NOT FITTING THE CRIME

All Schools Should Review Zero-Tolerance Punishment

American society asks a lot of its schools. We send them students from
every background imaginable and with varying abilities to learn and
expect the schools to provide them a good education. We also expect
them to provide a safe, healthy learning environment free of violence
and drugs.

It's a tall order. No wonder public education costs so much, about
$6,000 per student in Alabama. And no wonder that over the past decade
or so, schools have resorted to some tough discipline measures to deal
with society-wide problems of drugs and violence that didn't spare
schools. The result is "zero-tolerance" rules that provide harsh
penalties for offenses deemed intolerable.

Besides, schools were only following the example of lawmakers who
wanted to send a clear message about the illicit drug trade and
violence that threatened public safety. Schools' zero-tolerance rules
are a natural progression from the criminal justice system's
"three-strikes" laws that mandate stiff prison sentences.

But classifying a student caught with an aspirin in her purse as a
major drug offender is plain silly. Yet that's what most school
systems have essentially done with zero-tolerance laws against drugs.

The best publicized example of that is the case of Clay-Chalkville
High School sophomore Ysatis Jones. Last month, the 15-year-old honor
student was suspended and ordered to alternative school for a month
after she was spotted taking a common over-the-counter medicine for
menstrual pain without permission.

Ysatis was not alone in receiving such tough punishment. Jefferson
County school officials told News staff writer Vicki McClure that last
semester 10 students had been sent to alternative school for violating
the school system's over-the-counter medicine policy.

Ysatis' case became public after her mother protested her daughter
being sent to alternative school. School officials expressed some
sympathy for the student but refused to reverse the decision of the
system's disciplinary panel. They couldn't let one student off the
hook after sending at least nine others to alternative school for
similar offenses.

Certainly, it's important for schools to be consistent in meting out
punishment. And rules against taking medicines at school without
permission makes sense; even over-the-counter drugs can be abused.

But sending students to alternative school for taking ibuprofen, and
listing it as a major drug offense, is like using a sledgehammer to
swat a gnat.

For school rules to be seen as fair and to be respected by both
students and parents, the punishment must fit the crime. Unreasonable
punishment and rigid rules that don't allow for reasonable exceptions
can do as much harm as good.

One bit of good news to come from the publicity over Ysatis' case is
that new county Superintendent Phil Hammonds says it will likely
prompt a serious review of the school system's student code of
conduct. Other school systems as well should use this as an
opportunity to review their discipline policies to see if they are
fair and just.

Students who break school rules should be punished - within reason.