Ship of Fools: Overkill

Thread: Overkill Board: Purgatory / Ship of Fools.

To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=2;t=020355

Posted by Gramps49 (# 16378) on :

An Oregon school district has now ordered its faculty and staff to report any suspected sexual activity of its minor students to authorities. Technically, under Oregon law, no person under 18 can give informed consent. Therefore sexual activity between two persons would amount to statutory rape.

In most other states the age of consent is lower, as low as 14 in a few, generally around 16 in others or if the age difference is less than two years under 18 in a couple. The US is very prudish and all over the place when it comes to the age of consent.

But, in the case of this district, I think it is overkill. That means if I, as a staff member, find that two persons coupling up, I would have to report it at some point. But where? If I find them holding hands? If I find them kissing? If I find them embracing? The directive seems vague.

Then too, if a young person who is active is wanting to talk about what is happening in his/ her sex life, s/he cannot share with a trusted teacher in that district.

This is not helping minors become sexually responsible in my book.

Posted by sabine (# 3861) on :

As a social worker (now retired) I had to deal with the fallout of what many states and municipalities call "status offenses." It's a category that allows officials to lump together the behavior of minors they consider difficult, suspect, or prone to leading to worse crimes (e.g., truancy, running away from home, staying out after curfew, fighting, etc). Maybe this locale considers sex between two minors to be a status offence.

I have mixed feelings about how status offenses are defined and used to punish young people (or their parents).

On the other hand, sometimes scrutiny into behavior leads to understanding of other issues.

I don't know enough about the situation mentioned to speculate on what I think school officials hope to accomplish by bumping up the reporting to the state authorities.

sabine

Posted by Augustine the Aleut (# 1472) on :

I do hope that the school board provides some more specific instruction to teachers as to what "sexually active" might mean-- if snogging counts then the impact could be immeasurable.

But as the offspring of a teacher and a friend of several, I know that trusted teachers are often the safe space for adolescents who are dealing with personal issues for the first time at an intense period of their lives. If their only option to silence (or very artful phrasing) is to enter into the judicial system, often punitive and clumsy in its operations, they will have no-one to whom they might turn.

The notion, popular in Saudi Arabia and many states in the US, of criminalizing adolescent behaviour, is perhaps for another thread. As a friend (with three adolescents) said, having a chat with a child is one thing, sending him/her to the clinker for excessive fumbling is another. But perhaps this state's laws are subtle and focussed in phrasing, and humane in operation.

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :

We had this in Enlgand too - holding hands was 'sexual' - when David Blunkett was education secretary. Very few took it seriously and it went away.

[ 05. November 2017, 17:48: Message edited by: leo ]

Posted by Leorning Cniht (# 17564) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Gramps49:

But, in the case of this district, I think it is overkill. That means if I, as a staff member, find that two persons coupling up, I would have to report it at some point. But where? If I find them holding hands? If I find them kissing? If I find them embracing? The directive seems vague.

"If you learn or suspect that a student is sexually active." That's not vague. Kissing is not sex. Holding hands is not sex. Blow jobs are sex.

I agree with you that it's a bad idea, though.

Posted by Dave W. (# 8765) on :

In another article, it is reported that:

quote:
The district provided staff a handful of examples in the presentation of when an employee needs to report:
A 15-year-old student comes to your office and tells you that she is having sex with her boyfriend and would like to talk with someone about birth control options.
Your 17-year-old son tells you that his 16-year-old girlfriend is pregnant.
A 14-year-old boy confides in you that he was kicked out of the house after his parents discovered that he was in a same-sex relationship. During the conversation, the student shares that he has engaged in sexual acts with his partner.
You overhear a group of students discussing a party they attended the prior weekend. The students comment that one of their classmates who attended the party had been too drunk to walk and ended up in a bedroom with an individual who attends a different high school. There is a rumor going around that they “hooked up."

Posted by Augustine the Aleut (# 1472) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:

quote:
Originally posted by Gramps49:

But, in the case of this district, I think it is overkill. That means if I, as a staff member, find that two persons coupling up, I would have to report it at some point. But where? If I find them holding hands? If I find them kissing? If I find them embracing? The directive seems vague.
"If you learn or suspect that a student is sexually active." That's not vague. Kissing is not sex. Holding hands is not sex. Blow jobs are sex.

I agree with you that it's a bad idea, though.

There may be a legal definition in Oregon law, or an interpretation from Oregon courts, which might make the teachers' job on this easier (or much more difficult). All we have is the phrase "sexual activity," which may or may not equate to what we would call sex.

