Inappropriate teacher interaction

[Macanudo 13012]

Someone may have pointed this out already but I'd be really reluctant to leave it up to the school/district to determine if this was illegal and warrants police involvement.   The district wantas this to go away quietly with as little publicity as possible while "trying" to make it right for your daughter.   These two things are not of equal concern to them and in opposite to what you want as a parent.

[Nice Guy Eddie 13523]

Dealing with the principal first does not prevent a parent from taking additional actions.

the OP is handling this correctly. the only part that I would add is that I would ensure the principal is aware that that I was planning to talk to other authorities next. Not as a threat to the principal but that he/she is aware that the parent would never allow this to be swept away.

 

[Nice Guy Eddie 13523]

19 hours ago, Texzilla58 said:

Male teachers in middle school and below give me the creeps.

bad take. Whatever gives you the creeps is whatever gives you the creeps but we need more male teachers in the younger grades.

Odds are higher that high school or even college teachers are acting inappropriately. Not in the lower grades.

[Dahobbs 17682]

5 hours ago, slorch said:

Profiling/ assuming the worst is wrong, correct?  or just in certain circumstances?  Want to have good administrators in our schools?  Trust has to start somewhere.  I'll be the first to support the fact that protecting my child comes in way above building trust with school administrators, but both are important, albeit different levels.

What I'm not clear on is why building the trust of school administrators in you as a parent matters. This isn't a hierarchal situation where an employee is going over the head of their immediate boss or a solder is going over the head of their superior. I don't think parents have any duty to their kid's principal and are not honor bound to wait for the principal to take actions.  As a parent, I would absolutely take this to multiple levels of authority simultaneously. I really wouldn't care if it upset the principal in someway. The principal needs to convince me to trust him/her, not the other way around.  

[Mullet Free 40]

45 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

What I'm not clear on is why building the trust of school administrators in you as a parent matters. This isn't a hierarchal situation where an employee is going over the head of their immediate boss or a solder is going over the head of their superior. I don't think parents have any duty to their kid's principal and are not honor bound to wait for the principal to take actions.  As a parent, I would absolutely take this to multiple levels of authority simultaneously. I really wouldn't care if it upset the principal in someway. The principal needs to convince me to trust him/her, not the other way around.  

Agreed. My oldest is in 8th grade so we’ve had this principal for 3 years. All communication and school functions have been very professionally managed. That’s why we thought it was the right place to start. 
 

1 hour ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Dealing with the principal first does not prevent a parent from taking additional actions.

the OP is handling this correctly. the only part that I would add is that I would ensure the principal is aware that that I was planning to talk to other authorities next. Not as a threat to the principal but that he/she is aware that the parent would never allow this to be swept away.

 

when we spoke last I asked if the on campus officer was aware of case or involved. That’s when I was told that district HR makes the determination if police need to be involved. Not the best answer I’d like to hear, but he knows we’re tracking that angle. 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Dahobbs said:

What I'm not clear on is why building the trust of school administrators in you as a parent matters. This isn't a hierarchal situation where an employee is going over the head of their immediate boss or a solder is going over the head of their superior. I don't think parents have any duty to their kid's principal and are not honor bound to wait for the principal to take actions.  As a parent, I would absolutely take this to multiple levels of authority simultaneously. I really wouldn't care if it upset the principal in someway. The principal needs to convince me to trust him/her, not the other way around.  

Oh I don’t know…maybe as a parent actively involved in my child’s education, I might have already engaged the principal beyond just knowing who they are, and beyond this singular issue.  Secondly, and much more importantly, it’s the base level of contact for the community.  Evidently it doesn’t matter to you.  For me, it does.

Going over their head might get your ego a trip, but bottom line is that the principal will still be the one initiating/ administering the investigation.  Maybe I’m a bit more confidant or respectful  than you… not my problem.  That’s the community I which I choose to live.

Edited April 25, 2023 by slorch

[Mullet Free 40]

5 minutes ago, slorch said:

Oh I don’t know…maybe as a parent actively involved in my child’s education, I might have already engaged the principal beyond just knowing who they are, and beyond this singular issue.  Secondly, and much more importantly, it’s the base level of contact for the community.  Evidently it doesn’t matter to you.  For me, it does.

