Phone Taken in School

John Mason

grindelwald wrote: »

After reading this thread i e-mailed the school we want are daughter to attend in 2 years time, to ask what there stance is on mobile phones as my daughter is diabetic she need a mobile with her so she can phone me at lunch to see how many insulin units she has to take.

so what would she have done 10 years ago when no-one had mobile phones ?

they didnt exist when i went to school and i, along with the rest of the school survived.

there is no need whatsoever for mobiles to be allowed in schools. schools have telephone and can be used but by the parent and the pupils in emergencies

seamus

69 wrote: »

Where exactly did I say or imply any of that behaviour was acceptable. Stop making stuff up. I'm just dicussing the overstepping of authority by the school in seizing a phone for a week.

The authority to do this is bestowed upon the school by the parents. If the parents have agreed to it, they're not overstepping anything.

I gave my youngest son a mobile phone because I and my wife want to be able to contact him when he is outside the home. We live in unsafe times and a child having a mobile phone can be a very valuable asset in keeping him safe.

Despite my disagreement about the "unsafe times" nonsense, if you don't want your child to be deprived of his phone outside of the school environs, then don't let him bring it into school with him and punish him if he does.

Problem solved, simple.

Oryx

Lotsafish wrote: »

Thats fine if your dealing with ideal circumstances, but if its the teacher who is abusing their power, treating the students wrongly, etc, then what is the student to do? Ask the teacher if they can ring home?!

Or as I mentioned, the child complains about feeling ill and the teacher tells them to sit down and be quiet.

I've been in this situation - as you pointed out, I didn't have a mobile phone - but I wish to god I did!

And please dont say that teachers these days dont abuse their power or their students for that matter, it happens.

Ive never heard of a situation in recent times where a teacher has blankly refused to help a clearly sick child, apart from anecdotal stories from the dim and distant past, and in the past I know of examples of abusive teachers who could not be stopped even when parents were well aware, phone or not. (My brother will testify to that)

I have however seen situations where teachers monitor a student who MAY be ill. There is a difference. I think youre trying to hold up an extreme example (seriously negligent teacher) to prove a point. But the fact is, most teachers are fine. And in 99.99% of cases a child will not need a phone in school. As none of us adults over 30 ever did.

Kimono-Girl

69 wrote: »

Obey or GTFO? Nice, I like it, it has a catchy ring to it.

it's not obey or GTFO its agree to the way we do things or find somewhere that agrees with you. you'll find in life that applies everywhere, not to side step the OP here but you'll find this policy in religon, workplaces, groups and obviously schools, its like parents who send children to catholic schools and complain because they make their child partake in the practises of the catholic religon! if you send your child to a 'no-mobile phone allowed' school don't complain when they wont let your child have a mobile!

if you don't like the schools policies dont send your child there...simple.

irishejit

A lot of the posters are assuming that the parents of the child would give the phone straight back to the child after lifting it from the school, say the same day it was lifted and let them bring it back the next day

I would agree that the parents should lift the phone on the day it was confiscated. One it is your property, and two, I can't imagine the scholl reimbursung someone if the phone got lost.

A simple way would be for the parent to take the phone from the child at the start of the day, and return it in the evening. Both school and parents would accept that, although you would have a grumpy kid for a few days!!!

Hagar

it's not obey or GTFO its agree to the way we do things or find somewhere that agrees with you.

Oh right, I get it now. I simply take my child to one of the many other schools in the catchment area, all of which have free places crying out for pupils.

I must say I really love the we bit.

I'll leave you to it.

cynder

if you don't like the schools policies dont send your child there...simple.[/QUOTE]


Thats why I e-mailed the principle today and im happy enough with what he said, but of course will have to meet with him before my daughter starts in the secondry school to finalise little details so I will be fully happy where I am sending her.

If they wont allow her to use her mobile but will provide an office phone to phone me on, im happy. I just hope they realise it will be once a day for the next 2-3 years....... as i said that merits further discusion with the principle before she starts.

beth-lou

69 wrote: »

Where exactly did I say or imply any of that behaviour was acceptable. Stop making stuff up. I'm just dicussing the overstepping of authority by the school in seizing a phone for a week. By all means deprive the child of the phone during school hours but you have no right to deprive him of access to his phone outside the school environs. I gave my youngest son a mobile phone because I and my wife want to be able to contact him when he is outside the home. We live in unsafe times and a child having a mobile phone can be a very valuable asset in keeping him safe.



