Story sounded sorta hot until I got to the picture. Oh well.

I still hope the school board loses so bad that they have to have a goddamn bake sale to buy toilet paper for the administrators' toilet. I see NO reason for a search of that nature under any circumstances. Even cops making a murder arrest don't strip the person down until they get to the jail.

If the student poses an immediate safety threat, isolate them, get the school cop/call the cops and present the situation. If they're actually wielding a weapon, hey, no need to search, and if they're hiding it, they're not causing an immediate threat. Thus, isolation is sufficient. If they resist, then restraining techniques are acceptable pending arrival of law enforcement. If there's probable cause to make an arrest, then the cop can do a NORMAL search. If there's not, then simply keep the student isolated until parents can be called to check them out.

There is NO imminent danger to other students if someone is holding a Motrin in their butt crack, thus there should never be a reason to strip search a student for that.

This court has no respect for the Fourth Amendment.

"We did not find any pills during our search of Savana," Wilson reported.

Fools.

My school vice-principle would have planted the pills and never admitted any wrong. Then again it is Safford.

(I went to High School in Scottsdale).

i still think that schools should have the right to strip search students. i'm sure that the administrator in this case didn't do it without thought. Like he (she?) said in the article, if the kid did have the pills in question and someone else got sick, then the school would have been sued for that. damned if you do, damned if you don't, right?

should there be a strip search for ibuprofin? no. i think in this specific case, the right course of action should have been to call the kid's parent, and isolate the kid until mom could have picked her up and brought her home.

something tells me that mom probably would have sued for this, too.

xpennyroyaltyx: i still think that schools should have the right to strip search students.

Why? And who is supposed to do the strip searching? Suddenly a school nurse has the authority to perform a strip search?

There is no reasonable excuse for any school to perform a strip search on a student. As dahmers love zombie pointed out, if you have reasonable cause to do that, you call the police. And I would hardly think that a freakin' Advil is "reasonable cause".

I'm just wondering what the school would have done if the girl had refused to be strip searched. It probably never occurred to a shy girl like her that she could refuse.

Another thought. FTFA: Glines was found with what turned out to be several 400-milligram ibuprofen pills tucked into a folded school planner. A few days before, Savana had lent Marissa the folder. The vice principal also found a small knife, a cigarette and a lighter in it.

1. Why was the vice-principal looking for Advil when the other girl was caught w/a knife? Is it because the other girl admitted the knife was hers but said she got the pills from Savana?

2. Savana lent the folder to the other girl a few days before. Even if she did give the other girl the pills, why in the world would the VP believe that she still had days later?

I'm not getting the creepy vibe from the vice-principal...

brigid_fitch: still had THEM days later

FTFM

brigid_fitch: I'm notw getting the creepy vibe from the vice-principal...

Wow, my cat could type better than me this morning...

Is that what the kids are calling it theses days, subby?

brigid_fitch: Why? And who is supposed to do the strip searching? Suddenly a school nurse has the authority to perform a strip search?


because these days schools can be very scary places and sometimes (hell, most of the time) the rights of the other 900 students or so should come before the rights of the one. Strip searches have been performed exactly twice in our local school system in the past twenty years. Both times, guns have been found. was the strip search worth it? Yes.

the case in the article? well, i know what i might have done in that situation if i was the admin, but that doesn't really matter to the facts of the case, does it?

we need to be careful about our definition of 'strip search' as well. If we dis-allow them in the school system, if we say that school admins have no right to do strip searches, does that mean an admin has no right to check a student's pockets if there is warrant to do so? How about asking a student to remove a jacket? a hoodie? How about searching backpacks?

The safety of all students in the school comes first comes before the discomfort of an individual, imo. these things are not done wantonly.

You know, I would think the answer to this would be painfully obvious.

But this is the supreme court we're talking about, so I don't have high hopes.

If the supreme court decides that this sort of thing is ok, then i'm going to demand strip searches of elected officials and mandatory drug testing for everyone holding any public office.

Weaver95: If the supreme court decides that this sort of thing is ok, then i'm going to demand strip searches of elected officials and mandatory drug testing for everyone holding any public office.

This. I came here to say the same god damn thing. If you want to infringe on the rights of the students as people, than what about the teachers? the principals themselves? you?

