Strip Searching A Thirteen Year Old

[Zierro]

The school could be held liable for the death of the girl. They could also be held liable for the various other assortment of uses she could find with them.

 

 

 

Then you're basing your argument on another flaw in the system. Schools shouldn't be responsible for deaths which they had nothing to do with. This is another problem that needs fixed.

[Laura]

Why would she bring it to school to overdose on it if she was planning to? 13 isn't "that young" at all, it's ibuprofen for crying out loud...

It doesn't matter what her rationalization is, it has an increased potential for misuse. All medicine is poison, it just depends on what you kill first; don't say it's "just" ibuprofen.

 

Then you're basing your argument on another flaw in the system. Schools shouldn't be responsible for deaths which they had nothing to do with. This is another problem that needs fixed.

The normal rationalization is that the school could have or should have done something to prevent it. However wrong that may seem in this scenario it proves to be fruitful in others.

[Zierro]

It doesn't matter what her rationalization is, it has an increased potential for misuse. All medicine is poison, it just depends on what you kill first; don't say it's "just" ibuprofen.

 

 

 

Can you tell me what doesn't have a potential for misuse? Even video games can be considered "dangerous" because there are so many cases where kids throw their lives away just to play a game.

 

 

 

The normal rationalization is that the school could have or should have done something to prevent it. However wrong that may seem in this scenario it proves to be fruitful in others.

 

 

 

And this means they have the right to command children to take their clothes off, just based off of unreliable hearsay?

[Laura]

It doesn't matter what her rationalization is, it has an increased potential for misuse. All medicine is poison, it just depends on what you kill first; don't say it's "just" ibuprofen.

 

 

 

Can you tell me what doesn't have a potential for misuse? Even video games can be considered "dangerous" because there are so many cases where kids throw their lives away just to play a game.

I figured that argument would be brought up. It's a drug. It has no use in a school environment except for the nurse's office. Should she feel the need to take a few every four hours, it should be administered in a controlled environment.

 

And this means they have the right to command children to take their clothes off, just based off of unreliable hearsay?

That depends on your stance regarding the media, I would assume. In this case, no probably not. But should this come up again based on the same situation with something such as marijuana instead of an OTC drug the courts would argue the same thing. That's no in favor of a learning environment.

[Zierro]

I figured that argument would be brought up. It's a drug. It has no use in a school environment except for the nurse's office. Should she feel the need to take a few every four hours, it should be administered in a controlled environment.

 

 

 

Why? It is her body - not the school's.

[Laura]

I figured that argument would be brought up. It's a drug. It has no use in a school environment except for the nurse's office. Should she feel the need to take a few every four hours, it should be administered in a controlled environment.

 

 

 

Why? It is her body - not the school's.

Using that same idea, am I allowed to bring what ever I chose to school? Am I above the rules? The law?

[mmmcannibalism]

I figured that argument would be brought up. It's a drug. It has no use in a school environment except for the nurse's office. Should she feel the need to take a few every four hours, it should be administered in a controlled environment.

 

 

 

Why? It is her body - not the school's.

Using that same idea, am I allowed to bring what ever I chose to school? Am I above the rules? The law?

 

 

 

the difference between having ibuprofen and a gun is that you arent posing a threat to anyone with pills; detaining the girl to prevent her distributing drugs is fine but everything the school did was over the top and not thought out.

[Laura]

I figured that argument would be brought up. It's a drug. It has no use in a school environment except for the nurse's office. Should she feel the need to take a few every four hours, it should be administered in a controlled environment.

 

 

 

Why? It is her body - not the school's.

Using that same idea, am I allowed to bring what ever I chose to school? Am I above the rules? The law?

 

 

 

the difference between having ibuprofen and a gun is that you arent posing a threat to anyone with pills; detaining the girl to prevent her distributing drugs is fine but everything the school did was over the top and not thought out.

The media is the last source we should be using for this kind of situation. I disagree about pills being not threatening; they can do a lot of damage in a matter of hours with no inkling as to their destructive results.

[WWWWW]

http://www.cracked.com/article_17216_p2.html

 

 

 

http://www.thisistrue.com/zt.html

 

 

 

http://www.usatoday.com/educate/ednews3.htm

 

 

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/24/us/24savana.html?_r=4

 

 

 

Read this before you respond. Zero tolerance is a bad rule.

[mmmcannibalism]

I figured that argument would be brought up. It's a drug. It has no use in a school environment except for the nurse's office. Should she feel the need to take a few every four hours, it should be administered in a controlled environment.

 

 

 

Why? It is her body - not the school's.

Using that same idea, am I allowed to bring what ever I chose to school? Am I above the rules? The law?

