Posted on 04/01/2004 5:19:52 AM PST by Theodore R.
Parents sound off on sexual harassment at junior high School officials plan better education about harassment.
By Becky Orr rep6@wyomingnews.com Published in the Wyoming Tribune-Eagle
CHEYENNE - McCormick Junior High parents brought concerns to school administrators Wednesday in light of what happened March 17 outside the school.
A couple of parents told administrators about new allegations of inappropriate sexual touching and harassment. Others said they were frustrated over how to report problems and whether there's follow-up.
School officials during the meeting explained why they handled the March 17 incident they way they did. They also talked about and demonstrated plans to better educate students about sexual harassment issues.
But while emotions ran high Wednesday, not all parents were negative. One parent said the school did a good job of handling her daughter's situation, and another said the school provides supervision, but parents have to do something too.
Between 35 and 40 people came to the noon meeting. They included four school board members and other McCormick administrators. The regularly scheduled parent advisory committee meeting was used as a forum to take parent comments.
Around 4 p.m. March 17, two boys wrestled a girl to the ground outside the school after hours and held her down.
That is where the agreement about what happened ends. Her father says it was sexual assault - even attempted rape - because the boys groped her breasts and made comments about their intent.
But school administrators and the school resource officer said it stopped short of that behavior. The officer issued a citation for rude and indecent behavior and suspended the boys for three days.
Principal Jeff Conine said what happened on March 17 was they "had a very serious incident occur here," which easily could have escalated.
Conine said he wants to educate the students, faculty and parents about the line between teasing to where it becomes assault.
"We believe we need to take a very proactive stance on this," he said. "The bottom line is we are educators. It has to come down to 'This is OK, and this is not.'"
Conine showed parents a segment of a videotape about sexual harassment. Students will watch the video when they come back from spring break, he said.
One mother at the meeting said if a child feels like she was assaulted or sexually harassed, her daughter understood that it had to happen three times before she could report it.
"My daughter did go to the counselors' office and report an incident of a male grabbing her breast two times in the hall," the woman said.
The girl told the counselor, who then asked how many times it happened and said it had to happen three times before it could be dealt with, the woman said.
Other parents nodded in agreement about the three-strikes-you're-out rule. Some said it was brought up at parent orientation meetings.
Her daughter wanted out of school and asked to be home-schooled. She has been out of McCormick since October.
"Now my daughter is living in fear," she said, since seeing news accounts of the March 17 incident.
Conine told parents the three-times issue is a misunderstanding that will be cleared up. He said after the meeting that it likely refers to issues of teasing or picking on a kid, but certainly does not apply to anything as serious as sexual harassment.
A parent who did not give her name did not go into detail other than saying her daughter was sexually harassed. She said her daughter tried to report it three times without action. Her daughter finally beat up the boy.
She got three days suspension, and nothing happened to the boy, the woman said. "You can only take so much before you lose it," she said.
Conine said the school has addressed sexual harassment issues in the health curriculum, but maybe it hasn't done enough.
Another parent who wouldn't give her name said discipline is inconsistent. Conine said that every discipline case is isolated. "We can't set up a blanket. Every case is going to be different. We're dealing with 1,400 kids."
Another parent, Jamie Halter, said there should be consistent rules. Otherwise, she said, a student could walk down the hall and inappropriately touch her daughter, and nothing would happen.
Halter said another girl threatened to kill her daughter at school, and nothing was done.
She was frustrated because she said she went to the police department. Police said she had to go through the school officer, who didn't call her back. She went to the district attorney's office, where staff said they had to go to the school because it was a school incident.
It basically was dropped. "I want to know that my daughter is going to be safe," she said.
The issue about the time an incident happens is important and is somewhat fuzzy. Time is important because it can determine whether an incident is a police or a school matter.
Conine said McCormick releases students at 2:31 p.m. There are teachers on duty until 3 p.m., when the building is cleared except for those in extracurricular activities.
Students can sit in the homework room until 4 p.m. or be involved in other activities. But after that, they shouldn't be staying around unsupervised, Conine said. They also can call their parents or others from the office until 4 p.m.
"The after-school supervision is an issue," Conine said, adding that it's a problem across the country. "To hang around at school is not an acceptable alternative."