Going over their head might get your ego a trip, but bottom line is that the principal will still be the one initiating/ administering the investigation.  Maybe I’m a bit more confidant or respectful  than you… not my problem.  That’s the community I which I choose to live.

There is a small town angle to this. The principal’s wife is a teacher at the elementary. The schools aren’t mega sized. It’s a decent sized school district but the schools we feed into service a smaller community. 

[Texzilla58 4744]

I’m with OP in how he is managing it.

These creeps often work in compartmentalized groups to work multiple victims. He cultivated relationships with the daughter and other girls, and then culled the one he felt vulnerable. If he did the same with her friends as well the jealousies make discovery more probable. It’s highly likely he has other groups of girls he’s working as well, maybe as a church youth assistant, summer softball coach, whatever.

As for the cops, it’s not about whether it’s an arrestable crime. It’s a clue about possible deviant behavior that might warrant some investigation into his background. Maybe there are other actual crimes or complaints tied to this guy. Maybe he has moved around a bit to cover his tracks.

And You’re Hot is not a compliment like That’s a pretty dress. Especially coming from an adult onto a 12 year old girl. It’s creepy predatory behavior. No doubt in my mind he has done this prior in some manner.

Good luck OP and thank you for sharing. I have three granddaughters 8, 5, and 4 and this kind of shit scares me to death as they grow up. The 8 year old is so trusting and naive.

[Dahobbs 17682]

14 minutes ago, Mullet Free said:

Agreed. My oldest is in 8th grade so we’ve had this principal for 3 years. All communication and school functions have been very professionally managed. That’s why we thought it was the right place to start. 

Just to be clear, my post wasn't at all meant to be critical of your decision. I completely understand being concerned about how the aftermath of allegations or police interaction could affect your child. 

4 minutes ago, slorch said:

Oh I don’t know…maybe as a parent actively involved in my child’s education, I might have already engaged the principal beyond just knowing who they are, and beyond this singular issue.  Secondly, and much more importantly, it’s the base level of contact for the community.  Evidently it doesn’t matter to you.  For me, it does.

I have no idea what the "base level of contact for the community" means or why it matters to you (or apparently doesn't matter to me). 

Quote

Going over their head might get your ego a trip, but bottom line is that the principal will still be the one initiating/ administering the investigation.  

Ego trip? What are you talking about? 

Quote

Maybe I’m a bit more confidant or respectful  than you… not my problem.  That’s the community I which I choose to live.

1) I'm confident that the bold is incorrect. More importantly though, you have confidence in what? Yourself? The principal? The system? Even if I have confidence in something, it doesn't mean I don't want a backup just in case. 

2) And this was really my core point, respectful of what? How is it disrespectful to report this to as many people at different levels as possible? Arguably, if you're concerned about being "respectful," shouldn't you first try to address it with the creeper teacher rather than principal? Does anyone think that is a good idea? 

[closetohumping 17470]

Beyond inappropriate.  I'd exhaust resources to make sure this dude gets busted.

[Nice Guy Eddie 13523]

On 4/24/2023 at 11:33 AM, Mullet Free said:

Here’s the profile change. Before with his real name. 
 

 

And after. 
 

 

 

Is this Snap Chat? Why is a 12 year old on snap chat or using an app that looks to be connected to Snap Chat, and one that is referencing Instagram? you can call it a "kids chat" app but it looks like it wants the user to also be on platforms that require you to be 13+, and frankly you should be much older before you use those apps. 

As much as bad behavior by the teacher is 100% on the teacher, I would be questioning why a kid is on an app where apparently it's easy for them to interact with adults.

[closetohumping 17470]

40 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Is this Snap Chat? Why is a 12 year old on snap chat or using an app that looks to be connected to Snap Chat, and one that is referencing Instagram? you can call it a "kids chat" app but it looks like it wants the user to also be on platforms that require you to be 13+, and frankly you should be much older before you use those apps. 

As much as bad behavior by the teacher is 100% on the teacher, I would be questioning why a kid is on an app where apparently it's easy for them to interact with adults.

Posted in another thread, but I get a lot of nude pics from women on snapchat.  Definitely not a place for kids.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Dahobbs said:

Just to be clear, my post wasn't at all meant to be critical of your decision. I completely understand being concerned about how the aftermath of allegations or police interaction could affect your child. 

I have no idea what the "base level of contact for the community" means or why it matters to you (or apparently doesn't matter to me). 

