Has our intelligence dropped to zero already?

[wolf]

Originally Posted by BigV

Guess why? They're not designed to be used on children that small.

I'm well aware of that.

Most cuffs don't fit adult women, either, but cops certainly expect to arrest them.

[BigV]

Originally Posted by OnyxCougar

OK Big, I just don't see where I'm alone in a special category of wrongness here.

OC, I said that for a couple of reasons. I'm not going to bother formatting this reply with your "quotes". You're free to correct my memory. Not in any particular order...

1 -- Let's say the little girl does have special needs. That's no excuse for denying her special attention. Ausberger's or whatever doesn't like touching? Ok, not an expert in that area but that means there's some other way of rendering the help she needed. I said APPROPRIATE restraint. Ok, whatever's appropriate for her. I contend that handcuffs were not appropriate. Adequate? Yes, more than adequate, way more.

2 -- I've already addressed the fiction of not being allowed to touch a child. My disagreement with you is the deeper issue of hiding behind the rules as an excuse for not doing what needed to be done. Speaking for the teacher, you defended her actions by saying "THE RULES SAID" she couldn't touch the child. I am upset that the respect for the rules exceeded the compassion for the child.

3 -- I asked about personal responsibility. You indicated that the dominant forces happen from birth to 5 years old. Do you mean that by 5 years old that personal responsibility should be dominant? You were singing a different tune when the discussion was regarding your own child. You spoke at length about the responsibility resting on the shoulders of the adult when push came to shove. And yet you seem to give the adult in this case a pass because the little kid should have more personal responsibility, has issues, is having an epic tantrum, etc. That kind of double standard chaps my ass.

4 -- This video and this story struck a very different chord in you than it did in me. I was aghast at the image of the little girl being handcuffed by police. Your reaction was "Bravo to the teacher for courage in the line of fire. Give her a raise." Hey, it's a free country. You can think and say what you want. Maybe "wrong" is not exactly the right word here....But I struggle to find a better word, and I can find none. It is wrong to see this video and fail to be scandalized by the image of cops handcuffing a little girl.

[BigV]

Originally Posted by Troubleshooter

That's because children that age weren't as likely to behave like that in the past.

Not true. Kids have been having tantrums since time immemorial. It's a part of growing up.

Are you saying that the cuffs didn't fit because they were designed in a time when kid's behaved better?

I contend that the behavior shown here is largely unchanged since "the past", and that instead, our standards of behavior have changed considerably. Furthermore, this case represents an enormous change in our reaction to that behavior and how it compares to our changed and changing standards.

Originally Posted by Troubleshooter

Straw Man.

Not true. The cops didn't use steel cuffs because they didn't fit. They didn't fit, because they're designed to fit adult wrists. The kid's wrists were smaller than what the cuff designers intended to accommodate. No straw man. Just a really short, really easy to follow set of facts.

[wolf]

It is when you try to lead to the conclusion that they shouldn't do it or shouldn't need to do it because of the size of the cuffs.

And incidentally, those cable ties ... great for large scene control problems, lousy for regular usage. They have to be cut off.

I won't approach one of my clients with a pair of scissors to cut off a wristband on discharge, I'm sure as shit not doing so before admission (and medication) to cut off a cable tie.

[BigV]

Hey, I looked up Straw Man fallacy.

Review the thread:

wolf's question:
where did they get cuffs to fit a kid?

BigV's answer:
they didn't. they used plastic ties.

BigV's explanation for answer:
steel cuffs didn't work, because they're too big. I implied that the cuffs are only too big because the wrists are too small.

Draw your own conclusions. My answer said nothing about about whether the cops shouldn't do it or shouldn't need to do it.

Methinks the lady and others doth protest too much.

