If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Oakland Press)   Helicopter parents upset that schools are being overprotective of their children   (theoaklandpress.com) divider line 61
    More: Ironic, helicopter parents, Sandy Hook Elementary School, field Hills, Oakland University, early childhood education, Riverside Elementary  
•       •       •

5257 clicks; posted to Main » on 23 Sep 2013 at 4:51 PM (50 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



61 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-09-23 03:56:13 PM
Sigh.

Part of the fun of changing grades is walking ON YOUR OWN down the hallway.  Parents should drop the kid at the front door of the building.
 
2013-09-23 04:01:40 PM
This school's new security sounds pretty standard nowdays. We've had secure entrances for years, and we're a tiny little not-rich rural district.

If the adults treat the new system as no big deal, the kids will be fine with it. The opposite is also true.

And if your child needs to be dragged kicking and screaming into pre k, your child is not ready for pre k.
 
2013-09-23 04:18:31 PM
We just keep our iphone 5S video conference call going after we have to part ways, at one point he almost dropped it into his paste but it was so close to afternoon nap I couldn't really blame him.
 
2013-09-23 04:56:13 PM
"I still believe in American exceptionalism, and this includes a parent's right to be involved in their children's educational experience. By allowing our lives to be placed under oppressive rules, it sends the message that the terrorists and psychos win."

If your kid gets shot to death by a crazed gunman, are you really worried about who "won"?
 
2013-09-23 04:56:31 PM
I'm torn about this. The policy and parent's walking their kids to the classroom are both ridiculous.
 
2013-09-23 04:57:52 PM

Chinchillazilla: If your kid gets shot to death by a crazed gunman, are you really worried about who "won"?


You imagine this policy would prevent a mass shooting? LULZ.
 
2013-09-23 05:00:56 PM

lockers: Chinchillazilla: If your kid gets shot to death by a crazed gunman, are you really worried about who "won"?

You imagine this policy would prevent a mass shooting? LULZ.


Well, what would really prevent mass shootings would be not allowing disturbed individuals or their families to purchase guns. But since we can't do that because Second Amendment, then yeah, I think not letting a bunch of adults into the school building is as good as you can get.
 
2013-09-23 05:01:00 PM

Chinchillazilla: "I still believe in American exceptionalism, and this includes a parent's right to be involved in their children's educational experience. By allowing our lives to be placed under oppressive rules, it sends the message that the terrorists and psychos win."

If your kid gets shot to death by a crazed gunman, are you really worried about who "won"?


This is the type of 'feel-good' security measure that won't have any meaningful effect. Most don't, pretty much the only thing that could stop a repeat of the Newtown shootings are armed security or police officers at schools.
 
2013-09-23 05:02:03 PM

Awesome T-Shirt: Chinchillazilla: "I still believe in American exceptionalism, and this includes a parent's right to be involved in their children's educational experience. By allowing our lives to be placed under oppressive rules, it sends the message that the terrorists and psychos win."

If your kid gets shot to death by a crazed gunman, are you really worried about who "won"?

This is the type of 'feel-good' security measure that won't have any meaningful effect. Most don't, pretty much the only thing that could stop a repeat of the Newtown shootings are armed security or police officers at schools.


The armed guard at Columbine did a fabulous job stopping that shooting, right?
 
2013-09-23 05:04:23 PM
Chinchillazilla: Well, what would really prevent mass shootings would be not allowing disturbed individuals or their families to purchase guns. But since we can't do that because Second Amendment, then yeah, I think not letting a bunch of adults into the school building is as good as you can get.

Except for the part where it won't stop a mass shooter, it is a great policy for stopping a mass shooter.
 
2013-09-23 05:06:32 PM
fta: parents were informed that they would not be able to walk with children in school halls at the start of the day.
Wow, most parents I know can't wait to get their kids out of the house for school. Also, as I child I felt a certain happiness from my parents about making me up at 6 am b/c we lived on the other end of the district to get my funky ass out to the bus stop.
 
2013-09-23 05:08:00 PM

lockers: Chinchillazilla: Well, what would really prevent mass shootings would be not allowing disturbed individuals or their families to purchase guns. But since we can't do that because Second Amendment, then yeah, I think not letting a bunch of adults into the school building is as good as you can get.

Except for the part where it won't stop a mass shooter, it is a great policy for stopping a mass shooter.