/a slippery slope coated in delicious butter

xpennyroyaltyx: The safety of all students in the school comes first comes before the discomfort of an individual, imo. these things are not done wantonly.

Yes, but the principal was looking for IBUPROFEN! An over the counter pain reliever with no narcotic effects. This was neither a case of exigent circumstances (requiring immediate action to prevent the destruction of evidence or to insure public safety) or even reasonable suspicion of wrong doing. I understand that schools are not (and probably should not be) held to the same standards as police, but they need to exercise some common sense.

Weaver95: f the supreme court decides that this sort of thing is ok, then i'm going to demand strip searches of elected officials and mandatory drug testing for everyone holding any public office.

We should put this on pay per view, help the economy! I would watch every week!

brigid_fitch: I'm just wondering what the school would have done if the girl had refused to be strip searched. It probably never occurred to a shy girl like her that she could refuse.

With a name like "Savana", she should get used to stripping.

BlackCat23: Weaver95: If the supreme court decides that this sort of thing is ok, then i'm going to demand strip searches of elected officials and mandatory drug testing for everyone holding any public office.

This. I came here to say the same god damn thing. If you want to infringe on the rights of the students as people, than what about the teachers? the principals themselves? you?

/a slippery slope coated in delicious butter

I'm amazed at our double standard. our society is horrified at the merest hint of someone drinking and driving....but we don't drug test corporate leaders or elected officials? If we're going to put a janitor through drug testing, then we damn well better be putting members of the legislature through the same screening.

Ennuipoet: Yes, but the principal was looking for IBUPROFEN! An over the counter pain reliever with no narcotic effects

i said in another post that this was a bit much in these circumstances. the admin should have confined the student until mom could have picked her up. however, should this one case completely usurp the validity of strip searches in other warranted cases? i get a feeling FTFA that mom is the type of lady who's stumbling around in life hoping to to come across a good suing. isn't that the american way?

xpennyroyaltyx: brigid_fitch: Why? And who is supposed to do the strip searching? Suddenly a school nurse has the authority to perform a strip search?


because these days schools can be very scary places and sometimes (hell, most of the time) the rights of the other 900 students or so should come before the rights of the one. Strip searches have been performed exactly twice in our local school system in the past twenty years. Both times, guns have been found. was the strip search worth it? Yes.

the case in the article? well, i know what i might have done in that situation if i was the admin, but that doesn't really matter to the facts of the case, does it?

we need to be careful about our definition of 'strip search' as well. If we dis-allow them in the school system, if we say that school admins have no right to do strip searches, does that mean an admin has no right to check a student's pockets if there is warrant to do so? How about asking a student to remove a jacket? a hoodie? How about searching backpacks?

The safety of all students in the school comes first comes before the discomfort of an individual, imo. these things are not done wantonly.

I have no problem asking students to turn out their pockets, remove their jackets, or searching backpacks. Then again, that's a FAR cry from asking to student to remove ALL of his/her clothing. And I've already said that if a strip-search is warranted, like in the case of weapons, you call the farking cops and have them do it.

I think it's stupid that this case has gone all the way to the SCOTUS, but since it's there, let them define strip search in schools and whether it's allowed or not. And if so, under what circumstances & parameters.

BTW, I'm a former HS teacher who taught in an inner-city school. Weapons & drugs were rampant. Nobody would ever CONSIDER strip searching a student, even if we had good, credible info. We just called the cops. 99% of the time, the kid would admit to the weapons/drugs and hand them over by the time the cops showed up. They still got hauled away, though.

This is a school, not a jail. Teachers' & admins' time should be spent on teaching the kids, not treating them like inmates.

brigid_fitch: This is a school, not a jail. Teachers' & admins' time should be spent on teaching the kids, not treating them like inmates.

what makes you think that this isn't a lesson?

Look, we're becoming an increasingly authoritarian culture. we're less tolerant of differences and we're trending towards centralized authority and mob rule. the signs are all around us - everything from strip searching 13 year old girls for advil up to and including wire taps on political dissident groups.

