America - The Official Thread

[BobK]

More political correctness and mindless bureaucracy run amok in America. Here's the scenario. You're in grade 10 and another kid in your class goes down with an asthma attack. Literally falls off her chair and onto the floor, wheezing and gasping for breath.

Teacher's response: Sends an email to the school nurse and tells all the kids not to touch the person on the floor having an asthma attack. Yes, an email.

15 year old Anthony Ruelas' response: Defies the teacher, picks her up and carries her to the nurses office potentially saving her life.

Result: Anthony Ruelas is suspended for walking out of class.

Source

I should be flabbergasted that such a thing can occur. Sadly, I'm not in the least surprised.

 

[Joel]

I fully agree that it's ridiculous, but how on earth is that "political correctness"? Are we just going to call anything silly or inefficient "political correctness" now?

 

[Johnnypenso]

I fully agree that it's ridiculous, but how on earth is that "political correctness"? Are we just going to call anything silly or inefficient "political correctness" now?

IMO, the reason rules like this come up in the first place is because you have a bureaucrats whose job is simply to think of every possible thing that can go wrong or be said wrong or might offend someone and make up a rule about it. Part of the goal is to take individual initiative and decision making out of the equation so that no one can be blamed or take responsibility for anything so long as ,"it's in the rules". Much of it is motivated by political correctness, hence it's all fruit from the same poisoned tree. In a sensible world, this teacher should be fired or at least disciplined in some way for not acting quickly in the interests of the child on the floor, literally dying right before their eyes, something a 15 year old kid could figure out, but a teacher cannot. But nothing will happen to the teacher because, "it's in the rules". God forbid it should ever happen, but I wonder what the outcome would be if the poor kid had died because one kid didn't do the right thing.

 

[Northstar]

As ridiculous as the situation sounds, I always have to wonder what really happened as schools aren't allowed to defend themselves so we only end up with one side of the story. For all we know he could have dropped the girl off than took a stroll.

 

[1241Penguin]

Wouldn't sprinting to the nurse's room to get a nurse be faster than sending them an email? Hopefully this sort of idiocy is an isolated case...

 

[prisonermonkeys]

More political correctness and mindless bureaucracy run amok in America.

My concern is why there was no mandatory first aid training for the teacher. I have to have mandatory first aid, CPR and anaphylaxis training, and I have to re-certify every year.

15 year old Anthony Ruelas' response: Defies the teacher, picks her up and carries her to the nurses office potentially saving her life.

If the asthma attack was serious enough to be life-threatening, the student probably shouldn't have been moved. The student having the attack should know that her asthma is that serious, and should have had a health management plan; that health management plan would be shared with the school, and the teacher would know the course of action to take.

You see a student defying a teacher and bureaucratic red tape to save another student. Assuming that the teacher acted professionally - I'm guessing that the e-mail was school policy - I see a student defying a teacher to play hero, endangering the welfare of another student.

 

[Johnnypenso]

You see a student defying a teacher and bureaucratic red tape to save another student. Assuming that the teacher acted professionally - I'm guessing that the e-mail was school policy - I see a student defying a teacher to play hero, endangering the welfare of another student.

Part of the goal is to take individual initiative and decision making out of the equation so that no one can be blamed or take responsibility for anything so long as ,"it's in the rules". But nothing will happen to the teacher because, "it's in the rules". God forbid it should ever happen, but I wonder what the outcome would be if the poor kid had died because one kid didn't do the right thing.

You see a student defying a teacher to play hero. I see a student who defied a teacher and is a hero.

 

[squadops]

Meh, don't send your kiddies to any public school system. Waite, maybe you should so they will be able to adapt to the nonsense that spills into the real world.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

I see a student who defied a teacher and is a hero.

I work in a school with 2,500 students. In terms of area, it's enormous. There is one attendant in the infirmary. In the event of a medical emergency, I text the student's name and location to the infirmary phone, and the attendant will come straight to that location; in the meantime, I offer whatever first aid that I can.

The reason for this is that there might be an emergency on the lower oval and I - or any other teacher - could have their own emergency at the opposite end of the school. So what happens in that situation? A kid collapses in the middle of class and a teacher orders them to stay put until the nurse can arrive. But a student decides to defy the teacher and takes the kid to the infirmary, only to find that the attendant is not there because they're attending to someone else. Is that student still a hero? What if it's not asthma, but anaphylaxis?

All of this is moot. The student has no formal training in first aid and has no duty of care to the other students. By removing the girl from class, he put the class teacher in an impossible position: unable to maintain their duty of care to all students, thereby making the teacher liable if something happened. He had no way of knowing if the school nurse was available, or that the treatment would be available (serious asthma requires particular treatments, and schools don't typically carry the strong stuff because it is prescription-only). The school's policy most likely required teachers to contact the nurse, who would then go to the class, but in this case, you have got a student playing hero wondering around the corridors with the sick student and no way of knowing where they are.