[mrnoodle]

BigV, is it the image of the girl wearing handcuffs that's so objectionable, or the actual long-term effect on the child herself? Because she'll live. Having to hold her hands behind her back for 15 minutes will not scar her nearly as deeply as 1) whatever environment fostered her acting out; 2) being allowed to throw tantrums unchecked; 3) growing up in a world where your every action is viewed through a filter of pop psychology and victimhood rather than personal responsibility.

I suspect that you are the kind of empathetic person who sees your own child in the eyes of every other child, and that's a good thing. But not every child is as well-adjusted as yours, and not every teacher is a trained expert in handling every random behavioral oddity that comes through her door.

Ok, say you're a teacher. Class is proceeding normally, when suddenly Sybil starts spewing green puke from the back of the room. You have 10 seconds to restore order. 3,2,1, GO.
...try to hug her, she tries to claw your eyes out
...try to explain to her, she screams and spits, not hearing a word
...try to remove her from the classroom by taking her arm. Oops, you left a mark. Abuse! call the ACLU!
...try to remember page 57 of whatever flavor-of-the-month child development manual you read last week. I think it had something to do with "strong-willed children". OW! the (edit: brat)bit me.

10 minutes, not seconds, have now elapsed, and you have a case study in demon possession still raving in front of you. Come on, you're the teacher! Fix it, NOW! But don't screw up, or you'll lose your job and won't be able to make your mortgage or care for your own children. Plus, know that every action you take is a possible lawsuit in the making, not to mention a possible life-altering event for the foaming monster in front of you (within whom, somewhere, is a little girl).

Not quite so easy as Monday morning quarterbacking, is it?

[Troubleshooter]

Let's try a few flows here...

A) most perpetrators are adults or adult sized
B) handcuffs are used in the handling of perpetrators
C) most handcuffs are sized for adults

A) the least number of perpetrators are children or child sized
B) handcuffs are used in the handling perpetrators
C) the least number of handcuffs are sized for children

A) most situations a police officer will have to deal with are adults
B) many situations will require handcuffs
C) most handcuffs are adult sized
D) most officers carry handcuffs
D) most are adult sized handcuffs

Am I far off base here?

[Troubleshooter]

Originally Posted by wolf

I won't approach one of my clients with a pair of scissors to cut off a wristband on discharge, I'm sure as shit not doing so before admission (and medication) to cut off a cable tie.

You need these:


and this:

[BigV]

3,2,1 go.

on the fly, quick reply.

Sybil, are you ok? Sybil?! no, ok, grab the trashcan and the paper towels on the way to the back of the room. Johhny, a good kid in the front row, Johnny, go to the office and tell Mrs Smith we need help right away! Go, now. Hurry.

Sybil--what's wrong honey, you're pretty sick. Are to taking any medicine? Clawing and raving? Sounds like a seizure. Let's get down on the floor. Rebecca, Harry, move those desks and chairs out of the way, thanks guys. Ok, Sybil. here we go, down on the floor. You're ok. I'm here to help. Can you breathe ok? No, it's ok, stay down on the floor, lie on your side. I'm right here with you. It's gonna be ok, it's gonna be all right, honey. All right... Lisa, go next door and ask Mrs Thomas to come here, quickly, please. Go on. Go, go.

Ok, *louder* Class! Sybil's sick and I'm trying to help her. I need your help too. Please stay in your seats, the nurse and the principal are on their way. Just sit quietly for now, please. That would be a biiig help to me, thank you, thank you very much.

*continue rendering aid until help arrives* That help would hopefully be my next door teacher, the principal, the nurse, and maybe the paramedics and the cops. Somebody's gonna call mom and dad too, for sure. My job as the first responder is to give the first help, not the best help.

I have been spat on, shit on, hit, bit, and kicked, called every name in the book, in more than one language. I've dodged and caught pictures and vases and books. I've had to talk with cops, paramedics, firemen, parents, siblings, bystanders, tow truck drivers, victims, victims families, strangers, my kids, my parents.

