Proud Member of The Moms Clean Air Force
Print This Post
Dec
16
When I saw this article on below the fold of the NYT’s front page, before I read a word, I thought, “They better mention CCDCFS, because I know we’ve been doing this forever.”
Sure enough, CCDCFS, aka Cuyahoga County Department of Children and Family Services, and its director Jim McCafferty, get excellent play in the article.
In an effort to correct dysfunctional foster care systems, a growing number of child welfare agencies around the country are reaching outside their ranks to involve troubled families and the people in their lives in wrenching decisions about where endangered children should live.
Some agencies find that by enlisting help from grandparents, church members, school counselors and sports coaches, they can reach faster, safer and more lasting decisions that result in fewer children languishing in foster care. Under the practice, known as team decision making, a group is assembled within 24 to 48 hours after a state agency is called into a crisis situation.
Programs exist in at least 21 states. Indiana, Michigan and Tennessee have adopted the team-approach statewide, while other programs are run at the county level. Officials in Denver County, Colo., credit the team approach for a 32 percent drop in out-of-home placements since 2002. In Cuyahoga County, Ohio, the program has reduced the number of children in foster care by more than half since 2001. Tennessee has reduced the number of children in state care by more than 1,000 since March 2004, when there were 10,600 in the system.
…
No comprehensive long-term studies have been conducted to assess whether the team approach reduces incidents of child abuse. But in Cuyahoga County, Ohio, which instituted its program in 1994, Jim McCafferty, director of the county’s Department of Children and Family Services, credits team meetings with helping reduce the number of children in the system to 2,702 this month from 6,237 in 2001, when the county’s largest city, Cleveland, was rebounding from a crack epidemic. The number of children re-entering the system within 18 months dropped to 9 percent in 2004 from 16 percent in 1996.
I’m proud to say that during my eight years with Bellefaire JCB, I often knew about and occassionally attended team meetings. It’s the kind of thing you say, I can’t believe people haven’t always done this.
However, to put this approach which emphasizes making efforts at reunification, as opposed to keeping a child in foster care and terminating parental rights in perspective, it’s important to remember that, as some commenters in the article imply, the pendulum does swing: it goes from being too cautious about putting kids back in the home and therefore terminating rights of and efforts with parents way too early, before change can take root, back to leaving the kids or placing them back with the parents before the parents – or the kids – are ready to be reunited.
The goal, overall, has been money-driven, there’s no denying that, in addition to wanting to do what’s best for the children. But out of home care is expensive, state budgets cut and cut and cut, and federal programs are minimal to non-existent. And so it should be noted that another reason for success here is the Annie E. Casey Foundation, which has provided millions of dollars of support here.
Finally, what I liked the most about the article? The anguish on the face of the Tennessee director, on the front page of the Times. Because let me tell you, if you’ve ever been involved in one of these cases, you see that kind of expression a lot, and you feel that expression a lot.
Thanks to McCafferty and the thousands of social workers – county and nonprofit and school and otherwise. Well done. Talk about unsung heroes. And, let me also add, in McCafferty, we get what we need – this man has spent at least 15-20 years in this field. He’s not swapping around looking for other cabinet positions or political office. I don’t know him well at all, but I’ve met him enough times and been involved with the department enough to say, he has a genuine dedication to his work. And in his field of work, you can’t succeed without that.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 7:27 pm December 16th, 2006 in Politics | 5 Comments
Print This Post
Dec
16
Jewish House Rock: How to spell Channukkaa
Filed Under Politics | 2 Comments
It’s been a long week and I thank Scott Simon for bringing the band, The LeeVees, to my attention this morning. (Btw, Scott, bubbelah, did you really have to throw in a line about Jews and Chinese restaurants during the holiday season? Such a stereotype. Not that I don’t partake, but you are heard by millions and just last night, All Things Considered broadcast this piece about the lack of value and reinforcement of generalizations about stereotyping Atheists, i.e., as never being found in foxholes. Let’s move on, hmm?)
Have a great Chanuka, everyone. I can’t seem to get the YouTube version of their newest about how to spell Channukkaa, so you’ll have to click on it on their site.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 4:35 pm December 16th, 2006 in Politics | 2 Comments
Print This Post
Dec
16
When I saw this article on below the fold of the NYT’s front page, before I read a word, I thought, “They better mention CCDCFS, because I know we’ve been doing this forever.”