I remember reading something somewhere about this sort of situation. the longer that we allow order to be imposed, and the stricter said order is enforced, the chance of breakdown increases and the level of backlash rises inversely to the previous level of authoritarian control. or to put it more simply, eventually we snap and go nuts. 'we' as in 'society', not so much as individuals. we need safety valves. we need to let people go and do things that we think aren't safe, secure or even sane. If we don't back the hell off and let people do the stuff we don't agree with, then eventually there WILL be a backlash and it'll get ugly.

brigid_fitch: This is a school, not a jail. Teachers' & admins' time should be spent on teaching the kids, not treating them like inmates

i agree. i like to think that strip searches are rare and done as a last resort. again, did the admin act appropriately in this case? i don't know, i'm not a lawyer. However, if the courts say that strip searches cannot be conducted, the next lawsuit will be from a student asked to lift up his pant legs or asked to remove a jacket. the next lawsuit will be from a kid who was asked to take off a hat or turn out a pocket. the next will be from a kid who was asked to open his locker.

i can't speak for the US, but this has already been addressed in Canada. students should have no expectation of privacy when they enter a school and there are reasonable grounds of suspicion that they are breaking the law. students should be made aware of this, and i like to think that they are.

does this mean admins can ask kids to strip at will? no. and i like to think that these severe types of searches are done as a last resort. an admins' first priority is the safety of the students. In a more serious situation, if something had happened and it came out that the admin had the information to stop something from happening, what kind of outcry would there be, then?

xpennyroyaltyx: i can't speak for the US, but this has already been addressed in Canada. students should have no expectation of privacy when they enter a school and there are reasonable grounds of suspicion that they are breaking the law. students should be made aware of this, and i like to think that they are.

And what happens when we start treating our kids as if they're criminals with no rights? what sort of society will they build for themselves once they're out of that environment? If we tell kids that they cannot be trusted, and that they have to be constantly monitoried by higher authority....what sort of adults will they be?

xpennyroyaltyx: However, if the courts say that strip searches cannot be conducted, the next lawsuit will be from a student asked to lift up his pant legs or asked to remove a jacket. the next lawsuit will be from a kid who was asked to take off a hat or turn out a pocket.

That would be true if this were purely a black and white dichotomy. But it isn't.
The police can't randomly stop you and strip search you. However, if they have probable cause, they can arrest you and strip search you at the station. Just because we say that the police can't strip search you on the street randomly doesn't mean that they never can investigate crimes.
Frankly, you're just taking this to an absurd conclusion.

Weaver95: And what happens when we start treating our kids as if they're criminals with no rights? what sort of society will they build for themselves once they're out of that environment? If we tell kids that they cannot be trusted, and that they have to be constantly monitoried by higher authority....what sort of adults will they be?

wow. i think a kid who brings a gun or drugs to school should know that they are breaking the law and should probably be treated a such. Kids should feel safe at school. By allowing strip searches in schools, we are not TREATING OUR KIDS AS IF THEY'RE CRIMINALS WITH NO RIGHTS, we are teaching them that if they choose to break the law, there will be consequences for that. The policy should be used for the good of the majority.

i don't think allowing searches is telling kids that they can't be trusted. i don't understand where that thinking came from.

xpennyroyaltyx: i think a kid who brings a gun or drugs to school should know that they are breaking the law and should probably be treated a such.

And the kid who didn't bring a gun or drugs to school, but was still treated as a criminal? You know, like the one in the article?

Theaetetus: Frankly, you're just taking this to an absurd conclusion.


absurd conclusion? in such a litigious society? again, IANAL, but i really don't think so. ITFA the vp had a probable cause to search. so he did. why is it an issue then?

Just because we say that the police can't strip search you on the street randomly doesn't mean that they never can investigate crimes.

isn't that what i am saying?

Theaetetus: And the kid who didn't bring a gun or drugs to school, but was still treated as a criminal? You know, like the one in the article?

From what i understand from the article, the school has a zero tolerance drug policy and the pills in question "'could only be obtained with a prescription,' Wilson reported." So, the kid was suspected of bringing non-prescribed prescription drugs to school that possibly caused two other kids to get sick, and was searched for them.

xpennyroyaltyx: However, if the courts say that strip searches cannot be conducted, the next lawsuit will be from a student asked to lift up his pant legs or asked to remove a jacket. the next lawsuit will be from a kid who was asked to take off a hat or turn out a pocket. the next will be from a kid who was asked to open his locker.

