I love responsible teenagers and their parents

Backroads · #1 (**permalink**) 06-08-2012, 04:50 PM

Saw this linked on Facebook. I'm somehow impressed by the fact that Fox considered it newsworthy.

Seniors Leave Fieldtrip on Train

Eowyn · #2 (**permalink**) 06-08-2012, 05:02 PM

Why would 17/18-year-old kids need a chaperone? What's magically going to happen between now and Fall when they're supposed to be on their own, going away to school?

Backroads · #3 (**permalink**) 06-08-2012, 05:13 PM

I thought 18-year-olds were... adults.

RipplecutBuddha · #4 (**permalink**) 06-08-2012, 05:21 PM

Because they were on a school associated trip, the school is accountable for their safety, health, etc. As such, Chaperones are used to monitor the students as they participate in an event off of school campus.

Most of the time, in such events, no troubles are encountered, but the point of the story is that the school has a legal obligation to provide for the safety of the students from the time they depart on the trip to the time they arrive home again. In this instance, no oversight was provided by the school on the return trip, and thus the school exposed itself to legal liability if anything had happened to the students on the train. It's not about what the students could have/would have done. It's all about what could have happened to the students that the school would have been immediately liable for.

beefche · #5 (**permalink**) 06-08-2012, 05:25 PM

Doesn't matter if they were 18. They were seniors in high school and on a school sponsored field trip. I would expect there to be chaperons. Further, I would think the school system would WANT chaperons to avoid lawsuits or something like this--the media jumping on a perceived offense.

Backroads · #6 (**permalink**) 06-08-2012, 05:57 PM

Yet the kids and parents signed a form. It would be interesting to see a copy of it to see if it mentions that chaperones were specifically included in the warning of being 'sent home'. For all we know, the school was under all rights to do what it did. This is a charter school, not always automatically under the same policies as a regular public school.

But what gets my goat is that the mother in the video was so upset at her school, yet seemed not upset at her kid for damaging property.

The way I see it, if the kid is old enough to purposefully damange someone's property, he's old enough to ride a freakin' train.

beefche · #7 (**permalink**) 06-08-2012, 06:16 PM

So, you are more upset by the fact that no one is talking about the kids damaging property? This isn't about chaperons?

Backroads · #8 (**permalink**) 06-08-2012, 07:37 PM

Sort of.

I get what you're saying about how the schools should have chaperones (I think it's silly to attempt a lawsuit when nothing happened, I doubt the school would get much more than a slap on the wrist if something was forced through, but it would behoove the school to provide chaperones). I get it from a legal perspective, but from a practical perspective I think a bunch of 18-year-olds are fine on a train.

My issue is the mother of an 18-year-old boy who according to her own words has never been anywhere without an adult bawling over the fact that something might have happened to him (when nothing did), even though he and his schoolmates knew the consequences (or should have known, from reading the paper they signed).

My issue is that instead of raising a kid who could function independently and responsibily without an adult present by the time he reached the age of adulthood, she constantly hovered over this kid. The moment he gets a bit of freedom, he causes chaos and faces the consequence. And she flips out that he was sent home on a perfectly safe form of transportation.

And then tells the media.

My issue is the at the story is about an uneventful train ride taken by ADULTS and tries to make them out at the same functional level as a third-grader.

In a way, it's a sign of our sue-happy society. It won't let 18-year-olds handle themselves.

applepansy · #9 (**permalink**) 06-08-2012, 08:12 PM

I'm glad they sent them home. The parent should be upset that her Senior High-age son caused damage. Good Grief!

ruthiechan · #10 (**permalink**) 06-10-2012, 12:07 AM

It looks to me that the class trip had chaperons but that the problem comes in when the kids who were sent home were sent home without a chaperon. But really, this is a stub article that does not really give you very much information to go on. Also 17 is NOT the legal age of an adult.