Bullying

The movie we watched in class, Bullied, showed a more personal level of how bullying affects people. Before watching the film I thought that the school should do little to prevent bullying. I thought that physical violence should be either handled by the student or by the authorities. At first I agreed with the Middle School Principle. She said that "boys will be boys", and at first I agreed. However, after seeing the physical and emotional affect on Jamie Nabozny I completely changed my opinion. The school did not do anything to protect him or punish the bullies at all. Some sort of punishment should have been enforced. When it came to the point that Jamie Nabozny had to go to the hospital, it was time for the school to step in. Jamie's security was seriously threatened every time that he went to school. This is a serious problem that the school had to handle. Verbal harassment should have different consequences than physical harassment. I do not think it is right that the verbal harassment wasn't handled immediately. Growing up in and around Deerfield, I have always witnessed people getting in trouble for something they said. I would say that verbal harassment is the most common type of offense that students at Deerfield High School commit.

In the case of Nabozny vs. Podlesny , the court ruled in Nabozny's favor. Jamie won a total of close to one million dollars. This was the first case in the United States that had to address anti- gay violence in public schools. Also, this case led to more programs to accepting gay people. This case was truly a breakthrough case.

In our own high school, I do not feel as though bullying is a problem. Physical bullying is not present in the school; this may be because of past cases similar to Nabozny vs. Podlesny. Our school is defiantly "clicky". People have their friends and only associate with them. This leaves little room for bullying because no one is forcing people to hang out with other people that they don't like. Deerfield High School is not different from other schools. Other schools may have some more problems with physical bullying but I feel as thought the level of verbal harassment is the same. I also think that it is difficult to stop verbal harassment. Cyber bullying is too easy and as long as students have Facebook or text messaging, it is possible.

Potential solutions to stop bullying involve taking one step at a time. It is easy to say that bullying is bad. Everybody knows that. However, it is more difficult to talk about different ways to accept LGBT students. I do think, however, that more lectures and accepting values should be incorporated into the school environment. This may be through activities such as challenge day. What really influenced me my freshman year were the SAGA and Minority Report panels. It made me realize that in high school it is important to understand that there are those different from you in our own school. You never know when a joke may affect someone or whom it may affect. I think it is important to continue freshman panels just to increase awareness. Obviously our school has a very strict policy and discrimination. If one student makes a bad decision and discriminates they are very likely to get in trouble. This sends the right message to everyone else in the school. It is important that everyone knows that there will be consequences.

-Igor

Student Searches

Students, like in the case of Samantha Redding, should not be subjected to unreasonable searches. Samantha Redding was strip searched and embarrassed when strip searched under false accusations. Probable cause was not evident and this was clearly a mistake by the school. Subjecting a girl in eighth grade to a strip search can be truly costly. The feelings of uncomfert will carry through Samantha forever. What the school did was rape her. They made her expose her private parts for no clear reason. Also, Samantha Miller did not know the reason of her search. Her feelings of confusion and uncomfert were the result of a search taht unvealed nothing. What would they have done if they found prescribed pills? Most likely, the pills would have been prescribed to her. They were looking for evidence that would not have solved anything. There would have been no proof that the pills that she had were the same as the ones that were found on the student.

Also, the case of the Missouri school  and random lockdowns shows students a bad lessson. When students are subject to searches like this, they are presented with unamerican values. These suspicionless searches completely go against the Fourth Amendment. There is no reason for these searches and the students are subjected to exactly the opposite of what they are learning in school. Schools should insure that students have constitutional rights, at least to some extent.

Drug Testing

Students should be subject to drug tests no matter what. What should they have to hide? If the law states that all students are innocent until proven guilty, let the students prove themselves innocent. If the students have nothing to hide then there should be no question that drug testing should be allowed. It is better to get students help and invade their privacy then to find out later that they have suffered a drug related injury. It is best to use preventative measures and upset a few students. It would be worth it.

 School officials, however, should be cautious of the searches that they do. I believe that in order to drug test a student there must be probable cause from a credible source. For example, in the case of New Jersey v. T.L.O, the principle had no right to keep rummaging through the purse looking for more evidence. He found what he had probable cause to find and should have left it at that. Reasonable cause is important. A new case, the case of Samantha Redding and Safford Middle School, there was not probable cause from a credible source. The vice principal had no right to strip search a middle school student with the intent of finding prescribed painkillers. Also, the voice of a student in trouble is not a credible source of accusation, especially if the student is not backed up by evidence.

Students, like in the case of Veronia School District v. Acton, should be subject to drug testing with probable cause. If a student wishes to represent there school in either a sport or a club they should be subject to drug testing. This makes perfect sense. If I ran a school, I would want my school represented by students who obeyed the law and didn't use illegal substances. In this case, the drug testing would be used based on "individualized suspicion of wrongdoing". If there was a probable cause to test a student then it would make sense to test them. This is not a random generalized search of a group of students. This is a scenario where one student is suspected of violating rules and this is the probable cause needed to test them.

Also, I do not believe that drug testing is an issue of privacy. What can be so embarrassing that can show up in a drug test? If you are on a medication then there should be no shame for it to come up and for one person to see it. If it proves your innocence of illegal substances then it is worth it. Students who refuse drug testing should also be a probable cause. What can be the reason a student didn't want to be drug tested other than them taking illegal drugs? If there is nothing to hide, then taking a drug test should not be a problem.

Drug testing is different than strip searching. There is a major privacy breach when it comes to stripping down a middle school student looking for prescribed medicine. Drug testing, however, is for the overall good of the community. Finding out if someone has a drug problem early can be a major life changer. Students may be unhappy about this, but it is worth it in order to get help for students who need it.