Randy Cassingham's Blog

I read your blog, and I find it to be an hilarious, albeit disturbing insight into the American Court-system, and the laws "over there".

The ZT-policy, in itself, can be seen as a good idea. The implementation thereof seems to be lacking, though. The "war against drugs/terror/guns/porn/swearing/teddybears" (strike what doesn't fit) seems to have gone beyond reason.

There is, of course, plenty of real life reasons for the ZT-policy - there is a lot of drugs and violence present in todays America. Using that fact to ban teenagers from having access to common OTC drugs, water pistols, t-shirts with "threatening slogans" etc. is just plain idiotic.

I can, thankfully, say that it hasn't gotten this bad here in Norway as of yet. Who knows though - since we tend to import and deploy most of the American Way of Life anyway, there might be some ZT coming our way too.

I know that if this had been happening to me, that they would probably have had completely different reasons to throw the ZT-policy in my face. I would have been too furious to actually do anything but tell them to go to hell and then probably just gone home.

I hope the girl does go through with her lawsuit, and I hope she wins. Then, I hope there is a precedent set, and thousands of other lawsuits follow. Maybe even a class-action suit, to thwart this ZT-policy once and for all. As usual, they fail to see that the laws they put in place more often than not hampers the life of ordinary people, more than the criminals - simply because the criminals never cared about the laws in the first place. Forbidding drugs and guns at schools (I thought this was in place way before ZT-policy) isn't gonna make them go away any more than before - it's just gonna make people try harder to hide it.

And seriously - if someone brings a painkiller to school... because they hurt, and want to relieve that pain - then let them. If they want to give a pill to the other girl in class having her period, to easy her pain, let them. The world won't come to an end. I promise!

Last Friday, 11 July 2008, a drug crazed heroin addict shot and killed his own wife, my sister-in-law, and her two pre-teen daughters, all with multiple shots to the head.

Does that make me feel like having a zero-tolerance against drug dealers? You bet it does! Does it mean that I support zero-tolerance against drug peddlers and traffickers? No, because two seconds worth of thinking and you realise that there are traffickers that are black-mailed into doing that, and numerous other circumstances to take into account. The overburdened criminal justice system is unfortunately all that we have, lets try and make that work better.

Does Friday's experience for *one* second make me think that Savana's experience was a "worthwhile sacrifice from an innocent bystander" in the "war against drugs"?

Don't be daft.

And this is why schools a) do not want the kids to have cell phones. 9-1-1 anyone? b) parents do not trust the schools to do their job. c) Johnny doesn't understand the Constitution -- teacher didn't read it either!

Q. Besides the slap on the wrist, did the administrator & nurse get fired? Did the family get any punitive damages? Case like this in NY several years ago the family did, but newer Supreme ruling has lowering the burden of proof may have changed some peoples interpretation of search as well.

Lastly, my local school board has refused to change their ZT policy (which they violate by carrying pocket knives :), as a medic & mandated reporter I have told them if any kid saves a an other by loaning out their inhaler to one in need I will put that kid on the front page of the newspaper getting an award for heroism. The Board can then explain to the press why that new hero is suspended for a year. :)

---

Regarding your question, read the page again: the court decision means the lawsuit can get started -- nothing has been decided yet. After all, it's only been five years since the incident.... -rc

Many years ago, I read a book by Mercedes Lackey called "Queens Own". This is one of the Herald Mage series. Herald Mages had magical powers that could allow them to see into the hearts and minds of people to determine if they were speaking the truth.

In the book, Talia is asked to judge a case where a girl has accused her step-father of incest. She is able to determine that the girl is telling the truth and that she is pregnant. The step-father absolutely cannot see that he has done any wrong because she is not his "real" daughter and he considers her his property. Talia reaches into the girl's mind, grabs her memories of the assaults and implants them in the step-father's mind where he is required to re-live these experiences until he sees the error of his ways.

I truly wish I could do that to the superintendent, principal, vice-principal and anyone else who feels that this strip search for over-the-counter medication was reasonable.