So the response to Sandy Hook should have been to change absolutely nothing and continue to act surprised about school shootings? People are going to change security when things like that happen, because the alternative is to just hope it doesn't happen to you. Even if it doesn't prevent all shootings, at least if there is another one, the school can say "Well, we tried" instead of saying "Well, we didn't give a shiat."
 
2013-09-23 05:12:09 PM

Chinchillazilla: So the response to Sandy Hook should have been to change absolutely nothing and continue to act surprised about school shootings?


Ineffectual change for the sake of Doing Somethingtm Is no better than doing nothing at all. It's a pointless charade that might make you feel more secure, but in actuality does nothing of the sort.
 
2013-09-23 05:15:05 PM
Why would a parent walk in to the school with their kid?  My parents left me at the bus.
 
2013-09-23 05:18:06 PM
I just threw up everywhere.

/everywhere
 
2013-09-23 05:20:23 PM

megarian: I just threw up everywhere.

/everywhere


play.esea.net
 
2013-09-23 05:23:26 PM
Ya know, I'm starting to think these "helicopter parent" stories are gross exaggerations of anecdotal incidents exploited by an older generation uncomfortable with facing their own mortality.
 
2013-09-23 05:24:26 PM

lockers: megarian: I just threw up everywhere.

/everywhere


Hopefully it was a boner for the children.

Because I'm told I'm supposed to think of the children. Or something.
 
2013-09-23 05:24:33 PM
If I had kids, I would be very freaked out that they're letting all those parents into the school. It's a lot easier to spot something unusual when the average person in the building should only be 3 or 4 feet tall. That, and it's a statistical fact that a percentage of those parents are going to be pedos feeling up kids in the hallway.
 
2013-09-23 05:25:00 PM
"I still believe in American exceptionalism, and this includes a parent's right to be involved in their children's educational experience. By allowing our lives to be placed under oppressive rules, it sends the message that the terrorists and psychos win."

Translation:  I was OK with arbitrary, fascist, oppressive rules for you.  I wasn't aware that eventually they would impact me or my precious little snowflake.  I've done nothing wrong.
 
2013-09-23 05:25:55 PM

megarian: Because I'm told I'm supposed to think of the children. Or something.


No, you need to stop thinking about the children.  Seriously, for the sake of those dirty, sexy children.
 
2013-09-23 05:27:18 PM

Chinchillazilla: lockers: Chinchillazilla: Well, what would really prevent mass shootings would be not allowing disturbed individuals or their families to purchase guns. But since we can't do that because Second Amendment, then yeah, I think not letting a bunch of adults into the school building is as good as you can get.

Except for the part where it won't stop a mass shooter, it is a great policy for stopping a mass shooter.

So the response to Sandy Hook should have been to change absolutely nothing and continue to act surprised about school shootings? People are going to change security when things like that happen, because the alternative is to just hope it doesn't happen to you. Even if it doesn't prevent all shootings, at least if there is another one, the school can say "Well, we tried" instead of saying "Well, we didn't give a shiat."


Nothing would have been better than making schools even more like prisons, yes.
 
2013-09-23 05:28:08 PM

lockers: Chinchillazilla: So the response to Sandy Hook should have been to change absolutely nothing and continue to act surprised about school shootings?

Ineffectual change for the sake of Doing Somethingtm Is no better than doing nothing at all. It's a pointless charade that might make you feel more secure, but in actuality does nothing of the sort.


The article says many parents have thanked the school, meaning those people feel better about sending their kids there. On the other hand, you have this one guy in the article complaining about not being able to walk his kid to the classroom. If the changes decrease anxiety for more parents than they inconvenience, there's still a net benefit even if the changes are completely pointless.

Placebos won't cure a terminal disease, but they give them to people anyway.
 
2013-09-23 05:28:20 PM

havocmike: Ya know, I'm starting to think these "helicopter parent" stories are gross exaggerations of anecdotal incidents exploited by an older generation uncomfortable with facing their own mortality.


probably- but it's always been there.   we just hear about it more because of social media.
 
2013-09-23 05:31:10 PM
FTA: the doors remain locked through the day

Do kids not go outside to play at lunch and recess any more?
Sad.
 
2013-09-23 05:31:47 PM

Chinchillazilla: The article says many parents have thanked the school, meaning those people feel better about sending their kids there. On the other hand, you have this one guy in the article complaining about not being able to walk his kid to the classroom. If the changes decrease anxiety for more parents than they inconvenience, there's still a net benefit even if the changes are completely pointless.

