Tim McG Posted June 20, 2008 Report Share Posted June 20, 2008 To wit: California Penal Code Section 11166.5 "As a part of your official duties, you are required to report every instance of child abuse which becomes known to you or which you reasonably suspect to have occurred to a child with whom you have professional contact." "Your failure to report instances of child abuse known or reasonably suspected to you is a misdemeanor, punishable by up to six months in jail or by fine of one thousand dollars or by both." I think that's clear enough. "REASONABLY SUSPECTED". I think a psychic's word isn't reasonable suspicion in this case. In your opinion. I'm not willing to risk my credential on some over zealous case worker and their hyper-extended definition of what is or isn't considered reasonable, Aggie. If it means the difference between my staying out of jail and somebody else's happiness the choice is a nobrainer. Mess with the state on this one and you will be burned to the ground first before the truth of it comes out. I'd report it no matter who told me. It simply is not worth the risk, Aggie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim McG Posted June 20, 2008 Report Share Posted June 20, 2008 Read my reply to Aggie, Dan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RDK Posted June 20, 2008 Report Share Posted June 20, 2008 To wit: California Penal Code Section 11166.5 "As a part of your official duties, you are required to report every instance of child abuse which becomes known to you or which you reasonably suspect to have occurred to a child with whom you have professional contact." "Your failure to report instances of child abuse known or reasonably suspected to you is a misdemeanor, punishable by up to six months in jail or by fine of one thousand dollars or by both." I think that's clear enough. "REASONABLY SUSPECTED". I think a psychic's word isn't reasonable suspicion in this case. Agreed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RDK Posted June 20, 2008 Report Share Posted June 20, 2008 To wit: California Penal Code Section 11166.5 "As a part of your official duties, you are required to report every instance of child abuse which becomes known to you or which you reasonably suspect to have occurred to a child with whom you have professional contact." "Your failure to report instances of child abuse known or reasonably suspected to you is a misdemeanor, punishable by up to six months in jail or by fine of one thousand dollars or by both." I think that's clear enough. "REASONABLY SUSPECTED". I think a psychic's word isn't reasonable suspicion in this case. In your opinion. I'm not willing to risk my credential on some over zealous case worker and their hyper-extended definition of what is or isn't considered reasonable, Aggie. If it means the difference between my staying out of jail and somebody else's happiness the choice is a nobrainer. Mess with the state on this one and you will be burned to the ground first before the truth of it comes out. I'd report it no matter who told me. It simply is not worth the risk, Aggie. Wow. Is the law - hell, the world - that black & white to you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Magnificent Goldberg Posted June 20, 2008 Report Share Posted June 20, 2008 In your opinion. I'm not willing to risk my credential on some over zealous case worker and their hyper-extended definition of what is or isn't considered reasonable, Aggie. If it means the difference between my staying out of jail and somebody else's happiness the choice is a nobrainer. Mess with the state on this one and you will be burned to the ground first before the truth of it comes out. I'd report it no matter who told me. It simply is not worth the risk, Aggie. Regrettably, you're right on that. Power and reason don't necessarily share the same bed. MG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim McG Posted June 20, 2008 Report Share Posted June 20, 2008 To wit: California Penal Code Section 11166.5 "As a part of your official duties, you are required to report every instance of child abuse which becomes known to you or which you reasonably suspect to have occurred to a child with whom you have professional contact." "Your failure to report instances of child abuse known or reasonably suspected to you is a misdemeanor, punishable by up to six months in jail or by fine of one thousand dollars or by both." I think that's clear enough. "REASONABLY SUSPECTED". I think a psychic's word isn't reasonable suspicion in this case. In your opinion. I'm not willing to risk my credential on some over zealous case worker and their hyper-extended definition of what is or isn't considered reasonable, Aggie. If it means the difference between my staying out of jail and somebody else's happiness the choice is a nobrainer. Mess with the state on this one and you will be burned to the ground first before the truth of it comes out. I'd report it no matter who told me. It simply is not worth the risk, Aggie. Wow. Is the law - hell, the world - that black & white to you? Damn right it is, RDK. I'm not putting my neck on the line by not reporting any allegations along those lines. No sir. Not now, not ever. Let me put it to you this way: This time it wasn't true and you decide to chance it and not report the incident. Let's say a few months later another similar allegation is made. The Child Protective Services people will send out a caseworker and ask you two questions: #1 Were you aware of any instances of child abuse before this one? #2 Did you report on it? They would put you in jail so fast it'll make your head swim for a week. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim McG Posted June 20, 2008 Report Share Posted June 20, 2008 In your opinion. I'm not willing to risk my credential on some over zealous case worker and their hyper-extended definition of what is or isn't considered reasonable, Aggie. If it means the difference between my staying out of jail and somebody else's happiness the choice is a nobrainer. Mess with the state on this one and you will be burned to the ground first before the truth of it comes out. I'd report it no matter who told me. It simply is not worth the risk, Aggie. Regrettably, you're right on that. Power and reason don't necessarily share the same bed. MG Thanks, MD. Now you see what we public educators are up against. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Niko Posted June 20, 2008 Report Share Posted June 20, 2008 Let me put it to you this way: This time it wasn't true and you decide to chance it and not report the incident. Let's say a few months later another similar allegation is made. The Child Protective Services people will send out a caseworker and ask you two questions: #1 Were you aware of any instances of child abuse before this one?... would you say the answer to this question should be "yes" in the present story? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Al Posted June 20, 2008 Report Share Posted June 20, 2008 (edited) Let me put it to you this way: This time it wasn't true and you decide to chance it and not report the incident. Let's say a few months later another similar allegation is made. The Child Protective Services people will send out a caseworker and ask you two questions: #1 Were you aware of any instances of child abuse before this one?... would you say the answer to this question should be "yes" in the present story? I'm guessing by "similar," he means the psychic has another vision which is shared with the teacher. I can only imagine how THAT conversation would go: CPS: Were you aware of any instances of child abuse before this one? Teacher: Yes. CPS: Can you elaborate. Teacher: Yes, my psychic told me. CPS: Your psychic told you? Teacher: Yes, my psychic told me. CPS: So your psychic witnessed the child being abused? Teacher: No, she just had another vision. CPS: So, your psychic had a vision of this child being abused. Teacher: Well, not exactly; it was a child whose name begins with the same letter as the child in question. CPS: So, let me get this straight: you see a psychic and this psychic tells you of a vision she had wherein an unidentified child is being abused. And this isn't the first time. Teacher: Well, yes... CPS: And you immediately drew the conclusion that the child in question was the child in the vision. Teacher: Um, well... CPS: Has the child said anything about being sexually abused? Teacher: Well, uhh... CPS: Has the child made any motions that would indicate sexual abuse of any kind? Teacher: Well, she makes these sexually-oriented gyrations.... CPS: You do know the child is autistic, right? And the child can barely control her own movements, right? Teacher: Well, yeah, but... my psychic told me! I hope this teacher is severely reprimanded for such a blatantly stupid act. Edited June 20, 2008 by Big Al Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Niko Posted June 20, 2008 Report Share Posted June 20, 2008 Let me put it to you this way: This time it wasn't true and you decide to chance it and not report the incident. Let's say a few months later another similar allegation is made. The Child Protective Services people will send out a caseworker and ask you two questions: #1 Were you aware of any instances of child abuse before this one?... would you say the answer to this question should be "yes" in the present story? I'm guessing by "similar," he means the psychic has another vision which is shared with the teacher. I can only imagine how THAT conversation would go: CPS: Were you aware of any instances of child abuse before this one? Teacher: Yes. CPS: Can you elaborate. Teacher: Yes, my psychic told me. CPS: Your psychic told you? Teacher: Yes, my psychic told me. CPS: So your psychic witnessed the child being abused? Teacher: No, she just had another vision. CPS: So, your psychic had a vision of this child being abused. Teacher: Well, not exactly; it was a child whose name begins with the same letter as the child in question. CPS: So, let me get this straight: you see a psychic and this psychic tells you of a vision she had wherein an unidentified child is being abused. And this isn't the first time. Teacher: Well, yes... CPS: And you immediately drew the conclusion that the child in question was the child in the vision. Teacher: Um, well... CPS: Has the child said anything about being sexually abused? Teacher: Well, uhh... CPS: Has the child made any motions that would indicate sexual abuse of any kind? Teacher: Well, she makes these sexually-oriented gyrations.... CPS: You do know the child is autistic, right? And the child can barely control her own movements, right? Teacher: Well, yeah, but... my psychic told me! I hope this teacher is severely reprimanded for such a blatantly stupid act. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Gould Posted June 20, 2008 Report Share Posted June 20, 2008 To wit: California Penal Code Section 11166.5 "As a part of your official duties, you are required to report every instance of child abuse which becomes known to you or which you reasonably suspect to have occurred to a child with whom you have professional contact." "Your failure to report instances of child abuse known or reasonably suspected to you is a misdemeanor, punishable by up to six months in jail or by fine of one thousand dollars or by both." I think that's clear enough. "REASONABLY SUSPECTED". I think a psychic's word isn't reasonable suspicion in this case. In your opinion. I'm not willing to risk my credential on some over zealous case worker and their hyper-extended definition of what is or isn't considered reasonable, Aggie. If it means the difference between my staying out of jail and somebody else's happiness the choice is a nobrainer. Mess with the state on this one and you will be burned to the ground first before the truth of it comes out. I'd report it no matter who told me. It simply is not worth the risk, Aggie. Wow. Is the law - hell, the world - that black & white to you? Let's be clear why its so black & white to him. He's a state employee beaten down by the rules and regulations of an overbearing state. Yet he has internalized the mindset so thoroughly, he cannot see how ridiculous he is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Gould Posted June 20, 2008 Report Share Posted June 20, 2008 Let me put it to you this way: This time it wasn't true and you decide to chance it and not report the incident. Let's say a few months later another similar allegation is made. The Child Protective Services people will send out a caseworker and ask you two questions: #1 Were you aware of any instances of child abuse before this one?... would you say the answer to this question should be "yes" in the present story? Curious but waiting to be astounded by Goodie's answer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexander Posted June 21, 2008 Report Share Posted June 21, 2008 Guys, this was reported to the mother because if it wasn't the school would be sued if it was true. By law, we public educators are required to report any allegations of sexual misconduct, abuse, neglect or other child endangerment. We are compelled by the state education code or risk legal action and/or credential revocation. Right or wrong; true or untrue. Besides, if you will note, the allegations were made by a non-credentialed teacher's assistant. Typically, with not much more than a HS diploma. It is the system, not the intelligence of the principal, vice-principal or teacher involved which caused this to happen. No other recourse is possible. Bank on it. Quite true. Educators are "mandated reporters." If we have ANY reason to suspect abuse, we have to report it. I agree that this story is absurd, but I think it's a mistake to blame the principal and other adminstrators. Here's the thing: If someone reports that they suspect a child is being abused and the teacher, the principal, and the district don't act on it, they can be sued if it turns out that the allegations are true. If a kid comes in with suspicious looking bruises, I have to report it, even if it turns out that the kid took a bad spill on his bike. It sucks, but if I don't report it, I can lose my job. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim McG Posted June 21, 2008 Report Share Posted June 21, 2008 Let me put it to you this way: This time it wasn't true and you decide to chance it and not report the incident. Let's say a few months later another similar allegation is made. The Child Protective Services people will send out a caseworker and ask you two questions: #1 Were you aware of any instances of child abuse before this one?... would you say the answer to this question should be "yes" in the present story? I'm guessing by "similar," he means the psychic has another vision which is shared with the teacher. I can only imagine how THAT conversation would go: CPS: Were you aware of any instances of child abuse before this one? Teacher: Yes. CPS: Can you elaborate. Teacher: Yes, my psychic told me. CPS: Your psychic told you? Teacher: Yes, my psychic told me. CPS: So your psychic witnessed the child being abused? Teacher: No, she just had another vision. CPS: So, your psychic had a vision of this child being abused. Teacher: Well, not exactly; it was a child whose name begins with the same letter as the child in question. CPS: So, let me get this straight: you see a psychic and this psychic tells you of a vision she had wherein an unidentified child is being abused. And this isn't the first time. Teacher: Well, yes... CPS: And you immediately drew the conclusion that the child in question was the child in the vision. Teacher: Um, well... CPS: Has the child said anything about being sexually abused? Teacher: Well, uhh... CPS: Has the child made any motions that would indicate sexual abuse of any kind? Teacher: Well, she makes these sexually-oriented gyrations.... CPS: You do know the child is autistic, right? And the child can barely control her own movements, right? Teacher: Well, yeah, but... my psychic told me! I hope this teacher is severely reprimanded for such a blatantly stupid act. Oh c'mon, Al. So in your world the only things which are similar are exact duplications? Not a teacher apparently, yes? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aggie87 Posted June 21, 2008 Report Share Posted June 21, 2008 "The Big Purple Spaghetti Monster said my neighbor is abusing his kid. Or my cat told me that, I forget which." Is that something a teacher has to report? Because it's really no different than a psychic saying it (and that psychic didn't even single out a kid, but just picked a random letter). That's "reasonable suspicion"??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim McG Posted June 21, 2008 Report Share Posted June 21, 2008 To wit: California Penal Code Section 11166.5 "As a part of your official duties, you are required to report every instance of child abuse which becomes known to you or which you reasonably suspect to have occurred to a child with whom you have professional contact." "Your failure to report instances of child abuse known or reasonably suspected to you is a misdemeanor, punishable by up to six months in jail or by fine of one thousand dollars or by both." I think that's clear enough. "REASONABLY SUSPECTED". I think a psychic's word isn't reasonable suspicion in this case. In your opinion. I'm not willing to risk my credential on some over zealous case worker and their hyper-extended definition of what is or isn't considered reasonable, Aggie. If it means the difference between my staying out of jail and somebody else's happiness the choice is a nobrainer. Mess with the state on this one and you will be burned to the ground first before the truth of it comes out. I'd report it no matter who told me. It simply is not worth the risk, Aggie. Wow. Is the law - hell, the world - that black & white to you? Let's be clear why its so black & white to him. He's a state employee beaten down by the rules and regulations of an overbearing state. Yet he has internalized the mindset so thoroughly, he cannot see how ridiculous he is. Right. So what you are really saying we all need to be selective about which laws we follow and which laws we shouldn't, eh? Interesting concept. I wasn't aware we had a choice. So which ones are the laws you don't follow, Dan? Amazing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim McG Posted June 21, 2008 Report Share Posted June 21, 2008 (edited) "The said my neighbor is abusing his kid. Or my cat told me that, I forget which." Is that something a teacher has to report? Because it's really no different than a psychic saying it (and that psychic didn't even single out a kid, but just picked a random letter). That's "reasonable suspicion"??? Big Purple Spaghetti Monster.....um, huh? No just the green midgets, Aggie. You know, like the one standing right behind you. What a ridiculous scenario. You are aware [i hope] that the public we serve pay a great deal of attention to psychics. You know, the same public whose kids we teach and the CPS folks have to follow up on....by law. Edited June 21, 2008 by GoodSpeak Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim McG Posted June 21, 2008 Report Share Posted June 21, 2008 (edited) Guys, this was reported to the mother because if it wasn't the school would be sued if it was true. By law, we public educators are required to report any allegations of sexual misconduct, abuse, neglect or other child endangerment. We are compelled by the state education code or risk legal action and/or credential revocation. Right or wrong; true or untrue. Besides, if you will note, the allegations were made by a non-credentialed teacher's assistant. Typically, with not much more than a HS diploma. It is the system, not the intelligence of the principal, vice-principal or teacher involved which caused this to happen. No other recourse is possible. Bank on it. Quite true. Educators are "mandated reporters." If we have ANY reason to suspect abuse, we have to report it. I agree that this story is absurd, but I think it's a mistake to blame the principal and other adminstrators. Here's the thing: If someone reports that they suspect a child is being abused and the teacher, the principal, and the district don't act on it, they can be sued if it turns out that the allegations are true. If a kid comes in with suspicious looking bruises, I have to report it, even if it turns out that the kid took a bad spill on his bike. It sucks, but if I don't report it, I can lose my job. Finally, the voice of reason. Thank you Alexander. Read this, Dan...OK? Edited June 21, 2008 by GoodSpeak Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RDK Posted June 21, 2008 Report Share Posted June 21, 2008 "The Big Purple Spaghetti Monster said my neighbor is abusing his kid. Or my cat told me that, I forget which." Is that something a teacher has to report? Because it's really no different than a psychic saying it (and that psychic didn't even single out a kid, but just picked a random letter). That's "reasonable suspicion"??? I think that's the key right there. Both Goodspeak and Alex are correct about a teacher's duty to report, but in this case I don't think the "allegation" rises to the level of credible. I mean, hell, if the psychic knew the girl's name and address I'd be damn impressed, but just referring to her by a single letter - well that's just foolish. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RDK Posted June 21, 2008 Report Share Posted June 21, 2008 Still, bet this makes a good "Law & Order" episode next season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim McG Posted June 21, 2008 Report Share Posted June 21, 2008 (edited) "The Big Purple Spaghetti Monster said my neighbor is abusing his kid. Or my cat told me that, I forget which." Is that something a teacher has to report? Because it's really no different than a psychic saying it (and that psychic didn't even single out a kid, but just picked a random letter). That's "reasonable suspicion"??? I think that's the key right there. Both Goodspeak and Alex are correct about a teacher's duty to report, but in this case I don't think the "allegation" rises to the level of credible. I mean, hell, if the psychic knew the girl's name and address I'd be damn impressed, but just referring to her by a single letter - well that's just foolish. Not our call to make, RDK. We are required to report on it regardless of the source of the allegations. And, if you will further note, Dan, Aggie and the rest are conveniently ignoring the "or" in front of the "reasonable suspicion" part of the law. The first part of that refers to any made known to us incident. To wit: California Penal Code Section 11166.5 "As a part of your official duties, you are required to report every instance of child abuse which becomes known to you or which you reasonably suspect to have occurred to a child with whom you have professional contact." "Your failure to report instances of child abuse known or reasonably suspected to you is a misdemeanor, punishable by up to six months in jail or by fine of one thousand dollars or by both." Edited June 21, 2008 by GoodSpeak Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aggie87 Posted June 21, 2008 Report Share Posted June 21, 2008 There was no "known" incident though. So the only thing to report would be reasonable suspicion. The "psychic" (who IS equivalent to a spaghetti monster in this case) picked a random letter and told someone that a kid with that initial was being abused. That ISN'T reasonable suspicion, to most (reasonable) people, I don't think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim McG Posted June 21, 2008 Report Share Posted June 21, 2008 (edited) There was no "known" incident though. So the only thing to report would be reasonable suspicion. The "psychic" (who IS equivalent to a spaghetti monster in this case) picked a random letter and told someone that a kid with that initial was being abused. That ISN'T reasonable suspicion, to most (reasonable) people, I don't think. Aggie, you are beating a dead horse here. The "known" instance came to the teacher via a paid TA. That automatically makes it a required reportable allegation of abuse. It is out of our hands at that point. We are required to report it. Period. End of discussion. And whose definition of "reasonable" do we rely upon, Aggie? The state says it is up to them to decide. Have you ever had to deal with some of the yutzes in the various state departments of justice or human welfare agencies? These guys see everyone as a target...including the person reporting the incident. You going to trust that they won't come after you because of a differing opinion of what reasonable is? Please. Not worth it, Aggie....on any level. I'm really not sure why you can't understand that issue. But whatever, it is what we are compelled to do regardless of the source of the allegation. OK? Edited June 21, 2008 by GoodSpeak Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aggie87 Posted June 21, 2008 Report Share Posted June 21, 2008 No dead horse here. Nobody witnessed any abuse, nor were there any visible signs of abuse on the girl. Can you re-read the article and show me where the "known instance" of child abuse is discussed and described? If it's a known instance, then there has to be some details there. Yet there are none. Since there was none, the only other choice (in your California law example) is reasonable suspicion. I remain unconvinced that the word of a random psychic who didn't even name a particular child is "reasonable suspicion". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim McG Posted June 21, 2008 Report Share Posted June 21, 2008 (edited) No dead horse here. Nobody witnessed any abuse, nor were there any visible signs of abuse on the girl. Can you re-read the article and show me where the "known instance" of child abuse is discussed and described? If it's a known instance, then there has to be some details there. Yet there are none. Since there was none, the only other choice (in your California law example) is reasonable suspicion. I remain unconvinced that the word of a random psychic who didn't even name a particular child is "reasonable suspicion". Aggie....there doesn't need to be a witness. An allegation of child abuse must be reported even if it is a bald faced lie from the kid just to get his big brother in trouble or what have you. That makes it a "known" incident by definition. We now know about a possible abuse situation. OK? There is absolutely no wiggle room on this one. You are also aware [i hope] that verbal abuse isn't visable either...neither is most neglect. So if a person tells you there is abuse you report it. Game over. Geez. Write your congressman if you don't like how this law works. There's not one damn thing we teachers can do about it. We report or risk jail, fine or job loss. Period. Edited June 21, 2008 by GoodSpeak Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_forumlogo.png.a607ef20a6e0c299ab2aa6443aa1f32e.png)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.