Obey or GTFO? Nice, I like it, it has a catchy ring to it.

Well the obvious answer is to tell your kid not to use the phone during school time. Pretty simple. If he does, then take it up with him and hopefully he'll listen to you and the school the next time.

The school taking the phone off him for the day would be no different than him actually complying with the school rules, so what punishment is that?

Lotsafish

Oryx wrote: »

I think youre trying to hold up an extreme example (seriously negligent teacher) to prove a point. But the fact is, most teachers are fine.

Absolutely I'm holding up an extreme example! Because I'd be sending my kids into school with a phone in case of extreme situations!

And in 99.99% of cases a child will not need a phone in school. As none of us adults over 30 ever did.

Thats simply untrue.

cynder

irishbird wrote: »

so what would she have done 10 years ago when no-one had mobile phones ?

they didnt exist when i went to school and i, along with the rest of the school survived.

there is no need whatsoever for mobiles to be allowed in schools. schools have telephone and can be used but by the parent and the pupils in emergencies

I would have driven or walked to the school each lunch time to ensure she had correct units of insulin......(i have done)...... The school refused her to use the office phone we had to provide one ......with credit.


The principle she has now is far better and allows her to bring her phone in so she can phone me he also allows her to phone me from the office if her bloods are low and school is finished. she will drink her coke and will wait for a few mins inside the school until her bloods are above 4 and then come out to me. the other principle didnt allow this either - he left in november (thank god)...



Also just because that really gets to me - did you go to school with diabetes which ment that any time of any day you could have a fit and go into a coma and possible die...... WELL MY DAUGHTER DOES, SHE HAS NEARLY DIED TWICE IN THE LAST 3 YEARS she had not been at school but one day she might, A TUMMY BUG COULD KILL HER IN LESS THAN 48 HOURS

beth-lou

69 wrote: »

Oh right, I get it now. I simply take my child to one of the many other schools in the catchment area, all of which have free places crying out for pupils.

I must say I really love the we bit.

I'll leave you to it.

Just tell your kid not to use the phone in school.
It's not that complicated.

seamus

Lotsafish wrote: »

Absolutely I'm holding up an extreme example! Because I'd be sending my kids into school in case of extreme situations!

What do you mean by this? That you won't be sending your kids to school except in extreme circumstances?

Even if a teacher is abusing their power, then child can wait until the end of the day and tell their parents about it. No child ever died in an Irish school in the last 50 years because they were unable to get in instant contact with a parent.

Thats simply untrue.

How so? Millions of children have gone and still go to school without a mobile phone. How do they survive? My parents once had to be contacted when I was in school - when I puked all over the table in 3rd class. There was nobody lamenting the fact that they had to walk down the corridor to the principle's office and make a quick phone call.

In reality when an emergency does crop up, ringing the parents is the last thing which needs to be done. The school deals with the emergency, then lets the parent know whats happened. Contacting the parent instantly will not fix the emergency.

Oryx

Lotsafish wrote: »

Thats simply untrue.

Take my use of the word phone to mean Mobile phone. And it was impossible for any of us over 30s to have had one... cos they didnt exist. And we dealt with bad teachers, sickness, allergies, breaks and all of that without needing them. The only reason we feel the need for our kids to have them now is because we are used to the instant convenience of phones. But they are not essential to your childs safety whilst in a schools care. And they cause a lot of trouble within schools, they provide far more trouble than they do a benefit to pupils which is why on balance, they are banned in many schools.

cynder

seamus wrote: »

In reality when an emergency does crop up, ringing the parents is the last thing which needs to be done. The school deals with the emergency, then lets the parent know whats happened. Contacting the parent instantly will not fix the emergency.

Im an special case, if my daughter vomits we have to be informed asap, if she vomits 3 times in 2 hours she has to go to hospital to be re hydrated.
The school lacks information about certain illnesses and sometimes calling a parent is the best because a parent will know what to do. The school also have her diabetic nurses number and have contacted her time to time.

were lucky this year our daughters teachers brother is type 1 so he knows a lot about it and is very very understanding.

Kimono-Girl

69 wrote: »

Oh right, I get it now. I simply take my child to one of the many other schools in the catchment area, all of which have free places crying out for pupils.

