A Mom Goes To Jail For Sending Her Kids To A Safer School

Kelley is a single mom in Akron, Ohio who was sentenced to 10 days in jail and 3 years probation for sending her kids to a safer school in her father's neighboring district, instead of the violence-plagued district where she lives.

Kelley was interviewed from jail on Good Morning America yesterday. Time Magazine and the New York Times columnist Nick Kristof shined more light on the cause.

It seems that Kelley lied about where her children lived, using her father's address instead of hers, because he lived in a safer school district. When the school found out, she was ordered to send her kids to the school in her district. She flatly refused to comply and was arrested, tried, and jailed.

But it's not over for her. She is currently attending college working towards her teaching credential. If this conviction stays on her record she will not be allowed to teach in the state of Ohio where they have a law which prohibits anyone who has been convicted of ANY crime, even one of a non-sexual nature, that involves children. She's just a few credits away from finishing her teaching degree and clearly passionate about education.

A petition has been circulated and sent to Ohio Governor John Kasich demanding that he pardon Kelley.

The judge in Kelley's case said that the harsh penalties for telling district officials that her children lived with Kelley's father, when in fact they lived with her in a different town, will serve as a message to other parents considering a similar move.

Ohio should be working to improve all schools, instead of punishing parents whose children are trapped in unsafe, ineffective schools.

As a former teacher, I know you would all be appalled if you knew what was going on in our schools and why. All schools have a zero-tolerance policy when it comes to drugs and weapons. If a student violates those policies, he is immediately expelled. However, it is more difficult with other things. Students who commit other offenses are allowed to stay in school unless they've committed multiple offenses. For example, a student who beats up two or three other students would be suspended for a few days and his parents fined, then allowed back. He would have to be suspended several times before being expelled because of some misguided notion that there is "no such thing as a bad boy (or girl)." Father Flannigan, founder of Boy's Town said that, and it's one of the biggest loads of BS I ever heard.

Here is a typical scenario in California: A student punches a teacher in the stomach. Especially if the teacher is male, he is encouraged by the school NOT to press charges. The student is suspended for a few days, and is right back in school. They'll probably not return that student to that teacher's class, but he will still be back in school. If the teacher insists on pressing charges, that teacher may find himself looking for a new job by the summer if he's not tenured.

Another reason for bending over backwards to keep these young thugs in school is money. For every student that leaves the school for whatever reason, the school loses money. The thing is, these "students" don't want to be there at all. They have no interest in school, and refuse to get with the program. These hooligans prevent the kids who want an education from getting the most they can out of school. A child can't do his best if he's constantly worried about being victimized.

We have to remove all students from regular public schools who will not get with the program. We need to set up more schools for these hoodlums where they can be handled properly, and kept away from the good kids. But there's a problem with that. A Federal law called Title Nine prevents segregating students, except those who have been designated as Special Needs kids like the mentally retarded, autistic, and physically handicapped. Non-special needs kids have to commit multiple offenses (not counting drugs and weapons which are zero-tolerance) before they can be removed from the regular school system and sent to continuation schools. In other words, they have to do a lot of damage before we can act, and the majority of our kids suffer because of a few.

Comrades, in a National Socialist state, this would not be the case. Any student who refuses to get with the program would be removed quickly, and sent to a re-education school where they would not be able to harm the other children while they were being rehabilitated. Someplace less than Juvenile Hall, but more than an ordinary continuation school. If they still don't get with the program, then more drastic action would be taken.

Basically, a National Socialist state would not allow a few troubled children to victimize all the rest. Don't get me wrong. We have to help these troubled kids. But we mustn't allow them to prey on their classmates either.