Sure enough, CCDCFS, aka Cuyahoga County Department of Children and Family Services, and its director Jim McCafferty, get excellent play in the article.
In an effort to correct dysfunctional foster care systems, a growing number of child welfare agencies around the country are reaching outside their ranks to involve troubled families and the people in their lives in wrenching decisions about where endangered children should live.
Some agencies find that by enlisting help from grandparents, church members, school counselors and sports coaches, they can reach faster, safer and more lasting decisions that result in fewer children languishing in foster care. Under the practice, known as team decision making, a group is assembled within 24 to 48 hours after a state agency is called into a crisis situation.
Programs exist in at least 21 states. Indiana, Michigan and Tennessee have adopted the team-approach statewide, while other programs are run at the county level. Officials in Denver County, Colo., credit the team approach for a 32 percent drop in out-of-home placements since 2002. In Cuyahoga County, Ohio, the program has reduced the number of children in foster care by more than half since 2001. Tennessee has reduced the number of children in state care by more than 1,000 since March 2004, when there were 10,600 in the system.
…
No comprehensive long-term studies have been conducted to assess whether the team approach reduces incidents of child abuse. But in Cuyahoga County, Ohio, which instituted its program in 1994, Jim McCafferty, director of the county’s Department of Children and Family Services, credits team meetings with helping reduce the number of children in the system to 2,702 this month from 6,237 in 2001, when the county’s largest city, Cleveland, was rebounding from a crack epidemic. The number of children re-entering the system within 18 months dropped to 9 percent in 2004 from 16 percent in 1996.
I’m proud to say that during my eight years with Bellefaire JCB, I often knew about and occassionally attended team meetings. It’s the kind of thing you say, I can’t believe people haven’t always done this.
However, to put this approach which emphasizes making efforts at reunification, as opposed to keeping a child in foster care and terminating parental rights in perspective, it’s important to remember that, as some commenters in the article imply, the pendulum does swing: it goes from being too cautious about putting kids back in the home and therefore terminating rights of and efforts with parents way too early, before change can take root, back to leaving the kids or placing them back with the parents before the parents – or the kids – are ready to be reunited.
The goal, overall, has been money-driven, there’s no denying that, in addition to wanting to do what’s best for the children. But out of home care is expensive, state budgets cut and cut and cut, and federal programs are minimal to non-existent. And so it should be noted that another reason for success here is the Annie E. Casey Foundation, which has provided millions of dollars of support here.
Finally, what I liked the most about the article? The anguish on the face of the Tennessee director, on the front page of the Times. Because let me tell you, if you’ve ever been involved in one of these cases, you see that kind of expression a lot, and you feel that expression a lot.
Thanks to McCafferty and the thousands of social workers – county and nonprofit and school and otherwise. Well done. Talk about unsung heroes. And, let me also add, in McCafferty, we get what we need – this man has spent at least 15-20 years in this field. He’s not swapping around looking for other cabinet positions or political office. I don’t know him well at all, but I’ve met him enough times and been involved with the department enough to say, he has a genuine dedication to his work. And in his field of work, you can’t succeed without that.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 3:27 pm December 16th, 2006 in Politics | 5 Comments
Print This Post
Dec
16
Judith Regan, OJ book dealmaker, fired
Filed Under Politics | Comments Off
I’m so not surprised. When I read about her, I think, “She’s a NUT.”
More here from the NYT.
Here’s a good piece from New York magazine. She’s a wiz and a wonder, but she is nuts and, imho, very unprincipled. Sociopathic politician meets sociopathic publisher in her persona.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 3:18 pm December 16th, 2006 in Politics | Comments Off
Print This Post
Dec
16
Ohio legislators get bullish on school bullying, but is it enough?
Filed Under Politics | 3 Comments
The original bills were HB 276 and SB 239 (links are to bill analysis at time of introduction much earlier this year.) But here is HB 276 as passed by the Senate this week.
I was unaware of this legislation until I read this article in the Gay People’s Chronicle. Apparently, some enforcement questions exist.
From the Gay People’s Chronicle:
Attempts were made in both chambers to add victim categories to the bill that would specify, among other things, sexual orientation and gender identity and expression.
If the victim categories aren’t named, backers of the change fear, teachers and administrators might assume the measure doesn’t include bullying of gay, lesbian or transgender students.