In the US, many of these issues have already been addressed. Lockers can be searched without a warrant or permission because they're school property. Asking a kid to take off a hat is within dress code policy. Asking a kid to turn out his pockets, lift his pant leg, or take off his jacket is NOT a strip search. And I'm sure there are plenty of cases like the hypothetical lawsuits you describe, either closed or pending, peppered throughout the US already.

My point is that once the SCOTUS rules on this, either allowing it or saying it is a violation of the 4th Amendment (unreasonable search & seizure, which I believe strip-searching a student to be) they will have to spell out what constitutes a strip search.

Must be a Catholic school. It'll be okay and the priest will get a new assignment if anyone complains.

xpennyroyaltyx: wow. i think a kid who brings a gun or drugs to school should know that they are breaking the law and should probably be treated a such. Kids should feel safe at school. By allowing strip searches in schools, we are not TREATING OUR KIDS AS IF THEY'RE CRIMINALS WITH NO RIGHTS, we are teaching them that if they choose to break the law, there will be consequences for that. The policy should be used for the good of the majority.

i don't think allowing searches is telling kids that they can't be trusted. i don't understand where that thinking came from.

no, what you are teaching kids is that it doesn't matter if they obey the law or not - they're criminals no matter what they do. And once you've lost everything, you're free to do anything. So your 'solution' will teach kids that hey, they might as well go and do bad things anyway because no matter what they'll end up being treated the same.

xpennyroyaltyx: Theaetetus: Frankly, you're just taking this to an absurd conclusion.


absurd conclusion? in such a litigious society? again, IANAL, but i really don't think so. ITFA the vp had a probable cause to search. so he did. why is it an issue then?

Just because we say that the police can't strip search you on the street randomly doesn't mean that they never can investigate crimes.

isn't that what i am saying?

I can has reductio ab adsurdum?

brigid_fitch: My point is that once the SCOTUS rules on this, either allowing it or saying it is a violation of the 4th Amendment (unreasonable search & seizure, which I believe strip-searching a student to be) they will have to spell out what constitutes a strip search.

the cynic in me says that SCOTUS will leave the definition vague, then rule the search legal.

that would completely confirm my suspicion that we're no longer interested in being a free society. But hey, I could be wrong. SCOTUS might take the right pills that morning and decide to err on the side of the individual for once.

Weaver95: no, what you are teaching kids is that it doesn't matter if they obey the law or not - they're criminals no matter what they do.

you need to explain to me how you're getting that from what i am saying. because if i am saying that, it is being said unintentionally. if kids are breaking the law, they should be treated as though they are breaking the law. if they are not breaking the law, they should not be treated as such.

"...look in your underwear for aspirin"

Shouldn't that be ass-peerin' ?

xpennyroyaltyx: wow. i think a kid who brings a gun or drugs to school should know that they are breaking the law and should probably be treated a such. Kids should feel safe at school. By allowing strip searches in schools, we are not TREATING OUR KIDS AS IF THEY'RE CRIMINALS WITH NO RIGHTS, we are teaching them that if they choose to break the law, there will be consequences for that. The policy should be used for the good of the majority.

i don't think allowing searches is telling kids that they can't be trusted. i don't understand where that thinking came from.

Really? You don't understand where that kind of thinking comes from? Because it's a school, with teachers and admins as authority figures. It is NOT a jail. Teachers & admins have backgrounds in education, not law enforcement.

Yes, kids who bring drugs & weapons to school are fully aware that they are breaking the law and if caught, should be punished according to the law. However, taking away ALL rights of privacy from the entire student body just in case one or two might be breaking the law at some point is bad policy. The whole knee-jerk "kids should be safe at school" thing is reactionary, feel-good legislation, nothing more. It ends up punishing good kids more than the real trouble-makers.