Ego trip? What are you talking about? 

1) I'm confident that the bold is incorrect. More importantly though, you have confidence in what? Yourself? The principal? The system? Even if I have confidence in something, it doesn't mean I don't want a backup just in case. 

2) And this was really my core point, respectful of what? How is it disrespectful to report this to as many people at different levels as possible? Arguably, if you're concerned about being "respectful," shouldn't you first try to address it with the creeper teacher rather than principal? Does anyone think that is a good idea? 

You are arguing over a power trip.  Go be you.  That's why our schools and communities are broken, among other reasons.

The Principal is the teacher's direct manager. He/she owns the initial response regardless.  Your skipping steps just makes you feel good.Same process will still ensue.

Edited April 25, 2023 by slorch

[Mullet Free 40]

51 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Is this Snap Chat? Why is a 12 year old on snap chat or using an app that looks to be connected to Snap Chat, and one that is referencing Instagram? you can call it a "kids chat" app but it looks like it wants the user to also be on platforms that require you to be 13+, and frankly you should be much older before you use those apps. 

As much as bad behavior by the teacher is 100% on the teacher, I would be questioning why a kid is on an app where apparently it's easy for them to interact with adults.

It’s not Snapchat. It’s some app called SendIt that I hadn’t heard of until Sunday. We’ve never allowed her to have Snapchat for reasons discussed earlier. 
 

As for other apps, I’ll just say isolating your kids from all electronic communication is a noble goal, but impractical. When they start traveling for sports or stay late for practices etc it’s pretty easy to justify them having a phone for communication. Then once all their friends all also on social media like instagram or TikTok it’s hard to keep them off. You have to essentially isolate them from peers. Maybe that’s a good thing. Idk. We went with allowing some of it, but closely monitoring all their communication on the apps. You can put up certain safeguards that appear to deter some of this bad contact. On her insta it says parent monitored on the profile. You approve who follows her etc.  we limit her screen time where the phone will make the apps unavailable after a certain amount of use daily or a certain time of day.  
 

No perfect answers. If you don’t have kids or teenagers specifically you probably underestimate the role it plays in their lives and the trickiness of keeping it under wraps. For example, new apps pop up that you’ve never heard of. 

[Dahobbs 17682]

10 minutes ago, slorch said:

You are arguing over a power trip.  Go be you.  That's why our schools and communities are broken, among other reasons.

The Principal is the teacher's direct manager. He/she owns the initial response regardless.  Your skipping steps just makes you feel good.Same process will still ensue.

Again, power trip? I have no idea what you're talking about. Reporting something to the police doesn't have anything to do with a power trip. This is just such an odd take, and I have no idea why you're being a dick to me about it. But maybe it has something to do with bootstraps.

As to your last sentence, given that we have had plenty of instances of schools and other institutions hiding bad conduct, I absolutely believe reporting this up as many levels as possible is reasonable thing to do. If you have a relationship with your principal and trust them to do the right thing, great. But I don't think there is anything disrespectful about approaching the problem from multiple levels. Also, I think your take on the initial response isn't always correct. Often times the initial person in charge of investigating something like this isn't the direct supervisor, but rather an independent party. This is the same reason cops have internal affairs and the government as an independent accountability office. Finally, think of how many parents felt they were doing the respectful thing by reporting abuse to the supervisor of a priest or boy scouts troop only for everything to be covered up. Reporting bad conduct as many times, in as many ways, and to as many people as possible is the surest way to make sure it is handled correctly.  

[TexasEd 8077]

On 4/23/2023 at 10:00 PM, Bevo said:

I see the problem: Tell her to respond, "You're".

negged for the cycle

On 4/24/2023 at 1:09 PM, Bevo said:

wrong thread

pos repped here and another to make up for it

[Bevo 13601]

4 minutes ago, TexasEd said:

negged for the cycle

pos repped here and another to make up for it

Thank you. I've been waiting for this moment my entire life.

[TwiceHorn 31536]

Again, I think Mullet is handling this very well.

I agree that giving the principal the opportunity to handle it is the right thing to do, with appropriate attention should it not get handled.  Otherwise, you may be falling victim to a media-induced moral panic about things like this getting swept under the rug.  Sure, it happens, but like slorch says, not everyone is Joe Paterno or Art Briles.  We have plenty of stories on a thread here of school admins acting swiftly and decisively in this type of case, and much worse.

