Stuck in a dilemma

silvercar

Banned items. If a child has a good reason for having a banned item eg going to use it at a friend's house after school there should be some procedure for it to be handed over and locked up safely in the office. My daughter's school did this with phones.

This ^^^^.

No point making excuses as to why an item needed to be in school. If it is banned, it is banned for a reason. Allow your child to take it into school and you have to take the risk that it is lost/ stolen /damaged.

Can only assume those encouraging you to go down the route of 'well it shouldn't have been there in the first place' are obviously the type who take no responsibility for their actions.

Wrong assumption. Can equally assume that parents who allow their children to break the rules on what can be taken into school, don't value their property.

iammumtoone

Dird wrote: »

Remember those words if we ever cross paths on a train and I knock your phone clean out your hands or take your laptop off the table and slam it to the floor...you shouldn't have left it somewhere I could damage it

If I had hold of my phone or my laptop was right in front of me it would be somewhere I could keep an eye on it. if I went to the washroom and took my phone and left it on the side then walked out, when I went back to collect it, if it was gone it would still be theft but I would have to take some responsibility for not taking care of it.

What you are describing in this situation would be if the ds was in clear sight and the OP sons picked it up and broke it knowing they were breaking a games console, then I would agree 100% their fault but in this instance I would say 50/50

iammumtoone

FBaby wrote: »

How do you know?

My DS used to take a game to school, keeping it in his bag because after school, a friend pick him up along with DD and her DD and take them to their swimming class. The girls class was first, so DS would sit with friend until I could get there. He used to play on his game during that time. I couldn't get the game to friend and DS didn't want to be without it for a week.

Thankfully, his bag never got kicked nor his game damaged.

There is nothing wrong with letting children take these things to school if you are prepared to accept the consequences, if anything happens to the item. Would you have expected someone else to pay for a new one if anything happened to it?

My son is not allowed to take anything of value to school (he would forget to hand it into the office). Even with things that aren't valuable they often get damaged/broken/lost/stolen etc, he moans about that, I simply tell him yes it is wrong that another child did that but he also has to take responsibility for choosing to take the item in the first place.

jackyann

LKRDN_Morgan wrote: »

It's not really a dilemma though is it. He broke it. You should be paying for it.

Can only assume those encouraging you to go down the route of 'well it shouldn't have been there in the first place' are obviously the type who take no responsibility for their actions.

I disagree, but very much in the spirit of debate. I think that there are several issues, and a big one is that the child is special needs. Therefore by definition, he is not understanding and learning in the same way as other children. That is why supervision by the school and being careful about items & surroundings is important.

An analogy would be with, say a 2 old, who, unsupervised, knocked over an expensive ornament. Of course the child needs to learn, but we all know that 2 year olds don't have a good understanding of these things, and leaving expensive fragile things around them is daft.

OP does appear to be taking this seriously. But in terms of 'not taking responsibility' there are the parents who disobeyed the rules (which are there for a good reason) and the school who did not supervise properly.

If we are talking about 'learning lessons' then we have parents who think that if they disobey school rules, it doesn't matter, because the banned & damaged item will be replaced.

I think that everyone has lessons to learn here.

pphillips

It raises some interesting points: if the banned item had not been taken to school then it could not have been damaged by your son, the other child has contributed to the damage caused by bringing the banned item into school, it is unjust for your child to have to pay for damage that no reasonable child could have foreseen, your son should only be liable for damage caused that a reasonable child could have foreseen as being caused by throwing around another child's bag.

Person_one

iammumtoone wrote: »

If I had hold of my phone or my laptop was right in front of me it would be somewhere I could keep an eye on it. if I went to the washroom and took my phone and left it on the side then walked out, when I went back to collect it, if it was gone it would still be theft but I would have to take some responsibility for not taking care of it.

A better analogy would be that you had put your bag in one of the luggage racks at the end of each carriage, then somebody had picked it up and thrown it around because you'd annoyed them somehow.

pphillips

Person_one wrote: »

A better analogy would be that you had put your bag in one of the luggage racks at the end of each carriage, then somebody had picked it up and thrown it around because you'd annoyed them somehow.

A better analogy still would be that you were on a plane and you had put your bag in one of the overhead luggage storage, then somebody had picked it up and thrown it around because you'd annoyed them somehow, and the item in the bag that got damaged was a prohibited item.

Person_one

pphillips wrote: »

A better analogy still would be that you were on a plane and you had put your bag in one of the overhead luggage storage, then somebody had picked it up and thrown it around because you'd annoyed them somehow, and the item in the bag that got damaged was a prohibited item.

Fairly close, but taking prohibited items on a plane is both dangerous and criminal. Taking a Gameboy thingy to school is just breaking the school rules in a way that wouldn't have harmed anybody, and which of us never did that, being honest?

pphillips

Person_one wrote: »

Fairly close, but taking prohibited items on a plane is both dangerous and criminal. Taking a Gameboy thingy to school is just breaking the school rules in a way that wouldn't have harmed anybody, and which of us never did that, being honest?

The harm caused is financial in nature but I take your point about the seriousness of the plane situation.

Person_one

pphillips wrote: »

The harm caused is financial in nature but I take your point about the seriousness of the plane situation.

Well, yes, but if the game had been broken and it was the fault of the child who owned it, the mum should (and probably would) take that on the chin. That it was broken by the deliberate actions of another child does mean that child is responsible. The bag could have had spare glasses in, or an allowed phone, or an electronic aid for learning as this is a special school.