October 28, 2010

Student with Nose Piercing Allowed to Return to School

After a student was suspended from school for wearing a nose piercing, a federal judge ruled that the North Carolina school must allow the 14 year old to return to school. The nose piercing, the student says, is a part of her religious beliefs.

nose%20piercing.JPGThe federal judge, US District Judge Malcolm Howard stated his decision which allowed the student, Ariana Iacono to return to school. The Johnston County school system dress code states that any facial piercings are not allowed. However, there are exemptions in place for religious beliefs.

The attorney for the school district declined to comment about the federal ruling.

Another hearing is scheduled for November 3rd and the student will be able to continue classes at Clayton High School until at least that time.

The student’s attorney, Jon Sasser and the American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit against the school officials stating that the student’s constitutional rights were violated when she was suspended several times since classes started. The student and her mother state that the nose piercing is not a fashion statement but part of the student’s religious beliefs.

The Iaconos are part of a small religious group called the Church of Body Modification, consisting of 3,500 worshippers, a small clergy, a statement of beliefs, and regular religious practices. The group believes that piercings and tattoos are a religious devotion. The religion was first incorporated in July of 2008 in Pennsylvania.

The school’s dress code allows for exemptions based on “sincerely held religious beliefs” and “the principal or the designees should not attempt to determine whether the religious beliefs are valid but if they are central to religious doctrine and sincerely held.”

Since the start of school Ariana Iacono has been suspended four times missing 20 days of class. The student was told that she would have to attend the South Campus Community School, which is a facility designated for those students who have disciplinary or other problems. She would still not be allowed to wear a nose piercing.

The school, the lawsuit states, stepped over the boundaries.

October 20, 2010

Parents File Suit Against School for Bullying

The parents of a student attending District 2 in Sumter, South Carolina have filed a lawsuit stating that the child was repeatedly bullied and school officials did not take action to correct the problem, resulting in gross negligence.

bullying.jpgThe parents, Tina and Brian Christmas state that their son Joshua now 13, was bullied by another student while the boys attended both High Hills Elementary School and Hillcrest Middle School. Named in the lawsuit are the bus driver and the vice principal of Hillcrest. The lawsuit states that Joshua suffers from a condition called Benign Essential Tremor Syndrome in which his hands tremor. He is also easily frightened and has difficulty dealing with stressful situations.

The lawsuit states that his condition is one of the reasons Joshua is continually bullied. Tina Christmas is administrative assistant to 3rd Circuit Court Judge Jeffrey Young, while his father Brian is a Sumter Police Department detective and fire department captain.

The lawsuit claims the boy was initially attacked in 2006 on a bus by a bully who bit, strangled, bruised, and kicked the child, which lead to him bleeding. Joshua did not fight back because he did not want to get in trouble. The boy faced suspension from the bus but continued to threaten Joshua and his mother’s life. Then, Tina Christmas contacted police who involved the state department of Juvenile Justice. The boy was forced to write an apology and Joshua was given a one year restraining order against the bully.

The boy moved out of the area but transferred back for the 2009 to 2010 school year. This caused the continuation of the bullying and the boy encouraging others to act out against Joshua.

Tina Christmas contacted to the school and spoke to the vice principal. According to the lawsuit, the child was threatened, frightened and bullied. According to the lawsuit, vice principal Richburg stated, “I would take a child home myself before putting him on the bus afraid.” The parent asked that she be contacted if he was afraid to ride the bus home.

On April 16th, the boy threatened Joshua throughout the day and stated he would beat him up on the bus. Joshua went to the principal and asked to call his mother. Joshua’s request was denied even after the student begged not to be put on the bus. He was taken to the bus by the vice principal and the bus driver was alerted to the situation. The boy punched Joshua in the face on the bus, and Joshua fought back. The bus driver called police but refused to stop the fight and told other children on the bus to “let them fight.”