Placebos won't cure a terminal disease, but they give them to people anyway.


I take it back, this "solution" is worse than doing nothing. It has given people a false sense of security when it is anything but effective.
 
2013-09-23 05:34:41 PM

lockers: Chinchillazilla: The article says many parents have thanked the school, meaning those people feel better about sending their kids there. On the other hand, you have this one guy in the article complaining about not being able to walk his kid to the classroom. If the changes decrease anxiety for more parents than they inconvenience, there's still a net benefit even if the changes are completely pointless.

Placebos won't cure a terminal disease, but they give them to people anyway.

I take it back, this "solution" is worse than doing nothing. It has given people a false sense of security when it is anything but effective.


It's like gun control, thinking that the next set of gun laws might just disarm the criminals.
 
2013-09-23 05:35:08 PM

lockers: Chinchillazilla: The article says many parents have thanked the school, meaning those people feel better about sending their kids there. On the other hand, you have this one guy in the article complaining about not being able to walk his kid to the classroom. If the changes decrease anxiety for more parents than they inconvenience, there's still a net benefit even if the changes are completely pointless.

Placebos won't cure a terminal disease, but they give them to people anyway.

I take it back, this "solution" is worse than doing nothing. It has given people a false sense of security when it is anything but effective.


What's wrong with having a false sense of security if you are prohibited from having any real security?
 
2013-09-23 05:38:05 PM

Chinchillazilla: lockers: Chinchillazilla: So the response to Sandy Hook should have been to change absolutely nothing and continue to act surprised about school shootings?

Ineffectual change for the sake of Doing Somethingtm Is no better than doing nothing at all. It's a pointless charade that might make you feel more secure, but in actuality does nothing of the sort.

The article says many parents have thanked the school, meaning those people feel better about sending their kids there. On the other hand, you have this one guy in the article complaining about not being able to walk his kid to the classroom. If the changes decrease anxiety for more parents than they inconvenience, there's still a net benefit even if the changes are completely pointless.

Placebos won't cure a terminal disease, but they give them to people anyway.


Sure, if the parents were the only parties involved that be fine. But there's also a bunch of kids spending much of their time experiencing life in and becoming acclimated to an authoritarian shiathole. A pretty significant harm to accept just to make parents less butthurt.
 
2013-09-23 05:42:00 PM

Chinchillazilla: lockers: Chinchillazilla: I take it back, this "solution" is worse than doing nothing. It has given people a false sense of security when it is anything but effective.

What's wrong with having a false sense of security if you are prohibited from having any real security?


The problem is that the policy didn't address the parents concerns about security in a meaningful way. It has papered over a real concern to silence it. It is worse than doing nothing.
 
MrT
2013-09-23 05:43:13 PM
A far more likely reason why a school would impose a strict dropoff/pickup policy is to mitigate the threat of a child being abducted by an embittered parent on the losing end of a custody dispute. There are security reasons why a preschool might not want large numbers of parents wandering around in the halls other than the incredibly remote chance that one of the parents might be a psychopath who's going to shoot the place up.

But no, this happened in the wake of Sandy Hook, so it clearly must be about school shootings!
 
2013-09-23 05:44:53 PM

MrT: A far more likely reason why a school would impose a strict dropoff/pickup policy is to mitigate the threat of a child being abducted by an embittered parent on the losing end of a custody dispute. There are security reasons why a preschool might not want large numbers of parents wandering around in the halls other than the incredibly remote chance that one of the parents might be a psychopath who's going to shoot the place up.


This policy has zero chance of stopping abductions either.
 
2013-09-23 05:45:50 PM

lockers: Chinchillazilla: lockers: Chinchillazilla: I take it back, this "solution" is worse than doing nothing. It has given people a false sense of security when it is anything but effective.

What's wrong with having a false sense of security if you are prohibited from having any real security?

The problem is that the policy didn't address the parents concerns about security in a meaningful way. It has papered over a real concern to silence it. It is worse than doing nothing.


But what could they do to actually address parents' concerns about security? Their hands are completely tied.
 
2013-09-23 05:46:44 PM

Chinchillazilla: Awesome T-Shirt: Chinchillazilla: "I still believe in American exceptionalism, and this includes a parent's right to be involved in their children's educational experience. By allowing our lives to be placed under oppressive rules, it sends the message that the terrorists and psychos win."

