7th grader and mom Anna Amador sue California elementary school over right to wear pro-life t-shirt

[RamboLiberal]

Source: NY Daily News

A mother is suing a California elementary school on behalf of her 7th grade daughter who she claims was asked by school administrators to remove a t-shirt with a pro-life message on it.

The 13-year-old student was wearing a shirt with two pictures of a growing fetus with the words "growing, growing, gone," on it as part of "National Pro-life T-shirt Day," FoxNews.com reports.

The mother, Anna Amador, says in the complaint that her daughter was treated unfairly and was humiliated when she was forcefully dragged to the principal's office at McSwain Elementary School to remove the shirt. She was in 6th grade at the time of the incident.

According to the complaint, the school's administration defended its actions by citing the school's dress code, which does not allow clothing to make reference to "tobacco, drug, or alcohol use, sexual promiscuity, profanity, vulgarity, or other inappropriate subject matter."

"The t-shirt's message did not disrupt the work and discipline of the school. Nor was it inapporpriate for her to have worn a shirt that promotes the sanctity of life. There is nothing inappropriate about supporting life," said William J. Becker Jr., a first amendment attorney representing Amador. "The student doesn't forfeit her First Amendment free speech rights at the schoolhouse steps."


Adminstrators at McSwain Elementary School asked a 7th grader to remove this shirt because they found it inappropriate. The girl and her mother are suing.






Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/us_world/2009/07/08/2009-07-08_mother_anna_amador_sues_school_on_behalf_of_.html

[Wickerman]

1. I hate censorship

unless they censor other political statement shirts then this should be allowed.

[RamboLiberal]

7. I'd be curious how the mom and daughter feel about the right

of a student to wear a pro-choice shirt?

I sure wouldn't want to be a school official these days and have to decide these things.

[tomm2thumbs]

20. or a shirt with Jesus hanging upside down on a cross - the list goes on

offensive can be anything - so 'no message shirts of any kind' seems to be a reasonable rule. it neither supports nor condemns anyone

[mitchum]

31. Or the rotting corpse of Jesus

[JuniperLea]

9. In Los Angeles...

Most schools do not allow message t-shirts of any kind. It's hard enough teaching kids without that kind of distraction.

[Wickerman]

10. agreed

I think t-shirts should be message free in elementary school, but like someone else said, I sure would hate to be a school admin person this day and have to set policy. You have to make some real double-edged decisions.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

24. And then there are shirts where the color(s) and design are the statement

Seen massive arguments over that too. It can get very crazy

[Dappleganger]

30. Our schools are this way.

You cannot wear anything which is disruptive to the learning process, period.

[Posteritatis]

83. Pity nobody ever defines "disruptive to the learning process"

It just means "I don't like this, so I'm going to ban it and claim it's disrupting the learning process whether it is or not."

[ProgressiveProfessor]

105. Key point...who makes the call. Its one of the problems that produced "zero tolerance"

and other idiocies

[merwin]

11. Schools have a dress code. Many schools also don't let you have

clothes that bands on them, etc. The purpose of wearing a shirt with that particular message on it serves no other purpose than to be a distraction and cause arguments. Just like I would expect them to do the same to someone wearing one of those shirts with the picture of Bush that says "Idiot-in-chief".

If she really wanted to stir up some shit, she should have put that image/phrase on a bible and brought it to school. You can't tell someone to go home because of thier bible or take it away from them :)

Kids these days...

[ProgressiveProfessor]

22. Concur

If you allow one view you need to allow the other. The classic example is * Pride. If you allow one kind of pride shirt, you have to allow them all...straight pride as well as gay pride etc.

[Howardx]

2. the lawyer is an idiot

""The student doesn't forfeit her First Amendment free speech rights at the schoolhouse steps."

if that was the case then no school could have a dress code.

[Ms. Toad]

17. That is pretty much a direct quote from the Supreme Court case

Tinker v. Board of Education, which established that very fundamental principle of constitutional law. (students do not "shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gates." Tinker v. Des Moines Indep. Sch. Dist., 393 U.S. 503 (1969)) The 40th anniversary of that case was earlier this year it, and it is still valid law - as is the relatively contemporaneous case Roe v. Wade. Back from when we had a court that respected the constitution.

[Howardx]

21. why are dress codes allowed then? n/t

[ProgressiveProfessor]

26. Many have opt out options. In CA such options are required

A school in the bay area tried a dress code so strict it was effectively a uniform an lost in court.

[Ms. Toad]

29. In part because no one bothers to challenge them.

If you don't bother enforcing your rights, the fact that you have them doesn't really matter since they will be trampled on.

In addition, dress codes which do not impact political speech are viewed somewhat different than a prohibition on political speech (whether that prohibition is by the language of the dress code or by selective enforcement general categories such as "inappropriate" to stop political speech. Whether you like it or not the speech on the girl's T-shirt is every bit as political as the black armbands Mary Beth and John Tinker fought, and won, the right to wear to school.

[Howardx]

34. hmmmm

im gonna do more research

[Ms. Toad]

35. Here's a start

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/15/AR2005091502238.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8wjBoo1s8ik

[Howardx]

37. thanks but im good

already found what youre not mentioning about tinker

"unless they could reasonably forecast that the student expression would cause substantial disruption or material interference with school activities or would invade the rights of others."

[Ms. Toad]

38. and what you are missing is:

>>But, in our system, undifferentiated fear or apprehension of disturbance is not enough to overcome the right to freedom of expression. Any departure from absolute regimentation may cause trouble. Any variation from the majority's opinion may inspire fear. Any word spoken, in class, in the lunchroom, or on the campus, that deviates from the views of another person may start an argument or cause a disturbance. But our Constitution says we must take this risk, Terminiello v. Chicago, 337 U.S. 1 (1949); and our history says that it is this sort of hazardous freedom--this kind of openness--that is <509> the basis of our national strength and of the independence and vigor of Americans who grow up and live in this relatively permissive, often disputatious, society.