 

 

 

the difference between having ibuprofen and a gun is that you arent posing a threat to anyone with pills; detaining the girl to prevent her distributing drugs is fine but everything the school did was over the top and not thought out.

The media is the last source we should be using for this kind of situation. I disagree about pills being not threatening; they can do a lot of damage in a matter of hours with no inkling as to their destructive results.

 

 

 

Let me refine that statement

 

 

 

The difference between a gun and pills is largely in the possible outcomes; while there are plenty of "good" reasons to have ibuprofen at school, there is no reason at all for having a gun at school. Secondly, while pills if tainted could be used to poision a person or persons, in this situation there was no reason to believe there was such a threat(always considered but no support for it here). Taking the girl to the office for holding while her parents came and possibly a later controlled search by police(if a crime was still believed) would have been fine; searching the girl without calling her parents, without getting an attorney, and without hesitating to strip search her was ridiculous. Now, if a gun was suspected and substantiated the school would have the full need to do a pat down search and detain the girl for as long as needed to get the police and her parents to the school. You cant attack someone with a pill, so this girl was nowhere near the threat of a gun/knife/bomb.

[Laura]

I figured that argument would be brought up. It's a drug. It has no use in a school environment except for the nurse's office. Should she feel the need to take a few every four hours, it should be administered in a controlled environment.

 

 

 

Why? It is her body - not the school's.

Using that same idea, am I allowed to bring what ever I chose to school? Am I above the rules? The law?

 

 

 

the difference between having ibuprofen and a gun is that you arent posing a threat to anyone with pills; detaining the girl to prevent her distributing drugs is fine but everything the school did was over the top and not thought out.

The media is the last source we should be using for this kind of situation. I disagree about pills being not threatening; they can do a lot of damage in a matter of hours with no inkling as to their destructive results.

 

 

 

Let me refine that statement

 

 

 

The difference between a gun and pills is largely in the possible outcomes; while there are plenty of "good" reasons to have ibuprofen at school, there is no reason at all for having a gun at school. Secondly, while pills if tainted could be used to poision a person or persons, in this situation there was no reason to believe there was such a threat(always considered but no support for it here). Taking the girl to the office for holding while her parents came and possibly a later controlled search by police(if a crime was still believed) would have been fine; searching the girl without calling her parents, without getting an attorney, and without hesitating to strip search her was ridiculous. Now, if a gun was suspected and substantiated the school would have the full need to do a pat down search and detain the girl for as long as needed to get the police and her parents to the school. You cant attack someone with a pill, so this girl was nowhere near the threat of a gun/knife/bomb.

This girl was supposedly handing out pills like candy. While I agree someone should have been called, you have to ask yourself if she actually said no to the search. Even if so, is a nurse not qualified? In the United States anyways, I was legally, as an intern, allowed to view areas not covered by a bathing suit with consent. Then only issue here is that she shouldn't be her own consent as a 13 year old. The article is blatantly biased to cause commotion as there are few statements to any of the persons involved. And drugs don't have to be tainted to be dangerous - it's all the same. A police officer would have no more qualifications than a school nurse in this case, if not less so. The girl would have also had a higher chance of having an opposite sex search her.

 

 

 

It was poor judgment with good intentions, the same as the girl.

[mmmcannibalism]

[hide=]

I figured that argument would be brought up. It's a drug. It has no use in a school environment except for the nurse's office. Should she feel the need to take a few every four hours, it should be administered in a controlled environment.

 

 

 

Why? It is her body - not the school's.

Using that same idea, am I allowed to bring what ever I chose to school? Am I above the rules? The law?

 

 

 

the difference between having ibuprofen and a gun is that you arent posing a threat to anyone with pills; detaining the girl to prevent her distributing drugs is fine but everything the school did was over the top and not thought out.

The media is the last source we should be using for this kind of situation. I disagree about pills being not threatening; they can do a lot of damage in a matter of hours with no inkling as to their destructive results.

 

 

 

Let me refine that statement

 

 

 

The difference between a gun and pills is largely in the possible outcomes; while there are plenty of "good" reasons to have ibuprofen at school, there is no reason at all for having a gun at school. Secondly, while pills if tainted could be used to poision a person or persons, in this situation there was no reason to believe there was such a threat(always considered but no support for it here). Taking the girl to the office for holding while her parents came and possibly a later controlled search by police(if a crime was still believed) would have been fine; searching the girl without calling her parents, without getting an attorney, and without hesitating to strip search her was ridiculous. Now, if a gun was suspected and substantiated the school would have the full need to do a pat down search and detain the girl for as long as needed to get the police and her parents to the school. You cant attack someone with a pill, so this girl was nowhere near the threat of a gun/knife/bomb.