LGBT advocates say that opponents of the change are against any law that includes “sexual orientation” or “gender identity” among protected groups.
“We think that the majority that voted to table this issue bought into the argument put forward by the other side, exemplified by anti-gay conservative activist Linda Harvey, that any mention of sexual orientation or gender identity in the Ohio Revised Code furthers ‘homosexual interests,’ ” said Bo Shuff.
Shuff, who was present for much of the committee meeting, is the director of education and public policy for Equality Ohio, which wants the categories added.
I know several people involved in the anti-bullying movement and look forward to checking with them on this bill. I’ll also shoot my Orange district people a couple of questions about it.
From a lawyer’s perspective, one of the problems, generally speaking, with enumerating categories is that there can be the unintended effect that, when you name groups, there’s an implication that any group not named isn’t included as being protected. That’s a bad outcome. So, we really have to be thoughtful here. This is not to say that enumeration, in this particular law, is a bad thing, or a good thing. It sounds to me as though schools will have discretion and there’s a fear of how that discretion will break.
To wit, the article says:
While there was little testimony against adding them, many people spoke in favor of enumeration, including State Sen. Ray Miller of Columbus, who pointed to civil rights laws that invariably spell out which groups are protected.
Along the course of the bill’s journey through the legislature, opponents of listing victim categories have argued that it already covers all students, and putting in the categories would narrow the focus, leaving some students out.
Amendments that would have created reporting requirements and provided for teachers to get “more training about child abuse and report student writing that may indicate suicidal or homicidal thoughts” failed. This passage from the article demonstrates the intensity with which those of us who work or have worked with children and families affected by bullying feel.
“I am sickened today,” said [Kaleidoscope Youth Center executive director, Angie] Wellman. “After over an hour of testimony . . . after the mother of a son, dead–another victim of suicide–testified, after a teacher testified, in tears, about one of her students being beaten in school, kicked out of his home, I had a senator tell me that the current verbiage says, ‘all students,’ so what’s the problem?”
“Clearly he hadn’t been listening,” she continued. “Clearly he doesn’t get that queer kids are the victims of homophobes. He doesn’t get that black kids still attend schools where it is okay to let the N-word fly, and Confederate flags on car bumpers are a norm.”
Shuff said that “The next step is going to be an immediate introduction in January of a piece of legislation that defines bullying and gives guidance to school boards, so bullying in one district looks like bullying in every other school district.”
Equality Ohio supported both enumeration and reporting.
I could go for the extra training, but I’m not sure teachers should have the responsibility, the legal obligation, to discern suicidal or homicidal tendencies based on kids’ writing. Social workers, psychologists and other mental health professionals go through years and thousands of hours of clinical training just to get licensed so that they can diagnose and treat kids with issues. Education professionals’ best practices certainly could include an expectation that teachers would bring certain things to a guidance counselor or school psychologist’s attention. But making it a mandatory reporting law? Based on writing?
I suspect that the school boards have in place already guidelines for how teachers deal with scary information they may learn from kids. How about enforcement of those guidelines, by the proper professionals? I just don’t know that it needs to be at the Ohio Revised Code level – who would want to be a teacher with that kind of expectation? I don’t know. As a parent and a lawyer and a social worker, I want the teacher to call me or email me if they have a concern. But I don’t know if I want that teacher to be under a legal obligation to be able to tell when he or she has to call me, or anyone else. And I certainly want to be the first one notified, not hear it from the school personnel after the teacher has told them. And yet that expectation on my part is somewhat unreasonable because a teacher would need to go through other levels before anyone would even decide if the writing merited attention. And what does all this do to a kid’s public school record?
People need to think these things through.
Which is what I’ll have to do – and if anyone has any other knowledge about it, I hope you’ll drop me a line or leave a comment. I’d be interested to know how other states handle these issues.
NB: The original Senate version was introduced by Senate Minority Leader Teresa Fedor and incoming Attorney General, State Senator Marc Dann. Chris Geidner, a lawyer and formerly of the blog, Law Dork (no longer available online, though intermittently as cached pages), wrote often about important LGBT issues. He is a staff member of Dann’s transition team, serving as Deputy Director. It would be interesting to know his thoughts on the bill as passed and what he thinks the chances might be for seeking enumeration in the future or otherwise following up on how schools enforce this new law.
