Posted on 03/23/2014 4:15:46 AM PDT by Altariel
Missouri resident Niakea Williams was at home, in bed when she got a phone call from Walnut Groves Elementary School. She was told that her son, Michael,who has Asperger’s syndrome, was panicking. Niakea quickly head over to her son’s school, got buzzed in, and immediately went to find Michael. As KMOV News 4 reports, what happened next has Ms. Williams furious.
Ms. Williams, though she had been buzzed in as a “known parent” by school officials, apparently broke protocol when she did not sign in before heading to Michael’s classroom to console him. Williams admits this but feels she was justified, telling KMOV, “I didn’t sign the book, but I had to check on my son.” She told the principal to bring the book to her and she’d sign it, but the administrator had other ideas. Niakea recounts, “She said, ‘Oh no, I’ve already called the police.’”
She had indeed called the police. Calverton Park Police showed up and put the school in a 12-minute lockdown due to an “unauthorized entry to a school.” Williams was arrested and taken to the police station on trespassing charges. This all despite her being a known parent at the school who actually had met with the principal just one day prior.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Until one checks into the office - no one knows that.
I conclude you must also believe that children are the property of the school, and belong to the school, not to the parents, during school hours.
“Increasing numbers of reports indicate that our schools are being administered by blithering idiots.”
But blithering idiots who not only have credentials but whose profession has full legal control of the monopoly on institutions that grant credentials. Institutionalize moron idiocy. (but I repeat myself)
The left must be defunded at every possible opportunity. If leftists can claim that they should never let a good crisis go to waste, so can we. Education is a walking crisis. Time to work towards abolishing government-run schools and the best way is through giving parents vouchers and allowing private schools to compete for the education money.
Gee...you would think yahoo would include such pertinent information in their article...
My bet is the principal had already called the police the second she was buzzed in...
Being pro-active knowing she was unhinged...
Okay Barney Fife. If you don't want parents, whom you know, to show up at school in a state of worry, don't call them and tell them there's something wrong with their kid and to come down and then expect them to not act like a worried mother.
Mama Bear/Cub. Don't get in the way Barney or you'll lose your ass - in this case via lawsuit.
Really, so the magic act of signing one’s name on a piece of paper makes a mother checking on her own child no longer a threat?
By the way, anyone who wished to harm children could at first avoid detection by *following official protocol to minimize suspicion*.
Which children, pray tell, are endangered by a mother who is checking on her own child?
The school called the mother in the first place and buzzed her in.
If they thought she was unhinged and a danger, they would not have buzzed her in.
The whole *point* of a buzzed in system is that you have the option of *not* buzzing someone in if the evidence suggests that someone means to harm others.
Apparently the idea that we must “break through our kind of private idea that kids belong to their parents, or kids belong to their families, and recognize that kids belong to whole communities” is gaining traction on FR.
Don’t you realize that the students were in danger because a mother didn’t sign a magical piece of paper?
</sarc>
As I said before, the key is stopping at the office to get the permission to proceed past the office. And you’ll recall that I also said that I had been “waved on” once. But I always check in.
A “blur of a person” rushing past the office could be a killer or a murderer or a non-custodial parent who may be trying to steal the kid. That’s why all people are to stop by the office.
We have lost our collective minds in allowing these administrators this type of authority.
Used to be schools had entrances all over the building, that were always open during school hours.
Now they have turned them into jails. I am suprised that she didn’t get a cavity search before entry.
The idiocy of the educational system is nearly equal to their arrogance in assuming they have more rights to our children than do parents.
Homeschooling is the only answer, today. For the long term, however, we must eliminate the Dept of Education, and relieve the fedgov stranglehold on state and local boards of education.
How can “a blur of a person” “[rush] past the office”, unidentified, when the staff member responsible for buzzing the person in has to *look and see who is at the door*?
Moreover, the parent was seen and identified by another teacher by name and conversed with the parent (briefly) apparently without incident or cause for alarm.
The notion that someone can be “a blur” and rush in unidentified is nonsensical.
But thank you for doing your part to “break through our kind of private idea that kids belong to their parents, or kids belong to their families, and recognize that kids belong to whole communities.”
How are you coming on explaining how a parent checking on her own child is a danger to other children?
I’m sure cavity searches will be implemented, soon enough.
We’ll probably have some Freepers here who justify them “for the safety of the children”, when they are.
No, everyone is buzzed in ... and then they proceed to the office to be identified. The “transaction of identification” does not happen at the door and at the buzzer. That “identification” happens at the office. In the office they have all the legal paperwork, which was signed at the beginning of the year which specifies who has the legal authority to have access to a child in school.
Since there are many kids in school, that may have to be looked up from the legal paperwork which was signed. And the person may have to show identification to verify who they are.
In my case, the mother IS NOT ALLOWED in the school. So ... just because you think a mother should be allowed in, doesn’t make it so.
“The level of stupidity is striking.”
Everything I was going to say in a nutshell.
Sadly nothing will come of this.
JB
If they thought she was unhinged and a danger, they would not have buzzed her in.
It could be as simple as she was calm and normal when she was buzzed in and once in she became belligerent and as I said become "unhinged"
This smells like she is has perpetually victim mentally..
They know how to work the system to manipulate the rules to get her way...
Of course I'm just speculating...
Exactly; this is the principle at stake. Hopefully more Freepers will recognize this.
If this can be done to this mother, then it can be done to any Freeper.
I’m sure there are more than a few principals who view Freeper parents as being “unnecessarily difficult” and who would LOVE to call the police on them at the slightest opportunity.
The moment you let someone into the building, you have *allowed* them in.
The school employees have the ability to *NOT* buzz in someone if they deem it necessary to the safety of the children.
That they choose NOT to and instead insist that the real protection comes from a magical piece of paper is their problem.
How are you coming on establishing how a mother checking on her own child is a danger to other students?
Everyone is buzzed in at the door. The purpose of the buzzing in is not for identification - it’s to stop direct and unhindered access to the rest of the school - and - to alert the office that someone is coming inside.
It’s at the office that a person will be checked to see - according to the legal documents, whether they are to have access or not. That cannot be done at the door.
In my case, the mother is “recognizable” at the school by several of the personnel there, but she cannot gain access without me. Now, even though she’s recognizable - it’s ONLY the office which has those documents to verify that. All the school personnel are not in the position to know that.
The only evidence we have of anyone acting irrationally is the principal.
“Oh, Student’s Mother didn’t sign in. I’m calling the police.”
THAT is known irrational behavior. We don’t need to speculate about unknown behavior.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.