Phone Taken in School

Nevyn

Can we please keep post civil as per the charter, sneering and snides posts add nothing to the forum.

smelltheglove

I've been following this thread all along though havent posted yet.

To be honest this seems to me to be a ridiculous argument. The school has rules for reasons and yes it could very possibly be something got to do with insurance, i.e. insurance company stating they will not cover any cases brought against them due to invasion of privacy caused by a mobile.

Surely the rule is there for a reason, if you do not agree with it ask the reason first and you may change your mind. Children could easily video other students unknowingly doing a variety of things, also teachers and cause huge humilation, it presents a much wider opportunity to bully, and a more secretive way also as the teachers may not know a child is walking around with a phone in their hand videoing other students so how are they to be disciplined.

The rule is not there to irritate you or to put your child at risk, the rule is there to protect all children, I mean we see very often in every day papers images taken from photographers putting themselves in specific positions so as they can find out whether a celebrity is wearing knickers or not, who knows what a teenage boy can do with a camera phone, not saying only boys with phones in school are the problem.

Attacking teachers and school rules are not the best examples to set for kids, the school is the first experience a child has of a civilised community away from their parents and they need to learn to live in a soceity where there are rules, and when a rule is broken there is a system that needs to be followed.

Jo King

I am not objecting to a rule against mobile phones. I am objecting to confiscation and "fines". The insurance company will only require that there be a restriction on the use of mobile phones. I am not aware of any insurance company having such a requirement. The insurance company would be much more likely to say that they will not pay to defend teachers against criminal charges.
If the child is supposed to be in a civilised place, then surely the teachers should not be engaging in criminal activity. When I was at school, a lot of teachers engaged in criminal activity. Now teachers object to me objecting to criminal activity by teachers.

byhookorbycrook

Who knows what happens to the money extorted from parents by teachers? How is it accounted for?
A parent may not be able to buy shoes for a child after paying these illegal "fines". The teacher can go and have a few pints with the money. Who will ever know about it?
If money is so tight, then how come the child would have a phone?Also, if money is short,then all the more reason to keep the rules.

robinph

Jo King wrote: »

If the child is supposed to be in a civilised place, then surely the teachers should not be engaging in criminal activity. When I was at school, a lot of teachers engaged in criminal activity. Now teachers object to me objecting to criminal activity by teachers.

There is nothing criminal in taking the phone off the child and the fining them if that is what the agreed form of punishment for the breaking of that rule is. Just like there is nothing criminal about you being fined for breaking a speed limit, that is the agreed system of punishment for breaking that rule.

If the kid breaks some rule of the parents at home is it them a criminal offense for the parent to then fine the child or remove some item of theirs from being used for some time as punishment?

looksee

Jo King wrote: »

I am not objecting to a rule against mobile phones. I am objecting to confiscation and "fines". The insurance company will only require that there be a restriction on the use of mobile phones. I am not aware of any insurance company having such a requirement. The insurance company would be much more likely to say that they will not pay to defend teachers against criminal charges.
If the child is supposed to be in a civilised place, then surely the teachers should not be engaging in criminal activity. When I was at school, a lot of teachers engaged in criminal activity. Now teachers object to me objecting to criminal activity by teachers.

I think it would be a good idea to say this poster's user name out loud before trying to engage in reasoned discussion, because I cannot imagine s/he is serious in this nonsense.

goat2

Jo King wrote: »

I am not objecting to a rule against mobile phones. I am objecting to confiscation and "fines". The insurance company will only require that there be a restriction on the use of mobile phones. I am not aware of any insurance company having such a requirement. The insurance company would be much more likely to say that they will not pay to defend teachers against criminal charges.
If the child is supposed to be in a civilised place, then surely the teachers should not be engaging in criminal activity. When I was at school, a lot of teachers engaged in criminal activity. Now teachers object to me objecting to criminal activity by teachers.

are you big into law, for any tittle tattle, it was only a phone, and a few bob
child did not adhere to rules
child broke the law of the school

the school my kids went to if they caused trouble they would be brought to book also, i had no problems with this
because no matter where they go, what jobs they take on, there will be rules
just as in some homes thare are rules
put it to sleep

Hotblack Desiato

The 'rules is rules' attitude of many posters on this thread is something I find very worrying.

