Originally Posted by
clrankin
Yes. Again, teachers and guidance counsellors have no business asking questions that do not pertain to their role as educators. And they would have no business in detaining a child and preventing free and open access between the child and the child's guardian, absent clear and convincing evidence that the guardian was going to put the child in imminent danger.
I don't have children myself, but can easily imagine a situation similar to the OP's at a school. If I went to the school to pick up my child but was denied access to him/her because s/he was crying, and was told that the child would have to be questioned first, I could easily imagine picking up my cell phone and dialing 9-1-1 to get law enforcement there.
So you think that TSA's intention was to help the child in this situation? Government primarily cares about a few things-- power, control, money, and getting more of all three. Maybe general welfare of the population is on the list somewhere, but it's close to the bottom-- especially with law enforcement and quasi-law enforcement agencies.
TSA representatives are entitled to the respect that they earn. Do they deserve to be treated like dirt without cause? No. But in this case, there is plenty of cause-- false imprisonment, questioning without a legal guardian or attorney present, to name two.
TSA acted inappropriately. If they had suspicions, they should have called a LEO over immediately to do an interview. And the interview should have been conducted in a much more professional manner, with the mother being fully involved in the process. Clearly that is not what happened here.
I won't go into your entire post since it would be rehashing opinions, just the parts I find humorous or incorrect.
There comes that hyperbole again "... false imprisonment ..."? Come on! An LEO would conduct the interview in a "... more professional manner ..."? First, why do you assume the TSA was not professional? Secondly, if the TSA representative called the LEO, it would have been with the statement he suspected abuse - if the questioning occurred with the parent fully involved in the process, I suspect it would be an error in judgment on his part.
As to the teacher comments, you might want to review the following since it would appear you are flat out wrong. I would suggest that a teacher asking a few questions BEFORE contacting the LEO would be a MINIMUM courtesy and obligation to the parents - or would you prefer 2,400 LEO's be disbursed each day?
http://www.nmsa.org/Publications/Mid...6/Default.aspx
In spite of the critical role that middle level teachers play in the effort to identify, report, and prevent cases of adolescent abuse and neglect,
In fact, approximately 2,400 children are found to be victims of child abuse each day, and each week Child Protective Services (CPS) agencies throughout the United States receive more than 50,000 reports of suspected child abuse or neglect (Prevent Child Abuse America, 2003). Sadly, the actual number of incidents of abuse is probably much higher, given that most abuse occurs in closed systems (families that remain distant and isolated from other families and social institutions),
All states have enacted legislation that identifies teachers among the professionals required to report signs of child abuse (Cambron-McCabe, McCarthy, Thomas, 2004). While all states require abuse and neglect to be reported if there is physical injury (Fischer, Schimmel, & Stellman, 2003), the specifics of the laws vary from state to state. For example, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Maryland, Minnesota, Oregon, and Wisconsin do not require reporting of emotional or mental injury. However, all states currently include sexual abuse and exploitation in their definition of child abuse. The laws are not ambiguous or varied about a teacher's duty to report suspected abuse;
As is evident from these congressional acts and state statutes, educators are criminally liable if they fail to report a suspected case of child abuse in most states