In order for the State in the person of school officials to justify prohibition of a particular expression of opinion, it must be able to show that its action was caused by something more than a mere desire to avoid the discomfort and unpleasantness that always accompany an unpopular viewpoint. Certainly where there is no finding and no showing that engaging in the forbidden conduct would "materially and substantially interfere with the requirements of appropriate discipline in the operation of the school," the prohibition cannot be sustained. Burnside v. Byars, supra, at 749.<<

Many people latch on to the phrase you latched on to without following the factual analysis the court applied - and remember in the Tinker timeframe in Iowa being against the Vietnam war was likely to get you beaten up.

[Howardx]

39. you dont think thats a loophole for the school?

especially the not infringing on others rights bit?

[Ms. Toad]

43. Pure speech does not invade the rights of others.

The whole point of the Tinker case is that you cannot squash speech just because it makes the school board or other students uncomfortable. I don't know if you were alive and old enough to remember the Vietnam war, but particularly in places like Iowa (where the Tinkers wore their armbands) and in Nebraska (where I grew up) it was risky to speak out against the war - far more likely to incite a riot than someone wearing an anti-abortion T-shirt today (although perhaps about as likely to provoke violence as someone wearing a pro-choice T-shirt, given recent attacks on doctors performing abortions). Students protesting the war in Ohio in the same time frame were shot by the Ohio National Guard. Even in the heat of that kind of passion, the Supreme Court said that the school district's fear of nasty exchaanges was not sufficient to prohibit the student's right to express their political opinions on the war.

I am sure the school will try to use it - but Tinker has stood the test of time, when those whose speech rights were infringed bothered to fight for their rights. As long as all the girl was doing was wearing a T-shirt with a political saying - and T-shirts were not generally prohibited (and they appear not to have been - based on the description of the kind of clothing that was banned), it is pretty clear that the school cannot bar political speech because it does not like the content.

As one of the students who wore a black armband to Junior High school the day after the Tinker decision (and having engaged in lesser civil disobedience in the name of students' free speech a few years later) I find it really ironic that as often as not when I discuss Tinker I am trying to convince the very people whose political heritage established the right that the right still exists.

[Howardx]

46. hypothetically

say someone had a religious reason for not wanting to view fetuses, would the 1st amendment rights trump that? im just wondering what possible defence the school's lawyers could use.

[Ms. Toad]

50. That would be the pledge of allegiance scenario

There are individuals (and I am one of them) whose religious beliefs prohibit reciting the pledge of allegiance. That does not stop the school board from mandating that it be recited every day. I was permitted to be excused during the recitation (although generally I chose to just stand respectfully and recite (to myself) a prayer or poem or something else to drown out the pledge.

The student would probably have the right to avoid attending class with the T-shirt s/he found religiously offensive, but not to force the other student to remain silent.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

106. The only one they can use is disruption, but the same pictures are in textbooks

School will lose this one unless they radically change the dress code

[Hepburn]

89. Safety reasons on some issues

For example ~~ one district I am aware of has a code that states for elementary students: No backless shoes.

[boppers]

100. Free speech is not absolute.

If the shirt wasn't disrupting education, allow it, if it's denying other students an education, disallow it.

Pretty simple.

[Warpy]

3. I hate deceptive advertising

The fetus panels should be life sized.

Trying to make it look like a baby instead of something the size and shape of a cashew nut with gills like a fish is false, misleading, deceptive, and a total perversion of the fact that a fetus is not a baby. That's the stage at which 90% of abortions are performed, the embryo stage.

If they're banning all political and advertising shirts across the board, they should ban this one, too. If they don't, they should consider it.

This shirt is repugnant because it is such a lie. However, if they're allowing other political expression, they don't have a legal leg to stand on unless they want to call it pornographic and that will open up another rotten can of worms.

[bemildred]

4. Assuming this is not bullshit, the school administrators needs to get a grip.

Students are in school to learn, but they are not in school to shut up. They would have done far better to hold an open forum to discuss abortion and let everybody wear the T-shorts of their choice.

[merwin]

12. The kid and her family needs to get a grip, not hte administrators.

The kid's parents should have offered to hold an open forum to discuss it. The administration has the right to enforce whatever dress code they see appropriate to provide a safe and relatively distraction-free environment.

BTW, what are T-shorts? :evilgrin:

[bemildred]

15. The kids parents are holding and "open forum" to discuss it.

With lawyers and judges and everything. The administration is accountable for what they do, that's what they get paid for, being responsible, managing the school. If they cannot deal with ideologues like this, they should resign, it's not some sort of secret skill.
:evilgrin:

[SkyDaddy7]

28. I think there should be a dress code in all public schools...

Call it a uniform or whatever...Light colored button up shirt with slacks. No T-shirts or Jeans. Case solved. Then poor kids would not have to feel embarrassed for not having the latest greatest cool clothes they can't afford. Politics has no place in elementary schools...That is what college is for.

[bemildred]

32. Well, yeah, I like that.

But on the other hand, I think children are citizens and have the same civil and legal rights as the rest of us, in particular the right to speak freely in appropriate situations, and it is the job of the school to handle that in appropriate ways. If the school cannot deal with these things, there is damn little reason to expect children to pick up the slack.

[mamaleah]

41. That's the perfect world.

In the real world, teachers are so overworked as it is, they do not have time to break up every little squabble. Poor kids are often mocked relentlessly. Dress codes level the playing field. Honestly, with all the average kid and teacher have to worry about, why add in the snark over who buys their clothes where?

[bemildred]

75. No, that's the intelligent, functional, discriminating, and considerate world.

The current "world" is none of those things and that is why it does such a shitty job. My mother, wife, brothers, and daughter are/were all teachers and I know about how school systems were run in the past and are run today. I don't have any problem with certain modest restraints on how people dress at school, but there is no substitute for intelligent judgement and a cool head.

[mattvermont]

5. Remember Tinker vs Des Moines

I know Mr. Tinker, and this was the case in 1965 that set the standard for expression in public schools
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tinker_v._Des_Moines_Independent_Community_School_District

[JuniperLea]

6. Schools have dress codes for a reason...

Mainly due to the distractions. Many gang infested schools have gone to uniform dress code, and it helps a great deal.