I've had to explain myself, defend myself. I've apologized more times than I can count. Sometimes I didn't mean the apology when I said it, but that's another thread: feelings versus facts. Many times I've said Eureka! and sometimes out loud even. I have been known to change my position. I've been cried on, I've cried with, I've cried alone.

I wonder every day if I could have done better, and make that the plan for tomorrow.

MMQB? No. Livin is harder, and more rewarding than monday morning qb'ing. Analyzing what happend and what can be learned is valuable on Monday, though.

[mrnoodle]

You are diagnosing a temper tantrum as a seizure. I don't have the medical knowledge to refute you, but I don't buy it. I have to defer to your apparent expertise, but I smell something funny about it. In the first place, every 5-year-old in the room knows a shit fit when they see one. They've tried em themselves.

If what happened that day was a medical emergency, I'll just have to take the word of medical folks.

But what about the first question? Is it the image of a child being restrained by police that's objectionable, or is there actually lasting psychological harm to the child?

[BigV]

mrnoodle, I want to answer your first question now. I'll wind up repeating some of what I've already said.

Originally Posted by mrnoodle

I suspect that you are the kind of empathetic person who sees your own child in the eyes of every other child, and that's a good thing. But not every child is as well-adjusted as yours, and not every teacher is a trained expert in handling every random behavioral oddity that comes through her door.

Let me start by saying thank you for the nice compliment. It is not hard for me to see my child in the eyes of every other child. This is not just my hyperactive imagination at work. Gosh this is difficult to explain. Seriously, I know they're not my kids. Duh. But I view them as if they're worthy of the same respect, and effort and love that my kids deserve. And I try to act accordingly. I am straining to avoid melodrama here, but if children are not thought of as precious, and treated as precious, what the fuck are we doing here?

EVERYBODY gets this on some level, tobacco companies, MTV, McDonalds, schools, contries (Italy, negative birthrate, aging population) GW and SS, even the nook-yu-lar family gets it.

Shit.

I started off saying thanks for the compliment and drove it into the ditch. Ok, seriouisly, I do have empathy for children. But not just the good ones. All of them. I aim high. And I am often rewarded only by the effort of the child. But sometimes I am rewarded by their efforts and their success! But even when I am rewarded with scoffs of derision, I know that I have planted seeds of hope and love. The germination and growth of those seeds is not my department. But I sow and plant and water and weed and nurture. The rest (well, really all of it, I'm just a steward) is in God's hands.

Originally Posted by mrnoodle

BigV, is it the image of the girl wearing handcuffs that's so objectionable, or the actual long-term effect on the child herself? Because she'll live. Having to hold her hands behind her back for 15 minutes will not scar her nearly as deeply as 1) whatever environment fostered her acting out; 2) being allowed to throw tantrums unchecked; 3) growing up in a world where your every action is viewed through a filter of pop psychology and victimhood rather than personal responsibility.

Yes, the image is horrid.

The long term effects chill me as well. Not only for the child, because I believe that adverse circumstances far worse than this can be overcome. But also for the school and our society as a whole. This should not be how we respond to kid's tantrums. It is an isolated incident? I hope to God it is. Is this the beginning (or continuation) of a trend? Maybe, a strong maybe. Probably, even. That makes me sick.

Sick because it's sooo much emphasis on the symptom at the expense of neglecting the problem. I played water polo in school. It's a tough sport, and I loved it. Our coach would drill us to death. Passes, plays, drills, sprints, manouvers, practice practice practice. Practice makes perfect, right? Coach says NO. Perfect practice makes perfect. His point is that if we practice sloppy, we play sloppy. He's right. If we practice hookin up kindergarteners, that's how we'll play...Bad precedent.

Yeah, she'll live. I have no fears on that score. I know bupkis about her home environment. If you do, share.