NB2: House Rep and ODP Chair Chris Redfern is engaged to Kim Kahlert, director of development at Equality Ohio.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 1:19 pm December 16th, 2006 in Politics | 3 Comments
Print This Post
Dec
16
Jewish House Rock: How to spell Channukkaa
Filed Under Politics | 2 Comments
It’s been a long week and I thank Scott Simon for bringing the band, The LeeVees, to my attention this morning. (Btw, Scott, bubbelah, did you really have to throw in a line about Jews and Chinese restaurants during the holiday season? Such a stereotype. Not that I don’t partake, but you are heard by millions and just last night, All Things Considered broadcast this piece about the lack of value and reinforcement of generalizations about stereotyping Atheists, i.e., as never being found in foxholes. Let’s move on, hmm?)
Have a great Chanuka, everyone. I can’t seem to get the YouTube version of their newest about how to spell Channukkaa, so you’ll have to click on it on their site.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 12:35 pm December 16th, 2006 in Politics | 2 Comments
Print This Post
Dec
16
NYT touts Cuyahoga County Dept. of Children & Family Services
Filed Under Politics | Comments Off
When I saw this article on below the fold of the NYT’s front page, before I read a word, I thought, “They better mention CCDCFS, because I know we’ve been doing this forever.”
Sure enough, CCDCFS, aka Cuyahoga County Department of Children and Family Services, and its director Jim McCafferty, get excellent play in the article.
In an effort to correct dysfunctional foster care systems, a growing number of child welfare agencies around the country are reaching outside their ranks to involve troubled families and the people in their lives in wrenching decisions about where endangered children should live.
Some agencies find that by enlisting help from grandparents, church members, school counselors and sports coaches, they can reach faster, safer and more lasting decisions that result in fewer children languishing in foster care. Under the practice, known as team decision making, a group is assembled within 24 to 48 hours after a state agency is called into a crisis situation.
Programs exist in at least 21 states. Indiana, Michigan and Tennessee have adopted the team-approach statewide, while other programs are run at the county level. Officials in Denver County, Colo., credit the team approach for a 32 percent drop in out-of-home placements since 2002. In Cuyahoga County, Ohio, the program has reduced the number of children in foster care by more than half since 2001. Tennessee has reduced the number of children in state care by more than 1,000 since March 2004, when there were 10,600 in the system.
…
No comprehensive long-term studies have been conducted to assess whether the team approach reduces incidents of child abuse. But in Cuyahoga County, Ohio, which instituted its program in 1994, Jim McCafferty, director of the county’s Department of Children and Family Services, credits team meetings with helping reduce the number of children in the system to 2,702 this month from 6,237 in 2001, when the county’s largest city, Cleveland, was rebounding from a crack epidemic. The number of children re-entering the system within 18 months dropped to 9 percent in 2004 from 16 percent in 1996.
I’m proud to say that during my eight years with Bellefaire JCB, I often knew about and occassionally attended team meetings. It’s the kind of thing you say, I can’t believe people haven’t always done this.
However, to put this approach which emphasizes making efforts at reunification, as opposed to keeping a child in foster care and terminating parental rights in perspective, it’s important to remember that, as some commenters in the article imply, the pendulum does swing: it goes from being too cautious about putting kids back in the home and therefore terminating rights of and efforts with parents way too early, before change can take root, back to leaving the kids or placing them back with the parents before the parents – or the kids – are ready to be reunited.
The goal, overall, has been money-driven, there’s no denying that, in addition to wanting to do what’s best for the children. But out of home care is expensive, state budgets cut and cut and cut, and federal programs are minimal to non-existent. And so it should be noted that another reason for success here is the Annie E. Casey Foundation, which has provided millions of dollars of support here.
Finally, what I liked the most about the article? The anguish on the face of the Tennessee director, on the front page of the Times. Because let me tell you, if you’ve ever been involved in one of these cases, you see that kind of expression a lot, and you feel that expression a lot.
Thanks to McCafferty and the thousands of social workers – county and nonprofit and school and otherwise. Well done. Talk about unsung heroes. And, let me also add, in McCafferty, we get what we need – this man has spent at least 15-20 years in this field. He’s not swapping around looking for other cabinet positions or political office. I don’t know him well at all, but I’ve met him enough times and been involved with the department enough to say, he has a genuine dedication to his work. And in his field of work, you can’t succeed without that.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 12:27 pm December 16th, 2006 in Politics | Comments Off
Print This Post
Dec
16
Judith Regan, OJ book dealmaker, fired
Filed Under Politics | Comments Off
I’m so not surprised. When I read about her, I think, “She’s a NUT.”