I couldn't wear band tour t-shirts, or my infamous "group therapy" t-shirt... now that I'm a parent, I see why that was a good idea.

Schools are having a hard enough time teaching kids anything... this doesn't help matters.

Minors don't have free speech rights; they are under the complete control of their parents.

This is stupidity at it's finest.

[RamboLiberal]

13. Heck I would probably not be allowed to wear this kind of t-shirt

to work on casual day.

We have a dress code against message shirts except there seems to be an allowance for tasteful sports team shirts since Pittsburgh is a big sports town. And you can get away with a funny shirt again as long as its tasteful.

[Rage for Order]

64. "Minors...are under the complete control of their parents."

So then it's safe to assume that you agree with parental notification laws for minors who seek to get an abortion. Or is that different?

[brendan120678]

74. Most people I know support laws like that...

Not to change the subject of this thread into a pro-choice/anti-choice thread, but minors cannot consent to medical procedures. It is as simple as that.

[Rage for Order]

117. "Minors cannot consent to medical procedures"

I agree with you. However, start an OP or a poll in General Discussion and ask whether DUers support parental notification laws. My educated guess is 75% - 80% are against them, and half of those people vehemently so who will flame you relentlessly for suggesting that a minor be required to get parental permission to undergo a medical procedure. Give it a try if you're feeling bored (or masochistic) sometime.

[DebbieCDC]

8. "National Pro Life T Shirt Day"

Just who dreamed up this stunt?

[Quantess]

57. Is Hallmark aware? {n/t}

[Hepburn]

91. Just a guess....

...but a RW fundie asshole? :shrug:

[Auggie]

14. I agree with the school

Keep the discussion of political issues under control of licensed educators. This girl has plenty of opportunity to promote her causes after school hours.

[Ian David]

16. I want to wear a pro-masturbation shirt to school! n/t

[Stargazer09]

18. Let me know how that goes over

I'd love to hear the reactions to THAT shirt! :rofl:

[tomm2thumbs]

23. I would wear

a suppository shirt - it's educational!! that means 'science'



'It's like a little banana - only you don't put it in your mouth!'

No doubt they have only laid the foundation for the district to remove any and all graphic shirts to prevent issues like this from coming up again, and since it is clearly an across-the-board rule, it cannot be said to discriminate against any one particular group or issue.

[tomm2thumbs]

19. there will never be a right answer - settle for a white shirt and blue pants/slacks/skirt

if this is worth spending another ounce of effort or money on that could be going to the schools....well...

[ProgressiveProfessor]

25. In California, parents can opt out of school uniforms with just a signature

[incapsulated]

103. And that's the problem, go back to uniforms like I wore as a kid

Made everyone equal, regardless of background and none of this bullshit.

[BobTheSubgenius]

27. "The student doesn't forfeit her First Amendment free speech rights at the schoolhouse steps."

Actually, you kinda do.

[Ms. Toad]

33. No, you don't forfeit your rights

Spend a little time with Tinker v. Board of Education (http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/cas/comm/free_speech/tinker.html ), the Supreme Court case from the Vietnam war which established that constitutional principle when John and Mary Beth were suspended for wearing black armbands to school in protest of the Vietnam war.

[Posteritatis]

82. I've always 'loved' the contempt for this particular ruling everyone seems to have

People get confronted with the SCOTUS ruling and just say "nuh-uh." It kinda bothers me.

[no_hypocrisy]

36. I think the school will lose on this case.

At the moment, I'm working for the law firm that represented the two boys in this lawsuit.
http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1190278978670

They wore buttons with pictures of Hitler Youth and a red slash through them and a caption "No School Uniforms!".

* * * *


Greenaway found the button's image relatively harmless. "It is, in fact, a rather innocuous photograph -- rows and rows of young men, all facing the same direction and wearing the same outfit (with no identifying marks or patches). In fact, the picture "might easily be mistaken for a historical photograph of the Boy Scouts," he said. He added in a footnote, "If the student in this case had displayed a swastika, a Confederate flag, or a burning cross, then this Court's analysis would differ greatly."

Greenaway thus found that wearing the buttons was protected free speech, just as high school students' wearing of black armbands to oppose the Vietnam War was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in Tinker v. Des Moines Indep. Cmty. Sch. Dist., 393 U.S. 503 (1969).

"A student may not be punished for merely expressing views unless the school has reason to believe that the speech or expression will 'materially and substantially disrupt the work and discipline of the school,'" Greenaway wrote, citing Tinker. Students do not "shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate."

In finding irreparable harm would befall the students unless the injunction were granted, Greenaway rejected the school board's "no harm, no foul" argument. "A student whose protected expression is stifled suffers an injury that cannot be undone," he said.

In this case, these are photos of a fetus, not an aborted fetus, but an intact and seemingly healthy fetus with a benign message. Following my employers' case, I think the First Amendement will triumph again.

[bc3000]

40. too bad

Students do not "shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate."

That's a shame. We'd all be a lot better off if the freedom of speech did not apply to public schools. At least that's my opinion after a lifetime of Catholic school. I don't think Catholics are inherently better than other Americans, but for the most part our schools sure are.

[Ms. Toad]

47. I find it really sad that on a liberal discussion board

I am encountering so many advocates that children should not be forbidden from expressing their political opinions within the school. It was despair and outrage at the actions our government was taking in Vietnam that moved John and Mary Beth so strongly that they felt compelled to wear black armbands to school in silent protest. (Tinker v. Board of Education)

I want my daughter to have that same right to speak out about the Iraq war, the death penalty, her parents' right to marry, or even being pro-life if that is how she ultimately comes to believe.

School is not just a time to learn academics - if it was we would not have sports, drama club, Future Farmers of America, Chess club, and even the Fellowship of Christian Athletes. School is also a place to explore what interests, to practice forming friendships, and a whole host of other things - including place to learn how to discuss difficult issues with each other in a civil fashion, to refine our analytical reasoning ability, and perhaps to win hearts and minds.