I get it, it's your kid, so there's a tendency to freak the fuck out.  But kudos to Mullet for insuring his child's safety, both from the adult threat and from other threats, primarily.  It's a very rational approach.

[Mullet Free 40]

Just got my afternoon update. The principal let me know he will never set foot on campus again. I asked about any legal ramifications and he said the same line that the investigation was in district HR hands. He said he wasn’t able to legally share anything that they had uncovered but he wanted to let me know he will never be employed by our school district again. So he got shitcanned in less than 48 hours with minimal fuss at the school. I’ll take it.
 

I’ll probably call the school district in a couple weeks just to poke around. Maybe just ask, “Is the investigation complete?” Though I suppose if they really find something else the cops will get in touch with us. 

Edited April 25, 2023 by Mullet Free

[MonkeyDoughnut 10356]

19 minutes ago, Mullet Free said:

Just got my afternoon update. The principal let me know he will never set foot on campus again. I asked about any legal ramifications and he said the same line that the investigation was in district HR hands. He said he wasn’t able to legally share anything that they had uncovered but he wanted to let me know he will never be employed by our school district again. So he got shitcanned in less than 48 hours with minimal fuss at the school. I’ll take it.
 

I’ll probably call the school district in a couple weeks just to poke around. Maybe just ask, “Is the investigation complete?” Though I suppose if they really find something else the cops will get in touch with us. 

Well done.  If you can plan to check this site next August : https://tea.texas.gov/texas-educators/investigations/do-not-hire-registry   you can continue to help the next person.  Let district HR know that you will be expecting the teachers name on that list and if you don't find it you will be back.

When districts decide there isn't enough clear evidence of wrongdoing they often just push them on to a nearby district. They don't grasp that the other district did the same thing and they just swapped problems.

[HornOnTheBayou 8946]

Nice work, @Mullet Free. And like others have said, you handled this amazingly well. Father of the Year!

[Mullet Free 40]

8 minutes ago, MonkeyDoughnut said:

Well done.  If you can plan to check this site next August : https://tea.texas.gov/texas-educators/investigations/do-not-hire-registry   you can continue to help the next person.  Let district HR know that you will be expecting the teachers name on that list and if you don't find it you will be back.

When districts decide there isn't enough clear evidence of wrongdoing they often just push them on to a nearby district. They don't grasp that the other district did the same thing and they just swapped problems.

Wow this is a great idea. I will definitely follow up this way. 
 

8 minutes ago, HornOnTheBayou said:

Nice work, @Mullet Free. And like others have said, you handled this amazingly well. Father of the Year!

cheers. My borderline Asperger’s helps in stressful situations like these. Having an awesome wife is a huge help as well.
 

Thanks again to everyone here for all the input. Especially the people who normally aren’t my biggest fans. 😂 🫡 

[Baboontyme 2824]

Nice job mullet. F the haters. Hope everything stays cool in your daughter's social circle. 

[closetohumping 17470]

1 hour ago, Mullet Free said:

Just got my afternoon update. The principal let me know he will never set foot on campus again. I asked about any legal ramifications and he said the same line that the investigation was in district HR hands. He said he wasn’t able to legally share anything that they had uncovered but he wanted to let me know he will never be employed by our school district again. So he got shitcanned in less than 48 hours with minimal fuss at the school. I’ll take it.
 

I’ll probably call the school district in a couple weeks just to poke around. Maybe just ask, “Is the investigation complete?” Though I suppose if they really find something else the cops will get in touch with us. 

[Guest]

@Mullet Free Glad it worked out.  Stay vigilant. Hopefully your daughter never hears from el Creepo again.  

[Helobious 9464]

7 hours ago, Mullet Free said:

It’s not Snapchat. It’s some app called SendIt that I hadn’t heard of until Sunday. We’ve never allowed her to have Snapchat for reasons discussed earlier. 
 

As for other apps, I’ll just say isolating your kids from all electronic communication is a noble goal, but impractical. When they start traveling for sports or stay late for practices etc it’s pretty easy to justify them having a phone for communication. Then once all their friends all also on social media like instagram or TikTok it’s hard to keep them off. You have to essentially isolate them from peers. Maybe that’s a good thing. Idk. We went with allowing some of it, but closely monitoring all their communication on the apps. You can put up certain safeguards that appear to deter some of this bad contact. On her insta it says parent monitored on the profile. You approve who follows her etc.  we limit her screen time where the phone will make the apps unavailable after a certain amount of use daily or a certain time of day.  
 