I want to take #s 2 and 3 together. Unchecked tantrums and pop psychology and victimhood versus personal responsibility. The personal responsibility idea is key here. The little girl IS responsible for the tantrum, in a...mathematical sense or whatever, literal sense. But what a tantrum is is the loss of control. Sometimes that loss of control can be a conscious decision, like when you dive into a fight. Sometimes it can be faked, just the illusion of the loss of control. I don't think either of these apply to the little girl. It's possible, but I don't think so.

Regardless, I say that the adults bear the final responsibility. What if the kid thinks it's ok to dart into the street, into traffic. Maybe the kid just wasn't thinking, they were just chasing after their ball. Or maybe they knew the rules about the street and decided it was ok and went anyway. The adult now has a responsibility. Standing on sidewalk with the kid? Grab them if possible. Shout NO! STOP! The adult driving the car? Dynamite the brakes or steer around. The kid's behavior propel the situation. Yes, they're responsible in that way. Responsible too for poor judgement or lack of judgement. Now it's up to the adults to act. In this analogy, the teacher and the vice principal are easy on the brakes. Hell, maybe their brakes just aren't that strong.

But the kid's not in control, the teacher couldn't get and keep control, the vice principal is out of her depth. Call the cops. They were able to exert contol. I am sad this happened, as we all are. I am disappointed in the school staff, I have higher expectations. I am alarmed that the cops needed to do what they did to achieve the result they sought: "Jaieesha, you need to calm down and you need to do it now. OK." Then the cuffs. It looks lazy and overcautious. I mean, what the hell! What crime was committed here? Where's the personal safety threat? The cops have a hard job too. No question about it and dangerous as well. It is harder to do just the right thing and no more, but this was more.

[BigV]

Originally Posted by mrnoodle

You are diagnosing a temper tantrum as a seizure. I don't have the medical knowledge to refute you, but I don't buy it. I have to defer to your apparent expertise, but I smell something funny about it. In the first place, every 5-year-old in the room knows a shit fit when they see one. They've tried em themselves.--snip--

No, I'm playing along with your hypothetical examples in a previous post. Let me be clear: I do not think the little girl in the video is having a seizure. It is a shit-fit, no question. And you're also right on target about the rest of the kids in class. All of them. That's what make me mad here, who hasn't seen, been, and lived through little kid's shit fits?! Hands? Ok, now how many of those ended in handcuffs? Hands? Zero. Wait, one. This one.

[Clodfobble]

I think the problem is not how you view the girl, BigV, but how you view handcuffs. To you, handcuffs are an indication of a crime, and a harsh and painful restraint. To others, handcuffs don't carry the same emotional baggage, and are completely equivalent to holding the child in a bear hug, or restraining them in a strait jacket, or wrapping their arms at their sides with SaranWrap.

The point is restraint, and you've already said you agree with the bear hug as a means of restraint. The only difference is that in a bear hug, the restrainer has the chance of being injured, and can't effectively move the child, say to another classroom, or a squad car, or anywhere away from the situation that started the tantrum.

Hypothetically, if a child had to be restrained and moved out of the room at the same time, how would you do it? What if you had a medical stretcher with straps and leather restraints for the wrists and ankles, would you feel comfortable using that? Can you think of any method of restraint other than a bear hug that you would be comfortable with?

[OnyxCougar]

Originally Posted by BigV

OC, I said that for a couple of reasons. I'm not going to bother formatting this reply with your "quotes". You're free to correct my memory. Not in any particular order...

1 -- Let's say the little girl does have special needs. That's no excuse for denying her special attention. Ausberger's or whatever doesn't like touching? Ok, not an expert in that area but that means there's some other way of rendering the help she needed. I said APPROPRIATE restraint. Ok, whatever's appropriate for her. I contend that handcuffs were not appropriate. Adequate? Yes, more than adequate, way more.

By the way, I use quotes because I post most often from work and it helps me focus when I'm in and out of window so often.

At no time was the teacher or VP denying her special attention. She was getting all the attention she could hope for, and it turns out, more than anyone bargained for.

