What do you think of this idea?; can you find anything bad about it?

OK. For the third or fourth time, and please try to comprehend what you read this time around, thanks. I have never ever said nor implied that teachers should be counselors, never. And, you can NOT show me where I have said. Also, I have said and written about our schools failing our kids for many years now. I have written many pieces expressing my concern for the lack of education in our schools. So, don't tell me that I'm not concerned about education, or concerned about our kids. Yes, it is definitely your reading comprehension that's the problem. You continue to say that I have said some or implied something that I have NOT. And, you can NOT show anywhere where I have said nor implied that our teachers should be counselors, or that our schools are doing a good job teaching our kids. You can blow smoke until your heart is content, but you can NOT show where I have said or implied what you claim that I have said.

Please go back and read what I have said again, slowly, and then put the quote where I said or implied those things in your next comment to me, please, thanks. I have never said that teachers should expand their responsibilities. If you'll go back and read, I said that teachers have enough on their plates as it is. So, please stop saying that I have said something, or implied something, that I have NOT.

As far as the name calling, it's childish, silly, and adds absolutely nothing to this conversation. Please try to have a conversation in an adult and civil manner. Name calling and personal attacks are for kids on the school yard, not on a public forum where adults engage in discussions concerning our many socioeconomic woes. Thanks.

I have challenged you to show where I have said or implied what you have said that I did. Please do it if you can. Otherwise, please stop accusing me of saying things that I have NOT said nor implied. Thanks. And, please be adult and civil and refrain from name calling and personal attacks.

Yeah. People get a bit worked up about issues like this and exaggerate. Yet I still find your proposal disturbing. Essentially, what you're suggesting is that we use the relationship created by public education as a wedge to inject monitoring and government oversight that ordinarily wouldn't be viable. To illustrate, if this kind of program is a justifiable use of government, why use the schools as a vehicle? Why not simply require all children to schedule semi-annual checkups with government appointed counselors?
FYI - I did NOT suggest that the schools get involved in any way, shape, form, or fashion. What is my proposal? Did you even read what I wrote? If so, please read it again and tell me where I mentioned that schools should get involved. Again, for the fifth or sixth time, and for your benefit, I said that we should train counselors to handle the matter. I further stated that we could counsel kids at community centers, summer camp, and family oriented events where time would be devoted to family and counselor discussions. I never once mentioned that teachers would be involved, nor did I mention even once that schools would be involved in any way, shape, form, or fashion.

What do you find disturbing about my proposal? What did I say that was disturbing? Please explain. I have never suggested that we use the relationship created by public education as a wedge to inject anything, period. Where are you getting all this fabricated nonsense from? You're certainly not getting it from anything that I have said, and I doubt very seriously that you can show where I have said such. I have already previously challenged you to show where I have ever said any of the things that you accuse me of saying. And, so far, you have totally ignored that challenge. Why? Why not just quote what I have said to back up your accusations? Where's the problem with you showing where I have said what you are saying that I have said? I have never ever said to use the schools as a vehicle for anything other than education.

Again, it's very obvious to me, and I'm sure it is for anyone reading these exchanges between you and I, that you have a serious reading comprehension problem. You are not understanding what you read. You continue to credit me with things that I have never said nor implied. Why? Why accuse of saying things that I have never said? What do you hope to gain from it? Please take a course in reading comprehension so that you can understand what others say.

Again, I challenge you to quote me as to what you're saying that I have said or implied. Please do it, or stop accusing me of things that I have never said nor implied. Thanks.
 
OK. For the third or fourth time, and please try to comprehend what you read this time around, thanks. I have never ever said nor implied that teachers should be counselors, never. And, you can NOT show me where I have said. Also, I have said and written about our schools failing our kids for many years now. I have written many pieces expressing my concern for the lack of education in our schools. So, don't tell me that I'm not concerned about education, or concerned about our kids. Yes, it is definitely your reading comprehension that's the problem. You continue to say that I have said some or implied something that I have NOT. And, you can NOT show anywhere where I have said nor implied that our teachers should be counselors, or that our schools are doing a good job teaching our kids. You can blow smoke until your heart is content, but you can NOT show where I have said or implied what you claim that I have said.