More here from the NYT.
Here’s a good piece from New York magazine. She’s a wiz and a wonder, but she is nuts and, imho, very unprincipled. Sociopathic politician meets sociopathic publisher in her persona.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 11:18 am December 16th, 2006 in Politics | Comments Off
Print This Post
Dec
16
Jewish House Rock: How to spell Channukkaa
Filed Under Politics | Comments Off
It’s been a long week and I thank Scott Simon for bringing the band, The LeeVees, to my attention this morning. (Btw, Scott, bubbelah, did you really have to throw in a line about Jews and Chinese restaurants during the holiday season? Such a stereotype. Not that I don’t partake, but you are heard by millions and just last night, All Things Considered broadcast this piece about the lack of value and reinforcement of generalizations about stereotyping Atheists, i.e., as never being found in foxholes. Let’s move on, hmm?)
Have a great Chanuka, everyone. I can’t seem to get the YouTube version of their newest about how to spell Channukkaa, so you’ll have to click on it on their site.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 9:35 am December 16th, 2006 in Politics | Comments Off
Print This Post
Dec
16
Ohio legislators get bullish on school bullying, but is it enough?
Filed Under Politics | 3 Comments
The original bills were HB 276 and SB 239 (links are to bill analysis at time of introduction much earlier this year.) But here is HB 276 as passed by the Senate this week.
I was unaware of this legislation until I read this article in the Gay People’s Chronicle. Apparently, some enforcement questions exist.
From the Gay People’s Chronicle:
Attempts were made in both chambers to add victim categories to the bill that would specify, among other things, sexual orientation and gender identity and expression.
If the victim categories aren’t named, backers of the change fear, teachers and administrators might assume the measure doesn’t include bullying of gay, lesbian or transgender students.
LGBT advocates say that opponents of the change are against any law that includes “sexual orientation” or “gender identity” among protected groups.
“We think that the majority that voted to table this issue bought into the argument put forward by the other side, exemplified by anti-gay conservative activist Linda Harvey, that any mention of sexual orientation or gender identity in the Ohio Revised Code furthers ‘homosexual interests,’ ” said Bo Shuff.
Shuff, who was present for much of the committee meeting, is the director of education and public policy for Equality Ohio, which wants the categories added.
I know several people involved in the anti-bullying movement and look forward to checking with them on this bill. I’ll also shoot my Orange district people a couple of questions about it.
From a lawyer’s perspective, one of the problems, generally speaking, with enumerating categories is that there can be the unintended effect that, when you name groups, there’s an implication that any group not named isn’t included as being protected. That’s a bad outcome. So, we really have to be thoughtful here. This is not to say that enumeration, in this particular law, is a bad thing, or a good thing. It sounds to me as though schools will have discretion and there’s a fear of how that discretion will break.
To wit, the article says:
While there was little testimony against adding them, many people spoke in favor of enumeration, including State Sen. Ray Miller of Columbus, who pointed to civil rights laws that invariably spell out which groups are protected.
Along the course of the bill’s journey through the legislature, opponents of listing victim categories have argued that it already covers all students, and putting in the categories would narrow the focus, leaving some students out.
Amendments that would have created reporting requirements and provided for teachers to get “more training about child abuse and report student writing that may indicate suicidal or homicidal thoughts” failed. This passage from the article demonstrates the intensity with which those of us who work or have worked with children and families affected by bullying feel.
“I am sickened today,” said [Kaleidoscope Youth Center executive director, Angie] Wellman. “After over an hour of testimony . . . after the mother of a son, dead–another victim of suicide–testified, after a teacher testified, in tears, about one of her students being beaten in school, kicked out of his home, I had a senator tell me that the current verbiage says, ‘all students,’ so what’s the problem?”
“Clearly he hadn’t been listening,” she continued. “Clearly he doesn’t get that queer kids are the victims of homophobes. He doesn’t get that black kids still attend schools where it is okay to let the N-word fly, and Confederate flags on car bumpers are a norm.”
Shuff said that “The next step is going to be an immediate introduction in January of a piece of legislation that defines bullying and gives guidance to school boards, so bullying in one district looks like bullying in every other school district.”
