WuWei
164
I would say there is a bit of overlappin’ but not much.
Yes, they make a determination based on predetermined indicators.
WuWei
168
Not whether or not abuse has occurred, no they do not.
Link to the thread please.
What evidence of child endangerment did she see?
WuWei
170
Not discipline. Simply behavior required for admission.
RTchoke
171

PurpnGold:

WuWei:
Harm. There was no harm in the zoom case. In your hypothetical, there is harm. Which means it is ex post facto, not prior restraint. When harm has been done, responsibilities change. We punish, investigate, etc., after harm has been done. Not because we feel it may be done in the future. Law is reactive, not proactive.
Common law principles. Right @TheDoctorIsIn?
Mandatory reporting include child endangerment. For example if the kids parents are running a drug ring in the house. No physical abuse but endangerment.
In the zoom case… the teacher THOUGHT the child was endangered. Student was off campus but “in-school”.
Why was she told to mind her business?
Having a gun in the house does not mean a child is endangered. The teacher was letting her personal beliefs interfere. Period.
2 Likes
That’s your opinion.
She used her judgement based on her mandatory reporting requirements
Yes, they discipline for conduct that happens on campus
RTchoke
174
Where is it mandatory to report that a gun is in a student’s home and ONLY that scenario?
WuWei
175
She was not mandated to report the presence of a firearm in a home.
Get off the Silly Road.
2 Likes
WuWei
177
No, they don’t. They suspend and expel. No admission until the behavior is corrected.
What “mandatory reporting requirements” require teachers to report child abuse because of a firearm being seen in the home?
You just described discipline. It’s punitive
WuWei
182
No, it is not. You think the school is “punishing” a kid by making him not go to school?