Please go back and read what I have said again, slowly, and then put the quote where I said or implied those things in your next comment to me, please, thanks. I have never said that teachers should expand their responsibilities. If you'll go back and read, I said that teachers have enough on their plates as it is. So, please stop saying that I have said something, or implied something, that I have NOT.

As far as the name calling, it's childish, silly, and adds absolutely nothing to this conversation. Please try to have a conversation in an adult and civil manner. Name calling and personal attacks are for kids on the school yard, not on a public forum where adults engage in discussions concerning our many socioeconomic woes. Thanks.

I have challenged you to show where I have said or implied what you have said that I did. Please do it if you can. Otherwise, please stop accusing me of saying things that I have NOT said nor implied. Thanks. And, please be adult and civil and refrain from name calling and personal attacks.

Yeah. People get a bit worked up about issues like this and exaggerate. Yet I still find your proposal disturbing. Essentially, what you're suggesting is that we use the relationship created by public education as a wedge to inject monitoring and government oversight that ordinarily wouldn't be viable. To illustrate, if this kind of program is a justifiable use of government, why use the schools as a vehicle? Why not simply require all children to schedule semi-annual checkups with government appointed counselors?
FYI - I did NOT suggest that the schools get involved in any way, shape, form, or fashion. What is my proposal? Did you even read what I wrote? If so, please read it again and tell me where I mentioned that schools should get involved. Again, for the fifth or sixth time, and for your benefit, I said that we should train counselors to handle the matter. I further stated that we could counsel kids at community centers, summer camp, and family oriented events where time would be devoted to family and counselor discussions. I never once mentioned that teachers would be involved, nor did I mention even once that schools would be involved in any way, shape, form, or fashion.

What do you find disturbing about my proposal? What did I say that was disturbing? Please explain. I have never suggested that we use the relationship created by public education as a wedge to inject anything, period. Where are you getting all this fabricated nonsense from? You're certainly not getting it from anything that I have said, and I doubt very seriously that you can show where I have said such. I have already previously challenged you to show where I have ever said any of the things that you accuse me of saying. And, so far, you have totally ignored that challenge. Why? Why not just quote what I have said to back up your accusations? Where's the problem with you showing where I have said what you are saying that I have said? I have never ever said to use the schools as a vehicle for anything other than education.

Again, it's very obvious to me, and I'm sure it is for anyone reading these exchanges between you and I, that you have a serious reading comprehension problem. You are not understanding what you read. You continue to credit me with things that I have never said nor implied. Why? Why accuse of saying things that I have never said? What do you hope to gain from it? Please take a course in reading comprehension so that you can understand what others say.

Again, I challenge you to quote me as to what you're saying that I have said or implied. Please do it, or stop accusing me of things that I have never said nor implied. Thanks.

Good grief. I mistook you for the OP. My apologies. I'll re-read your posts again with my glasses on. ;)
 
OK. For the third or fourth time, and please try to comprehend what you read this time around, thanks. I have never ever said nor implied that teachers should be counselors, never. And, you can NOT show me where I have said. Also, I have said and written about our schools failing our kids for many years now. I have written many pieces expressing my concern for the lack of education in our schools. So, don't tell me that I'm not concerned about education, or concerned about our kids. Yes, it is definitely your reading comprehension that's the problem. You continue to say that I have said some or implied something that I have NOT. And, you can NOT show anywhere where I have said nor implied that our teachers should be counselors, or that our schools are doing a good job teaching our kids. You can blow smoke until your heart is content, but you can NOT show where I have said or implied what you claim that I have said.

Please go back and read what I have said again, slowly, and then put the quote where I said or implied those things in your next comment to me, please, thanks. I have never said that teachers should expand their responsibilities. If you'll go back and read, I said that teachers have enough on their plates as it is. So, please stop saying that I have said something, or implied something, that I have NOT.

As far as the name calling, it's childish, silly, and adds absolutely nothing to this conversation. Please try to have a conversation in an adult and civil manner. Name calling and personal attacks are for kids on the school yard, not on a public forum where adults engage in discussions concerning our many socioeconomic woes. Thanks.

I have challenged you to show where I have said or implied what you have said that I did. Please do it if you can. Otherwise, please stop accusing me of saying things that I have NOT said nor implied. Thanks. And, please be adult and civil and refrain from name calling and personal attacks.

