid has the opportunity to report it and it's taken seriously.  If a kid is abused in a program, they're accused of lying/manipulating/exaggerating etc.  It's not taken seriously because the program would lose a paying client.  Public schools don't lose money if the abuse becomes public.

[Whooter]

Public Schools are far and above programs for abuse. The potential for abuse from peers, older kids, teachers, bus drivers, ect is there.
For everyone who believes kids can not be censored in public schools are wrong, especially with parents that have lost trust with their kids.
Parents are much more involved with kids in programs today then when most of us here went 20-30 years ago.

So because you believe the potential for abuse is higher, not actual incidents, that in your mind means programs are safer?

You are of course ignorning the fact that no matter how much more parents are involved with kids in programs then they were in the past (they're not, youre wrong again) it doesnt change the fact that communication is always restricted whenever the programs deem it approrpriate. In public schools even if a situation arose where a school would not allow a child to use a phone for an entire school day, or go home early (impossible situation that is not going to happen) at the end of the day a child is free to go home and report to their parents any incidents that occur. Programs prefer zero oversight, and zero accountability. For that reason alone public schools are safer. They have oversight and accountability to the hilt.

Yep.....that's a huge difference between public schools and programs.  If a kid is abused in a public school (as I was, although not nearly as bad as in Straight because my father did something about it and the teacher was fired and his license permanently revoked), the kid has the opportunity to report it and it's taken seriously.  If a kid is abused in a program, they're accused of lying/manipulating/exaggerating etc.  It's not taken seriously because the program would lose a paying client.  Public schools don't lose money if the abuse becomes public.

Well I think both programs and public schools can lose if abuse occurs.  The school district and program can be sued.
As far as reporting the abuse that is really after the fact  (the abuse has already occurred).  In a program the child can walk to the nearest store and phone the police, or run away and notify police, report it to a staff member, tell their parents when they speak to them.  There are many options to notify authorities.  The person is immediately fired and a letter is sent to the other parents informing them of what occurred in the program.

But then this is after the fact, you cannot undo abuse for the child that was abused.



...