In the grand scheme of things, the kid got lucky. As soon as he was out of the classroom, he put that girl in danger. He's not a hero, and his suspension was a suitable punishment, even if the school's reasoning was lacking.

 

[Shaun]

I text the student's name and location to the infirmary phone,

Out of interest why text and not call?

Only asking because I've attended countless first aid courses since 1990 and not once has the instruction to text someone been given.

Seems like a strange policy on your schools behalf to me.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

I honestly have no idea.

 

[Pupik]

IMO, the reason rules like this come up in the first place is because you have a bureaucrats whose job is simply to think of every possible thing that can go wrong or be said wrong or might offend someone and make up a rule about it. Part of the goal is to take individual initiative and decision making out of the equation so that no one can be blamed or take responsibility for anything so long as ,"it's in the rules". Much of it is motivated by political correctness, hence it's all fruit from the same poisoned tree. In a sensible world, this teacher should be fired or at least disciplined in some way for not acting quickly in the interests of the child on the floor, literally dying right before their eyes, something a 15 year old kid could figure out, but a teacher cannot. But nothing will happen to the teacher because, "it's in the rules". God forbid it should ever happen, but I wonder what the outcome would be if the poor kid had died because one kid didn't do the right thing.

It's because of litigation. Except litigation makes profit for somebody, so it's less popular to denounce than saying "politically correct", which assumes either the power in charge is inept, or the public are brainwashed. Litigation is a huge reason we have so-called Big Government. Who stands to profit from more laws and more rules?

Thus..."I do not think it means what you think it means."

 

[squadops]

My mother is a liberal from the 60's and in her 60's, she has always said 'we have Ralph Nader to thank for that'.



Think seatbelts and corvairs

 

[Pupik]

Source

I'm going to decode the source Johnnypenso gave, because it only tells half the story.

Anthony Ruelas, 15, a student at Gateway Middle School, an alternative school in the Killeen Independent School District (ISD)

Alternative school: the place where bad (or "troubled") kids go. I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that touching another child is verboten, due to the circumstances because the way the school has to have more restrictive rules and stronger penalties against violations of the school's code. These are last-chance types of schools which aim to keep habitual troublemakers out of juvenile halls or jails, but they're tougher places than regular public schools.

I've known students and educators that have taught or went to school at these types of places, and boy do they suck hard. It's basically a minimum-security prison for 7-8 hours a day; no ability to speak your mind, nothing creative is allowed, constant evaluations, you're talked down to the entire day, you're reminded that you're the equivalent of dog turds, and there's no excuses for anything outside the rules.

Anthony proceeded to go over and pick her up, saying ‘f—k that'

Gee, maybe another reason for the suspension?

The school district said it was investigating the matter and released a statement in response to the incident.

"The District is unable to provide details related to the matter as it pertains to information involving student discipline and/or health records. In an effort to protect students' rights to confidentiality granted under the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, the details of the investigation and/or disciplinary actions may not be provided by the district at this time. The Killeen ISD maintains the safety of our students, staff and campuses as a priority and applauds the efforts of students who act in good faith to assist others in times of need."

So, like many things that occur; there's an investigation. And the kid will probably not have a long suspension.

That said, I congratulate the kid for doing the right thing. Although, there's the chance he could have made it worse, he did something irresponsible by letting a gut reaction take over.

 

[Liquid]

I fully agree that it's ridiculous, but how on earth is that "political correctness"? Are we just going to call anything silly or inefficient "political correctness" now?

Preach, brother.

It's because of litigation. Except litigation makes profit for somebody, so it's less popular to denounce than saying "politically correct", which assumes either the power in charge is inept, or the public are brainwashed. Litigation is a huge reason we have so-called Big Government. Who stands to profit from more laws and more rules?

Thus..."I do not think it means what you think it means."

I think France has what is referred to as a duty to rescue law whereby you are legally obligated to help someone who needs emergency assistance. The photographers who took pictures as Diana and Dodi Fayed lay dying were liable for prosecution for not helping them but I can't find whether that was pursued.

On the other hand, some countries have good Samaritan laws whereby there is a legal protection for members of the public attempting to assist someone in an emergency; to get over the hesitation some might feel.

Is the litigation-profiteering mantra really so strong in America that people are hesitant to help others or is it a cultural cold streak which has wormed its way into law?

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Although, there's the chance he could have made it worse, he did something irresponsible by letting a gut reaction take over.

He's really just done what every stereotypical male hero does: he rejected an authority that he considered to be out-dated or ill-equipped, and took on the moral responsibility to handle the situation. In being proven right, he was vindicated for his actions, and a new authority was established.

In other words, so long as his intentions were good, his actions could be overlooked.

I think France has what is referred to as a duty to rescue law whereby you are legally obligated to help someone who needs emergency assistance.

I think most countries style it as a duty of care: you are legally required to provide aid to someone in need, but only to the extent that you feel comfortable or capable.

 

[Johnnypenso]

The reason for this is that there might be an emergency on the lower oval and I - or any other teacher - could have their own emergency at the opposite end of the school. So what happens in that situation? A kid collapses in the middle of class and a teacher orders them to stay put until the nurse can arrive. But a student decides to defy the teacher and takes the kid to the infirmary, only to find that the attendant is not there because they're attending to someone else. Is that student still a hero? What if it's not asthma, but anaphylaxis?

What if it's asthma and the student said she was having an asthma attack?

All of this is moot. The student has no formal training in first aid and has no duty of care to the other students.

No duty to care? A human being has no duty of care to another dying human being?

By removing the girl from class, he put the class teacher in an impossible position: unable to maintain their duty of care to all students, thereby making the teacher liable if something happened. He had no way of knowing if the school nurse was available, or that the treatment would be available (serious asthma requires particular treatments, and schools don't typically carry the strong stuff because it is prescription-only). The school's policy most likely required teachers to contact the nurse, who would then go to the class, but in this case, you have got a student playing hero wondering around the corridors with the sick student and no way of knowing where they are.

By removing the girl from class he potentially saved her life. There comes a time when following the rules causes people to die, in this case, waiting for an email response when a child is suffering and may die. In this case you have a student who correctly assessed the situation, realized that waiting for an email wasn't going to be quick enough, and acted. Thank God he did or the girl might have been yet another student killed by bureaucracy:
A headteacher and four other members of a school's staff have been suspended after an 11-year-old boy was left dying in a corridor during an asthma attack.

A teacher who had been alerted to Sam's plight by other students told them to "go away" because she was in a meeting and he would "have to wait".

Asthmatic 12 y.o. Died After School Staff Confiscated His Puffer

“No one could get his inhaler in time because it was locked in the principal’s office.”

In the grand scheme of things, the kid got lucky. As soon as he was out of the classroom, he put that girl in danger. He's not a hero, and his suspension was a suitable punishment, even if the school's reasoning was lacking.

In the grand scheme of things, which presumably is the scheme which encompasses all the facts and the outcome, the kid made a judgment call while someone else was dying and made the correct decision. He took her somewhere she could get help, rather than leave her dying on the floor because the rules dictated that we rely on imperfect electronic media instead of human thought or action. He is a hero, and the punishment will serve to reinforce a troubled kid's belief that doing the right thing isn't important, following "the man's" rules is, regardless of whether the outcome is death or injury to another person. Just follow the rules son, follow the rules.

 

[TenEightyOne]

What if it's asthma and the student said she was having an asthma attack?

The teacher is still the parent of the child in loco. What happens if the girl dies and the correctional student decides to say that the teacher told him to take her?

 

[prisonermonkeys]

No duty to care? A human being has no duty of care to another dying human being?

For one, it's duty of care. That might sound like semantics, but it's a legal concept. It outlines the responsibility that a carer has to someone in need. Given that the teacher is liable for the welfare of their students, they are the one with the duty of care, not the student in question.

the kid made a judgment call while someone else was dying and made the correct decision

Based on nothing more than his instinct. He took a risk and endangered a student's wellbeing, and while he might have made the "correct" decision, that doesn't vindicate his actions.

There comes a time when following the rules causes people to die, in this case, waiting for an email response when a child is suffering and may die.

Neither you nor the kid had any idea what would have happened if they had waited for the e-mail. Do you honestly think that they'd be sitting around for forty-five minutes waiting for the nurse to check their inbox? If it was school policy to contact the nurse via e-mail, then you can assume that the policy would also require the nurse to have their e-mail open at all times, and so would have received it.

He is a hero, and the punishment will serve to reinforce a troubled kid's belief that doing the right thing isn't important, following "the man's" rules is, regardless of whether the outcome is death or injury to another person.

He is no doubt in that school because of a blatant disregard for the rules.

 

[Johnnypenso]

The teacher is still the parent of the child in loco. What happens if the girl dies and the correctional student decides to say that the teacher told him to take her?

What if they waited one more minute and then the girl died?

 

[Northstar]

What if they waited one more minute and then the girl died?

What if the nurse walked into the classroom a minute after he left and she died because the nurse wasn't in the office?

 

[Johnnypenso]

What if the nurse walked into the classroom a minute after he left and she died because the nurse wasn't in the office?

What if the nurse had an asthma attack on the way to the classroom?

