SAN DIEGO -- "Zero tolerance" policies in schools can be unfair, some
lawyers argue, because a student found with aspirin in his pocket can
get suspended as quickly as a one with marijuana.

Leaders of the 400,000-member American Bar Association probably will
come out against such rules at the close of their winter meeting,
even though some schools say lawyers were a big part of the reason
for adopting zero tolerance policies.

"The ABA is an organization that stands for fairness and justice, and
many of the zero tolerance policies around the country have been
unfair and unjust to children," said Robert Schwartz, director of the
Juvenile Law Center, a public interest group in Philadelphia.

"The problem is that children aren't treated as individuals, but are
treated the same way no matter what they've done or who they are,"
said Schwartz, a lawyer who helped draft the recommended policy.

Opponents of the policies at the ABA and in some civil liberties
groups point to examples they say show zero tolerance has run amok:
The Pittsburgh kindergartner disciplined in 1999 because his
Halloween firefighter costume included a plastic ax, and the Cobb
County, Ga., sixth-grader suspended last year because the 10-inch key
chain on her Tweety bird wallet is considered a weapon.

School districts say parents often demand the policies and most
parents like them unless their own child is targeted.

Tony Arasi, assistant superintendent in Cobb County in suburban
Atlanta, said zero tolerance works well, although he acknowledged
cases like the Tweety wallet "can look ugly."

"We say it treats all students the same based on what they did, not
who they are," Arasi said.

The policies came about partly because schools faced lawsuits
charging that principals disciplined unequally based on race or other
factors, Arasi said.