ZT = Zero Brains. Not only should the parents' lawsuit be upheld, the adults involved should be stripped of their positions and prevented from ever working with children again.

Drjan, I used to take a couple of aspirin to school, because my legs often hurt during my teen years, often debilitatingly (it wasn't until much later that I found out that this was "growing pains", which I'd thought was a figurative term). One time, I had none with me, so asked the school librarian for one, which she was very careful to not give to me (she simply showed me where they were), because it was against school policy. That event would have been over 20 years ago by now.

How debilitating? One night, I ignored a minor ache, and went to sleep; I woke up several hours later, with legs and arms hurting so badly that I had to crawl to the bathroom to get the aspirin, then had to get my mother to open the bottle for me. A single OTC aspirin and 15 minutes later, I'm back to normal.

I can understand the concern, though, especially when one student gives pills to another student; apparently it's quite easy to disguise illegal substances to look like an ordinary OTC pill such as Advil -- plus many pills are difficult to identify from appearance alone. Following the chain of logic effectively forces the school administration to *at least* have parental consent and/or verified prescriptions for any drugs.

---

I'm guessing you're a tall guy, Scott -- I had the same problem. And now that you mention it, I had a tiny pill bottle that I carried every day in high school so I could always have pain pills with me: in addition to "growing pains" I also had migraine headaches. Thankfully, it wasn't an issue in the 70s, when I was in school. I could take care of my own medical needs, thank you! -rc

So if Principal Robert Beeman said "he did not think the strip search was a big deal because they did not find anything," then let's round up the adults involved in either the decision to strip search or the actual participants and take them down to the station to "strip search" them. I wonder how much they would appreciate the experience.

Also, these are probably some of the most vocal people going on about THEIR constitutional rights when going through airport security and asked to take their shoes off.

I hope Savana (now 18) was able to maintain her honor roll status after such a traumatic experience and didn't fall into the decline of not caring when shown the stupidity of the "caring" people responsible for her education.

Simply outrageous! The justice system is totally backward for children. The parents should have been called immediately and allowed to be present. But the "Right to remain silent" nor "illegal searches without a warrant" does NOT apply to juveniles in this country!

I could understand if this was a weapons case, but aspirin? When I was in school (in the 70s), the school nurse would give you aspirin if you had a headache or menstrual cramps. Should we keep our girls home 1 to 3 days out of each month just to keep them comfortable?

---

Your idea of a strip search of the people involved is an interesting one. I think the chances of finding something prohibited are quite high -- a pocket knife, an aspirin, something that a kid would be suspended for having. As we've seen many times, the zero in zero tolerance is for the kids, not the staff. -rc

I used to carry a bottle of Advil on my person to school to cure intensely uncomfortable menstrual cramps. In some girls, cramps can seriously impair concentration... making it a real effort to study! And isn't that, after all, the point to school?! To study??

Now I'm older, and I have a nine-year old daughter of my own... and if she's like her mother, and her grandmother before her... she'll have intense menstrual cramps, REQUIRING some kind of pain killer for relief so she can function. I'm afraid for her. I've already sat her down to discuss what school officials are allowed to do and NOT allowed. And by not allowed... I mean what *I* will not allow them to do without my presence. (Screw THEIR rules... obviously they aren't looking out for the children!!) I'm not sure how much, at nine, she understands... but it distresses me that I have to have this conversation with her at all!!

Not a big deal because they didn't find something?! So if they HAD, it would be a big deal?? How does that change in ANY way the humiliation and violation of that poor girl?!

Parents: warn your children!! Set down what rules YOU think are acceptable, and tell your children not to comply with ANYTHING outside of YOUR rules without your presence!!

