Reply to given new, later, start time, can I drop my 4th grader at the (closed) door at 8:30?

Forum Index » Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS)

Reply to "given new, later, start time, can I drop my 4th grader at the (closed) door at 8:30?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]

[b]Because then there's no argument that the children are there for school-related activities that the school is liable for. [/b]If the grounds are kept in an unsafe condition and someone gets hurt because a piece of playground equipment breaks, sure, there might be a case. But the school doesn't become responsible if another neighborhood child assaults your child. If people are dropping unsupervised children off in front of the school to wait for the doors to open and the school does nothing to ban it, then the children arguably are there for school-related activities (i.e., waiting for school to start) and the school system becomes liable for a whole bunch of things like kids fighting under a failure to supervise theory -- they permitted kids to hang out there before school started, but then didn't put a responsible adult out there to monitor them. I'm sure your school always has staff members positioned outside the school during official drop-off and pick-up, and this is one of the primary reasons -- so they can supervise the kids and make sure no one is getting into trouble.[/quote]

But that wouldn't apply to children (who are not in the after care) using the playground after school, so it still doesn't explain exclusive playground use by the after care.

Could you please tell me more about the "failure to supervise" theory? Why would the school be expected to supervise 9-year-olds waiting outside school for school to start, especially after the school has made it clear that the school will not do so? And is this "failure to supervise" theory as applied to schools something that has only come up in the last 30 years? Before then, it was routine for elementary-school students to wait outside school for school to start.[/quote]

Exclusive use of the playground is something an aftercare provider would probably require from the school in the contract. They don't want to risk being sued because children they had no control over were creating dangerous situations on the playground while the aftercare kids were out there.

On the "failure to supervise" thing, that's a general umbrella for a lot of different causes of action (I'd need to get really into MD education law to put a more precise term to it). The notion is that when the school invites children onto the property for any kind of school-related activity, it is responsible for making sure that those children are safe during that time. Kids waiting for school to start is very arguably a school-related activity, since it's not like everyone can show up the moment the bell rings and be instantly transported into their seats. They need time to walk across school property, get inside, get to their classrooms etc., and if they don't want to be late, odds are there's going to be a few minutes of wait time somewhere (whether outside, in the hallways, or in the classroom) before the bell actually rings. If children are invited to wait on school property for school to start and the school does not provide staff to supervise those children, then it can be liable for failure to supervise -- it failed in its duty to make sure children are safe on school grounds during school-related activities. Therefore, the school needs to be very clear with children and parents about when they are and are not invited to wait on school property, to make sure it's only during times when staff are available to supervise. If they announce that school opens at a certain time and then simply look the other way on people waiting outside before then, the kids could still be construed as invitees because they school knew they were there for a school-related reason and did nothing to prevent it. In order to avoid liability, the school needs to take measures to make very explicit that kids are not invited to wait on school property at that time and to prevent kids from doing it, such as by contacting parents to come get their kids when they're found waiting on school grounds.

As for when the doctrine developed, I couldn't tell you when, but I'm fairly certain it's older than 30 years ago. 30 years ago, though, people weren't making claims against schools at nearly the same rate for not protecting their children from bullying, or because Billy punched him, or he fell while climbing a tree and broke his arm, so it wasn't really a risk that schools needed to contend with and minimize. As we've become more litigious as a society, lots of organizations, not just schools systems, have had to take extra steps beyond what they used to in order to protect themselves from lawsuits. It doesn't make sense from the school's standpoint to sit back and wait for something bad to happen and then see what the courts say when it's very easy for them to set out a clear rule that parents/kids can't do this, and then enforce it. It's pretty fundamental risk management.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics