Recently, a number of very young students across the country have been suspended or disciplined for making "terroristic threats" in school. By way of example:
In Pennsylvania, a 5-year old girl said that she wanted to shoot her pink bubble gun and told her friends, "I'll shoot you, you shoot me, and we'll all play together." Initially suspended for 10 days for making "terroristic threats," school administration agreed to reduce the suspension to 2 days.
In Maryland, a first grader was given a one-day suspension for pointing his finger like a gun and saying "pow."
Find out what's happening in Chathamfor free with the latest updates from Patch.
In Massachusetts, a 5 year old made a gun out of Legos during an after school program. The school district has threatened to suspend the student.
In another school in Maryland, a second-grader inadvertently made a gun with a strawberry flavored Pop-Tart. After the student pointed the pastry gun at a classmate and said "Bang Bang," school officials claimed that the student "used food to make inappropriate gestures that disrupted the class."
Find out what's happening in Chathamfor free with the latest updates from Patch.
All of these incidences are knee jerk reactions to a terrible event that occurred in Newtown, Connecticut in December 2012. But it's also a reminder that it's time to rethink the "zero tolerance" policies.
In the eyes of school personnel, kids as young as five years old are perceived as "mini-grown ups." It seems as though these young children "should know better" than to make "terroristic threats."
But make no mistake: these are very young, playful children who can't spell "terrorism," couldn't really explain what "death" means, probably never heard of the word "suspension," and most likely will not hear about what happened in Newtown, Connecticut, for at least another few years.
Zero tolerance policies do not teach kids the difference between good conduct and bad conduct until it is much too late. In the end, zero tolerance policies only teach children to obey and follow instructions without questioning authority.
Do we really want kids to live in an Orwellian world where teachers are just another Brick in the Wall?
The American Academy of Pediatrics recently issued a policy statement that the zero tolerance approach is exceedingly rigid, much too harsh, and an ineffective deterence to inappropriate behavior. The Academy recommends positive behavior interventions as an alternative to suspensions and expulsions except in the most severe cases.
When investigating an incident, it is critical that school personnel take into context the child's age, the child's maturity, the child's motive and intentions, and the context in which the alleged incident took place. School personnel should also learn how the other students felt about what happened.
Zero tolerance policies ignore context, and that is clearly evident in recent events. Without context, no one can understand or appreciate the meaning and intent of words and gestures.
Some people say that zero tolerance is madness and lacks common sense.
Some people say there should be zero tolerance on stupidity.
What do you think?
Matthew Stoloff, Esq. represents clients throughout northern and central New Jersey. His practice areas include labor and employment law, special education law, small business matters, and non-compete disputes. For more information, visit his website. This blog article is for informational purposes only and should not be construed as legal advice.