No perfect answers. If you don’t have kids or teenagers specifically you probably underestimate the role it plays in their lives and the trickiness of keeping it under wraps. For example, new apps pop up that you’ve never heard of. 

SendIt is an offshoot of Snapchat and if I’m not mistaken it has to be tied to a Snapchat profile to be used. Ghost icon in your screenshot should’ve told you. 

[Mullet Free 40]

13 minutes ago, Helobious said:

SendIt is an offshoot of Snapchat and if I’m not mistaken it has to be tied to a Snapchat profile to be used. Ghost icon in your screenshot should’ve told you. 

Ah ok. That makes sense. She must’ve used the Snapchat account she set up a while back to sign up. Made her delete the app but I guess the account is still active. She is always mad that we don’t let her use it. Evidently kids love it. 

[conVINCEd 21469]

2 hours ago, Mullet Free said:

Ah ok. That makes sense. She must’ve used the Snapchat account she set up a while back to sign up. Made her delete the app but I guess the account is still active. She is always mad that we don’t let her use it. Evidently kids love it. 

It’s ok if your kids are mad at you every now and then.  You behaved like a reasonable and concerned father here.  If you would like to be an irrational father, there are probably a few posters who could help you out with that.  @YGIFS

[harpercollins 394]

tangentially related rant

I just want to know when people are going to wake up and stop giving little kids smartphones and social media.

Look at the research. Your kid (especially your daughters) is not some special super kid immune to these very real, very present dangers. The cognitive bias at play in that decision is beyond disturbing.

[Texzilla58 4744]

I think OP and wife are managing the creep situation very well, and they seem to be going well beyond most parents in managing the smartphone. The only truly bad thing about screens that impact all kids is blue light, which has a number of issues on young eyes because they haven’t got a filter for it until they are 12-15. So get a ZAGG InvisibleShield VisionGuard screen protector which filters blue light with out fuckibg up the image.

A smartphone is a tool. Just like TV, an electric guitar, a car at 16, a bicycle. It can be good or bad, usually some of both. You have to teach your kids vigilance online just as you do at the mall or at a neighbors or at school. Set limits and hold the line. I know I would have liked my son having a phone when I could track his location, could text him at times, could call and let him know where I was when picking him up. My 8 year old granddaughter is begging for one and it will probably be a 11-12 timeframe according to the parents. I know my wife wants her to have one so she can FaceTime her.

[4th and 5 4915]

On 4/24/2023 at 4:24 PM, immamac said:

GROOMING IS LITERALLY AGAINST THE LAW YOU DENSE FUCK

On 4/24/2023 at 4:29 PM, immamac said:

https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs/PE/htm/PE.21.htm

BUT GROOMING ISN'T A CRIME LOLOLOLOL

On 4/24/2023 at 4:33 PM, immamac said:

I'm out, fuck this nonsense. 

 

Your hot.

[Guest]

6 hours ago, harpercollins said:

tangentially related rant

I just want to know when people are going to wake up and stop giving little kids smartphones and social media.

Look at the research. Your kid (especially your daughters) is not some special super kid immune to these very real, very present dangers. The cognitive bias at play in that decision is beyond disturbing.

So...age 12 is not old enough?

Seems pretty damned reasonable to me.

Could just move to a log cabin and never talk to anyone.  That'd be normal and safe.

[Deej 76922]

What's wrong with a non-smart phone? I always hear, "A phone allows my child and I to stay in contact." A flip phone would accomplish the same thing. 

[Your Mom 4852]

I think the OP’s parenting method pretty much worked to perfection. Kid gets the phone, some social media accounts, but with heavy restrictions and mom and dad, check it all out every night.  When danger showed up, they found it immediately.  
This is not an example of why kids shouldn’t have smart phones, quite the opposite. It’s an example of how to handle it when your kids do get smart phones.  

[Your Mom 4852]

5 minutes ago, Deej said:

What's wrong with a non-smart phone? I always hear, "A phone allows my child and I to stay in contact." A flip phone would accomplish the same thing. 

