Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 11 to 20 of 20
  1. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    3,835

    Default Re: School Cell Phone Confiscation

    Quote Quoting jk
    View Post
    BOR, they're minors. Since when does a minor have the rights to do anything of their choice over a parents choice?
    Age of consent for sexual relations is one. It makes no difference if the parent's say no sex to the minor. If the age of consent is 16, that's it. Sure, a parent can forbid it, but what law was broken if the 16 yar old disobeys?

    I see nothing in the law you posted that would infer it is the minors choice. It merely states the ages which a minor must attend school.

    Go here: http://public.leginfo.state.ny.us/me...MMONQUERY=LAWS

    and cruise down to section 3212. That tells you who is responsible to see the minor does attend school.
    I see 3212, it merely outlines a parent's duty to enforce the truancy laws for thier child, that's all.

    Here is part of what I posted:


    3. In each school district, the board of education shall have power to require minors from sixteen to seventeen years of age who are not employed to attend upon full time day instruction until the last day of session in the school year in which the student becomes seventeen years of age.


    What do you take age 17 here to connotate? I take it as the minor can drop out at 17 if that school year has finished.

    I also read it to say IF the 16 and 17 year olds ARE employed, they can drop out, even before the school year is over.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    38,647

    Default Re: School Cell Phone Confiscation

    =BOR;271081]Age of consent for sexual relations is one. It makes no difference if the parent's say no sex to the minor. If the age of consent is 16, that's it. Sure, a parent can forbid it, but what law was broken if the 16 yar old disobeys?
    surely you jest. it is not a matter of law but of parental control and responsibility. A parent has legally authorized control over their minor children. It's as simple as that.

    I see 3212, it merely outlines a parent's duty to enforce the truancy laws for thier child, that's all.
    that's right and that is becuase the parent is held liable for the actions of their minor children which would mean the parent gets to make that call, not the minor child.

    Here is part of what I posted:


    3. In each school district, the board of education shall have power to require minors from sixteen to seventeen years of age who are not employed to attend upon full time day instruction until the last day of session in the school year in which the student becomes seventeen years of age.


    What do you take age 17 here to connotate? I take it as the minor can drop out at 17 if that school year has finished.
    No, it doesn;t. It means the state does not require a minor over 16 to attend school. That does not mean it is the minor childs decision.


    I also read it to say IF the 16 and 17 year olds ARE employed, they can drop out, even before the school year is over.
    It states they can be relieved of the requirement to attend school, BY THE STATE. A parent, as custodian and guardian of a minor child can require whatever they choose to.

    Let me take this to an extreme:

    The Amish society as a whole has petitioned and won the rights, from the courts, to allow their children to drop out of school after the 8th grade. They have also won the rights to dissallow the required innoculations that almost all other children are required to experience when attending school.

    Do you believe that this then allows a 5 y.o to determine they do not want the inccoculations and it is the childs right to determine if they attend school past the 8th grade?

    all the courts have stated is they are not required by law to be subject to the innoculations and attend school beyond the 8th grade. They are still subject to their parents control.

    In New York, the courts have simply stated that it is not required for a child beyond 16 to attend school. It affords the minor absolutely no rights to make that decision. It is still in the hands of their parents and the legally mandated parental rights of the parents to control their minor children.

    So, what does the law allow in the case of a child that does not respect the authority of the parent:

    in most states; corporal punishment. In the adult world, this would be illegal if each were afforded full rights of majority. In any state, any other form of punishment and control not specifically denied by the statutes.

    if it is beyond all control of the parents, the parent can, in some states, apply to have the minor emancipated and then that minor can be treated as any other adult and booted out of the house. Until that time, a parent is legally liable for the care and feeding of the minor child.


    You seem to be inferring the parents have no control over their minor children and unless the law requires a child to act in a particular manner, the child can do as they desire. You seem to ignore the simple fact that a parent is allowed to be a parent to the child and as such, is often held liable for the childs actions and as such is legally required to cause the child to act as the law directs.

    In this discussion, it is as simple as;

    the child is required to act as the parent directs lest they be subject to anything the parent wishes as long as that action is not in contrast to the law. A child does not have the legal authority to make decisions for themselves until such time they are emancipated, whatever age that may be, or the courts allow such action. The courts have, upon occasion, allowed a child to make a decision in contrast to a parents desire but such action requires a specific court action to address that situation.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    28,906

    Default Re: School Cell Phone Confiscation

    Quote Quoting jk
    View Post
    emancipation in New York is 19, not 18.
    It is?