I must say I really love the we bit.

I'll leave you to it.

whats wrong wit the 'we' bit?

'we' refers to everyone in the school partaking in the policy. apologies if i made you think anything else.

and this isn't a discussion on the availabilities of other schools and places so yes if you disagree with the policy on mobile phones you disagree with the rules as set by the school, just because there are a lack of places elsewhere doesn't entitle you to break school rules of the school you CHOOSE to send your child to.

Lotsafish

seamus wrote: »

What do you mean by this? That you won't be sending your kids to school except in extreme circumstances?

Meant to read: Because I'd be sending my kids into school with a phone in case of extreme situations!

***

There are so many things wrong with this......

Even if a teacher is abusing their power, then child can wait until the end of the day and tell their parents about it.

Really?! You think that if a teacher abuses a child then the child can wait a few hours and tell their parents?! Surely that cant really be acceptable to you?

No child ever died in an Irish school in the last 50 years because they were unable to get in instant contact with a parent.

So its only serious if the child dies? Mental and physical abuse doesn't count?

My parents once had to be contacted when I was in school - when I puked all over the table in 3rd class. There was nobody lamenting the fact that they had to walk down the corridor to the principle's office and make a quick phone call.

I'm not talking about situations where a child is ill and the parents are called by the school, I'm talking about situations where the teacher does not do what they should - I went to school with a student who asked to go to the toilet many times and each time was told to be quiet and sit down. He wet himself in his seat, the teacher cleaned up, sat him back down and continued on teaching. This was the same school that I had to leave because another teacher was hurling abuse at me, telling me I was a child of the devil and physically pushing me around.

So these are situations where the school is REFUSING to ring the parents, I would have loved a mobile phone.

beth-lou

grindelwald wrote: »

Im an special case, if my daughter vomits we have to be informed asap, if she vomits 3 times in 2 hours she has to go to hospital to be re hydrated.
The school lacks information about certain illnesses and sometimes calling a parent is the best because a parent will know what to do. The school also have her diabetic nurses number and have contacted her time to time.

were lucky this year our daughters teachers brother is type 1 so he knows a lot about it and is very very understanding.

I think in cases like yours there should be exemptions made or other arrangments.

But the majority of kids don't need a phone while in school.
If they bring one to school it should remain in their locker until home time.
I fully appreciate that parents want their kids to have access to phone for their journey home etc, so talk to your kid, explain the consquences and deal with them if the kid breaks the rule.

Lotsafish

And in 99.99% of cases a child will not need a phone in school. As none of us adults over 30 ever did.

I said its simply not true because there is no way that it can be said that none of the adults over 30 have been in a situation where a mobile phone would have helped (if it had been around then)

beth-lou

Lotsafish wrote: »

Meant to read: Because I'd be sending my kids into school with a phone in case of extreme situations!

***

There are so many things wrong with this......



Really?! You think that if a teacher abuses a child then the child can wait a few hours and tell their parents?! Surely that cant really be acceptable to you?



So its only serious if the child dies? Mental and physical abuse doesn't count?




I'm not talking about situations where a child is ill and the parents are called by the school, I'm talking about situations where the teacher does not do what they should - I went to school with a student who asked to go to the toilet many times and each time was told to be quiet and sit down. He wet himself in his seat, the teacher cleaned up, sat him back down and continued on teaching. This was the same school that I had to leave because another teacher was hurling abuse at me, telling me I was a child of the devil and physically pushing me around.

So these are situations where the school is REFUSING to ring the parents, I would have loved a mobile phone.

So do you think kids should be allowed to use their mobile phone any time they choose in school?

Lotsafish

beth-lou wrote: »

So do you think kids should be allowed to use their mobile phone any time they choose in school?

As I said:

I do agree with the no phone policy during classes and in between classes, but during lunch?!

or immediately after a situation where the child has been wronged, any situation where they need to contact their parents through a medium that is not controlled by the school and therefore subject to the schools idea of what is acceptable to ring home about and what is not.

I have not been arguing that the kids be allowed to run around texting their friends and so on.

seamus

Lotsafish wrote: »

Really?! You think that if a teacher abuses a child then the child can wait a few hours and tell their parents?! Surely that cant really be acceptable to you?

