Blog 36: To strip search or not to strip search, that is the question...
April 25, 2009
This article is talking about the legal ramification of strip-searching a student for contraband. The article details a case where an honor student was suspected for dealing drugs and she was thoroughly searched for these suspected drugs. None were found. However, the severity of the search led the suspect to feel extremely violated and vexed. The feeling of shame and vexation has led the family to get a lawyer and sue the school board.
So now, here are the million-dollar questions. What liberties does the school system have at its disposal to search for illegal substances? Would the principal of Columbine have been within their legal ramifications if a severe search could have prevented the incident many years ago? What about if a search could prevent several students from getting hooked on drugs and dropping out of school? Does a student’s enrolment in an honors class mean that the students is not guilty of crime, or just smart enough not to get caught? What about evidence? Is someone telling a teacher that a particular student is a drug dealer sufficient evidence? If not, would several students making such a claim be sufficient? At what point would enough students be sufficient? What about the severity of the drug? Would a strip search be ok if you found prescription drugs, marijuana, cocaine, a gun? These all represent questions make it very difficult for administrators to do their job.
Where to draw the line is what administrators deal with this all the time. Often the information that administrators have to go on is sketchy. If examined under a microscope it may not stand up in court as justifiable evidence for a severe search. Yet most administrators know their students. They often times know if a student is telling the truth or not. But no one living today is infallible, even the best administration make mistakes. So what are the options?
On one hand we can support the principals. They have a difficult job and cut them slack. On the other hand we could say that their actions were overstepping their boundaries. It is much like the debate going on in the political realm. The Obama administration is vehemently against the use of torture. The Bush administration allowed this practice. By allowing it you prevent tragedies but you violate human dignity. So what extent of tragedies is worth violating human dignity? This is what it breaks down to. Strip-searching students at school would be a violation to many of these students. However, at some point the reward of prevented harm from the found contraband would be worth the risk. What is that point?
Now finally, how does this relate to curriculum and instruction? Personally I fail to see how it relates to the curriculum unless you need to set a day off in your yearly planning to strip search the students. However, I see several ways that is can indirectly relate to the instruction of a class. First should intensive searches be allowed and become commonplace in school, then teachers safety should increase. With this there should be a decrease of teacher stress and in increase of teacher performance. Another, indirect positive result of allowing the invasive searchers would be to either remove some of the students who bring contraband or curb their behavior. Usually these students cause trouble in class and make it difficult to teach students who want to learn.
Comments
I am against school strip searches. I did read the article in question. The debate over criminal investigation in the schools vs. student privacy is not new; it has been discussed in the context of random drug testing. The difference is merely that it is comparatively more invasive.
I can understand and appreciate the comparison of this issue to the current discussion regarding torture in the military, but I do not think it an apt one. First of all, there are several variables in the equation in the schools that do not translate into the warzone. Most of these students are minors, and therefore under the legal responsibility of a parent; we cannot say that of prisoners of war. The setting does not equitably compare, either. Tragic that Columbine and the Virginia Tech incidents were, they do not occur with the same frequency as in war and so the scope of the matter is not even the same.
Let us examine the incidents themselves. In the case of Virginia Tech, it was pointed out early and relatively often that the shooter was suspected to be mentally instable, and did not receive proper medical treatment; that it was suggested that he apply elsewhere to a smaller school where he might be more comfortable, but that he rejected the suggestion. Therefore we can say that there was some culpability on the part of parents and university faculty to attend to these matters.
I cannot state similar points for the Columbine case, but I find it very disturbing that a student athlete said of the shooters, and ON RECORD, no less: "They were a bunch of faggots, always touching each other." I paraphrase a bit, but you get the idea. Under any other normal situation (even at the time) there would be some outrage, but of course no one would want to be seen as defending the shooters. Nevertheless, can we say that this young jock demonstrated himself to be free of bullying, which schools should take seriously? He cannot be compared to a soldier taking orders; no teacher nor coach commanded him to bully them, criminals though they were shown to be.
You mentioned guns-- in most cases, the student shows another student the gun, and action is swiftly and aggressively taken. I do not see a strip search to be necessary to reveal such a weapon, unless you wish to consider patdowns as part of the equation.
As far as drugs, well... let's be real. I don't really consider marijuana to be on the same level as harder drugs, and I'm not sure how a stoned student is any bigger of a disruption than a drunken one. I don't see how a strip search helps that; if anything, we come back to the issue of drug testing generally, and not strip searches. Since I can recall incidents of teachers at my high school coming to class drunk, well, if we're going to discuss drug testing and such, why are we not discussing it in regards to the teachers?
And as far as "teacher stress" and "teacher performance", when tenure is restructured so it stops protecting bad teachers, the discussion will be on more level ground and I can see this being a fairer claim, but not before. I had a band teacher who assaulted students and assaulted teachers. I did not see all of these incidents, but when he assaulted the choir teacher, it was right in the school cafeteria in full view of EVERYONE. Was he fired? Was he sent to another school (as before)? No and no. I cannot reasonably discuss criminal investigation and prosecution of students if teachers are not held equally responsible. Let's not make it seem that it is simply troublesome students disrupting education, for there are equally troublesome teachers, too.
IMHO, the principals overreached. First, when the student asked to call her parents, the school officials have no legal right to prevent them from doing so (in the absence of a court order otherwise). Second, the rigor of the search is out of line with the severity of the supposed crime. We don't do strip searches when someone runs a red light, so why is it appropriate here? Finally, as the Supreme Court has ruled before, a student doesn't leave all of his rights at the schoolhouse door. For a principal to ignore those rights in support of an ill-conceived "zero tolerance" policy merely indicates that student isn't the only one in need of schooling.
John