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    9,096

    Default Re: Schools Confiscating Student Property

    And all of this has to do with the confiscation of a cell phone how?

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    38,647

    Default Re: Schools Confiscating Student Property

    Quote Quoting cyjeff
    View Post
    And all of this has to do with the confiscation of a cell phone how?
    it has to do with the return of the cellphone. Is the school required to treat OP as an adult or can they require their legal guardian to claim the phone?

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Toledo, OH
    Posts
    16,303

    Default Re: Schools Confiscating Student Property

    If he is 18, legally an adult, then I should think the school would be required to allow him to claim it himself.

    He can already write his own absence notes at the age of 18, there's no reason he shouldn't be able to reclaim his property.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    38,647

    Default Re: Schools Confiscating Student Property

    I may be wrong, or simple mistaken, or even just confused but somewhere in NY statutes, it states a parent is required to support a child until (I thought) 19 but many sites are quoting 21. If a child is fully emancipated at 18, how and why could a court require a parent to support that child beyond that point?

    As well, I have actually read the statute although I cannot seem to find it again, but for the parent to refute this requirement, they must file to have the child emancipated. They can only do so under certain situations.

    I would suggest that if a parent is required to support their child until either 19 or 21 (whichever it is) , that child is not fully emancipated and as such, still under the control of their parent/guardian.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    9,096

    Default Re: Schools Confiscating Student Property

    Quote Quoting jk
    View Post
    I may be wrong, or simple mistaken, or even just confused but somewhere in NY statutes, it states a parent is required to support a child until (I thought) 19 but many sites are quoting 21. If a child is fully emancipated at 18, how and why could a court require a parent to support that child beyond that point?

    As well, I have actually read the statute although I cannot seem to find it again, but for the parent to refute this requirement, they must file to have the child emancipated. They can only do so under certain situations.

    I would suggest that if a parent is required to support their child until either 19 or 21 (whichever it is) , that child is not fully emancipated and as such, still under the control of their parent/guardian.
    unless, of course, school policy requires the parent or guardian of the child to pick it up.

    This is the question I would like to explore.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Toledo, OH
    Posts
    16,303

    Default Re: Schools Confiscating Student Property

    If a child is fully emancipated at 18, how and why could a court require a parent to support that child beyond that point?
    You might be confusing the age of majority with the age of termination of child support. Many states require divorced parents to support their children past the age of majority.

    One's parents' decision to terminate their marriage does not have an effect on when one may otherwise enjoy the benefits of adulthood.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    38,647

    Default Re: Schools Confiscating Student Property

    Quote Quoting LawResearcherMissy
    View Post
    You might be confusing the age of majority with the age of termination of child support. Many states require divorced parents to support their children past the age of majority.

    One's parents' decision to terminate their marriage does not have an effect on when one may otherwise enjoy the benefits of adulthood.
    nope. the statute simply required a parent to support their child beyond 18. It had nothing to do with a divorce situation.

    It seemed a really odd situation. There was this mom that had a kid, 19, that asked about how to have the kid emancipated since they were basically incorrigible. Everybody originally said 18, 18, 18. Somebody dug up this law that stated a parent was required to provide room and board to their child until a certain age (beyond 18) but given certain situations, the parent could seek emancipation for the child to relieve themselves of the requirement.

    I hate searching NY statute. all clumped together and not a lot of intuitiveness to the organization.

    1. Sponsored Links
       

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2

Similar Threads

  1. Property Division: Student Loans and Community Property
    By EyesOpen in forum Divorce, Annulment and Separation
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 06-05-2011, 10:24 PM
  2. Stepparents and Schools
    By DadInDetroit in forum Child Custody, Support and Visitation
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 12-08-2008, 08:22 AM
  3. Student Speech Rights: Censorship in Schools
    By sega18 in forum Education Law
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 10-02-2008, 05:27 AM
  4. Sex Offenses: Sex Offenders Near Schools
    By Heather78 in forum Criminal Charges
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 03-14-2008, 12:32 AM
  5. Student Discipline: Schools Not Following Their Rules
    By Scaredneedhelp in forum Education Law
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 06-05-2007, 04:39 AM
 
 
Sponsored Links

Legal Help, Information and Resources