So this is what I learned from attending the meeting yesterday - TopicsExpress



          

So this is what I learned from attending the meeting yesterday between Mary Ann Shiech and LPSs Director of Student Services, Russ Uhling: 1. The district is defensive about the ire coming from parents (they are ready for questions and quite practiced at deflecting from their own responsibilities regarding the referral of youth to the county attorney; 2. The filing from the county attorney that we are reacting to was due to a referral made to the county attorney in May for LAST YEARS ATTENDANCE. 3. The rhetoric: Kids can only learn when they are at school, and There is a direct correlation between attendance and failures in life, is alive and well. Perhaps the angriest I saw Mr. Uhing was when I challenged this notion by saying it isnt true that children must be in school to learn. It seems the current climate of justifying the overreach into parental decision making and the crackdown on kids who choose other activities on occasion over school relies heavily on this rhetoric. That tells me we need to be addressing that notion head on - whenever we can. 4. Russ Uhing worked very hard to maintain his careful use of words and definitions when referring to what is and is not excused according to LPS school district policy. The bottom line: According to LPS policy, if you want to be safe from the jurisdiction of the prosecutor, you are required to turn in documentation for illnesses, college visits, and funerals. If you do not turn in documentation, your childs absence will not be coded as school excused. Instead it will be coded as PA or ILL (which means parent acknowledged or ill - neither of which are school excused). If your child racks up any number of absences not coded as school excused, it gives the school the justification to send letters, call you into meetings, suggest truancy diversion, and essentially ask prying and private questions that may or may not be appropriate, depending on your circumstances and the actual reasons for the absences. SUMMARIES: LPS publicly states that its policy doesnt *require* a doctors note for every illness, but if you dont have one, the absence will fall under a category that is fair game for a referral to the county attorney, should your child reach a number of absences throughout the year that are not school excused. To me, thats highly problematic. It adds in illnesses to a prosecutable tally, and therefore discriminates against the poor and families with high deductible insurance policies who cannot afford to pay over $100 for a note. Further, notes dont always account for recuperation time, which the school would then count as NON SCHOOL EXCUSED. The county attorney is still playing catch up from referrals made at the end of last year, and pulling families into the system who have moved on to a new school year - a practice I believe is highly destructive and destabilizing for kids and parents. _______________ So here is the explanation, as I understand it for what Mary Ann and her son are going through right now (Mary Ann, you can correct anything I get wrong): Mary Anns son was not referred to the county attorney for THIS school year. The filing is from a referral made in May for LAST SCHOOL YEARS ATTENDANCE. Russ Uhing explained that their hands were tied. They were just following the law. Last school year Mary Anns son missed a total of 24 days (mostly due to illness, but also from the school factoring in a number of tardies they calculated and added in, tardies primarily due to his oversleeping and getting to school late). The before-school tardy problem was resolved successfully. But most notable during last year were the number of illnesses, including the day her son fell at school and had a seizure in the hallway. A staff member walked by him and left him there for a full 8 minutes without getting help. He was transported by ambulance from the school to hospital, and - from what we saw on the attendance detail yesterday at the meeting, they counted his absences from that as NON SCHOOL EXCUSED. Mary Ann never received a letter saying her son had been referred last year. In fact, Mary Ann kept in close contact with the attendance secretary at her sons school, and was repeatedly reassured that she had nothing to worry about, since his absences were due to illness. But alas, this was not true. Only a few days ago her son was approached AT SCHOOL (with no communication made with Mary Ann first) to woo him into the schools truancy diversion program. According to her son, they made the program sound fun - with gift cards used as rewards for participating successfully. But of course his mom knows the downside of signing agreements with programs that are tied to law enforcement. Mary Ann declined the offer, and it was a day or two later when she received notice that the county attorney was filing on her son. Suspicious timing? I think so. Regardless, this is a dangerous practice that threatens all of us. ________________________________ As frustrated as we are with LPS for its still-too-overreaching attendance policy that we believe is teetering on the edge of the law, if not outright in violation of it, I believe we also need to turn our attentions to the Lancaster County Attorneys office, since they are playing catch up from the past year - long after the alleged problem occurred. It is inappropriate and unnecessary to drag families and kids into the juvenile justice court system after that youth passed to the next grade and is doing well in his current school year. Further, I think we should all be highly concerned at the practice of the county attorney with families of sick children or otherwise non-truant kids who do not voluntarily submit to the truancy diversion or other government programs. As we have heard from families whove experienced this, and as I heard with my own ears, the county attorneys are DELIBERATELY PUNISHING FAMILIES FOR EXERCISING THEIR RIGHT NOT TO PARTICIPATE IN A PROGRAM THAT VIOLATES PRIVACY AND REQUIRES SIGNING AGREEMENTS WHEN IT IS NOT APPROPRIATE FOR THEIR CHILD. They are forcing these families to retain council, endure threats of child removal and defamatory petition language, and several hearings leading up to trial. Then the cases are being dropped at the 11th hour - due to what we all know is lack of evidence for the prosecutor to succeed in the case against the family. This is an OUTRAGE. Who wants to write to, call, and complain before the Lancaster County Board about this practice? Who wants to protest the county attorneys office for the practice of terrorizing children and violating the rights of citizens? Regardless of what we are told, these people have discretion. The school district has had discretion since our amendment to the rigid attendance law was passed in 2012. The county attorney has discretion to consider the history of cases and the evidence that clearly shows a kid doing well in school who also suffers medical issues. While we hear so much about reforming the juvenile justice system to keep kids out, its important to identify which people and systems appear to be bending over backwards to pull them in. That costs us ALL big time.
Posted on: Sat, 04 Oct 2014 21:20:20 +0000

Trending Topics



Recently Viewed Topics




© 2015