Appropriate restraint for a child that is kicking and hitting is not close physical contact. In fact, in the CNN broadcast last night, the lawyer for the parents stated that it's the police he's most upset with, and he feels the teachers were "shadowing and hovering" around her in a way that was "not conducive to calm"ing the child down. (Those are direct quotations.)

So here, you're screaming for physical restraint on the part of the teacher, but the lawyer is saying he's thinking of pressing charges because they were too close to her!! Obviously the lawyer thinks she should have been left in an empty room to destroy it. *shrug* Bottom line is, the LAWYER didn't want them to touch her, and that's exactly the point I was trying to make.

I want to also say that I am 100% for the use of hug as a method of restraint, but again, for the millionth time, legal bullshit prevents me (and anyone else) from doing so. Your school's policy is different than Jaieesha's school, and it's different from mine here in Podunk, NC. It's also different in my kids schools in every school they've been to, since 1996, in Las Vegas. No touching is hardly an isolated policy.

2 -- I've already addressed the fiction of not being allowed to touch a child. My disagreement with you is the deeper issue of hiding behind the rules as an excuse for not doing what needed to be done. Speaking for the teacher, you defended her actions by saying "THE RULES SAID" she couldn't touch the child. I am upset that the respect for the rules exceeded the compassion for the child.

The child was not in physical danger, until she jumped up on the table, when the VP physically removed her from the table. Then she wasn't in danger then. This school has a no-touching policy, and the VP followed policy. As a teacher, the child's shit fit (not physical danger, but shit fit) does not, and will never, trump my source of income for my family. In other words, I will not get fired over restraining this little brat. School policy is not to touch, she's not in physical danger. Done deal.

3 -- I asked about personal responsibility. You indicated that the dominant forces happen from birth to 5 years old. Do you mean that by 5 years old that personal responsibility should be dominant?

No, that's not what I mean. Dominant forces in a childs life are birth to 5. Meaning, if you haven't put the correct foundation in, it's MUCH harder to add it later. If by 5 you haven't shown by example, taught with love and discipline, the basics of personal responsiblity and respectable behavior, chances are, they're not going to get it without a serious learning experience. That is not to say that all 5 year olds take personal responsiblity, but it IS to say that the seeds have to be planted BY age 5 and then nurtured and grown into adolescence and young adult hood.

You were singing a different tune when the discussion was regarding your own child. You spoke at length about the responsibility resting on the shoulders of the adult when push came to shove. And yet you seem to give the adult in this case a pass because the little kid should have more personal responsibility, has issues, is having an epic tantrum, etc.

No, I wasn't singing any other tune. I agree that the adults in the situation were ultimately responsible for what happened, and that starts with Jaieesha's parents, NUMBER 1. Jaieesha KNEW that she was wrong. She KNEW she was pissing the VP off, and she was flat out playing games with the VP. Willfully. This behavior is not ALL Jaieesha's fault, by ANY means, mostly I blame her parents. But there *IS* a measure of personal responsibility that she needs to take. Let's use your 5 year old as an example.

LittleV is having a *really* bad day. He manages to clear out the classroom, and then gets sent to the principles office. At this point, LittleV *knows* beyond a shadow of a doubt he's in deep shit. He knows that when you are called, his ass in the ringer for sure. At this point, if at no other, he should take personal responsibility and calm down, and that's it. It's over. You come, pick him up, do whatever you do, and it doesn't happen again.

Jaisheesa isn't like LittleV. Jaieesha got the the VP's office, and at that point (and any normal child's point) INSTEAD OF TAKING PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY or, instead of being afraid of punishment, or whatever, she continued, because she KNEW she was wrong and didn't care.

That's the difference, Big.

That kind of double standard chaps my ass.

It's not a double standard, so there's some vaseline.

4 -- This video and this story struck a very different chord in you than it did in me. I was aghast at the image of the little girl being handcuffed by police. Your reaction was "Bravo to the teacher for courage in the line of fire. Give her a raise."

