SCHOOL DISTRICT SHOULDN'T USURP PARENTAL ROLE

Moorestown officials must be careful not to overreach with discipline policy.

No parent or school official in Moorestown, or in any other South
Jersey district, would admit supporting teenage substance abuse or
other potentially dangerous behavior. Yet, the Moorestown school
district's initiative to regulate the risky behavior of students off
campus has some parents asking if administrators are being too intrusive.

As with most new regulations, interpretation and enforcement will be
key. If parents find the school district is encroaching too far into
their private lives or imposing regulations arbitrarily, it's up to
them to demand change. Some in the community have already said the
school board's new policy regarding student drug and alcohol use goes too far.

It appears Moorestown school officials, like officials throughout New
Jersey, are trying to meet the community's insistence that they do
more to crack down on student substance abuse and violence. Parents,
judges and state officials throughout the nation have recognized that
schools, who often are given the responsibility of surrogate parents,
have a significant opportunity to help mold student behavior. But
should schools have a say in how students behave once they leave
school for the day, the weekend or over the summer?

Parental Responsibility

Moorestown school board officials, backed up by 30 years of case law
and recent state Education Department regulations, say they do.

Moorestown's revised policy allows school administrators to punish
off-campus student behavior if it meets two tests:

A student's behavior is a danger to himself or herself or a danger to
others at the school;

And, a student's off-campus behavior will disrupt or affect school operations.

Across the country, school districts' right to suspend students from
school or extracurricular activities for off-campus behavior has been
regularly upheld by courts and administrative judges. But that
doesn't mean parents should not be involved in setting school policy. .

Interim Moorestown Superintendent Timothy Brennan said nine parents
have come to public meetings to say the board is reaching too far;
two parents have said the board should have gone farther. Other
parents have sent e-mails questioning the policy, he said. Two of the
nine board members -- A.J. Kreimer and Richard Kaye -- voted against
penalizing students' off-campus behavior when it is not directly
related to school activities.

"I have a strong aversion to the school's reaching out and usurping
parental responsibility," Kreimer has said.

The rules clearly encroach upon the responsibility of parents to
control their children.

Brennan said a student who engages in underage drinking over a
weekend, but arrives sober to school on Monday would not be subject
to school penalties. But if the student or his friends came to school
to spread the word about future drinking parties, they could face
penalties, he said. Yet, it should be parents' responsibility to take
charge of this situation and ensure their children aren't drinking at home.

But under Moorestown's revised policy, the district could suspend a
student for 10 days and order a mandatory one-year intervention program.

The board plans to tighten the rules even further, requiring a
mandatory 45-day suspension from extracurricular activities, such as
sports teams and student government, if students are caught violating
school policy on or off the campus. Unlike attending classes,
extracurricular activities are viewed as a privilege and not a right
under New Jersey regulations.

But that doesn't mean the district should throw kids off a sports
team or ban them for a club because it heard about unacceptable
off-campus behavior. Such bans without a guilty plea or conviction
are too much of a reach by the schools.

Still, with the pervasiveness of drugs and random school violence,
parents might need or want help keeping their children under control.
But it is not clear whether the seven-member board majority who
approved tightening district policy has widespread support of
parents. The policy was approved a day after a fight between two
Moorestown high school boys led to the discovery of lists for
weapons, drugs and possibly drug clients. A search during a two-hour
lockdown at the high school did not turn up weapons or drugs.

But board members had already planned to tighten the rules in
response to four students found with cocaine and amphetamines at the
school in December. Brennan said the tougher policy was discussed
with parents, students and outside experts before its adoption. Based
on feedback from some parents and board members, he said, the policy
could be further revised.

Too Much Control?

The question for Moorestown parents and others is whether school
boards should exercise this level of control over their children. It
probably will take a challenge from a Moorestown family to determine
if school administrators have gone too far. Parents might need help
controlling their children, but most don't want to be replaced as the
primary disciplinarian and teacher of values. The school board ought
to revise this policy so it doesn't tread too far into punishing kids
for things they do when they're under their parents' care.