Posted by Gramps49 (# 16378) on :

Granted, the examples I gave are maybe outward displays of affection, but there is no telling what happens when the kids are out of school. However, I was just using my examples to show just how nebulous the directive seems at first brush.

To DaveW's examples:

quote:
A 15-year-old student comes to your office and tells you that she is having sex with her boyfriend and would like to talk with someone about birth control options.

Is this a girl coming to the school nurse's office? I would take it a school nurse would be eminently qualified to take about birth control options. I would much rather have her talking to a nurse than trying to get something off the street.

Then if this is a 15-year-old girl having sex with her 16-year-old boyfriend, in most states this would sort of be permitted. I would rather encourage them to practice safe sex than have to report it to child protection services. That would be such a shaming experience for both kids. Now, if the boyfriend were 21, then maybe we should look at statutory rape.

quote:
Your 17-year-old son tells you that his 16-year-old girlfriend is pregnant.

You mean I would have to turn in my own child to child protection services? Hell no, I would not do that. I would rather work with the other parents to support both kids in their decisions about where their relationship is going and what to do with the fetus/baby.

quote:
A 14-year-old boy confides in you that he was kicked out of the house after his parents discovered that he was in a same-sex relationship. During the conversation, the student shares that he has engaged in sexual acts with his partner.

Now, this is child abuse, but it is not necessarily the kid having sex with his partner It is the parents neglecting their duty to provide for the kid. I would want to work to ensure that the kid is in a safe house, if not with the parents, with extended family or with suitable guardians. I do have concerns that a 14-year-old is of the age of consent and I would want to encourage the boy to defer any more sexual activity until he is older.

quote:
You overhear a group of students discussing a party they attended the prior weekend. The students comment that one of their classmates who attended the party had been too drunk to walk and ended up in a bedroom with an individual who attends a different high school. There is a rumor going around that they “hooked up."

Since the individual ended up too drunk to give informed consent, then, then yes, this would have to be reported even other states.

Something similar to this happened when I was a senior in high school. One of my classmates was ganged raped after she got too drunk. Everyone in the class knew about it. It finally got turned in by the janitor, believe it or not. That was 50 years ago. It ended up the guys that were involved basically got their wrists slapped. If it would happen today the guys would each be classified as sex offenders for the rest of their lives.

Posted by Dave W. (# 8765) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Gramps49:
Granted, the examples I gave are maybe outward displays of affection, but there is no telling what happens when the kids are out of school. However, I was just using my examples to show just how nebulous the directive seems at first brush.

That's only because you hadn't bothered to learn any more about it.

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.:

quote:
Originally posted by Gramps49:
Granted, the examples I gave are maybe outward displays of affection, but there is no telling what happens when the kids are out of school. However, I was just using my examples to show just how nebulous the directive seems at first brush.
That's only because you hadn't bothered to learn any more about it.

Um, no. "I see you guys are snogging in the halls. Are you also doing the old in-out-in-out? Because if you say yes I'll have to report you."

Are you a teacher?

Posted by Leorning Cniht (# 17564) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Augustine the Aleut:
All we have is the phrase "sexual activity," which may or may not equate to what we would call sex.

We have the phrase "sexually active" which is not quite the same. That particular phrase is the one used by English-speaking medical professionals all over the world to mean that someone is sharing their genitalia with someone else.

So without a specific definition of that phrase in Oregon law, I don't think there's any real ambiguity.

There is, I think, a small area of greyness. One could argue about whether teens who masturbated in each other's presence qualified. (If they do it over some kind of video chat, they're both guilty of child porn offenses.) I think I'd say that merely masturbating in the presence of your boy/girlfriend didn't qualify as "sexually active", but would suspect that it would be a rare teen couple who could resist the temptation to "help the other out" if such activity became a frequent occurrence.

Posted by Dave W. (# 8765) on :

quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:

quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.:

quote:
Originally posted by Gramps49:
Granted, the examples I gave are maybe outward displays of affection, but there is no telling what happens when the kids are out of school. However, I was just using my examples to show just how nebulous the directive seems at first brush.
That's only because you hadn't bothered to learn any more about it.
Um, no. "I see you guys are snogging in the halls. Are you also doing the old in-out-in-out? Because if you say yes I'll have to report you."

Are you a teacher?

I'd be interested in seeing evidence that the policy required teachers to interrogate students engaged in public displays of affection about whether they're having sex. Can you direct me to this?

