Replies

Truthfully, long ago the states should have intervened against “zero tolerance” policies in schools, because it is both school teachers and administrators abrogating their disciplinary responsibilities, and it also means children facing arrest by police officers for extremely petty and childish reasons, not serious criminal activities.

If teachers and administrators are terrified of lawsuits, this too is something states should intervene to stop, on the grounds that schools are “alma maters” (temporary foster parents), so should be exempt from lawsuits on frivolous grounds. If states permit limited corporal punishment in the schools, there should be no possibility of litigation at the state level about it, unless grievous physical harm has occurred to the child.

Please note that none of the above has anything to do with racism.

This being said, states should also consider boarding schools for at-risk elementary age children, based on parental misconduct. That is, if parents have previous convictions for violent crimes, or crimes against children, or gang membership, or even substantial poverty, it should be grounds for that state’s child protective services to declare them “semi-unfit” as parents, and to put their young children in a state boarding school.

This would not strip their parents of their legal parentage, nor would it in any way be seen as prejudicial against their children, but it would guarantee that their children had a proper diet, proper education, and were capable of attending secondary school on graduation.

States might then even consider providing a military secondary school for junior and senior high school age children whose parents were still unable to raise them properly. This would give those children better opportunities for success than an ordinary public school.

In effect it would break the welfare, dependency and crime cycle, and give the children a fresh start.