I'm trying to understand what you're implying here. The mother volunteered for the Army, which is different than the son being forced to go to school. Since she's a volunteer, she can flout authority and get away with it, whereas, since he's forced to go to school, he's not obliged under any standard of conduct to respect the school's authority. I guess that's what you're trying so hard to say. No?
Closer to the other way around. The mother voluntarily submitted herself to military discipline. The kid did not. Thus she is obliged to obey the lawful orders of those appointed over her. Her son is forced by law to be in school, thus teh rules need take into account that the students are not prisoners, and need to be treated with respect.
Good military leaders treat their people with respect, even when they are tearing strip off of them when they deserve it. Can the same be said for these educational "leaders"?