This girl was supposedly handing out pills like candy. While I agree someone should have been called, you have to ask yourself if she actually said no to the search. Even if so, is a nurse not qualified? In the United States anyways, I was legally, as an intern, allowed to view areas not covered by a bathing suit with consent. Then only issue here is that she shouldn't be her own consent as a 13 year old. The article is blatantly biased to cause commotion as there are few statements to any of the persons involved. And drugs don't have to be tainted to be dangerous - it's all the same. A police officer would have no more qualifications than a school nurse in this case, if not less so. The girl would have also had a higher chance of having an opposite sex search her.

 

 

 

It was poor judgment with good intentions, the same as the girl.

[/hide]

 

 

 

a. one person said she had drugs, she wasnt accused of mass distribution. If she was such a big dealer this wouldnt be a controversial case because they would have found drugs on her person pre strip search

 

 

 

b. a female police officer should have done the search as a matter of procedure; however, I dont object to a school official if they had training in such matters(which is possible here)

 

 

 

c. agreed, she shouldnt be her own consent

 

 

 

d. this search was unreasonable because the immediate threat was not considered relative to the violation or rights. As supreme court cases have established, rights can be curtailed to an extent to protect the population. The problem is they violated her rights far beyond what was needed, simply taking her to the office(remember they had only hearsay as evidence) and giving her parents time to come and be involved in the schools action was all that was needed. Detaining the girl was perfectly fine and a good administrative choice, everything beyond that was handled horribly.

[Zierro]

Using that same idea, am I allowed to bring what ever I chose to school? Am I above the rules? The law?

 

 

 

We're not talking about whatever you choose though, we're talking about a common household drug which is rarely ever abused. If the student claimed that she had possession of a weapon then I could completely understand. There is probably even a higher death toll from pens than there are from ibuprofen.

[Riku3220]

Using that same idea, am I allowed to bring what ever I chose to school? Am I above the rules? The law?

 

 

 

We're not talking about whatever you choose though, we're talking about a common household drug which is rarely ever abused. If the student claimed that she had possession of a weapon then I could completely understand. There is probably even a higher death toll from pens than there are from ibuprofen.

 

"Each year, use of NSAIDs (Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs) accounts for an estimated 7,600 deaths and 76,000 hospitalizations in the United States." (NSAIDs include aspirin, ibuprofen, naproxen, diclofenac, ketoprofen, and tiaprofenic acid.)

 

 

 

Teenagers are idiots. Their minds work like this:

 

 

 

*Takes 2 Ibuprofen pills*

 

"Hmm nothing is happening. Maybe if I took more..."

 

*Takes more*

[Zierro]

Now how about the amount of cases where nothing bad happens? I'm guessing somewhere in the millions. Besides, I'm sure a good percentage of that has alcohol use in part of the equation (and allergic reactions).

 

 

 

Like I said, there is also a potential danger when it comes to pens yet every student is equipped with one. There is a potential danger when it comes to anything. The only way we can measure the true dangerousness of something is to compare the cases where it has been used responsibly with the cases where it has been abused.

[fastortoise]

Now how about the amount of cases where nothing bad happens? I'm guessing somewhere in the millions. Besides, I'm sure a good percentage of that has alcohol use in part of the equation (and allergic reactions).

 

True.

 

 

 

But at any rate, guys, I don't see how the school should be responsible to any of this. Principals have to deal with hundreds of students, teachers dozens. Parents? One, two, sometimes three. If they can't keep track of one or two teenagers, why would anyone expect the school system to?

[scootlaboot]

Now how about the amount of cases where nothing bad happens? I'm guessing somewhere in the millions. Besides, I'm sure a good percentage of that has alcohol use in part of the equation (and allergic reactions).

 

True.

 

 

 

But at any rate, guys, I don't see how the school should be responsible to any of this. Principals have to deal with hundreds of students, teachers dozens. Parents? One, two, sometimes three. If they can't keep track of one or two teenagers, why would anyone expect the school system to?

 

Because people are stupid. And when the even dumber ones get together they form groups like MADD or PETA.

[l0l0lpur34]

 

"Each year, use of NSAIDs (Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs) accounts for an estimated 7,600 deaths and 76,000 hospitalizations in the United States." (NSAIDs include aspirin, ibuprofen, naproxen, diclofenac, ketoprofen, and tiaprofenic acid.)

 

most of them are probably purposeful overdoses, allergic reactions etc.

 

 

Teenagers are idiots. Their minds work like this:

 

 

 

*Takes 2 Ibuprofen pills*

 

"Hmm nothing is happening. Maybe if I took more..."