A supportive parent said her students are always supervised by employees. "I think a lot of parents are putting a lot of blame on this school, and I do not agree with it," she said. "We need to take responsibility for our own children."
But another woman said that when they're on school grounds, students need to be supervised.
Some parents said there needs to be a strong cutoff time about when the school or the police would be handling a case.
That issue is a gray area, Conine said, but likely will be dealt with during a meeting today among secondary principals and school resource officers.
Pete Laybourn, the school's representative to the Laramie County School District 1 parent advisory committee, said the committee strongly recommends considering a later start time.
With such an early start and early release, there's a lot of unsupervised time, he said. He said he hopes the school board would look into it.
Conine said he hopes that with education, students will know that "it's OK to talk about it, and if you're feeling violated, if you're feeling offended, it's critical that you get to somebody for help and then those people help you."
Email Article Link to a Frie
If the lines are fuzzy, boys will "innocently" misbehave -- and they will have defenders.
If the lines are clear, and the punishments harsh, boys will always be on their best behavior. For example: groping breasts? That's attempted rape. Welcome to maximum security for the next 5 years. Sorry to sacrifice you, but we figure no one will be stupid enough to follow in your footsteps for at least 5 years.
The goal shouldn't be: punish the perps.
It shouldn't be: defend the innocent victim.
The goal should be: rebuild a civilized society.
If your statement was true, then rape should have disappeared years ago. Rape has had a prison sentence associated with it for many, many years, but obviously, can and will happen.
I think we have to look at also the young woman's behavior as well as her dress.
Belly buttons exposed; low hip hugger pants; super tight, tank tops; which is all design to say "look at me, don't I look sexually desirable."
No wonder young men, fresh in the transition from no sexual desire to rampant sexual desire, become confused from these signals and act upon them.
Uh huh. Values neutral health curriculum is supposed to take care of everything bad now. I'm sure showing parents the film will help, too. Problem? Show a film. Still trouble? Increase funding for "health curriculum." Sigh
Oh, puh-leeze.
Let's see..
teasing is verbal,
assault is physical.
How much more 'education' do you need?
On a side note- I was a victim of 'sexual harassment' in the workplace in my younger days.
But it only took one lesson for him to learn..."You grabba my butt, I breaka your face!" :)
Bigcat: it's not "interesting" but was totally predictable. Because while ordinary folks like you and me thought feminism was intended to only promote women's equality, the leftists who drove feminism down the throats of America also wanted to destroy Western civilization and American culture. This meant sexual excess and the undermining of traditional morals and our Christian heritage.
If you could get an liberal to talk about the tradeoff -- is it worth the higher rates of teen pregnancy and harrassment, as the logical price of a sexually free and libertine society, I think they would answer that the it's worth the cost. !! but also to tear down the
But then, that was over 45 years ago and we had never heard of sexual harassment, rape, or required sex education classes where the raunchiest details of sexual activity were discussed by the time we got to this age. The guys were more interested in playing baseball or hanging out with each other and who cared what the girls were up to? Whatever it was, it wasn't very interesting.
American morality and culture has slid a long, long way down hill in the intervening years. We (Liberals and secularists, actually) have managed to turn this age of fun and innocence into a neurotic, nasty playground where pre-adolescents imitate adults in rut!
That rules!
I think the counselor is probably confused about sexual harassment law. Of course the girls should report any touching they think was inappropriate. One instance, however, does not make harassment.
For "sexual harassment" to exist, I believe there has to be more than one incident. For example, if you are touched by a co-worker once in a way that you take to be sexually suggestive --but he denies it-- then you do not have sexual harassment.
If, however, that co-worker keeps touching you, in a way that shows a pattern, then you may have a case for sexual harassment.
You may find this bad law, but I think that is the way it has to be. There are too many hypersensitive types out there who will scream "sexual harassment" even when the offending touch was just an accident, or not intended to be sexual.
The school's counselor, if she really said "it had to happen three times before it could be dealt with," is wrong. Obviously the school should "deal with" the situation the first time.
What I'm saying is, the law says one touch does not equal sexual harassment.
ladylib, one touch might equal sexual assault. Or, it might not. If your husband lightly brushed a female co-worker on the breast, accidentally, do you think he should be charged with sexual assault?
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.