Everything that happens in a totalitarian regime is according to the 'rules'. That doesn't make it right. School in my time was like a totalitarian regime (including physical violence), I thought we had moved on as a society but perhaps not.

Rules should be fair and enforced fairly. It makes no sense to me that a child cannot use a phone outside of class time. Not so long ago, children were allowed go home [or wherever else they liked] during lunch time... nobody died.

Hotblack Desiato

goat2 wrote: »

most important of all, if all these phones are on in the closed in classroom, the amount of damage they are causing will show up maybe 5 or 10 years down the road, together they must be leaving off some amount of radiation

Do you know what 'radiation' is???

The light falling from your screen onto your eyeball right now is radiation, as is the Radio 4 long wave signal passing through your body right now!!!!!!!111!!!! spooky eh!?!?!?!

Unfortunately many people cannot tell the difference between non-ionizing radiation (radio waves, TV, wifi, EVERYTHING you see with visible light, UV, infra red, etc. etc.) and ionizing radiation (the vast majority of which occurs entirely naturally, volcanoes are driven by the heat of nuclear decay in the Earth's core) and assume that any new form of technology has to be bad, power lines BAD!, mobile phones BAD! but of course there is zero evidence to support this luddite nonsense.

goat2

ninja900 wrote: »

The 'rules is rules' attitude of many posters on this thread is something I find very worrying.

Everything that happens in a totalitarian regime is according to the 'rules'. That doesn't make it right. School in my time was like a totalitarian regime (including physical violence), I thought we had moved on as a society but perhaps not.

Rules should be fair and enforced fairly. It makes no sense to me that a child cannot use a phone outside of class time. Not so long ago, children were allowed go home [or wherever else they liked] during lunch time... nobody died.

we have moved on, in some ways good
in other ways bad, this is one of them, kids without rules or not obeying rules,

Hotblack Desiato

goat2 wrote: »

we have moved on, in some ways good
in other ways bad, this is one of them, kids without rules or not obeying rules,

If the rules make no sense they would be foolish to obey them.
Many school rules in my time existed purely for the convenience (and outright goddamn physical and intellectual laziness) of teachers and it appears that not too much has changed.

goat2

ninja900 wrote: »

If the rules make no sense they would be foolish to obey them.
Many school rules in my time existed purely for the convenience (and outright goddamn physical and intellectual laziness) of teachers and it appears that not too much has changed.

what age was this child,
another thing
if people are not happy with rules in the school
find a school without rules, just mayhem,
and reap what you sew

ShowMeTheCash

Who takes their mobile phone to work with them?
If you boss said, "I am taking this, you can get it back at the end of the week" what you think you would say to him/her?

Banning phones from school is a bad idea - better to embrace and regulate.
Caught using it in class or if it rings in class fair enough - but a mobile phone is a tool of the modern age. Laptops are replacing pen and paper and books.

Hotblack Desiato

goat2 wrote: »

what age was this child,
another thing
if people are not happy with rules in the school
find a school without rules, just mayhem,
and reap what you sew

Right, so if people are not happy with rules that make no sense, there should be no rules at all? What sort of nonsense argument is that?

Again I'm worried by your apparent respect for authority at all costs, those in charge just know better than you and me, is that it?

ocokev

Taken from the Citizensinformation.ie website.

Cyberbullying

Cyberbullying is bullying through the internet or mobile phone, often through social networking sites used by young people. A booklet GET WITH IT! A guide to cyberbullying (pdf) has been produced as a joint initiative between the Office for Internet Safety, the National Centre for Technology in Education and Barnardos. The booklet is intended to increase awareness of all aspects of cyberbullying including how to identify it and how to prevent it.
Effects of bullying

Many children who are being bullied are afraid to speak out. They are scared of reprisals if they tell someone. Reports have shown that as young people grow older, they are less likely to tell someone. They become more and more isolated, experience depression and, in extreme cases, can harm themselves or attempt suicide.