I don't see the big nasty police throwing her down on the floor, putting their knees in her back, and manhandling her. I see them restraining an out of control little girl, so she can be safely transported to CPS or wherever, since her parents haven't come to retrieve her in over 45 minutes.

Hey, it's a free country. You can think and say what you want. Maybe "wrong" is not exactly the right word here....But I struggle to find a better word, and I can find none. It is wrong to see this video and fail to be scandalized by the image of cops handcuffing a little girl.

I AM scandalized. I'm scandalized that our country has come to the point that schools HAVE to have this policy or something like it to keep from being sued. I'm scandalized that parents don't give a shit about their kids that they don't give them the loving care and discipline (also called loving limits) that they need.

I'm scandalized that instead of the PARENTS being handcuffed for not doing THEIR job, (1) teaching Jaieesha proper behavior and (2) coming to pick her up when she's out of control, the FUCKED UP PARENTS are suing the cops for restraining their child, because the school can't, because of policies put in place because of parents like them!!!

Why aren't you pissed about that?????

Why aren't you pissed at the parents, Big???? They are the ROOT CAUSE of this whole situation. The PARENTS failed at not just one juncture, but TWO. And you're pissed at the teacher?????

Fuck THAT.

[Catwoman]

Teachers are in a unique position. They have full responsibility of the child during class time, essentially assuming the role of parent. However, while they are equally as responsible as the parent during this time, they do not have the same freedom of judgement or action that a parent has. It's like putting J-Lo naked in a snake tank, and asking her to do the same job as Steve Irwin with a 12 bore. Not all that fair.

Parents will (generally) know the best method of discipline for their child. Some chidren respond best to calming hugs or explanation. Others respond better to physical input - ie stronger restraining or spanking. Some don't need anything at all. The teacher will need to respond accurately to the situation and use her judgement to administer the appropriate discpline. This is hard enough without restrictions on spanking and physical contact.

The teacher in the video responded appalingly to the situation, for these reasons:

- She did not have the ability or insight to judge the situation. You can tell by the way she follows the child around, hangs about, and doesn't really do anything. She doesn't speak to her, not properly, and clearly doesn't have a clue what to do. I don't blame her for this; someone like her should never have been put in a position of authority. Good teachers 'sense' children, they are instinctive in their approach to tantrums or problems and have the ability to sooth, usually without any physical contact. You need to have natural authority, and be competent yourself if you expect the same rationality from your students, especially young children.

- She was restricted in what she could actually do by not being about to touch/restrain

In this sense that she was restricted, yes she technically did her job right, did what she was supposed to, what was acceptable. But she didn't go any further than this, just panicked, lost control and called for someone else. You don't need anyone else! One adult should be enough. Every kid plays up, she's not special needs nor is she any different to anyone else. It is fear and misinterpretation that caused this dilemma.

This is how I would have handled it, from the classroom:

1. Turned the video camera off, or at least put it down and pretended I'd turned it off. The girl is quite aware of its presence and looks into the lens a couple of times, clearly playing up to it.

2. Ignored her for a bit, to see if it's attention she's after or if she's just eaten too many sweets. Obviously you don't want the classroom destroyed so you'll have to intervene if she carries on. I'd simply take her by the hand, say 'come on, we're going' and move to another environment. I still wouldn't see a need to involve anyone else at this point. We move to maybe another classroom, or outside, just take her away from where she feels comfortable and where the outbreak started.

3. Try to engage her in conversation. Say 'have you been eating too many sweets today?' or 'Where's mummy today then' and just talk. This should hopefully settle her down.

4. If none of the above is achieved and she's punching and rattling like a catherine wheel, I would have failed and shouldn't be a teacher, and I'd hand my notice in.

It should never get to the stage of violence. It is possible to control it before it happens, but you do need incredible perception and people/child skills, which not many people have. If it does come to the point of a child throwing punches etc, restrain the overacting little brat! Teach them, don't pander to them.