This is strange, not only because of the strip search, but because of the witch-hunt for a Motrin tablet in the first place. I'm not even old, but when I was in school lots of people, especially girls, carried ibuprofen and didn't even have to hide it.

xpennyroyaltyx: you need to explain to me how you're getting that from what i am saying. because if i am saying that, it is being said unintentionally. if kids are breaking the law, they should be treated as though they are breaking the law. if they are not breaking the law, they should not be treated as such.

you advocate a policy that treats all kids as if they were criminals. anyone who thinks 'zero tolerance' is any sort of good idea is essentially saying that ALL kids are criminals and should be treated as such. absolutist rules and regulations are the hallmark of an authoritarian society more interested in control and obedience, not a society that handles things on an as needed basis, with wisdom and justice.

brigid_fitch: My point is that once the SCOTUS rules on this, either allowing it or saying it is a violation of the 4th Amendment (unreasonable search & seizure, which I believe strip-searching a student to be) they will have to spell out what constitutes a strip search.

in this case the search was deemed to be reasonable by the admin. would i call that reasonable, personally? no. but what i would have done is not what was done. i guess they really need to do is define what constitutes a 'reasonable' search.

you need to explain to me how you're getting that from what i am saying. because if i am saying that, it is being said unintentionally. if kids are breaking the law, they should be treated as though they are breaking the law. if they are not breaking the law, they should not be treated as such.

So it should be illegal to strip search the innocent?

xpennyroyaltyx: Weaver95: And what happens when we start treating our kids as if they're criminals with no rights? what sort of society will they build for themselves once they're out of that environment? If we tell kids that they cannot be trusted, and that they have to be constantly monitoried by higher authority....what sort of adults will they be?

wow. i think a kid who brings a gun or drugs to school should know that they are breaking the law and should probably be treated a such. Kids should feel safe at school. By allowing strip searches in schools, we are not TREATING OUR KIDS AS IF THEY'RE CRIMINALS WITH NO RIGHTS, we are teaching them that if they choose to break the law, there will be consequences for that. The policy should be used for the good of the majority.

i don't think allowing searches is telling kids that they can't be trusted. i don't understand where that thinking came from.

WAIT WAIT WAIT.... So you want untrained, unarmed school administrators to search kids for loaded firearms?

You are out of your farking head. And suppose kid draws on them? Or they find the gun, are they capable of clearing the weapon and rendering it safe?

Please leave the policing to the police.

xpennyroyaltyx: in this case the search was deemed to be reasonable by the admin. would i call that reasonable, personally? no. but what i would have done is not what was done. i guess they really need to do is define what constitutes a 'reasonable' search.

Or stop hiring pedophiles as school administrators.

xpennyroyaltyx: Theaetetus: And the kid who didn't bring a gun or drugs to school, but was still treated as a criminal? You know, like the one in the article?

From what i understand from the article, the school has a zero tolerance drug policy and the pills in question "'could only be obtained with a prescription,' Wilson reported." So, the kid was suspected of bringing non-prescribed prescription drugs to school that possibly caused two other kids to get sick, and was searched for them.

Not entirely true. First of all, only one kid got sick and the girl in the article, Savana, had nothing to do with it. A 2nd girl was found with the pills in her folder. She told Wilson that Savana had given her the folder "a few days ago", so the pills must have been in there the whole time (suuuuuure they were, kid). Lastly, 400mg is NOT prescription. Advil Extra Strength is 400mg, available over the counter.

Oh, and most importantly, I don't care whether or not the school has a zero-tolerance drug policy (another stupid knee-jerk, feel-good policy), you don't strip-search a 13-yo girl, who apparently has never been in trouble for anything before in school, because another student who was caught with a knife & said Advil told you she got it from her.

brigid_fitch: However, taking away ALL rights of privacy from the entire student body just in case one or two might be breaking the law at some point is bad policy.

agreed. in no place in this article is it suggested that the rights of all students were taken away.

Weaver95: you advocate a policy that treats all kids as if they were criminals

no, i advocate a policy whereby if there are reasonable grounds for a search, a search should be within the school's authority to do.

Teachers & admins have backgrounds in education, not law enforcement.

agreed, however, an admin's first duty is to protect students. if this duty to protect kids, at some point, requires that one student be searched, i don't understand why people would not want that to be a last resort option.

absolutist rules and regulations are the hallmark of an authoritarian society more interested in control and obedience, not a society that handles things on an as needed basis, with wisdom and justice.

which is why i think that in the case in the article, the search was certainly a bit much.