I wouldn’t blame a parent for getting the kid a flip phone, but I travel a lot for work and FaceTime is a very important part of our nightly ritual. It’s also nice tracking their location when necessary.  Plus the memes my kids send me are way funnier than the ones I find here.  
not to mention that if I gave my kids a flip phone, they’d throw it straight in the garbage as it’s completely useless for them.  Mom and dad might think it’s fine for the kids to just text and call therr friends, but their friends do not agree, are not going to be returning those phone calls and texts. Texting and phone calls just doesn’t happen anymore, at least in my kids circles. 

Edited April 26, 2023 by Your Mom

[Gene Parmesan 4014]

5 minutes ago, Deej said:

What's wrong with a non-smart phone? I always hear, "A phone allows my child and I to stay in contact." A flip phone would accomplish the same thing. 

Nothing, but parents don't give their kids smart phones to be able to contact them.  They get them smart phones because that's what the kid wants for social status.  

[harpercollins 394]

So...age 12 is not old enough?
Seems pretty damned reasonable to me.
Could just move to a log cabin and never talk to anyone.  That'd be normal and safe.

No. 12 is not nearly old enough.

It’s not about sheltering your kids from the real world. It’s about allowing them to live in the real world and not a virtual one.

Take a close look at what CTOs and CIOs are doing with their own children.

(It was a tangential rant, and I’m not calling out OP for the situation he’s in. It’s not the smartphone’s fault. Ease of access is definitely a factor though.)

[Guest]

Balance in everything.

Electronics and social media are not inherently bad.  Hell,  teachers/ coaches/ etc shouldn’t be hurting our fucking kids either. 

 

[harpercollins 394]

Balance in everything.
Electronics and social media are not inherently bad.  Hell,  teachers/ coaches/ etc shouldn’t be hurting our fucking kids either. 
 

I’d really like to know one teacher, principal, practicing physician, or therapist who thinks social media use is beneficial for a middle schooler’s developing brain.

Some weaker-willed may allow it, but I don’t know anyone in those categories who thinks it’s beneficial. Truly, this is as close to a consensus in these circles as could possibly exist.

[Guest]

sometimes their friends get a vote.

\Sometimes they don't

When my boys were in their teens, i was the one who said their friends didn't make a fuck.   father's privilege.

Edited April 27, 2023 by slorch

[MonkeyDoughnut 10356]

Social media is the problem, not a kid having a smartphone. Don't think that because you haven't gotten your kid a smartphone yet that they aren't all over social media.

Pro of you not giving them their own smartphone is it makes it slightly harder for them to consume. Con is you can't monitor it as closely and they will hide their interactions on it from you.

Plenty of their friends will have old phones, tablets, handheld game systems etc for your kid to use at school and/or at home to get their social media fix. All they need is an open wifi connection.

[Lat22 4017]

13 hours ago, MonkeyDoughnut said:

Social media is the problem

Yep, and that ship has sailed.  Never to return.

[Baboontyme 2824]

It depends on the kid as well. My 13 yo (boy) asked if he could get Snapchat. We monitor his phone daily and honestly he really has very little use for his it other than watching you tube videos about how to get abs or Arthur Morgan. He just doesn't care. I love it about him. He is social and well liked without caring about those things or trying to fit in. He's just him, a dumb boy who wrestles with his friends during the school assembly and gets lunch detention.

My 10 yo (girl) will be lucky if I let her access anything other than Google location services on her phone until she graduates college. She takes selfies with duck lips on my wife's phone and loves the attention she gets at school. I fight with her weekly about what she tries to wear to school. 4th fucking grade.

[Mullet Free 40]

23 hours ago, Deej said:

What's wrong with a non-smart phone? I always hear, "A phone allows my child and I to stay in contact." A flip phone would accomplish the same thing. 

Ok, boomer.

21 hours ago, harpercollins said:

Take a close look at what CTOs and CIOs are doing with their own children.

Well, they also have hot Swiss Au Pairs to actually raise their kids.

 

19 hours ago, harpercollins said:

I’d really like to know one teacher, principal, practicing physician, or therapist who thinks social media use is beneficial for a middle schooler’s developing brain.

Some weaker-willed may allow it, but I don’t know anyone in those categories who thinks it’s beneficial. Truly, this is as close to a consensus in these circles as could possibly exist.