[jberryhill]

69. I love the stuff at T Shirt Hell...

[Blasphemer]

70. Agreed

I am of the belief that a big part of the reason there is a considerable part of the population that are not free thinkers is because of the sort of cloistering that happens in schools, especially regionally. Young people's ability to question and challenge is an important part of progressive thought. While it may be disturbing for some to see the images on her t-shirt, the end result of this young woman asserting her rights outweighs that.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

107. We went through some of this hysteria at a local high school, the staff looked like idiots

before it was all over.

[Ms. Toad]

125. I'm actually pretty proud of my daughter and her friends

Although we told her (and the superintendent and vice-principal) that we would take the matter to court if the school dared suspend the kids for the T-shirt brigade they planned in support of their friend, the kids figured out how to get their point across without crossing the line in the sand drawn by the vice-principal.

My daughter's friend wore a T-shirt that said "I love my boyfriend girlfriend." After she was sent to in-school-suspension for a day for wearing it, her friends initially decided to wear identical T-shirts in support of her. They were told (via a general announcement) that because such sayings advertised sexual activity they would be suspended if they did. Pointing out that, if that was the case, the wedding band the vice-principal wore and the picture of his wife and family also advertised sexual activity didn't make a dent - nor did pointing out that given Ohio's (then) recent marriage discrimination amendment made the issue a political one (even if by some stretch of the imagination it wasn't one before).

The kids, entirely on their own, decided to make their point by wearing safety-yellow shirts (that really bright impossible to miss color) that declared "Freedom of Expression." The friend wore her original T-shirt the same day underneath a second shirt and flashed people all day long without getting caught. They made their point. Their friend was well supported. There was nothing the vice-principal could do since even though the T-shirts they were wearing were clearly directed at pointing out their disagreement with his action, even he could no longer argue with a straight face that they were advertising sexual activity.

What is even sweeter is that my daughter's friend felt free to wear the T-shirt in the first place, and about 20% of her class was outraged enough about the vice-principal's condemnation that they would have been willing to wear the same T-shirt in support of their friend - in a very conservative public school in Ohio. I hope that our daughter openly claiming two moms (by her choice since sometime in middle school) had something to do with that.

[Posteritatis]

80. I *hope* the school will lose that case

Censorship doesn't become good just because it blocks things that my personal politics find objectionable.

[subcomhd]

123. hazlewood

Hazelwood v. Cathy Kulmeier, et all. In its 1988 ruling the US Supreme Court held that school censorship of a student newspaper did not violate the 1st Amendment rights of the students. The censorship in this specific case was consistent with “the school’s legitimate pedagogical goals” and its “educational mission.” As both of these terms are vague enough to lend themselves to disparate interpretations, the Hazelwood ruling prompted many state legislatures to pass laws specifically defining the extent to which a district may interfere with speech in school-sponsored, but student-produced, publications.

When students journalists at Naperville Central High School in Illinois learned that district employees had used taxpayer funds for travel at a time of budget cuts they decided to investigate for the student newspaper. Using publicly available expense vouchers submitted by three principals and an administrator, they wrote a story revealing those individuals’ trips to New Orleans and San Francisco. School administrators refused to print the story. The Illinois Legislature passed a bill restricting the censorship authority of districts (a pro-free speech bill) but it was vetoed by the governor.

[uppityperson]

42. I see the school's point about the pictures.

Distracting pictures there. Probably can't wear pictures of rotting dead animals either.

[Eric J in MN]

119. Those pictures didn't stop students from learning.

Nor would students wearing pictures of rotting dead animals on their t-shirts.

Both are constitutional free speech.

Students face the front of the room, not the front of the shirts of the other students.

[uppityperson]

120. Not necessarily. They do not spend the whole day "facing the front of the room"

Some classes they face each other. In other classes they work together rather than "facing hte front of the room". Students walk down hallways between classes, or play on the playground (depending on the year). No, they don't spend the entire day "facing the front of the room".

Schools have dress codes. Irregardless of the Constitution.

[Eric J in MN]

121. Seeing a t-shirt while walking down the hall doesn't stop someone from learning. NT

NT

[uppityperson]

122. In a way, a grotesque t-shirt walking down the hall IS a learning experience

How about at lunch?

[depakid]

44. Yet another reason why schools should require uniforms

[TheCML]

58. Yep, its way easier to indoctrinate that way.

[depakid]

60. Yep, Australians are sure indoctrinated

:rofl:

Freer society, better schools, universal healthcare and an economy not in recession.....

[Posteritatis]

81. And a net marginally freer than Iran's! (nt)

[onehandle]

45. I'm with the school. It is disruptive. Period. nt

[kiranon]

49. Agree. n/t

[ancient mariner]

59. Unbelievable

Hey, this is America, folks, remember?

The Constitution trumps some penny-ante school rule any day of the week, including Monday through Friday in a public school. I remember way back when I was in high school and a young man wore a button that said "Stop the War in Vietnam!" This was in 1966 or 1967, so we're not talking about a very popular slogan at the time. He was hauled into the principal's office and ordered to remove the button, but he refused, citing his First Amendment rights. He wore the button proudly the rest of the week, too.

Democracy is messy, people, but it's all we have.

[onehandle]

62. "Stop the War in Vietnam!" isn't an attack on people's rights. The shirt is.

Can I send my kid to school with a t-shirt that says "Take the Vote away from Women!"?

I wasn't intending on addressing the subject matter, but there it is.

Regardless, the shirt addressed a very hot button issue and I would bet you that the Mom knew what would happen in advance.

[MellowDem]

102. Yes you can....

And the shirt isn't about rights, it's about when life begins. Pro-lifers don't see it as a privacy rights issue, they see it as a life and death issue. Otherwise, the shirt would say "take away women's right to choose", not trying to present the fetus as a living being, which is another issue entirely.

Regardless, you could say that stopping the war in Vietnam was taking away the rights of the South Vietnamese if you want to get down to it. Somehow, all speech could be couched in such terms. I'm just surprised at the amount of hypocrisy and excuses that I see on here to quelch speech people disagree with.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

108. Not really, it expresses a viewpoint. Its not inherently sexist

[junior college]

48. Based on their dress code, she should be able to wear the shirt

If they don't like it then they should change the wording of the dress code to prohibit political subject matter. But then you get into a murky area. I think they are censoring her shirt unfairly. I'm very much pro choice but we need to respect the right of people to express their views as long as they are within the law and the "rules of the school."

edit spelling

[MadMaddie]

51. School uniforms will fix this.

If the mom wants her daughter to express these kind of views why is she in a public school? Why not go to a church run school where they would accept this?

[junior college]

53. I think that students of public schools should be able to express

opposing viewpoints and not be censored. In debate and in classroom discussion, etc.

[MadMaddie]

56. The problem is that these kids are not necessarily expressing

their own individual views they expressing their parents.

Nothing wrong with free speech, however it is critical for our schools to focus on eductating the children and not fighting frivilous lawsuits.

[defendandprotect]

66. True . . .and it's not like they're going to have any meaningful debate on the issue . . .

which might overall be helpful in understanding what's at stake for women when
a late term pregnancy goes bad --

[Ms. Toad]

76. Certainly my black armband,

which I wore to junior high school the day after the Tinker decision came down prompted meaningful discussions about the US involvement in Vietnam, and what was at stake for the citizens of Vietnam, about the draft policies that put primarily poor or minority teenagers in the line of fire, about communism and self determination, and a whole host of other issues of the day.

Certainly the T-shirt my daughter's female friend wore proclaiming "I love my boyfriend girlfriend" prompted meaningful discussion - although the topic of their discussion was mostly about what T-shirt saying they could use that would get across the point that they believed the school's suspension of their friend for wearing it violated her constitutional rights, without putting them directly at risk for suspension (which they had been warned wearing T-shirts with the same saying would do). Even though the discussion wasn't specifically about the topic of the T-shirt, the kids did read Tinker v. Des Moines Board of Education, supported their friend, contemplated civil disobedience and decided against it, and found a meaningful way to protest the school's decision without crossing the line. All of which I find at least as valuable, if not more so, than the entire year they spent in their citizenship class the next year discussing theory.

I don't know why you would assume this issue would be any different. If we don't learn to engage each other civilly on issues about which we disagree as we are growing up, it is a lot harder as adults to do anything more productive than shout at each other across picket lines.

[defendandprotect]

78. Agree that the best course is enlightenment . . .

Let's say it begins with another student wearing a T-Shirt reminding the class
that "pro-lifers" have taken the lives of Dr. Tiller and many other doctors and
ordinary citizens working in women's clinics where reproductive issues are
discussed, birth control is available -- and even abortions ...

As I outlined it to another poster --

The problem is that expression is a two way street . . . are we going
to permit other students to wear T-Shirts showing the murder of Dr. Tiller

by Scott Roeder. Or other victims of "pro-life" fanatics?

Are you really for that?

PLUS, there is no way there is going to be any meaningful, educationing discourse

on this subject in that school where students can begin to understand a woman's

stake in protecting her own life -- right to self-defense -- when a late term

pregnancy goes wrong.

I'd be greatly in favor of real information in the hands of the students -- it's
the preferable way. Let's see what happens. But if this one "pro-life" opinion/
expression is permitted . . . then the school has to be open to the "pro-choice"
information. Let's go!

[Ms. Toad]

79. You are correct that it would be equally unconstitutional

to prohibit the other side of the debate. (Actually it would be more so - in the Tinker case part of what made it s clear was that it was only one viewpoint that was threatened with suspension.)

You are creating a straw man that doesn't exist here. The story did not indicate that anyone with a T-shirt advocating the other side of the debate was denied his or her right to free speech. If it had, I would also be arguing that both students should also be allowed to wear their T-shirts.

As the Supreme Court said in allowing Mary Beth and John Tinker to wear their black armbands during a period when that viewpoint was extremely unpopular, "in our system, undifferentiated fear or apprehension of disturbance is not enough to overcome the right to freedom of expression. . . . our Constitution says we must take this risk. In order for the State in the person of school officials to justify prohibition of a particular expression of opinion, it must be able to show that its action was caused by something more than a mere desire to avoid the discomfort and unpleasantness that always accompany an unpopular viewpoint."

[defendandprotect]

84. The message I repeated for you . . .

was sent to another poster who seemed to not be aware that the other side could
also engage in T-shirts featuring emotional messages.

The article, of course, was mute on the subject of opposing messages which is why
I saw the need to acknowledge the likelihood of that happening for those who may
not have recognized that likelihood. Without guidance, what the school would be
left with is simply a battle between emotional T-shirt messages -- and no facts.

The point is that WITHOUT PROPER GUIDANCE directing the students to research and
information from which they can make up their own minds about the issue of late term
abortions, it would simply come down to an emotional T-shirt display in the school
which wouldn't necessarily on its own promote any real enlightement for the students.

And I agree with the Court's decision in Tinker . . . and would like to see more
decisions like it.

And, of course, much of the reality of Vietnam -- Operation Phoenix, Gulf of Tonkin
Incident lies - Nixon's secret bombings -- was hidden from the public. As well as
the fact that we had financed France's continuing efforts to hold Vietnam as a colony.
And, the reality of where the United Nations left Vietnam after WWII -- decisions
ignored and overrun by the US. As Jack Kennedy related to aides in regard to the
high interest by the military/elites in Vietnam, he came to understand that it was
"a nice piece of real estate."

Again, I'm for opening up our schools to real information. While T-shirts can provide
an opening for discussion, there's no guarantee that any real information on abortion
or late term abortion will make it into the classrooms.

[Ms. Toad]

86. Just as there was no real guarantee

that real information on Vietnam would have made it into the classroom, despite the presence of black armbands to start discussions. On the other hand, it is pretty much guaranteed that it won't if we silence our children's voices.

At that age, they're not perfect - there will be a lot of emotionally charged conversations without much substance - and some kids (on both sides) will just recite their parents' opinions without at a superficial level. But given the opportunity you would be amazed at how intellectually mature some middle and high school students are, and how much they can learn from each other - and teach to us - if they are allowed to really explore emotionally and intellectually complex issues.

And how often does the generally adult conversation on DU degenerate into screaming matches with people sticking their fingers in their ears humming "I can't hear you..."

[defendandprotect]

97. Of course, "God" didn't tell Nixon to bomb VN . . . but as we've seen with Bush . . .

not only did he and Cheney know what "God" wanted, but he actually told Bush
to attack Afghanistan and then Iraq--!!!

There is something of that "God says" argument in the war on Roe vs Wade --
and it is why our Founders gave us Separation of Church and State --
all other issues are simply issues. When religion comes into the picture . . .
it's difficult to argue with what "God says."

Again, I agree with you -- it would be great to see honest discussions of late
term abortion in our schools. But I think they need to move onto the real
discussions and the real information. Schools which are not open to discussions
of normal human sexuality, birth control, I would imagine would not be open to
both sides of this subject.

[Ms. Toad]

98. You must have lived in a different part of the world

than I did during the Vietnam war - God was certainly used quite a bit for justifying fighting those Godless communists where I was, and at the very least God was on our side.

[defendandprotect]

101. That's true . . .

[Ms. Toad]

72. I don't know the girl in this case

but I do know the Tinker children who were a similar age when their actions in wearing black armbands resulted in Tinker v. Des Moines Board of Education. Their viewpoints agreed with their parents, but they were expressing their own views. As they grew older, they continued to express their own views - which often, but not always, agreed with their own parents. And, yes, the same charge was lobbed against them at the time.

Just because you do not agree with a teenager's views does not mean he or she is expressing their parents' views. I know plenty of teens who feel very strongly on both sides of this issue. There was also a teenager here who made some very powerful slide shows on the Iraq war - I don't recall anyone alleging that she was merely a mouthpiece for her parents. Some of these teens will continue to hold the same views throughout their lives - some won't. Some might even change them if they wear a provocative T-shirt to school and engage in real conversation with others of opposing viewpoiknts. If they don't change their viewpoints they will at least be exposed to other views and might learn how to have civil discussions on the issue, rather than screaming matches across a picket line. The Tinkers' older sister went on to discuss GLBT issues with right wing nuts on public talk shows - and to actually change many of their hearts and minds. Changing hearts and minds was her life's work - and was cut tragically short last week - but her effective engagement of those with differing viewpoints, is in a very real sense, a legacy of her younger siblings actions in wearing black armbands to their public high school.

As to not fighting frivolous lawsuits - then schools should not be repressing their students' free speech rights. Although I don't recall any specific discussion at the time, I am sure there are individuals who thought the Tinker case was frivolous - and it ended up being the case which is still cited in every significant case on students' free speech, and which has lasted longer than Roe v. Wade as THE case on free speech in schools.

[LWolf]

88. So you think

that whatever curricular mandates a teacher is required to meet ought to be scrapped every time someone wears a message that invites opposing view points?

Knowing that the teachers' jobs are on the line?

[Recursion]

55. Freedom of expression isn't about saying accepted things

I don't get it. Do you want the kid to learn to just say things that their peers agree with?

[defendandprotect]

67. The problem is that expression is a two way street . . . are we going

to permit other students to wear T-Shirts showing the murder of Dr. Tiller

by Scott Roeder. Or other victims of "pro-life" fanatics?

Are you really for that?

PLUS, there is no way there is going to be any meaningful, educationing discourse

on this subject in that school where students can begin to understand a woman's

stake in protecting her own life -- right to self-defense -- when a late term

pregnancy goes wrong.

[Recursion]

68. So to you, this isn't a decision kids can discuss or learn about?

Not everybody is going to have our opinions about abortion. Ever.

[defendandprotect]

77. Do you see the school introducing a program on enlightening these

kids as to the rare, but continuing need for abortion in late term?

The right-wing has succeeded in keeping information about normal human sexuality
from these kids -- as well as information about birth control.

So ... yes, I'd be surprised if they are inviting people from Planned Parenthood
or NARAL or clinic workers -- or even well informed elected officials -- who might
explain to the kids what Roe vs Wade was all about --
and why everyone has a right to self-defense . . . even if the attacker is a fetus.

The kids could, of course, form a group and discuss this away from school -- researching
the subject on the internet -- do I see anyone encouraging that?

They need a guidance counsellor to suggest these options to them --
don't see that happening, either.



The problem is that expression is a two way street . . . are we going
to permit other students to wear T-Shirts showing the murder of Dr. Tiller

by Scott Roeder. Or other victims of "pro-life" fanatics?

Are you really for that?

PLUS, there is no way there is going to be any meaningful, educational discourse

on this subject in that school where students can begin to understand a woman's

stake in protecting her own life -- right to self-defense -- when a late term

pregnancy goes wrong.


And, you didn't answer the questions . . .

[mamaleah]

118. I tend to not always agree with your posts, but I certainly do on this point!

You are correct, there will be no productive discussions from this in schools. Mainly because of RW actions, but also because quite honestly, teachers and administrators are already swamped with things to do help the average high school student just graduate.

You really cannot have an honest, open debate/discussion on abortion with your students when large sections of your student body suffer from things such as parents with addictions, parents who are absent, poverty, undiagnosed learning disabilities, undiagnosed or treated emotional issues, etc. There are many issues to get through.

[Rage for Order]

63. Are you serious?

Is it your position that people who are anti-abortion should not go to public schools? Okay then...

[slackmaster]

104. At least a dress code that uniformly bars clothing with any kind of writing or pictures

I wouldn't have a problem with that.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

109. Then the message gets more subtle but will still be there

Is a shirt with a red cross of St George but no stars OK? What about one with the flags?

[slackmaster]

127. That's a whole lot better than "I'm with stupid" or aborted fetuses

:D

[JonLP24]

52. The last time I was in K-12 was 2003

I don't remember if political shirts were banned but substance advertising wasn't ok. For example you couldn't wear a Corona shirt or a Cannabis leaf shirt.