Equality Ohio supported both enumeration and reporting.
I could go for the extra training, but I’m not sure teachers should have the responsibility, the legal obligation, to discern suicidal or homicidal tendencies based on kids’ writing. Social workers, psychologists and other mental health professionals go through years and thousands of hours of clinical training just to get licensed so that they can diagnose and treat kids with issues. Education professionals’ best practices certainly could include an expectation that teachers would bring certain things to a guidance counselor or school psychologist’s attention. But making it a mandatory reporting law? Based on writing?
I suspect that the school boards have in place already guidelines for how teachers deal with scary information they may learn from kids. How about enforcement of those guidelines, by the proper professionals? I just don’t know that it needs to be at the Ohio Revised Code level – who would want to be a teacher with that kind of expectation? I don’t know. As a parent and a lawyer and a social worker, I want the teacher to call me or email me if they have a concern. But I don’t know if I want that teacher to be under a legal obligation to be able to tell when he or she has to call me, or anyone else. And I certainly want to be the first one notified, not hear it from the school personnel after the teacher has told them. And yet that expectation on my part is somewhat unreasonable because a teacher would need to go through other levels before anyone would even decide if the writing merited attention. And what does all this do to a kid’s public school record?
People need to think these things through.
Which is what I’ll have to do – and if anyone has any other knowledge about it, I hope you’ll drop me a line or leave a comment. I’d be interested to know how other states handle these issues.
NB: The original Senate version was introduced by Senate Minority Leader Teresa Fedor and incoming Attorney General, State Senator Marc Dann. Chris Geidner, a lawyer and formerly of the blog, Law Dork (no longer available online, though intermittently as cached pages), wrote often about important LGBT issues. He is a staff member of Dann’s transition team, serving as Deputy Director. It would be interesting to know his thoughts on the bill as passed and what he thinks the chances might be for seeking enumeration in the future or otherwise following up on how schools enforce this new law.
NB2: House Rep and ODP Chair Chris Redfern is engaged to Kim Kahlert, director of development at Equality Ohio.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 9:19 am December 16th, 2006 in Politics | 3 Comments
Print This Post
Dec
16
Judith Regan, OJ book dealmaker, fired
Filed Under Politics | Comments Off
I’m so not surprised. When I read about her, I think, “She’s a NUT.”
More here from the NYT.
Here’s a good piece from New York magazine. She’s a wiz and a wonder, but she is nuts and, imho, very unprincipled. Sociopathic politician meets sociopathic publisher in her persona.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 8:18 am December 16th, 2006 in Politics | Comments Off
Print This Post
Dec
16
Ohio legislators get bullish on school bullying, but is it enough?
Filed Under Politics | Comments Off
The original bills were HB 276 and SB 239 (links are to bill analysis at time of introduction much earlier this year.) But here is HB 276 as passed by the Senate this week.
I was unaware of this legislation until I read this article in the Gay People’s Chronicle. Apparently, some enforcement questions exist.
From the Gay People’s Chronicle:
Attempts were made in both chambers to add victim categories to the bill that would specify, among other things, sexual orientation and gender identity and expression.
If the victim categories aren’t named, backers of the change fear, teachers and administrators might assume the measure doesn’t include bullying of gay, lesbian or transgender students.
LGBT advocates say that opponents of the change are against any law that includes “sexual orientation” or “gender identity” among protected groups.
“We think that the majority that voted to table this issue bought into the argument put forward by the other side, exemplified by anti-gay conservative activist Linda Harvey, that any mention of sexual orientation or gender identity in the Ohio Revised Code furthers ‘homosexual interests,’ ” said Bo Shuff.
Shuff, who was present for much of the committee meeting, is the director of education and public policy for Equality Ohio, which wants the categories added.
I know several people involved in the anti-bullying movement and look forward to checking with them on this bill. I’ll also shoot my Orange district people a couple of questions about it.
From a lawyer’s perspective, one of the problems, generally speaking, with enumerating categories is that there can be the unintended effect that, when you name groups, there’s an implication that any group not named isn’t included as being protected. That’s a bad outcome. So, we really have to be thoughtful here. This is not to say that enumeration, in this particular law, is a bad thing, or a good thing. It sounds to me as though schools will have discretion and there’s a fear of how that discretion will break.
To wit, the article says:
While there was little testimony against adding them, many people spoke in favor of enumeration, including State Sen. Ray Miller of Columbus, who pointed to civil rights laws that invariably spell out which groups are protected.
