|
|
Guest
|
 |
On fire! |
Registered: March 2012
Messages: 2344
|
|
|
No Message Body
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This article reminds me of the teacher Dave in Driver Nine's story Everyday Love. He would not touch a child unless he was in the presence of another adult, or better, the child's parents. How sad that it has come to this.
I blame the media the most for sensationalizing any and every story they can lay their hands on. This causes mass hysteria and knee-jerk reactions.
I do not remember who did the sturies, but I do remember that it has been shown that to develop normally a child has to be physically touched, whether it is just a pat on the head or cheek, or hugs and kisses. Children that do not experience physical touching grow to be withdraw and paranoid.
One of the greatest, and longest lasting, influences on a childs life is his teachers. It is a crime to restrict them from providing the full education and nurturing that we had.
Vent, vent, rage, rage.
Hugs, Charlie
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Guest
|
|
On fire! |
Registered: March 2012
Messages: 2344
|
|
|
I wish there was a solution to this...I was physically beaten by a teacher in public school. My father went in and told the principal if it ever occured again, he would have the law on the teacher and on the principal for allowing it. It did occur again. The entire problem was that I was writing left handed because my other parent had broken my right wrist  No one ever did anything about the teacher. I was moved into another class the following year. Children do need to be nurtured by their teachers, appropriately. Sad that it has come to this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Guest
|
|
On fire! |
Registered: March 2012
Messages: 2344
|
|
|
It seems to me that this is an extream manisfestation of the upheavals that are going on about broad issues such as sex roles and child rearing. There are people who think that no "real man" would want to work with young children because it is "women's work". There are people who are opposed to daycare centers and think that mothers should be required to stay at home with their children. I suspect that there is a good bit of overlap in these two groups.
One of the worst results of the hysteria is that reasonable parents and teachers can't sit down and talk to each other about how best to meet kids legitimate needs for both protection and affection.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
cossie
|
|
On fire! |
Location: Exiled in North East Engl...
Registered: July 2003
Messages: 1699
|
|
|
... determined to protect our children at whatever cost. I suspect that there are those who would like to chop down every climbable tree within reach of habitation, just in case a child should fall from it. As implied by some of the comments in the article, we've reached a situation in which those who are not prepared to condemn are presumed to condone. It's a bit remniscent of Bush's suggestion than anyone who doesn't support every aspect of US action is on the side of the terrorists!
I don't know how that statement was received in the USA, but it was greeted with some derision elsewhere.
But back to child protection. What has changed over the last couple of generations? The key element is individual mobility. Almost everyone has private transport, and paedophiles can travel to locations away from their normal routine with ease.
Those who do so are often aggressive predators, and the old-fashioned advice 'never take sweets from a stranger' is more true than ever before. But the pendulum has swung far too far.
Life is inherently dangerous. The zeal to protect the innocent from every contingency is counter-productive, because it sterilises relationships which would otherwise be much more fulfilling. Many, many kids have been deprived of comfort and affection because teachers are fearful of laying themselves open to unfounded allegations. Is it sensible to deprive the majority to protect a minority? I doubt it, if our concern is - as it should be - for the ultimate welfare of our society.
Exposure to risk is something we all face, every day. It helps to make us what we are. Whether that's a good thing, I leave you to judge - but whilst I'd have reacted very forcefully to any assault on my kids, I honestly did try to avoid over-protecting them, and they seem to have benefitted from their experience.
For a' that an' a' that,
It's comin' yet for a' that,
That man tae man, the worrld o'er
Shall brithers be, for a' that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Guest
|
|
On fire! |
Registered: March 2012
Messages: 2344
|
|
|
There have also been major changes in men's and women's roles. More children are being care for out of the home at a very young age. This kind of social upheaval usually produces fear and conflict.
BTW: I thought that the article in the SF Chronicle was well written and balanced.
Richard
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance is soo hard to achieve. I can totally relate to the teachers who know they need to be able to touch, but who also know it's probably best if they don't, given the current situation.
When I worked at an organization for lesbian and gay youth, I was fairly regularly accused of working there for ulterior motives. Even a sardonic raised eyebrow made me furious after a short while.
Now I am supervising a very experienced counsellor working with a teenager who is a chronic liar, and who has lied about being molested before. The school asked my agency to do the work, one counsellor declined, for very good reasons.
A couple of years ago I had a 14 year old client that had been accused of molesting a 5 year old. In my work with him, I found myself constantly questioning whether he was lying to me, or else why would the 5 year old say those things? Finally, the client himself pleaded with me to be the one person in the ENTIRE WORLD who believed him when he denied it. My heart broke for him, and he was right about what he needed from me.
This boy had never been in trouble in his life, and nothing was ever proved, and the case was dismissed due to lack of evidence. I still have no idea why that 5 year old said what he did, with amazingly graphic detail, I might add.
My client cooperated with everything ever required of him, in order to prove his innocence. In the beginning, he didn't even understand what he was being accused of. He genuinely didn't have a clue what the terms meant. When I explained what the words meant, he was more thunder-struck than I have ever seen anybody be.
But he could never be "innocent" again, even though I am sure now that he didn't do it.
Yet all the children should be protected, and not over-protected.
Balance would be wonderful.
I don't see it coming any time soon...
"Always forgive your enemies...nothing annoys them quite so much." Oscar Wilde
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I talked to a co-worker today who's wife is an elemtary teacher. When I first mentioned the subject of the article, he first words were "Those molesters should be sent to prison for the rest of their lives." I told hold on, there's more to the story, about how it turns out the teacher was innocent of the charges. He then stated that the accuser should go to jail.
I finally got him to admit that there is a double standard in US schools today. A female teacher has little worry in showing affection through touches and hugs in the class room. It is encouraged as a form of reward. However, a male teacher is advised by the administration to never touch a student for any reason without another adult present.
A little insight into the current attitudes in the US today.
Hugs, Charlie
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
How very (and sadly) true!
We do not remember days...we remember moments.
Cesare Pavese
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jack Rowan
|
 |
Getting started |
Registered: January 1970
Messages: 16
|
|
|
I think our society isn't entirely sane at the moment when it comes to this topic. It's really the case that you can't diverge even slightly from the general feeling on this without being accused of being soft on child molestors, or even of being a molestor yourself. Rational debate is almost impossible.
Simply because a crime is very nasty is not a good reason for suspending the ordinary rules of evidence and due process. It is not just to lock people up on suspicion or on very flimsy evidence, and even the fact that a child might be at risk doesn't make it just. There are other crimes which are pretty frightful too - armed robbery, rape and murder, for example, but nobody disputes that before someone is convicted of such a crime, the evidence must be secure and convincing.
In the UK, the government and others often try to persuade more men to become teachers, especially teachers of young children; the lack of male teachers and therefore of male role models is thought to be one of the reasons why girls are increasingly more successful academically in schools than boys. But a male student teacher told me that in no circumstances would he teach in a primary school, since he felt it was too perilous for him to touch the kids, but impossible to interact well with kids of that age without doing so...
Interestingly, recently there has been a case in the UK of a woman teacher being accused of having sex with two of her students, who were 14 and 15, if I remember rightly. The attitude of the papers has been - well, interesting. On the face of it, they have condemned what was alleged to have happened (she was acquited in the end) but there's been an underlying nudge-nudge wink-wink "teacher's night of passion" feeling to the reporting, quite different from the "lock the monster up and throw away the key" feeling there would have been if the teacher had been a man and kids girls, or even worse, boys.
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
|
] 
A Place of Safety
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
Current state of affairs in US 