If your kid gets shot to death by a crazed gunman, are you really worried about who "won"?

This is the type of 'feel-good' security measure that won't have any meaningful effect. Most don't, pretty much the only thing that could stop a repeat of the Newtown shootings are armed security or police officers at schools.

The armed guard at Columbine did a fabulous job stopping that shooting, right?


About as good as they did at the naval yard.
 
2013-09-23 05:49:05 PM

Chinchillazilla: But what could they do to actually address parents' concerns about security? Their hands are completely tied.


How about owning up to the fact that there really isn't anything they can do without hiring armed security, and they would have to raise taxes for that.
 
2013-09-23 05:51:56 PM

lockers: Chinchillazilla: But what could they do to actually address parents' concerns about security? Their hands are completely tied.

How about owning up to the fact that there really isn't anything they can do without hiring armed security, and they would have to raise taxes for that.


Armed guards will just give people a false sense of security, too. If a guy wants to shoot kids, maybe a guard can stop him -  after he's shot a few of them already. Which brings me back to my original post, "If your kid gets shot to death by a crazed gunman, are you really worried about who 'won'?"
 
2013-09-23 05:53:43 PM

Chinchillazilla: Armed guards will just give people a false sense of security, too. If a guy wants to shoot kids, maybe a guard can stop him - after he's shot a few of them already. Which brings me back to my original post, "If your kid gets shot to death by a crazed gunman, are you really worried about who 'won'?"


I'm scratching my head. This policy doesn't change the chance get's shot or not, but the armed security does. You can't eliminate the risk, you can only reduce it.
 
2013-09-23 05:55:09 PM

Chinchillazilla: lockers: Chinchillazilla: lockers: Chinchillazilla: I take it back, this "solution" is worse than doing nothing. It has given people a false sense of security when it is anything but effective.

What's wrong with having a false sense of security if you are prohibited from having any real security?

The problem is that the policy didn't address the parents concerns about security in a meaningful way. It has papered over a real concern to silence it. It is worse than doing nothing.

But what could they do to actually address parents' concerns about security? Their hands are completely tied.


The complete opposite approach.chug windows made out of safeshatter glass, an outside door and an inside door in every classroom(that only open from the inside) nice wide hallways. Basically make it really easy to run the fark away so that 1 crazy guy can't stand in the on exit and plink away at kids for the half hour before cops arrive.

But then no one would be "in control", and that's bad.
 
2013-09-23 05:55:24 PM
We live in Oakland County and we don't like the new security bullshiat either. The snazzy new "whatever-proof!" doors they installed at god only knows what expense. The rule that the latchkey room has to be locked, so every damn parent has to knock, wait, hope someone notices, etc (and it's psychologically isolating, IMO). The brand new security camera/intercomm/whatever that already has construction paper taped over it because it doesn't work (or works too well).

Yeah....... All these things say to me "we're more concerned with your vote than your kid". Security Farking Theatre. And the payment is not only money but also a kid's sense that school is supposed to be THEIR place. Of course I think we've done a good enough job of ruining that idea as a country already...
 
2013-09-23 05:55:35 PM

lockers: MrT: A far more likely reason why a school would impose a strict dropoff/pickup policy is to mitigate the threat of a child being abducted by an embittered parent on the losing end of a custody dispute. There are security reasons why a preschool might not want large numbers of parents wandering around in the halls other than the incredibly remote chance that one of the parents might be a psychopath who's going to shoot the place up.

This policy has zero chance of stopping abductions either.


But the ambulance chasers wouldn't have a shot at blaming it on the school.  Lots of preventative measures are done more to absolve responsibility than to stop bad things from happening.
 
2013-09-23 05:56:20 PM

lockers: Chinchillazilla: Armed guards will just give people a false sense of security, too. If a guy wants to shoot kids, maybe a guard can stop him - after he's shot a few of them already. Which brings me back to my original post, "If your kid gets shot to death by a crazed gunman, are you really worried about who 'won'?"

I'm scratching my head. This policy doesn't change the chance get's shot or not, but the armed security does. You can't eliminate the risk, you can only reduce it.


Yeah, but the school can't raise taxes to pay for armed guards. They have to lobby for that, and it won't necessarily happen anyway. So they've gone the placebo route, maybe instead of armed guards, maybe until they can afford armed guards. Either way, they can't have armed guards right now, so arguing about why they should just hire some is pointless.
 