Along the course of the bill’s journey through the legislature, opponents of listing victim categories have argued that it already covers all students, and putting in the categories would narrow the focus, leaving some students out.
Amendments that would have created reporting requirements and provided for teachers to get “more training about child abuse and report student writing that may indicate suicidal or homicidal thoughts” failed. This passage from the article demonstrates the intensity with which those of us who work or have worked with children and families affected by bullying feel.
“I am sickened today,” said [Kaleidoscope Youth Center executive director, Angie] Wellman. “After over an hour of testimony . . . after the mother of a son, dead–another victim of suicide–testified, after a teacher testified, in tears, about one of her students being beaten in school, kicked out of his home, I had a senator tell me that the current verbiage says, ‘all students,’ so what’s the problem?”
“Clearly he hadn’t been listening,” she continued. “Clearly he doesn’t get that queer kids are the victims of homophobes. He doesn’t get that black kids still attend schools where it is okay to let the N-word fly, and Confederate flags on car bumpers are a norm.”
Shuff said that “The next step is going to be an immediate introduction in January of a piece of legislation that defines bullying and gives guidance to school boards, so bullying in one district looks like bullying in every other school district.”
Equality Ohio supported both enumeration and reporting.
I could go for the extra training, but I’m not sure teachers should have the responsibility, the legal obligation, to discern suicidal or homicidal tendencies based on kids’ writing. Social workers, psychologists and other mental health professionals go through years and thousands of hours of clinical training just to get licensed so that they can diagnose and treat kids with issues. Education professionals’ best practices certainly could include an expectation that teachers would bring certain things to a guidance counselor or school psychologist’s attention. But making it a mandatory reporting law? Based on writing?
I suspect that the school boards have in place already guidelines for how teachers deal with scary information they may learn from kids. How about enforcement of those guidelines, by the proper professionals? I just don’t know that it needs to be at the Ohio Revised Code level – who would want to be a teacher with that kind of expectation? I don’t know. As a parent and a lawyer and a social worker, I want the teacher to call me or email me if they have a concern. But I don’t know if I want that teacher to be under a legal obligation to be able to tell when he or she has to call me, or anyone else. And I certainly want to be the first one notified, not hear it from the school personnel after the teacher has told them. And yet that expectation on my part is somewhat unreasonable because a teacher would need to go through other levels before anyone would even decide if the writing merited attention. And what does all this do to a kid’s public school record?
People need to think these things through.
Which is what I’ll have to do – and if anyone has any other knowledge about it, I hope you’ll drop me a line or leave a comment. I’d be interested to know how other states handle these issues.
NB: The original Senate version was introduced by Senate Minority Leader Teresa Fedor and incoming Attorney General, State Senator Marc Dann. Chris Geidner, a lawyer and formerly of the blog, Law Dork (no longer available online, though intermittently as cached pages), wrote often about important LGBT issues. He is a staff member of Dann’s transition team, serving as Deputy Director. It would be interesting to know his thoughts on the bill as passed and what he thinks the chances might be for seeking enumeration in the future or otherwise following up on how schools enforce this new law.
NB2: House Rep and ODP Chair Chris Redfern is engaged to Kim Kahlert, director of development at Equality Ohio.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 6:19 am December 16th, 2006 in Politics | Comments Off
Print This Post
Dec
16
Cleveland City Council makes New Years Resolution so you don’t have to
Filed Under Politics | 2 Comments
The nexus between New York and Cleveland just keeps creeping closer. From NewsNet5:
Following the lead of New York City, Cleveland’s City Council passed a resolution encouraging a trans fats ban.
New York was the first major city to ban the artery-clogging substance from public restaurants last week. Restaurants will be barred from using most frying oils containing artificial trans fats by July and will have to eliminate the artificial trans fats from all of their foods by July 2008.
In Cleveland, the resolution is not a law, but some health officials said it’s, “A step in the right direction.”
Poor Slyman’s.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 3:02 am December 16th, 2006 in Politics | 2 Comments
Voted into Top 25 Political Mom Blogs
Now on sale-WLST essay included!
Posts About Pepper Pike City Council2010 WE Magazine 101 Women Bloggers to Watch
Category Specific RSS
Pepper Pike Cleveland+ Politics Women Ohio Elections Law Jewish
