- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: With Disney dying on a hill for the LGBTQ+abcdlmnop people, is Universal making bank?
Posted on 4/21/22 at 9:46 am to BluegrassBelle
Posted on 4/21/22 at 9:46 am to BluegrassBelle
So you need the services defined now? Reporting abuse is required by law. That’s not some extra service they’re providing that a parent can opt out of. “Please don’t listen to my kid when he says I raped him” isn’t what’s happening as a result of this law.
1
Posted on 4/21/22 at 9:46 am to ell_13
quote:
Y’all are so dumb. Just ignoring what the law says. Counseling and guidance SERVICE is opted out. They can’t provide their own opinions on matters to the student but they can escalate as needed when approached regarding abuse. Ffs.
I guarantee you a parent will interpret that as seeing a counselor and will push the issue. The bill’s language is vague enough to allow that.
Posted on 4/21/22 at 9:47 am to Oilfieldbiology
quote:All three of those individuals are OBLIGATED reporters.
Because it certainly won’t be a teacher, Administator, or counselor with the child’s best interest at heart.
Even if, and it is a massive if, the student is completely barred from speaking to the counselor, both administrators and teachers are obligated to report abuse.
Obligated.
If they have the child’s best interest at heart, they would have zero issues reporting.
They can even go to the guidance counselor and ask for assistance with reporting, although it isn’t hard to do.
This post was edited on 4/21/22 at 9:49 am
Posted on 4/21/22 at 9:47 am to TDTOM
quote:
What is going to stop a kid from walking up to a counselor and telling them something?
Nothing. Just progs being progs. Manipulating, stating things factually incorrect and being protective of tParty.
Posted on 4/21/22 at 9:48 am to ell_13
Here's the scenario I'm guessing Pride and Belle are focused on -
A 6 year old tells the teacher he wants to talk to the counselor but doesn't tell her why. He wants to talk about dad hitting him. The counselor checks his records and sees his parent opted out, and can't meet with him. So the boy keeps it in and doesn't get help.
Now, maybe the boy tells someone else anyway. Maybe the teacher. Maybe the counselor meets with him but can't provide guidance, and can only hear him out, and the reporting duty is triggered all the same.
I get the narrow concern here, as unrealistic as I think it largely is. But again, my question is how do you let healthy families opt out from having their adolescent talk to someone you don't think has any business guiding your child, without this being a ramification? I'm all ears.
And, I'd note that if the entire community hadn't become obsessed with gender and sexuality issues, and universally and uniformly demonized parents who disagree with their profession's activist positions, this wouldn't be an issue. "Sure, we've completely corrupted ourselves, but by you trying to keep that away from your children you're going to leave us unable to get help for abused kids!" It's parenting blackmail, and that's intentional.
A 6 year old tells the teacher he wants to talk to the counselor but doesn't tell her why. He wants to talk about dad hitting him. The counselor checks his records and sees his parent opted out, and can't meet with him. So the boy keeps it in and doesn't get help.
Now, maybe the boy tells someone else anyway. Maybe the teacher. Maybe the counselor meets with him but can't provide guidance, and can only hear him out, and the reporting duty is triggered all the same.
I get the narrow concern here, as unrealistic as I think it largely is. But again, my question is how do you let healthy families opt out from having their adolescent talk to someone you don't think has any business guiding your child, without this being a ramification? I'm all ears.
And, I'd note that if the entire community hadn't become obsessed with gender and sexuality issues, and universally and uniformly demonized parents who disagree with their profession's activist positions, this wouldn't be an issue. "Sure, we've completely corrupted ourselves, but by you trying to keep that away from your children you're going to leave us unable to get help for abused kids!" It's parenting blackmail, and that's intentional.
Posted on 4/21/22 at 9:49 am to BluegrassBelle
quote:
I guarantee you a parent will interpret that as seeing a counselor and will push the issue.
Oh shite. Some parent will push it so it's gotta be a bad law.
Posted on 4/21/22 at 9:49 am to BluegrassBelle
Then let him push the issue with all the other problems he’ll be dealing with if he’s been reported for abuse. That’s his problem. Try and fight in court against a school admin who said he was told about abuse. Every state has a law requiring that report regardless of how it’s obtained.