Nevyn

Mobile phones can't be regulated in school.
They are prime tools for bullying, from who has one, what type to using the camera and texting abuse, and forwarding pictures. I think schools have it right, if a phone is seen it is taken and confiscated.
If a child needs to have it for the journey home then it should stay turned off in the bag until the child has left the school premises.

lucy2010

I agree if rules are made in school they have to be followed.

But....
A friends daughter brought her phone to school. She was using it so it was confiscated. Fair enough - she broke the rule & paid the consequence. At the end of school she went to get her phone off the teacher & was told her parents had to come to the school to get it. The teacher would not allow her to use the phone to ring her dad to come & get it. She asked the teacher to use her phone to ring dad, teacher refused.She had to go home, tell dad & get dad to come down basicly.
By the time she was finished she was delayed & her friends had all walked on so she was walking home alone ( getting dark - mid november).

Basicly she was attacked near St Annes park & had no phone to call anyone. A couple stopped & helped her but she was in such a mess she couldnt even remember the home phone number - it was in her phone in school.The parents ended up getting a guard at the door telling them what had happened.

We have debated this many a night. The parents in fairness to them agree she broke a rule & had the phone confiscated. But what they dont agree with is the fact it wasnt returned to her, the teacher wouldnt aid the situation & ring the dad & of course the one time the phone was needed the school had made the decision on their daughters safety without consulting them.

I personally feel it was a step too far when they compromised her safety & left her with no means to contact her parent to explain. I dont feel a teacher should have had that authority & personally if it was my daughter I wouldnt have been as understanding of the school rules as they were.

Del2005

lucy2010 wrote: »

I agree if rules are made in school they have to be followed.

But....
A friends daughter brought her phone to school. She was using it so it was confiscated. Fair enough - she broke the rule & paid the consequence. At the end of school she went to get her phone off the teacher & was told her parents had to come to the school to get it. The teacher would not allow her to use the phone to ring her dad to come & get it. She asked the teacher to use her phone to ring dad, teacher refused.She had to go home, tell dad & get dad to come down basicly.
By the time she was finished she was delayed & her friends had all walked on so she was walking home alone ( getting dark - mid november).

Basicly she was attacked near St Annes park & had no phone to call anyone. A couple stopped & helped her but she was in such a mess she couldnt even remember the home phone number - it was in her phone in school.The parents ended up getting a guard at the door telling them what had happened.

We have debated this many a night. The parents in fairness to them agree she broke a rule & had the phone confiscated. But what they dont agree with is the fact it wasnt returned to her, the teacher wouldnt aid the situation & ring the dad & of course the one time the phone was needed the school had made the decision on their daughters safety without consulting them.

I personally feel it was a step too far when they compromised her safety & left her with no means to contact her parent to explain. I dont feel a teacher should have had that authority & personally if it was my daughter I wouldnt have been as understanding of the school rules as they were.

What where the schools rules for confiscating phones? If it's clearly written down that the parents need to collect the phone then that's what needs to happen. If not then yes the teacher over stepped the mark, but we only have a 2nd hand account of what happened here. Do you think the parents would have been so understanding if the school had broken the rules?

Do you think that the people who attacked her would have left the phone with her? A phone is a very handy thing to have in an emergency. But only a person who's wiling to attack someone, is kind enough to leave behind what's quite possibly the most expensive item being carried on their victim.

byhookorbycrook

ShowMeTheCash wrote: »

Who takes their mobile phone to work with them?
If you boss said, "I am taking this, you can get it back at the end of the week" what you think you would say to him/her?

Banning phones from school is a bad idea - better to embrace and regulate.
Caught using it in class or if it rings in class fair enough - but a mobile phone is a tool of the modern age. Laptops are replacing pen and paper and books.

My phone stays in my bag, I do not take it to class or bring it into the yard with me.

jenny jinks

Del2005 wrote: »

Do you think that the people who attacked her would have left the phone with her? A phone is a very handy thing to have in an emergency. But only a person who's wiling to attack someone, is kind enough to leave behind what's quite possibly the most expensive item being carried on their victim.