 

[prisonermonkeys]

What if they waited one more minute and then the girl died?

If the asthma was that severe, the school would have a health management plan in place. They would identify the triggers of the girl's asthma and move to nullify them before she even started school.

What if the nurse had an asthma attack on the way to the classroom?

What if this story was posted on the internet and people started to create a series of increasingly elaborate and unlikely scenarios to try and prove a subjective opinion as being factually true?

Oh, wait ...

 

[squadops]

What if the asthma was unknown.

What if some kid helped another kid having a trouble when the rest stood around with their thumbs up their arse.

Oh wait...

 

[prisonermonkeys]

What if the asthma was unknown.

A sudden onset of asthma serious enough to kill someone with no prior history of asthma?

the rest stood around with their thumbs up their arse.

That didn't happen. Sure, the class teacher was awaiting a response from the school nurse, but you can bet that this was a part of the policy: that the class teacher contacted the nurse, who would respond immediately. In mild cases, the nurse would be able to advise, and the student able to assist in their own medication. In serious cases, the nurse would attend immediately.

All this amounts to is a kid who saw a student in distress, and with no apparent understanding of the situation other than his first impression, chose to defy a teacher. I have seen a student do exactly that in the past, and caused more problems than he solved. It was on a school camp and a girl hit her head when she fell. One boy leaped into the fray to try and assist her while we waited for an ambulance because we were concerned that she had a concussion and a sprained ankle - but he insisted on carrying her back to the campsite even though the teachers' training and assessment told them to keep the girl in place and wait for help to arrive.

But what makes your attitude so insulting is the way you assume that the teacher was so unprofessional and showed no concern for the welfare of their students.

 

[squadops]

Yes a sudden onset, I've seen it before first hand, a family member in fact.

Policy schmolicy, that's kinda the whole point is it not?

How do you know the kid had no understanding of the situation exactly?

The teacher had concern of course, but also a sheeple mentality.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

How do you know the kid had no understanding of the situation exactly?

Because he clearly made no attempt to assess the situation.

The teacher had concern of course, but also a sheeple mentality.

The policies and procedures aren't there to inconvenience or annoy you. They're there to protect the people who are responsible for the students' welfare. To ignore it would be a sackable offence.

 

[Johnnypenso]

A sudden onset of asthma serious enough to kill someone with no prior history of asthma?

Thousands of people die every year from Asthma related causes and many more are hospitalized. It's far, far more likely to lead to death in the Western world than say not getting vaccinated.

That didn't happen. Sure, the class teacher was awaiting a response from the school nurse, but you can bet that this was a part of the policy: that the class teacher contacted the nurse, who would respond immediately. In mild cases, the nurse would be able to advise, and the student able to assist in their own medication. In serious cases, the nurse would attend immediately.

Oh well if it's part of the policy then it must be right? The policy is never wrong is it? Once the bureaucrats write the rules we must all follow them right? Don't make a decision on your own because someone in an office has already anticipated every possible outcome and it's in the rule book amiright? Do you think Ryan Gibbon's mom is happy that his school came up with the policy of keeping puffers away from children who may need them immediately? I still can't believe that an email is the appropriate response to someone having an asthma attack. It's completely and utterly ridiculous.

All this amounts to is a kid who saw a student in distress, and with no apparent understanding of the situation other than his first impression, chose to defy a teacher. I have seen a student do exactly that in the past, and caused more problems than he solved. It was on a school camp and a girl hit her head when she fell. One boy leaped into the fray to try and assist her while we waited for an ambulance because we were concerned that she had a concussion and a sprained ankle - but he insisted on carrying her back to the campsite even though the teachers' training and assessment told them to keep the girl in place and wait for help to arrive.

It amounts to a kind who exercised his own judgment when everyone else was standing around with their thumb up their behinds and he may have saved her life.

But what makes your attitude so insulting is the way you assume that the teacher was so unprofessional and showed no concern for the welfare of their students.

Because she emailed. She could have emailed then picked up a phone and said it was urgent, but she waiting on imperfect electronic media when a child was lying on the floor potentially dying.

 

[TenEightyOne]

She could have emailed then picked up a phone and said it was urgent, but she waiting on imperfect electronic media when a child was lying on the floor potentially dying.

That's your opinion on how that system would work in that school. It's not unusual to send an SMS via a mobile or SIMS in a school to summon immediate help, I've also worked in companies where an email also gets immediate help from fire, medical or electrical crews. Voice calls can take too long in comparison and are harder to replicate to any number of people in an instant.

 

[Sanji Himura]

Active Shooter situation at the Naval Medical Center in San Diego. No one reported dead yet:

Update: The building has been cleared with no evidence of a shooter nor of any shots fired.