 

*Takes more*

 

no, just no.

[i_love_burritos]

sorry. meant to do something else. disregard.

[Racheya]

I'm curious about all you people who say people at your schools get searched for drugs... nothing like that happens here. I've always got paracetamol tablets on me and many times I've gone into the toilets to take one... I've even give one to a guy I know. Should I be strip searched or something? Teenagers aren't THAT stupid... even my 9 year old brother knows how to take the right dose of Calpol and cough medicines...

[Ren0gade]

I know nothing gets me more messed up than poppin a few Ibuprofen and listening to Dark Side of the Moon at night :roll: ... they should quit strip searching kids over advil and maybe concentrate on the kids with rolls or coke in the bathrooms, just a though.

[Laura]

 

"Each year, use of NSAIDs (Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs) accounts for an estimated 7,600 deaths and 76,000 hospitalizations in the United States." (NSAIDs include aspirin, ibuprofen, naproxen, diclofenac, ketoprofen, and tiaprofenic acid.)

 

most of them are probably purposeful overdoses, allergic reactions etc.

 

 

Teenagers are idiots. Their minds work like this:

 

 

 

*Takes 2 Ibuprofen pills*

 

"Hmm nothing is happening. Maybe if I took more..."

 

*Takes more*

 

no, just no.

 

Yes, that's how it usually works. I can't tell you the number of cases I've seen similar to that. At thirteen, the girl is just starting to develop higher levels of cognitive thinking for long-term consequences. As he puts it, they're idiots.

 

most of them are probably purposeful overdoses, allergic reactions etc.

If you could please provide an unbiased source to that. Which in retrospect isn't possible; that's a false statement.

 

We're not talking about whatever you choose though, we're talking about a common household drug which is rarely ever abused. If the student claimed that she had possession of a weapon then I could completely understand. There is probably even a higher death toll from pens than there are from ibuprofen.

Something similar to what mmmcanabalism said, pens have a large potential at the school, unlike the drugs and certainly at variance to a weapon. But regarding you previous statement, if she housed a weapon on her person, she should be allowed to bring it to school. You're arguing the school's standards and regulations alongside federal law. It doesn't matter what drug she brought to school, it can have devastating side effects for both parties - the school and the family. The family would obviously blame the school should their child die from the drug after accepting it from another student. The act of strip searching her so swiftly was unjustifiable but there is no excuse for why she brought it to school in the first place.

[Zierro]

Yes, that's how it usually works. I can't tell you the number of cases I've seen similar to that. At thirteen, the girl is just starting to develop higher levels of cognitive thinking for long-term consequences. As he puts it, they're idiots.

 

 

 

Using your own words, can you provide an unbiased source? Teenagers aren't the only ones effected negatively by drugs. In fact, can you provide me with something that says there are more cases of teens dying from drugs than adults or anything along those lines? Adults can be just as guilty, but yet your argument is targeting children as if they are the only ones who are known for doing this.

 

 

 

The act of strip searching her so swiftly was unjustifiable but there is no excuse for why she brought it to school in the first place.

 

 

 

I wouldn't be a fan of the inconveniences attached to going to the nurse's office just to take my pill which I presumably have been taking regularly without any bad side effects. Plus I have never heard of such a rule. You can't honestly think that it's a good idea to make teens liable for going up to the office every time they have something minor like a headache. School is the only place where I've heard of such a ridiculous rule. No one else seems to freak out when they see you holding ibuprofen. The school goes straight to assuming that a kid's hearsay about drugs = automatic death.

[Joes_So_Cool]

It was a female doing the search, (so I've heard) so I don't see the problem. Besides, don't you have to sign wavers at the beginning of school for medicine and such that is filed in the office and in the nurses office which probably includes something about being searched? At my school they give you a handbook (that's like 300 pages long and no one reads) and a paper with it that you and your parent/guardian must sign before you're allowed to come to school that has all of the rules, and I'm positive that it has something about being searched, so, you agree to it, at least in my school.

[Riku3220]

 

I wouldn't be a fan of the inconveniences attached to going to the nurse's office just to take my pill which I presumably have been taking regularly without any bad side effects. Plus I have never heard of such a rule. You can't honestly think that it's a good idea to make teens liable for going up to the office every time they have something minor like a headache. School is the only place where I've heard of such a ridiculous rule. No one else seems to freak out when they see you holding ibuprofen. The school goes straight to assuming that a kid's hearsay about drugs = automatic death.

 

Look, it does not matter if the drug was Ibuprofen, marijuana, or meth. If they seriously need to fix a headache problem every nurse I've been to since middle school had her own supply of Tylenol. There is no reason for anybody to bring any form of drug into the school.