Your shirt could have a message such as for example, "I lost my number can I have yours?", big pictures, etc.

Only thing that wasn't and really female students were affected by it was really short shorts, shirts that exposed the belly button, or tank tops they had to have a sleave.

[Quantess]

54. It's no worse than "Bong hits for Jesus"

I had no idea there was a "National Pro-life T-shirt Day". Does Hallmark know?

[ProgressiveProfessor]

110. Shirts with drugs, alcohol, sex, and firearms are specifically banned

Which leads to problems when common names are used in those areas

[onehandle]

61. posted in wrong place. ignore. nt

[defendandprotect]

65. T-Shirts showing the killing of Dr. Tiller by Scott Roeder . . . will that work?

Actually, there would be quite a variety of victims and "pro-life" murderers
to choose from . . . !!!

[noamnety]

71. Students where I teach honor the Day of Silence

There's one of those days for gay rights, and a number of students honor that. And there's one for right-to-lifers, and some kids honor that. In both cases, they do it very visibly with duct tape over their mouths.

I support gay rights, I certainly don't support right-to-life causes. But I support both groups of kids in expressing their beliefs and I have intervened on behalf of the right-to-lifers in one case where their teacher was going to penalize them for not participating in class that day. I also had a good talk with the kids involved about civil disobedience, and how sometimes that means we have to go into it by making a decision not only to break a rule, but also to accept the consequences of breaking that rule - that there is always that risk involved, and that's partly what makes the statement more powerful.

It doesn't make much sense to teach about democracy and the Tinker vs. Des Moines case from textbooks, and then at the same time teach kids by example the exact opposite lessons.

As a teacher, it's our job to recognize the teachable moments instead of viewing them as a "disruption." Sometimes (often) a disruption of a normal day of classes is when the most learning takes place.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

114. What if some student wore a "Straight Pride" shirt

This has happened and it did go to court

[JonLP24]

73. School Uniforms

Effects of Student Uniforms on Attendance, Behavior Problems, Substance Abuse, and Academic Achievement.

This study was first published in the:
The Journal of Education Research
(Volume 92, Number 1, Sept./Oct. 1998, pp. 53-62)
by David L. Brunsma, University of Alabama
and Kerry A. Rockquemore, Notre Dame.

In one sentence, this study showed that uniforms did NOT lead to an improvement in attendance, behavior, drug use, or academic achievement.

Mandatory uniform policies have been the focus of recent discourse on public school reform. Proponents of such reform measures emphasize the benefits of student uniforms on specific behavioral and academic outcomes. Tenth grade data from The National Educational Longitudinal Study of 1988 was used to test empirically the claims made by uniform advocates. The findings indicate that student uniforms have no direct effect on substance use, behavioral problems, or attendance. Contrary to current discourse, the authors found a negative effect of uniforms on student academic achievement. Uniform policies may indirectly affect school environments and student outcomes by providing a visible and public symbol of commitment to school improvement and reform.

Brunsma and Rockquemore wanted to investigate the extraordinary claims being made about how wonderful school uniforms are, particularly from the Long Beach California. It was being claimed that mandatory uniform policies were resulting in massive decreases (50 to 100 percent) in crime and disciplinary problems.

It is typically assumed, as exemplified in Long Beach, that uniforms are the sole factor causing direct change in numerous behavioral and academic outcomes. Those pronouncements by uniform proponents have raised strident objections and created a political climate in which public school uniform policies have become highly contested. The ongoing public discourse is not only entrenched in controversy but also largely fueled by conjecture and anecdotal evidence. Hence, it now seems critical that empirical analysis should be conducted to inform the school uniform debate. In this study, we investigated the relationship between uniforms and several outcomes that represent the core elements of uniform proponent's claims. Specifically, we examined how a uniform affects attendance, behavior problems, substance abuse, and academic achievement. We believe that a thorough analysis of the arguments proposed by uniform advocates will add critical insight to the ongoing debate on the effects of school uniform policies. (Brunsma and Rockquemore, 1998, pg. 54)

The authors point out that if uniforms work, they should see some of the following trends in schools with uniforms:

1. Student uniforms decrease substance use (drugs).
2. Student uniforms decrease behavioral problems.
3. Student uniforms increase attendance.
4. Student uniforms increase academic achievement.

They suspected that when other variables affecting these four items were accounted for, it would be shown that uniforms were not the cause for improvement.

How They Did Their Study

They used data from the National Educational Longitudinal Study of 1988 (NELS:88), and three follow-up studies. These studies tracked a national sample of eighth graders (in 1988) from a wide variety of public and private schools and followed their academic careers through college. Some of the data collected in the studies included uniform policies, student background (economic and minority status), peer group (attitudes towards school and drug use), school achievement, and behavioral characteristics (how often did each student get into trouble, fights , suspensions, etc.). The authors concentrated on data from the students 10th grade year.

Some of the independent variables they considered were sex, race, economic status, public or private school, academic or vocational "tracking", rural or urban district, peer proschool attitudes, academic preparedness, the student's own proschool attitudes, and most importantly, whether or not the students wore uniforms. The researchers wanted to determine if there was a tie between these variables and desirable behavior by the students. The areas that they were looking for improvement as a result of the previous variables included reduced absenteeism, fewer behavioral problems, reduced illegal drug use, and improved standardized test scores. The researchers considered this second group of variables to be the dependent variables. The goal of their study was to determine if there was any relationship between the independent variables (particularly uniforms) and the dependent variables.

The authors took all of the data for these variables from the NELS:88 study and performed a regression analysis to see if any of the independent variables were predictors of any of the dependent variables. If there was a strong tie in the data between any two variables ( uniforms and absenteeism, for example), it would show up in the study as a correlation coefficient close to 1 or -1. A correlation coefficient near 0 indicates no relationship between the two variables. So, if wearing uniforms had a large effect on behavior, we would expect to see a correlation coefficient of say 0.5 between uniforms and measures of good behavior. If we see a very low correlation coefficient between these two, then we know that wearing uniforms has no real effect on behavior.