Yeah. People get a bit worked up about issues like this and exaggerate. Yet I still find your proposal disturbing. Essentially, what you're suggesting is that we use the relationship created by public education as a wedge to inject monitoring and government oversight that ordinarily wouldn't be viable. To illustrate, if this kind of program is a justifiable use of government, why use the schools as a vehicle? Why not simply require all children to schedule semi-annual checkups with government appointed counselors?
FYI - I did NOT suggest that the schools get involved in any way, shape, form, or fashion. What is my proposal? Did you even read what I wrote? If so, please read it again and tell me where I mentioned that schools should get involved. Again, for the fifth or sixth time, and for your benefit, I said that we should train counselors to handle the matter. I further stated that we could counsel kids at community centers, summer camp, and family oriented events where time would be devoted to family and counselor discussions. I never once mentioned that teachers would be involved, nor did I mention even once that schools would be involved in any way, shape, form, or fashion.

What do you find disturbing about my proposal? What did I say that was disturbing? Please explain. I have never suggested that we use the relationship created by public education as a wedge to inject anything, period. Where are you getting all this fabricated nonsense from? You're certainly not getting it from anything that I have said, and I doubt very seriously that you can show where I have said such. I have already previously challenged you to show where I have ever said any of the things that you accuse me of saying. And, so far, you have totally ignored that challenge. Why? Why not just quote what I have said to back up your accusations? Where's the problem with you showing where I have said what you are saying that I have said? I have never ever said to use the schools as a vehicle for anything other than education.

Again, it's very obvious to me, and I'm sure it is for anyone reading these exchanges between you and I, that you have a serious reading comprehension problem. You are not understanding what you read. You continue to credit me with things that I have never said nor implied. Why? Why accuse of saying things that I have never said? What do you hope to gain from it? Please take a course in reading comprehension so that you can understand what others say.

Again, I challenge you to quote me as to what you're saying that I have said or implied. Please do it, or stop accusing me of things that I have never said nor implied. Thanks.

Good grief. I mistook you for the OP. My apologies. I'll re-read your posts again with my glasses on. ;)
No problem. It happens. I do it myself at times. I have replied to the wrong comment several times. Thanks, much appreciated.
 
Greetings,

...I just caught a glimpse of a commercial on TV and if I saw it correctly, the commercial said that 20% of young girls are victims of sexual abuse.

I think that if schools (elementary, middle, and high schools) had trained personnel (perhaps guidance counselors could do it) who talked with school students twice a year to see how things are going in their homes, more young people would be protected from abuse by Adults.

Is this a good idea do you think, having guidance counselors talk to school students twice a year to see if their home life is OK?

Anonymous1977


I think your idea is right on track.

I foresee conflict resolution training and intervention assistance
to prevent "relationship abuse, harassment and bullying"
at all levels of education for students and parents. Of course,
the same approach would also identify any other abuse issues (sexual abuse, drug abuse, etc.).

When it is organized and developed by the community working together,
it is not misused as anyone trying to target or police others.
Successful sustainable programs are about a community or school district committing
to means of helping each other address conflicts and stopping abuses as they surface.

I encourage you to follow up on this idea!

Find out what civics or school/nonprofit groups in your area
already have programs and relationships between schools and parents/community.
And work with the given relations and programs to develop this idea together.

By forming a team, you should be able to get grants behind it,
or work with local universities to find grad student or interns who
can help you as part of course credits to get a program started.

Here are some models you can look at to form your own:
Rachel s Challenge
Peer support - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
AVP USA Inc. For Youth
Youth Programs The Center for Nonviolent Communication
NOMORE.org Together we can end domestic violence and sexual assault. Home - NOMORE.org Together we can end domestic violence and sexual assault.

Sounds like a good idea.
 
Greetings,

...I just caught a glimpse of a commercial on TV and if I saw it correctly, the commercial said that 20% of young girls are victims of sexual abuse.

I think that if schools (elementary, middle, and high schools) had trained personnel (perhaps guidance counselors could do it) who talked with school students twice a year to see how things are going in their homes, more young people would be protected from abuse by Adults.

Is this a good idea do you think, having guidance counselors talk to school students twice a year to see if their home life is OK?

Anonymous1977

Mmm, maybe not,

St. James High guidance counselor arrested for criminal sexual conduct with a minor News CarolinaLive.com

"St. James High guidance counselor arrested for criminal sexual conduct with a minor"
 

Forum List

Back
Top