2013-09-23 05:58:08 PM

12349876: But the ambulance chasers wouldn't have a shot at blaming it on the school. Lots of preventative measures are done more to absolve responsibility than to stop bad things from happening.


This policy has a 0% chance of stopping lawsuits or absolving the schools responsibility. Despite this policy a school would still settle since the cost of litigation is more than the cost of paying out.
 
2013-09-23 06:02:57 PM

Chinchillazilla: Yeah, but the school can't raise taxes to pay for armed guards. They have to lobby for that, and it won't necessarily happen anyway. So they've gone the placebo route, maybe instead of armed guards, maybe until they can afford armed guards. Either way, they can't have armed guards right now, so arguing about why they should just hire some is pointless.


I get it, you're a fan of ineffective policies that do more harm then good. I will agree to disagree.
 
2013-09-23 06:09:51 PM
I had to google "helicopter parent". How long has the been around, and what would be its opposite, because my folks would have been in that category.
 
2013-09-23 06:16:33 PM

lockers: megarian: Because I'm told I'm supposed to think of the children. Or something.

No, you need to stop thinking about the children.  Seriously, for the sake of those dirty, sexy children.


Mmm honey-roasted spicy childrens...
 
2013-09-23 06:46:39 PM

lockers: Chinchillazilla: If your kid gets shot to death by a crazed gunman, are you really worried about who "won"?

You imagine this policy would prevent a mass shooting? LULZ.


Our elementary school implemented this rule at the end of last year. Not because of the shooting, but because someone walked in, stole technical equipment and walked out. Now all parents dropping off kids can take them to the playground and watch them until the bell rings for line up. Adults without visible ID badges are not allowed in the halls without going through the front door and signing in at the office. If found without an ID or visitors pass/sticker you will be stopped and escorted to the office.

/SOP for schools who are proactive and responsible for who's in the building.
 
2013-09-23 06:48:23 PM

Chinchillazilla: lockers: Chinchillazilla: Well, what would really prevent mass shootings would be not allowing disturbed individuals or their families to purchase guns. But since we can't do that because Second Amendment, then yeah, I think not letting a bunch of adults into the school building is as good as you can get.

Except for the part where it won't stop a mass shooter, it is a great policy for stopping a mass shooter.

So the response to Sandy Hook should have been to change absolutely nothing and continue to act surprised about school shootings? People are going to change security when things like that happen, because the alternative is to just hope it doesn't happen to you. Even if it doesn't prevent all shootings, at least if there is another one, the school can say "Well, we tried" instead of saying "Well, we didn't give a shiat."


Newsflash: the world is a dangerous place and bad things happen. Statistically Sand Hook is a fluke. The odds are astronomically against you or someone you know dying or even being involved in a mass shooting. Stop watching TV.
 
2013-09-23 06:59:13 PM
Oh, FFS can we stop labeling every parent who is concerned about their child as a farking "helicopter parent"? Jesus, you're the same assholes who complain if someone lets TV raise their children. Make up your minds people, one side or the other.
 
2013-09-23 06:59:24 PM

ginko: lockers: Chinchillazilla: If your kid gets shot to death by a crazed gunman, are you really worried about who "won"?

You imagine this policy would prevent a mass shooting? LULZ.

Our elementary school implemented this rule at the end of last year. Not because of the shooting, but because someone walked in, stole technical equipment and walked out. Now all parents dropping off kids can take them to the playground and watch them until the bell rings for line up. Adults without visible ID badges are not allowed in the halls without going through the front door and signing in at the office. If found without an ID or visitors pass/sticker you will be stopped and escorted to the office.

/SOP for schools who are proactive and responsible for who's in the building.


thank you for providing the only sane argument to support this.
 
2013-09-23 07:03:23 PM

lockers: Chinchillazilla: But what could they do to actually address parents' concerns about security? Their hands are completely tied.

How about owning up to the fact that there really isn't anything they can do without hiring armed security, and they would have to raise taxes for that.


to be honest, not allowing grownups roaming the halls of the school DOES mean that anyone over three feet tall gets to explain to the cops why they were there if they don't work for the school... so preventing shootings might be a 50/50 result, but i'm pretty sure they'll have cameras, and the adults will stand out in the crowd if there is an abduction case...
 
Displayed 50 of 61 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report