Results

The only positive result for uniforms that the study showed was a very slight relationship between uniforms and standardized achievement scores. The correlation coefficient was 0.05, indicating a very slight possible relationship between the two variables, but showing that uniforms are a very poor predictor of standardized test scores and that the relationship is much weaker than has been indicated in the uniform debate. Notice that 0,05 is much closer to 0 than to 1. Other than this one weak, possible relationship, uniforms struck out. In the authors own words:

Student uniform use was not significantly correlated with any of the school commitment variables such as absenteeism, behavior, or substance use (drugs). In addition, students wearing uniforms did not appear to have any significantly different academic preparedness, proschool attitudes, or peer group structures with proschool attitudes than other students. Moreover, the negative correlations between the attitudinal variables and the various outcomes of interest are significant; hence, the predictive analysis provides more substantive results.

In other words, the authors saw no relationship between wearing uniforms and the desirable behavior (reduced absenteeism, reduced drug usage, improved behavior). They did, however, see a strong relationship between academic preparedness, proschool attitudes, and peers having proschool attitudes and the desirable behaviors. Furthermore, they saw no relationship between wearing uniforms and the variables that do predict good behavior (academic preparedness, proschool attitudes, and peers having proschool attitudes).

Conclusion

Based upon this analysis, the authors were forced to reject the ideas that uniforms improved attendance rates, decreased behavioral problems, decreased drug use, or improved academic achievement. The authors did find that proschool attitudes from students and their peers and good academic preparedness did predict the desired behavior. They saw that wearing uniforms did not lead to improvements in proschool attitudes or increased academic preparation.

References

David L. Brunsma, D.L. and Rockquemore, K.A. (1998) Effects of Student Uniforms on Attendance, Behavior Problems, Substance Abuse, and Academic Achievement, The Journal of Education Research Volume 92, Number 1, Sept./Oct. 1998, pp. 53-62

http://sociology.missouri.edu/New%20Website%20WWW/Faculty%20and%20Staff/Assets/David%20Brunsma/Examining%20the%20Effects%20of%20Students%20Uniforms%20on%20Attendance.pdf (full report)
http://www.geocities.com/school_uniforms/abstract98.html (abstract)

Freedom of expression is important and besides most school uniforms are ugly.

[and-justice-for-all]

93. I have been saying that for years...

there should be school uniform policy in the states...

[JonLP24]

95. I don't understand your post

So you've been saying The findings indicate that student uniforms have no direct effect on substance use, behavioral problems, or attendance. Contrary to current discourse, the authors found a negative effect of uniforms on student academic achievement for years but suggest there be a school uniform policy?

[and-justice-for-all]

99. Implemetation of a uniform policy would be positive not negative..nt

[Ilsa]

85. Uh-oh. Someone is going to have to fill the Kindergartners in on where babies come from. nt

[BigBluenoser]

87. As someone who used to wear heavy metal T-shirts to school...

I gotta support the kid's right to wear whatever the heck they want.

If there is no mandatory uniform and this does not break any established rules, then the kids should be free to wear what they want.

Hell, I used to wear a CoF "Jesus is a C*nt" tee. I had a sabbath shirt with a demon being crucified. I had (along with everyone else) a "Metal up your Ass" shirt.

Sure I was wearing fucked up shit in the other direction from this, but it was fucked up shit :)

[and-justice-for-all]

92. I got those same T's man...the CoF shirt is aswome...nt

[and-justice-for-all]

90. So there should be no bitching if someone wears a Pro-choice T

the same day.

[bemildred]

94. Well, that's the main point.

Why this reluctance to duke it out intellectually in an academic setting? Isn't that what education is all about? Isn't parenthood a fundamental issue of human existence? Is it really so threatening to have to defend personal choice about whether and when to become a parent? Do we really desire parents who have never thought through the consequences of becoming a parent?

[ProgressiveProfessor]

112. Beacuse it might offend, hurt feelings, or lower a child's self esteem

Not my words but the words of a Asst Principal in a local school. I personally think its nonsense.

A better rule is no attack messages allowed. For example...Go White Soxs is fine, Cubs Suck is not.

[bemildred]

115. I think a demand for affirmative messages is fine.

One might be able to scrape up an objection or two, but the basic idea is sound, if you have an affirmative political view, you ought to be able to express it and debate it in a civil manner. One ought not dumb things down in the name of nebulous administrative cowardice, but one ought to be allowed to enforce orderly debate, respect for all, etc.

The notion that our schools do in fact give a shit about childrens self-esteem is contrary to simple observation, they are run like prisons.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

113. Indeed

But if it is allowed and the other shirt is not, there is clearly a problem

[Zhade]

116. Could a kid wear that shirt, for example?

NT!

[SoCalDem]

96. Schools just need to enforce dress codes..

or better yet,..UNIFORMS..

fancy prep schools do it, expensive private schools do it.. REAL LIFE does it..

but if public schools are too scared to do it, they just need to go to a "no logos/no opionons" policy like our sons' schools did..


The office had a big box of non-descript tee shirts in a box, and when a kid wore an inappropriate tee shirt, they would just get sent to the office, and were ushered to the restroom in the office, given a shirt and theirs was bagged up for them to retrieve at the end of school... no drama.. just enforcement of rules..

[ProgressiveProfessor]

111. Current CA law does not allow mandatory uniforms. A school that tried to get around

that with an extra strict dress code got slapped in court.

There are ways around the no logos/no opinions/no words. You can do amazing things with just colors...and make the staff look like idiots. Seen it happen in a local school

[EndersDame]

124. I am against censorship but find rules on graphic shirts at school reasonable

I would be up in arms defending the kid's right to wear a "Abortion is Murder" Text only shirt but graphic shirts can be distracting.
I think that the fetus is gross as I would a shirt depicting a liver or spleen . Bodily crap grosses me out

[KansDem]

126. The fetus is naked. And since fundies say it is a person, then the image is that of a naked person.

What would be said or done if some of the boys wore t-shirts with naked women on the front?

Just curious...