I've always liked that latter one. "No fighting" because "fighting" is always bad, even in self-defense, m'kay? Why? Because it's bad, m'kay, and we can't have bad things in school, m'kay?
When I was in school, they did just that. School policy dictated that any liquid substance in the possession of a student, not sold in the school cafeteria and consumed entirely therein, was to be considered the same as alcohol. But at least they didn't press felony charges in those days--the schools never punished actual criminals because doing so would require an implicit acknowledgment of their existence.
Another school-district policy required that some off-site educrat operate the thermostat, almost invariably on "full-blast heat" no matter how hot the environs. The building didn't happen to have any water fountains, and because most of it remained under construction, had a grand total of one toilet, access to which was intensely competitive and tightly controlled.
On one particularly warm mid-winter day, we had just received a new student whose family relocated from Vermont. By lunch time, the cafeteria already had sold out of liquids, and she was showing obvious signs of severe heat stress aggravated by dehydration. Once we brought her situation to the attention of the principal, she did manage to recover with the assistance of a bucket of ice. (The school nurse declined to come to work, and given the rules and the condition of the building, no one else could even get her a drink of water.)
In the principles of school rules, punishments inflicted should apply collectively rather than to the individual criminal. Because schools cannot target drunkards directly, they instead punish the broader collective of those in possession of any liquid beverage. Another principle tells us that in a fight between a bully and victim, the victim must receive a stronger punishment for being bullied than the bully. This principle mainly protects bullies, gangs, and drug dealers who operate on school property, thus creating a haven for juvenile delinquents and other criminals.
On one particularly warm mid-winter day, we had just received a new student whose family relocated from Vermont. By lunch time, the cafeteria already had sold out of liquids, and she was showing obvious signs of severe heat stress aggravated by dehydration. Once we brought her situation to the attention of the principal, she did manage to recover with the assistance of a bucket of ice. (The school nurse declined to come to work, and given the rules and the condition of the building, no one else could even get her a drink of water.)( Dufekin)
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
Dufekin,
This is CHILD ABUSE. What you have described of your school with the lack of water, and toilets is CHILD ABUSE.
If a private facility, such as a day care, private school or day camp, did this to children the owners would be rightfully arrested.
It is long past time that government school bureaucrats are held to the SAME child abuse standars, and standards for a safe environment, as are parents and those in private businesses.
that is truly amazing!
i didn't think even schools could come up with a policy that banned water.
I've always liked that latter one. "No fighting" because "fighting" is always bad, even in self-defense, m'kay? Why? Because it's bad, m'kay, and we can't have bad things in school, m'kay?