Posted by Augustine the Aleut (# 1472) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:

quote:
Originally posted by Augustine the Aleut:
All we have is the phrase "sexual activity," which may or may not equate to what we would call sex.
We have the phrase "sexually active" which is not quite the same. That particular phrase is the one used by English-speaking medical professionals all over the world to mean that someone is sharing their genitalia with someone else.

So without a specific definition of that phrase in Oregon law, I don't think there's any real ambiguity.

There is, I think, a small area of greyness. One could argue about whether teens who masturbated in each other's presence qualified. (If they do it over some kind of video chat, they're both guilty of child porn offenses.) I think I'd say that merely masturbating in the presence of your boy/girlfriend didn't qualify as "sexually active", but would suspect that it would be a rare teen couple who could resist the temptation to "help the other out" if such activity became a frequent occurrence.

Reviewing the press coverage again, both phrases are used. Without reference to the documents used by the board, and without knowing exactly what is meant in Oregon law--- and shipmates may wish to recall that each state has its own legislation and that some include non-genital activities in their definitions-- we are left guessing. The RAINN website tells us that Oregon statutes use the term "sexual intercourse," not "sexual activity," so it may be that the state's documentation used the legal term but that the journalists didn't, or the state decided not to, and that they may have had a reason to do so (or just made a mistake).

In any case, the notion of sending one's children off to the clinker or child protection services for teen pregnancy is on the peculiar side. The use of a very broad brush in law gives a great range to prosecutorial discretion. My guess (again without knowing Oregon law) is that the reporting requirement already exists for serious crimes (sexual assault).

Posted by Lyda*Rose (# 4544) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.:
In another article, it is reported that:

quote:
The district provided staff a handful of examples in the presentation of when an employee needs to report:
A 15-year-old student comes to your office and tells you that she is having sex with her boyfriend and would like to talk with someone about birth control options.
Your 17-year-old son tells you that his 16-year-old girlfriend is pregnant.
A 14-year-old boy confides in you that he was kicked out of the house after his parents discovered that he was in a same-sex relationship. During the conversation, the student shares that he has engaged in sexual acts with his partner.
You overhear a group of students discussing a party they attended the prior weekend. The students comment that one of their classmates who attended the party had been too drunk to walk and ended up in a bedroom with an individual who attends a different high school. There is a rumor going around that they “hooked up."

Horrendous. In most states, consensual sexual activity between minors is not treated criminally, but socially for counselling purposes. In fairness to the student population, schools should make the law clear to them each school year: "If you speak to a school employee about any sex you are having we are compelled by law to report it to the authorities as illegal activity. If you feel that you are being sexually abused, do talk to school employees. If not, you are on your own to find someone to listen to you without fear of reprisal."

[ 06. November 2017, 12:39: Message edited by: Lyda*Rose ]

Posted by Crœsos (# 238) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Lyda*Rose:
Horrendous. In most states, consensual sexual activity between minors is not treated criminally, but socially for counselling purposes.

That seems to be the case in Oregon as well, where the law will not punish sex between individuals who are both younger than 18 and less than three years apart in age. The hypothetical 17 year old boy and his equally hypothetical 16 year old pregnant girlfriend would not be subject to legal sanction in Oregon, so the policy would seem to be over-broad in that regard.

Posted by Augustine the Aleut (# 1472) on :

There's nothing on the school district's website about any of this, so all we have to go on are press reports.

Posted by Lyda*Rose (# 4544) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:

quote:
Originally posted by Lyda*Rose:
Horrendous. In most states, consensual sexual activity between minors is not treated criminally, but socially for counselling purposes.
That seems to be the case in Oregon as well, where the law will not punish sex between individuals who are both younger than 18 and less than three years apart in age. The hypothetical 17 year old boy and his equally hypothetical 16 year old pregnant girlfriend would not be subject to legal sanction in Oregon, so the policy would seem to be over-broad in that regard.

Okay. But if the district really is pursuing this policy of reporting, its students should still be made aware that they can expect no confidentiality about these matters.

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.:

quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:

quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.:

quote:
Originally posted by Gramps49:
Granted, the examples I gave are maybe outward displays of affection, but there is no telling what happens when the kids are out of school. However, I was just using my examples to show just how nebulous the directive seems at first brush.
That's only because you hadn't bothered to learn any more about it.
Um, no. "I see you guys are snogging in the halls. Are you also doing the old in-out-in-out? Because if you say yes I'll have to report you."