The supreme court doesn't need to know about any tiny white things surrounded by cotton in my pants. NO SIR I DO NOT LIKE IT!

brigid_fitch: Oh, and most importantly, I don't care whether or not the school has a zero-tolerance drug policy (another stupid knee-jerk, feel-good policy), you don't strip-search a 13-yo girl, who apparently has never been in trouble for anything before in school, because another student who was caught with a knife & said Advil told you she got it from her.

well...you do if you assume that school == prison and student == inmate. In that context, the actions of the school admin make perfect sense.

scary thought, isn't it?

Weaver95: no, what you are teaching kids is that it doesn't matter if they obey the law or not - they're criminals no matter what they do. And once you've lost everything, you're free to do anything. So your 'solution' will teach kids that hey, they might as well go and do bad things anyway because no matter what they'll end up being treated the same.

This, this, a thousand times THIS.

I was a good kid in high school, honor roll, valedictorian, all that jazz. My high school was full of stupid rules taken to extremes, including the full range of zero-tolerance policies. The constant threats of harsh punishment for the tiniest of infractions made for an oppressive, paranoid, miserable atmosphere. I felt more like an inmate than a student, and quality education took a backseat to inspection and enforcement.
It was extremely stressful and depressing. I couldn't convince myself to stop caring completely, but throwing violations of their own policies back in their faces during school board meetings worked out okay. Those three years in that environment aren't something I'd wish on any kid though.

xpennyroyaltyx: Weaver95: no, what you are teaching kids is that it doesn't matter if they obey the law or not - they're criminals no matter what they do.

you need to explain to me how you're getting that from what i am saying. because if i am saying that, it is being said unintentionally. if kids are breaking the law, they should be treated as though they are breaking the law. if they are not breaking the law, they should not be treated as such.

If they are reaking the law you call those people who are sworn officers charged with inforcing the law. You know, the police?

How is this even an issue?

reaking==breaking
inforcing==enforcing

/retarded today

What is illegal about carrying Aspirin to school? This is so Asinine. These types of searches should be conducted by police, not pedo teachers. The only reason the school wants to strip search them is so they can size up which ones to rape.

Weaver95
xpennyroyaltyx: wow. i think a kid who brings a gun or drugs to school should know that they are breaking the law and should probably be treated a such. Kids should feel safe at school. By allowing strip searches in schools, we are not TREATING OUR KIDS AS IF THEY'RE CRIMINALS WITH NO RIGHTS, we are teaching them that if they choose to break the law, there will be consequences for that. The policy should be used for the good of the majority.

i don't think allowing searches is telling kids that they can't be trusted. i don't understand where that thinking came from.

no, what you are teaching kids is that it doesn't matter if they obey the law or not - they're criminals no matter what they do. And once you've lost everything, you're free to do anything. So your 'solution' will teach kids that hey, they might as well go and do bad things anyway because no matter what they'll end up being treated the same.

Weaver95 is right on the money. I remember high school when it turned into a prison for us students. Random bag checks, wierd shiat like sniffing our fingers to see if we were smoking, random aressts on campus, and tardy sweeps.

For those of you who don't know what a "Tardy Sweep" is, let me explain. Once the bell rings, the teachers were instructed to lock the classroom door and keep kids out. Not all did this because many disagreed. But otherwise we'd have to spend 15 minutes or so listening to kids bang doors begging to be let in before the truancy officers caught them. That's right. If you got locked out, you got literally hunted down. Best case scenario, you remained where you were and recieved detention, but ended up missing an entire class of learning. But if you ran and managed to get caught, it was a suspension for truancy. And believe me, the would search all over the entire school looking in every stairwell, locker room, bathroom, hallway, and storage closet to hunt you down.

Did any of this impact the school? Yes it did. Rather than force students to adhere and create a safer school, campus violence increased, and the drop-out rate went though the roof. Sure, some went to the alternative high school, some simply got GEDs, and even a good number of students with high grades left. They either transfered to other schools, or got permission to go to college and take courses to count for both high school and college credits. But the biggest impact was with all these students leaving, the school lost money, and had to slowly phase these programs out.

xpennyroyaltyx, I don't know if you are seriously this out of touch, or just plain stupid. But you can't simply take peoples' rights and basic human dignity away because you don't think they need them. Open your mind and see things from other peoples points of view.