Posted on 4/21/22 at 9:49 am to ell_13
quote:
So you need the services defined now? Reporting abuse is required by law. That’s not some extra service they’re providing that a parent can opt out of. “Please don’t listen to my kid when he says I raped him” isn’t what’s happening as a result of this law.
Again, vague language of the law.
Schools may have to report their guidance services (seeing a counselor for any reason) as a “service” to CYA on this bill. If a parent says no I don’t want my child to see the counselor, then that counselor opens themselves up to whatever mechanisms are in the bill to address them acting against consent if a child asks to see them.
Not the same as a kid randomly walking up and saying I’m being abused (which generally doesn’t happen).
I’ve seen school staff gone after for less and sued.
Posted on 4/21/22 at 9:50 am to Scruffy
quote:
Obligated
Which makes the whole “This Will stop the reporting of abuse” argument null and void.
Reporting o go abuse isn’t a service, it’s a requirement.
Posted on 4/21/22 at 9:51 am to Pettifogger
quote:This is exactly what I’m referring to. And I don’t think it’s exactly a “wildly rare scenario”
A 6 year old tells the teacher he wants to talk to the counselor but doesn't tell her why. He wants to talk about dad hitting him. The counselor checks his records and sees his parent opted out, and can't meet with him. So the boy keeps it in and doesn't get help.
Posted on 4/21/22 at 9:52 am to BluegrassBelle
So if the counselor listens to a kid that reports abuse, he broke this law according to you? That’s your interpretation? Seriously?
Posted on 4/21/22 at 9:52 am to lsupride87
quote:
And I don’t think it’s exactly a “wildly rare scenario”
Ok. How often does it happen?
Posted on 4/21/22 at 9:52 am to lsupride87
quote:
And I don’t think it’s exactly a “wildly rare scenario”
Of course you don't
Posted on 4/21/22 at 9:52 am to roadGator
quote:I don’t know. You tell me?
Ok. How often does it happen?
Posted on 4/21/22 at 9:53 am to Pettifogger
quote:
I get the narrow concern here, as unrealistic as I think it largely is.
You’re correct. I just don’t think it’s as unrealistic given experience of working in a school and now a therapist.
Another scenario could be a teacher notices changes in a kid’s behavior and wants to report them to a school counselor for further investigation. But the parent has opt-ed out. The teacher doesn’t have enough on behavior change alone to file a CHFS report. That kid then falls through the cracks.
Posted on 4/21/22 at 9:54 am to ell_13
The argument being made against this section of the law has morphed into a debate whether “a counselor listening to a child referred to them or a child that approaches them to discuss abuse” is considered a service.
I argue it’s not, it’s an obligation a parent cannot opt out of.
I argue it’s not, it’s an obligation a parent cannot opt out of.
Posted on 4/21/22 at 9:54 am to Oilfieldbiology
quote:
Which makes the whole “This Will stop the reporting of abuse” argument null and void.
I honestly think even progs understand deep inside. I think they're as traumatized watching their icons fall as anyone. They just find it hard to believe such icons as Hollywood actors, Disney corp, and our sacred "essential" school teachers who braved death during a pandemic, can make terrible judgment errors. They choose to ride with the team even though they can see the cracks.
Posted on 4/21/22 at 9:54 am to roadGator
i don't think i've ever seen a more convincing argument for private/catholic school than this thread
Posted on 4/21/22 at 9:54 am to ell_13
quote:If the counselor sits down with a kid in his office whose parents opted out, yea the counselor absolutely would be breaking the law. You disagree?
So if the counselor listens to a kid that reports abuse, he broke this law according to you? That’s your interpretation? Seriously?
Posted on 4/21/22 at 9:54 am to lsupride87
quote:
And I don’t think it’s exactly a “wildly rare scenario”
And I think it is. The child is much more likely to approach the teacher they see every day, not a counselor who they may not even know. And they're more likely to approach a family member or family friend over the teacher.
We're talking K-3 here, not high school students who know what a counselor is.
Page 13 of 24
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News