I hear you, but how beneficial is it to have your kids socially isolated from all their peers at your repeated, dogged insistence?

Also, would any of those people say playing video games is beneficial for their brains? Probably not, but we all did that in the 80s and 90s and they still do it today.

If you have kids Harper, I applaud your goal of a isolated, spartan existence for them. They'll probably turn out great. I imagine as soon as they're out of the house they'll get social media accounts and smartphones all the same. They might even become obsessed and go crazy, like old school sheltered kids that get out and just start drinking and fucking like crazy.

 

1 hour ago, Baboontyme said:

It depends on the kid as well. My 13 yo (boy) asked if he could get Snapchat. We monitor his phone daily and honestly he really has very little use for his it other than watching you tube videos about how to get abs or Arthur Morgan. He just doesn't care. I love it about him. He is social and well liked without caring about those things or trying to fit in. He's just him, a dumb boy who wrestles with his friends during the school assembly and gets lunch detention.

My 10 yo (girl) will be lucky if I let her access anything other than Google location services on her phone until she graduates college. She takes selfies with duck lips on my wife's phone and loves the attention she gets at school. I fight with her weekly about what she tries to wear to school. 4th fucking grade.

Yeah my 14 year old son is much less social. He has no such accounts despite having a smartphone from about the same age. His big thing is playing xbox online with friends.

[Deej 76922]

10 minutes ago, Mullet Free said:

Also, would any of those people say playing video games is beneficial for their brains? Probably not, but we all did that in the 80s

Our asses got pushed outside to go fuck around, our new Atari 2600 be damned. We were pretty happy when it was actually raining hard enough to come back in the house. 

[harpercollins 394]

1 hour ago, Mullet Free said:

I hear you, but how beneficial is it to have your kids socially isolated from all their peers at your repeated, dogged insistence?

If you have kids Harper, I applaud your goal of a isolated, spartan existence for them. They'll probably turn out great. I imagine as soon as they're out of the house they'll get social media accounts and smartphones all the same. They might even become obsessed and go crazy, like old school sheltered kids that get out and just start drinking and fucking like crazy.

This is a really good example of an absurdly false dilemma. The only two options available are smartphones with social media at 12 or complete social isolation? 

 

1 hour ago, Mullet Free said:

Also, would any of those people say playing video games is beneficial for their brains? Probably not, but we all did that in the 80s and 90s and they still do it today.

No, not remotely to the same extent. That's one of the theories about why girls are especially damaged by the smartphone age. Girls have higher participation rates in social media (which I would liken to poison for a developing brain), and boys have higher participation rates in video games (less harmful). 

This is kind of the point of my original post. In my experience, parents who permit young children on social media are victims of some pretty serious cognitive distortions about the benefits and detriments that decision brings. I'm sorry that I posted my little rant on a good thread about your very upsetting situation. It was not intended to be pointed. You're a good parent obviously well-connected with your daughter and her relationships, and I did not intend to insinuate anything otherwise. 

[dcbc 14509]

OP, I'm sure you got this handled.  But just approach it with the notion that the principal is to a certain extent, working for you, and to a potentially larger extent, engaging in CYA for himself, the school, the district, etc.  I went to a small, private school and this sort of things happened a couple of times.  It was generally known and was pretty quickly uncovered.  The offending teachers were fired, but the school never acknowledged anything, and the cops never were involved.  They didn't acknowledge it for nearly 30 years (the sent a mass email acknowledgement to the alumni base).

[Rimbo 26112]

in related news, rip Jerry Springer

[52-80 19246]

On 4/24/2023 at 6:31 PM, Da Fino said:

Out of curiosity and for future reference for when my own kids have phones, how did you catch this and what app was it on? 

^^^ found the guy

[Mullet Free 40]

Got some good news on a couple fronts yesterday. 
 

My wife had lunch with her friend that has kids the same age as our two oldest (8th and 6th). The mom started saying hey did you know Coach X? He always gave me the creeps because XYZ. Well, the athletic director showed up at baseball practice and said he was now coaching the team and that Coach X would not be returning. I wonder what happened?

 

She had also asked a couple teachers and no one seemed to know. 
 

My wife later drove my daughter and two friends to volleyball practice. The other girls were talking about how Coach was there Monday morning, but he was gone by lunch. They heard rumors he had a death in his family. My daughter played along. Looks all good there.