Safety sense?
Apr 25, 2013 | 614 views | 0 0 comments | 8 8 recommendations | email to a friend | print
I would like to talk about one of our Grand County School policies that put my child and probably other children at a safety risk. The week before spring break, my child’s phone rang in class (wrong number). He was not playing with the phone, texting or calling anyone, nor was it in his desk or in his pocket, and his teacher confiscated his phone.

The school policy states that once it is confiscated they will not return it until a $25 fee is paid, so they let him out for the day with no means to communicate with his parents and no means to call for help (we do not have a land line phone in our home) if something were to happen. I am a working mother; my son goes to several different places after school and needs to call me to let me know he has safely made it there.

The next day, my son was so upset that he pretended to be sick and asked to stay home (he still had no way to communicate or call for help). He said he knew his parents were upset with the school and was afraid of repercussions from the office or his teacher.

On Friday, he decided to go to school, but only because I agreed to pay the $25 to get his phone from the office. I wrote out a check and sent it with him. Later that morning, I got a call from my very upset and crying son saying that they refused to take my check, saying that they only except cash for confiscated phones. Just so you know, I have been writing the Grand County School District checks for over 18 years and I have never bounced one of them. Although it was against my better judgment I left my job and went to the school to pay them the $25 in cash, only because the next day spring break started and he would have gone without communication for nine more days.

So explain to me why safety seems to be such a big deal while they are in school – they have crossing guards, people to watch them at recess, etc. – but when they let my child leave that day, he had no way to call for any kind of help at all, and to the school that is policy.

Well, I for one think that the policy is wrong and can put our youth at risk. Next year I will not sign any policies about cell phones, they are personal property and should not be put up for sale.

—Cheryl Stewart

Moab


Copyright 2013 The Times-Independent. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

report abuse...

Express yourself:

We're glad to give readers a forum to express their points of view on issues important to this community. That forum is the “Letters to the Editor.” Letters to the editor may be submitted directly to The Times-Independent through this link and will be published in the print edition of the newspaper. All letters must be the original work of the letter writer – form letters will not be accepted. All letters must include the actual first and last name of the letter writer, the writer’s address, city and state and telephone number. Anonymous letters will not be accepted.

Letters may not exceed 400 words in length, must be regarding issues of general interest to the community, and may not include personal attacks, offensive language, ethnic or racial slurs, or attacks on personal or religious beliefs. Letters should focus on a single issue. Letters that proselytize or focus on theological debates will not be published. During political campaigns, The Times-Independent will not publish letters supporting or opposing any local candidate. Thank you letters are generally not accepted for publication unless the letter has a public purpose. Thank you letters dealing with private matters that compliment or complain about a business or individual will not be published. Nor will letters listing the names of individuals and/or businesses that supported a cause or event. Thank you letters about good Samaritan acts will be considered at the discretion of the newspaper.