If she hadn't been delayed by the teacher she would not have been walking on her own and been attacked. How many parents have the time to be coming to a school during school hours to collect an article? It reminds me of a notice on the wall in my local primary school to the effect that there should always be a parent available to take home a sick child. Have they ever heard that in some families that both parents work? Have they ever heard of one parent families?
That school should be sued and the teacher should be charged with theft.
A child not knowing the home phone number is ridiculous. The parents should be ashamed.

looksee

jenny jinks wrote: »

If she hadn't been delayed by the teacher she would not have been walking on her own and been attacked. How many parents have the time to be coming to a school during school hours to collect an article? It reminds me of a notice on the wall in my local primary school to the effect that there should always be a parent available to take home a sick child. Have they ever heard that in some families that both parents work? Have they ever heard of one parent families?
That school should be sued and the teacher should be charged with theft.
A child not knowing the home phone number is ridiculous. The parents should be ashamed.

So what is a school supposed to do with a sick child. I can just hear someone on the Joe Duffy show - 'and the school just took my child to the hospital, without even consulting me!' Joe 'and they didn't even attempt to ring you' Parent 'well they did but I was in work and couldn't get away' Joe 'So what did you want them to do?' Parent 'Well they could have asked me should they take her to the hospital...' etc.

Schools are not a babysitting service. A parent is responsible for their child and if they let a child take a phone to school against school rules, then they have to accept the consequences. Now there's a phrase some parents have not heard of.

jenny jinks

Edited due to inflammatory/trollish posting.

dolliemix

jenny jinks wrote: »

It reminds me of a notice on the wall in my local primary school to the effect that there should always be a parent available to take home a sick child. Have they ever heard that in some families that both parents work? Have they ever heard of one parent families?
.

This just sums up everything!

It's unbelievable how there are so many people on this website who fail to see that when you have a child YOU are the responsible for the child and their actions.

The fact that school had to actually advertise this just goes to show that probably had been issues previously, where a child was sick and the parents refused to come in!!!! What kind of parenting is that?

Similarly if a child's phone is confiscated - God forbid the parent might be inconvenienced and asked to pick it up.

Just to repeat again. The mobile phone rule is to protect all children and school community. I've seen children bullied through mobile phones and it's devastating not only for the victim but the victim's family as well. No bullying is right but mobile phone bullying is hugely cowardly and extremely devious.

For those of you, who argue that teachers are abusing children's rights etc, I would also argue, that allowing students unlimited access to phones throughout the school day, with no course of action when they misuse the phones, is allowing the bullies, who are abusing other children, the opportunity to do this.

Call me and other teachers abusers (and lazy??!!) if you like. The bottom line is the rule is there to prevent abuse. Maturity and experience should enable you to see this!

There are children committing suicide and who are suffering from depression as a result of bullying.

Why are people so willing to take a chance on this?

Nevyn

jenny jinks wrote: »

If she hadn't been delayed by the teacher she would not have been walking on her own and been attacked. How many parents have the time to be coming to a school during school hours to collect an article? It reminds me of a notice on the wall in my local primary school to the effect that there should always be a parent available to take home a sick child. Have they ever heard that in some families that both parents work? Have they ever heard of one parent families?
That school should be sued and the teacher should be charged with theft.
A child not knowing the home phone number is ridiculous. The parents should be ashamed.

IF you have a child in school you will end up having to collect the kid when they are sick or call in to speak to the teachers when stuff happens, it is how things work when you have a child.

Del2005

jenny jinks wrote: »

If she hadn't been delayed by the teacher she would not have been walking on her own and been attacked. How many parents have the time to be coming to a school during school hours to collect an article? It reminds me of a notice on the wall in my local primary school to the effect that there should always be a parent available to take home a sick child. Have they ever heard that in some families that both parents work? Have they ever heard of one parent families?
That school should be sued and the teacher should be charged with theft.
A child not knowing the home phone number is ridiculous. The parents should be ashamed.

If she hadn't used her phone in school she wouldn't have been delayed. Why can't people see that actions have reactions and some aren't good. It was her fault she got her phone taken, not the teachers, and her fault she was delayed. Do you think the majority of teachers want the hassle of a parent coming in as their little darling couldn't follow a basic rule.