---

I agree: it's sad that you have to have that talk with your children. But you do have to. One of the rules is to not put anything in writing, or sign any statement, without your having looked at it first. Such statements are often used not just to justify expelling the student, but also for criminal charges. Anytime a kid thinks she's in trouble, parents should be called in. Good for you for having that talk with your daughter. But don't think you're done. You should do it every year before school starts. The issues change, she will understand more, and you will think of more things to clue her in on. It's a sad but very necessary part of growing up, and on these issues you cannot believe school officials will be helpful. -rc

Patricia: I had the impression that parents are SUPPOSED to be present for such things. I know that the school system (legally) acts as parents, but I would expect that any parent would want at least a courtesy call before any non-routine steps are taken. I can't imagine most parents agreeing to "we're going to have your baby girl undress and show us that she doesn't have anything hidden in her clothes or undies, because someone else, whom we caught with the goods, claimed to have gotten an Advil from her" unless they already know that their kid might be in the wrong. The only real reason that I can see for not calling the parents is when the school personnel know that the parents will be unhappy about it... which is why they SHOULD be called.

Randy: You posted someone's suggestion some time ago about cutting the pay of school administrators who clearly do not realize that they are being paid to think. A similar idea that occurs to me would be to get a restraining order against people who have done stupid ZT things to your kid, requiring that they not knowingly approach within so many yards or make any decisions related to your kid. That might get the point across also. I'm sure that a decent lawyer can provide an explanation to the school district of why it would be a bad idea to move the kid instead of moving the offender(s).

Patricia asked "Should we keep our girls home 1 to 3 days out of each month just to keep them comfortable?"

The obvious answer is 'No', however that is exactly what I have to do with my two girls every month. And it's actually 5 to 7 days. Why? Because the school does not allow ANY drugs, regardless of doctors letters or parents instructions. My older daughter also is asthmatic, yet I had to complain to civil court to order the school to allow her puffer to remain on her person, otherwise school policy is for puffers, et al, to be retained at the nurses station. Her doctor wrote a letter stating she needed the puffer on her person as she would be in danger even from the 3 or 4 minute wait for the puffer to be retrieved, yet the school still stood by its policy. Hence the court order.

This is in Australia where we, as yet, have no official ZT as a government policy, just some staff scared of liability if normal activities are allowed to continue regarding OCT/prescribed drugs.

---

Good for you to force the issue on the "puffer" (inhaler, in the U.S.) Children have died at school because of this idiotic policy. This is no "theory", no "scenario": we have dead bodies. That the paranoia over "drugs!!!" can lead to school officials condemning students to death is such an outrage that I can't see straight. And is a perfect example of when schools should be sued, with part of the proceeds used for publicity to stop other schools from doing it too. -rc

Regarding the inhaler/puffer comment, in the United States, schools are required to abide not only by the IDEA, but also Section 504. Section 504 is a civil rights law that prohibits discrimination against individuals with disabilities. Section 504 ensures that the child with a disability has equal access to an education. The child may receive accommodations and modifications. This is not like an IEP mandated by the IDEA. Children with physical disabilities (Down's Syndrome, Blind, Deaf, Asthma, Allergies, etc.) must be accommodated, even if their disability "does not substantially affect their ability to learn in a standard classroom setting."

A rescue inhaler definitely applies here. In a peanut allergy case that the school tried to state was not covered under Section 504 or IDEA, the Office of Civil Rights issued the following in an Resolution/Closure Letter, explaining that when "a school division's decision that a student is ineligible for Section 504 services could result in death or serious illness, there is a basis for . . . 'extraordinary circumstances' . . .".

Thought you might like to know. Unfortunately, knowing the law is necessary when you have a child with disabilities, and your readers might want to study what they can even if their child does not have a disability, because that could change in an instant.

---

Things have improved, but not everywhere: the American Lung Association's American Lung Association Action Network reports that 30 states now have laws in place requiring schools to allow kids to carry their inhalers. That means 20 do not.

I'm not at all surprised that there are some federal laws which can be interpreted to say that students must be allowed to carry life-saving medication on their person. I am also not at all surprised that there are schools which choose not to interpret those laws, or any other laws, in a totally different way. -rc