Schools held liable for bullying of students: State top court decides Toms River (NJ) gay-bias case

[Doondoo]

Much like employees in a workplace, students have the right to attend school without being subjected to repeated taunts from other children, the state Supreme Court said yesterday in a ruling that makes school districts responsible for stopping bias-based harassment. The sweeping decision came in a case brought by a Toms River Regional School District student who complained he was slapped, punched and repeatedly taunted from the time he was in fourth grade by classmates who perceived him as gay.

The former student, now 21, was referred to in legal papers only by his initials, but following the decision agreed to be interviewed and identified. Louis White said he was overcome with tears when he learned of the ruling.

"It wasn't right for me to go through that," White said. "I just felt like things needed to change at my school and it has branched out from there to include other schools statewide. This whole journey has made me stronger, so it was definitely worth it in the end."

The unanimous decision, based on New Jersey's Law Against Discrimination, gives pupils in the state greater protection from "student-on-student" harassment than their peers nationwide. It said a school district may be found liable if it knew about a "hostile educational environment" and failed to take reasonable action to end it.

"Students in the classroom are entitled to no less protection from unlawful discrimination and harassment than their adult counterparts in the workplace," Chief Justice James Zazzali wrote in the opinion.

"We do not suggest, however, that isolated schoolyard insults or classroom taunts" would be enough to spark a legal case, the decision said.


http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/index.ssf?/base/news-11/1172123393202441.xml&coll=1

[saltpoint]

1. If it isn't too traditional, I'd hope that schools would sanction learning,

and insist on safety and respect for others while that learning is going on.

In math class, in gym class, in the cafeteria, homeroom, at the bus stop.

Schools who put their clients' children's learning and safety in jeopardy should be held liable.

[Spangle]

4. Client's?

Oh, that don't go over so well with some peoples 'sensablities." I pointed out once that that schools have clients which are parents. And they are to provide an 'educated product' which are the students (children) of the clients, and I was told in no certain terms that parents don't want to hear of their kids talked about that way.

I take it differently. The educational system don't want to be thought of as a business that actually has to live up to the same type of standards that other business have to live up to. Another words, be liable for the 'product' after completion.

As it stands today, it's the Kid who is 100% responsible for their education. Followed by the Parents (who are not in the eduational field.) The eduational system considers the fault not their own, because they 'offered' and the student can 'take it' if they want the eduation.

This 'idea' is extreamlly flawed. Case in point is the Fellow this article is about. He wasn't treated fairly at school and it WAS allowed. This sort of treatment does effect ones ablity to pay attention in class (take). It makes one fearful of what classes one chooses (take.) And this article is about stuff that happened to the older students. Consider the younger grades. Students compliants there are very much ignored.

Schools are constantly testing 'eduational theorys' to see what will work. If it doesn't and the theory made things worse, no effort is made to help those students in the failed 'theory' to catch up. The students are on their own. We are talking about children here. Parents are not told that their children are being used as guinie pigs and if the experment doesn't work.. "oh well!" The whole mess is ignored and the students are passed on to the upper grades 'as is.' And if they can't handle it, then it's the STUDENTS fault. ????

No, they don't want to hear the word "clients" in refference to Parents of their students. Nore do they want it refferenced to their students either.

[saltpoint]

5. It may be too clinical a terminology for some ears. I'd prefer "Susan" and

"Joe" instead of sterile, generic terms, but the issue at hand involved a court ruling, so I slipped into legal jargon/business jargon.

The optimum goal, for me anyway, would be to have a public school system where students could thrive as young learners and adults-to-be without apprehension of taunting, bullying, or violence. That strikes me as a basic hinge for the reason we have schools in the first place.

[ThomCat]

2. This is Awesome!

Of course, we all know that this is going to result in zero tolerance rules that are going to be used to target the victims. Schools need to do everything they can to shut up the complainers.
x(

Any kid who comes out and calls himself "queer" is going to be suspended for "inciting conflict" or some such. It's always easier to target the victims than the bullies, especially because the bullies are often the popular kids.

[Spangle]

3. about time!

They should be liable for it. Bullying and the Taunts is were the school violence is comeing from. People being bullied are suppose to 'take it' and accept it. The reality is, some people eventually snap, and the school and society act all suprised????

Schools are making a big deal out of dealing with bullys. At the age level where bulling does extream PHYSICAL damage. But the bulling behavinor starts at the young ages. And those teachers are overwellemed. AND it's popular to just say "no tattling".

If there is problems in the middle schools, you got to look at the schools those kids are coming from. The whole issues has to be dealt with from K-12!

Using words as 'bullying' and 'cut downs' is planting 'ideas' of what should be 'good' or 'bad' in other kids heads. Which is why "you play like a girl" shouldn't be allowed. Alot of the 'girl cut downs' have been pushed out of the playgrounds by teachers. But they only did so because society as at large pointed out how wrong it was.

This lawsuite HOPEFULLY will wake up schools. They ARE responsible for these kids. They are responsible for their education (even tho they don't act like it) and they are responsible for their wealfare while the kids are at the school!

[Solo_in_MD]

6. But will there be any real change? I doubt it.

Human nature is what it is and the educrat buracray is what it is.

While I am not a big fan of interpersonal violence, it seems to be the one thing that does resolve bullying, at least in a notionally gang free environment (great discussion of this on another thread earlier this week). BTDT as a s student/parent/teacher

[rocktivity]

7. Schools should issue an anti-bullying policy to parents and students

at the beginning of every year. First-time offenders should suspended; repeat offenders get expelled and placed in alternate programs. Of course, it would also help if they didn't see adults bullying, too (Donald Trump, Simon on American Idol, the Bush monarchy, etc.).

:headbang:
rocknation

[On the Road]

8. Normally I Would Say Suing the Schools for Individual Misconduct

is shifting blame for individual actions. But in the case of bullying, schools have traditionally not wanted to get involved. Often the bullies are popular students or members of sports teams.

Among other things, schools need to provide basic protection and physical safety for their students to the best of their ability.

[knight_of_the_star]

9. Finally!

This is good news, look like the districts won't be able to turn a blind eye to this until someone can't take it anymore and buys a gun.

[billyoc]

10. Toms River

What a shithole.

(I grew up there.)