Police were not told about threats against Joshua and both boys were removed, handcuffed and placed in patrol cars. School officials did not notify the parents but the Christmas’s learned of the arrest from other students.

The lawsuit alleges that Joshua was traumatized by the events and was physically ill due to the situation. The following school year, Joshua was in two classes with the bully, which continued his suffering including vomiting and headaches. The parents believe that the school is negligent in protecting their son against the bully.

Continue reading "Parents File Suit Against School for Bullying " »

October 13, 2010

UPDATE: Lower Merion School District Settles 2 Webcam Spy Lawsuits

In February and March we posted about the webcam spying lawsuits filed against the Lower Merion (PA) School District. In an effort to move on with the business of education, the school district settled the lawsuits for $610,000.

Big%20Brother%20Spy%204.jpgBlake Robbins, filed a lawsuit in February claiming that the school district used then 15, charged in an explosive civil-rights lawsuit filed in February that the district used its remote tracking technology to spy on him inside his home. Evidence uncovered in the case showed that he was photographed 400 times, sometimes as he slept.

A second student, Jalil Hassan also filed suit.

Federal prosecutors investigated whether the district broke any criminal wiretap laws, but declined to bring any charges.

The terms of the settlement require $175,000 to be placed in a trust for Robbins and $10,000 for the second student Hassan. Additionally, their lawyer will get $425,000 for his work on the case.

The district's insurance carrier, Graphic Arts Mutual Insurance Company has agreed to pay $1.2 million on behalf of the district toward legal and settlement costs.

The district is no longer using the remote tracking program on the 2300 laptops issued to students.

October 9, 2010

Student Teacher’s Comment on Gay Marriage Leads to Termination

From Portland, Oregon comes a news story in which a conversation between a student teacher and a fourth grader in his class at Sexton Mountain elementary school, lead to the teacher’s dismissal. The school, in Beaverton School District, says that they do not have any anti gay discrimination occurring in the school.

student%20%26%20teacher.jpgThe incident surrounds student teacher Seth Stambaugh. In a conversation with a fourth grade student, the student teacher was asked about his marital status by the child to which he allegedly replied that it would be illegal for him to get married because if he would, he would choose to marry a man. The student also asked if the student teacher hung out with guys, to which he answered yes. This is an accurate account according to Stambaugh’s attorney.

The student teacher is in the Master of Education program being taught through Lewis and Clark College. He has been student teaching as part of his practicum to getting his degree since the beginning of the school year. Two complaints were filed against the student teacher after the incident occurred.

In a complaint, a father of a student allegedly complained he did not believe the student teacher was dressing appropriately. The teacher was wearing pressed slacks, an oxford style shirt and a cardigan that belonged to his grandfather. That complaint was dismissed by the school itself.

On September 15th, the school district contacted Lewis and Clark to alert them that the student teacher would not be able to return to the school. The student teacher was told nothing more than that his comments were inappropriate. There is no dispute in regards to the facts in the case, but rather if this is an acceptable dismissal.

According to the school district’s spokesperson, Maureen Wheeler, the school district honors diversity and that includes sexual orientation. Although she would not speak about the case in particular, she noted that it was a fourth grader who was 9 years old that the incident revolved around. She also said that this student teacher was just one of some 250 to 350 student teachers who come into the district each year to fulfill this educational requirement.

According to Lewis and Clark, administrators did not follow the usual academic protocols in this case. Problems and “bad fits” between student teachers and districts are common, according to Lewis and Clark. Usually before a move is made, the student teacher, district and college officials discuss what occurred but that did not happen in this case. In this case, the only conversation occurred on Sept 13th, in the evening, with the principal from Sexton Mountain, followed by a series of emails and voicemails the next day. On the 15th, a voicemail stated that the student teacher was no longer allowed back.

According to Stambaugh’s attorney, the sudden change placed the student teacher in jeopardy in regards to his education and career. The student teacher was moved to another school district to complete his practicum.