I don't really see the difference tbh. A child gets a smack across the back of the head - what difference does it make if the parents are told straight away or at the end of the day?

So its only serious if the child dies? Mental and physical abuse doesn't count?

You're talking about the ability to react instantly to long-term issues which occur very rarely. None of these things are emergencies which require immediate intervention and the greater good is not served by allowing children to carry mobile phones for the one-in-a-million chance that a teacher does something that requires a parent to react instantly.

So these are situations where the school is REFUSING to ring the parents, I would have loved a mobile phone.

But you didn't need one. You got exactly the same outcome when you went home and told your parents, right?

beth-lou

I think the schools have weighed up the pro's and con's of both sides of the argument and have most likely gone with the decision of no phone at any time because of the increasing incidents of bullying by both text and picture phone. Personally, I would rather no phones when my daughters get to secondary school. My sister has already had numerous problems with her son and text bullying. So I fully understand why the schools have a no phone policy. And while there are rare occasions when a kid might want to have instant access to a phone, I still believe it is unneccessary. I think the kid can tell the parent of any worries re teachers etc when they get home. The same as we all did if we needed to when we were kids. I just don't think they need them in school. It is not essential. The world will keep turning without mobile phones.

PCPhoto

seriously people ..... the OP was asking is it fair for the school to take the phone for a week.


I think everyone agrees that YES - the child knew the rules and broke the rules and should be punished as per the rules (confiscated for a week), the parent should NOT involve themselves in this situation and should allow their child to learn rules are rules for a reason.

* of course with all rules there are exceptions, and the most discussed one here is quite simply the child with diabetes, in this situation the child needs access to a phone but also needs to learn that the phone CANNOT be used wrecklessly.

I'm not a teacher or a parent - but find this topic interesting as I've noticed through my work that some kids today have lost respect/discipline and parents seem unwilling/unable to instill this into their kids (I speak about the minority - but a growing minority).

In simple - rules are there, break the rules and get punished (there is always an exception to the rule)

The chances of a teacher abusing its position is fairly low - and in the event that a teacher does this - phoning the parents straight away wont do anything to fix the situation - nothing will be done until the end of the working day or even the next day...or further down the line....as the matter would have to be investigated.

Lotsafish

seamus wrote: »

But you didn't need one. You got exactly the same outcome when you went home and told your parents, right?

Do you think theres a difference between sitting in soiled clothes all day humiliated and itching being taught by a teacher your terrified of, as opposed to ringing your parents and having them pick you up and make sure that teacher never goes near you again?

beth-lou

Lotsafish wrote: »

Do you think theres a difference between sitting in soiled clothes all day humiliated and itching being taught by a teacher your terrified of, as opposed to ringing your parents and having them pick you up and make sure that teacher never goes near you again?

Can I ask when this took place? What age was the kid involved? And what happened to the teacher?

seamus

Lotsafish wrote: »

Do you think theres a difference between sitting in soiled clothes all day humiliated and itching being taught by a teacher your terrified of, as opposed to ringing your parents and having them pick you up and make sure that teacher never goes near you again?

Do you think this one in a million occurrence is justification for all children having mobile phones in school?

My children won't even have a mobile until they're in their teens.

Lotsafish

beth-lou wrote: »

Can I ask when this took place? What age was the kid involved? And what happened to the teacher?

This was a school in Maynooth, the kid was around 10 and nothing happened to the teacher.
Same school where I had to leave as the school refused to do anything about an extremely abusive teacher.

Lotsafish

seamus wrote: »

Do you think this one in a million occurrence is justification for all children having mobile phones in school?

Yes, as I don't believe it is a one in a million occurrence.

beth-lou

Well that sounds horrendous. I seriously doubt that a teacher would get away with that these days.

Don't you think 10 is a little young for a child to have a mobile phone?
The mobile phone would not have stopped that from happening btw.
If the teacher was that bad there is no way he would have let the kid use the phone.

My daughter is 8 and wants a phone. She won't be getting one until she is at least 15. Am I a bad parent because of it? To be honest, the thoughts of her having a phone and what that gives her access to scares me more than the thoughts of her not having a phone in school for the reasons you have stated.

beth-lou

Lotsafish wrote: »

Yes, as I don't believe it is a one in a million occurrence.

It's pretty rare these days. You haven't said how long ago this all happened.