Are you a teacher?
I'd be interested in seeing evidence that the policy required teachers to interrogate students engaged in public displays of affection about whether they're having sex. Can you direct me to this?

I was just following where your comment led.

Posted by Gramps49 (# 16378) on :

Was it DaveW that asked if I was a teacher?

No. I am a former mental health counselor. A former minister. A parent of adult children. A grandparent of four grandchildren, one of whom will be going to school in Oregon. A resident Washington State and a citizen of the United States. I take great interest in local, regional, national and international issues.

I just went to the Salem Kelzer School District's Website. Apparently, the document instructing faculty and staff to report suspected sexual conduct of students to law enforcement authorities has been pulled from the site--at least I cannot find it now.

Just a couple of points. At what point should one "suspect" there is sexual activity? All most teachers would have to go on is through observation of public behavior or innuendo and rumors or if a kid comes out and admits he or she is having sex. No PDA does not equate behind the door sexual activity. I certainly do not want to imply that. I was just pointing out the absurdity of the term "suspect."

Second, the directive allegedly states faculty and staff are to report such activity to law enforcement agencies. Note, Oregon law states no one (male or female) under 18 has the capacity for informed consent. That means if anyone under 18 is having sexual activity, his or her partner is liable to be charged with statutory rape. SR is a felony offense. If found guilty, they would be labeled as a sex offender for the rest of their lives.

Overkill.

Posted by Ian Climacus (# 944) on :

Did anything happen to cause this requirement? Or did it come 'out of the blue' as it were?

It would be good to hear the school's side. I tend to think it seems like overkill, but it is good to have all the facts [I don't doubt the intentions of the change.org petitioner, but some things can be misconstrued. May not be the case here].

Posted by Gramps49 (# 16378) on :

Ian

You ask how this rule came about. I can only find hints. Apparently, a recent survey by the Center for Disease Control found that 40% of the Salem Kilzer School District kids admit to being sexually active. (As reported in a local newspaper)

I actually think this is below the national average IMHO.

It is my guess that some very conservative members of the school board jumped on this as a way to punish those who have chosen to be active.

But it has backfired. Parents have signed an online petition demanding the rule be rescinded. The rule was originally posted on the school board new teacher orientation site, but it has been taken down.

Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Gramps49:
Apparently, a recent survey by the Center for Disease Control found that 40% of the Salem Kilzer School District kids admit to being sexually active. (As reported in a local newspaper)

Surely you mean of the high school kids, or of the teenagers? The school district encompasses a lot of kids that aren't even capable of being sexually active. To have 40% of the district screwing around, you'd have to have every last teenager in bed.

Posted by Dave W. (# 8765) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Gramps49:
Apparently, a recent survey by the Center for Disease Control found that 40% of the Salem Kilzer School District kids admit to being sexually active. (As reported in a local newspaper)

Well, no. There's nothing on that page that refers to a CDC survey.

As Mousethief points out, 40% would be a ridiculously high number for all the "kids" in a school district. And why in the world would the CDC have such statistics down to the level of individual school districts?

This Washington Post article covering the same story says "[m]ore than 40 percent of high school students surveyed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported having sex in 2015, which if applied to this particular district, would account for almost 12,000 students" but even this isn't correct; the CDC actually found that "among U.S. high school students surveyed in 2015 41% had ever had sexual intercourse."

Posted by Gramps49 (# 16378) on :

So much for writing late at night while watching TV.

Yes, the CDC surveys say around 41% of American teenagers admit to being sexually active. This, of course, is based on self-disclosure. How many deny what is actually happening? How many brag about what is not happening? This is the problem with surveys based on self-disclosure. Nevertheless, while about 20% of ninth graders report sex having sex, 58% report having sex in the 12th grade.
CDC Youth at Risk Report, table 68, page 121

Posted by simontoad (# 18096) on :

I'm pretty sure we had this problem or something like it in Victoria. It was about kids being placed on the sex offenders register I think. They passed some amendments and fixed it.

Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
Blow jobs are sex.

Unless you are Bill Clinton.

Posted by Dave W. (# 8765) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Gramps49:
So much for writing late at night while watching TV.

Yes, the CDC surveys say around 41% of American teenagers admit to being sexually active.

No, the survey doesn't say that. It said 41% of high school students surveyed had ever had sex, which is not the same thing.

"high school students" =\= "teenagers"
"have ever had sex" =\= "sexually active"

UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0