Texas High School teacher in orgies with teenage boys

[dps]

Generally I agree, but the quetsion would be whether she used the authority of her position to goad/coax the students into sex.

Sure, the abuse of authority issue is why it should be a fireable offense.

I don't have a problem with the law.  We should hold teachers to a higher standard than the general public.

Making it a fireable offense for a teacher to have sex with an 18 year old student already holds them to a higher standard than the general public is held.  For a 28 year old who flips burgers at McDonalds, or runs a cash register at Walmart, or who is the executive assistant to the CEO of a Fortune 500 company, having sex with an 18 year old high school student wouldn't be a fireable offense.

It could be depending on the company.

Since most US states have at-will employment, you could[/b] get fired for it, but it would be considered termination for poor cause.

[Drakken]

Maybe it's cherry-picking, but I personally don't believe the multiplication of these cases in the media is a mere halo effect. The novelty around the Mary Kay Letourneau case is long gone, so something else is at work. I believe that more and more (ostensibly female) teachers engage in sex with people they shouldn't be legally having sex with, regardless of any consideration for deontology, and these are reported more and more in the press. When I was in high school, female teachers weren't having gangbangs with jocks.

It reminds me of a story we've had in Montreal last year. La Presse had published a paper revealing that a number of female attendants (social workers, employees, nurses, gaolers) who were working in juvenile centers for teenage male offenders (including those involved in gangs), often just out of college, would engage in unauthorized sexual contacts with detainees, including bringing them home for sex while their men were away, having trysts or sexual contacts inside the facility after the lights are off, or smuggle drugs or other contraband inside the walls of the facility for their secret boyfriends. I'm not talking about abuse of authority, boys would hit on these girls, and these girls would accept their advances. These girls were smart, they knew they would lose their career, their reputation, their pension and (for those married) their family, and yet they did it nonetheless because they couldn't resist their physical attraction to bad boys.

Regardless of any instantenous moral question or judgment about this issue, what exactly can be done to prevent these? Obviously the extreme idea that teachers and students should fuck anytime they want with no restriction, as long as they consent, is unacceptable and unprofessional. But neither is segregation or draconian punishments. Yet we cannot stop immature people being attracted to teenager and almost young adults. Shouldn't there be some systemic approach to detect teachers with these proclivities and reaffect them, even on mere suspiscions? 

Just throwing it for discussion, rather than an endless stream of "I'd tap her ass" or "I wouldn't touch her with a ten-foot pole".

[HVC]

Valmy's going to be mad at you.

Um I hate child abuse.  People over 18 are not children even in America

it was the whole "oh, it's just a moman teacher" thing that annoyed you in the past.

[garbon]

Generally I agree, but the quetsion would be whether she used the authority of her position to goad/coax the students into sex.

Sure, the abuse of authority issue is why it should be a fireable offense.

I don't have a problem with the law.  We should hold teachers to a higher standard than the general public.

Making it a fireable offense for a teacher to have sex with an 18 year old student already holds them to a higher standard than the general public is held.  For a 28 year old who flips burgers at McDonalds, or runs a cash register at Walmart, or who is the executive assistant to the CEO of a Fortune 500 company, having sex with an 18 year old high school student wouldn't be a fireable offense.

It could be depending on the company.

Since most US states have at-will employment, you could[/b] get fired for it, but it would be considered termination for poor cause.

I was thinking of places with non-fraternization clauses.

[dps]

Maybe it's cherry-picking, but I personally don't believe the multiplication of these cases in the media is a mere halo effect. The novelty around the Mary Kay Letourneau case is long gone, so something else is at work. I believe that more and more (ostensibly female) teachers engage in sex with people they shouldn't be legally having sex with, regardless of any consideration for deontology, and these are reported more and more in the press. When I was in high school, female teachers weren't having gangbangs with jocks.

It reminds me of a story we've had in Montreal last year. La Presse had published a paper revealing that a number of female attendants (social workers, employees, nurses, gaolers) who were working in juvenile centers for male young offenders (including those involved in gangs) would engage in unauthorized sexual contacts with detainees, including bringing them home while their husbands were away for sex, having trysts or sexual contacts inside the facility after the lights are off, or smuggle drugs or other contraband inside the walls of the facility for their secret boyfriends. These girls were smart, they knew they would lose their career, their reputation, their pension and (for those married) their family, and yet they did it nonetheless because they couldn't resist their attraction to bad boys.

Regardless of any instantenous moral question or judgment about this issue, what exactly can be done to prevent these? Obviously the extreme idea that teachers and students should fuck anytime they want with no restriction, as long as they consent, is unacceptable and unprofessional. But neither is segregation or draconian punishments. Yet we cannot stop immature people being attracted to teenager and almost young adults. Shouldn't there be some systemic approach to detect teachers with these proclivities and reaffect them? 

Just throwing it for discussion, rather than an endless stream of "I'd tap her ass" or "I wouldn't touch her with a ten-foot pole".

How would you detect someone with those proclivities, unless they had already gotten into trouble for sexual misconcuct of some sort?  And if you had some sort of psychological tests which could reliable detect someone with the proclivities, would it be legal or even right to bar them from teaching or other jobs which directly involve working with minors if they've never acted on those proclivities?

I suppose that you could raise the entrance requirements to get into college so that people dumb enough to do something like this (considering the negative outcomes you list toward end of the 2nd paragraph of your post) don't obtain the necessary degrees to get the jobs in the first place, but really it would seem that a teacher having sex with a minor student is more about poor self-control than intelligence, so that approach probably wouldn't do much good. 

One thing that might help would be to institute a policy that teachers under the age of, say, 35 not be hired to teach high school.  Start the teachers right out of college off teaching elementary school and allow them to move up to the high grade levels if they want as they accumulate time on the job.  It wouldn't eliminate all of these incidents, of course, but it would get rid of the temptations inherent in having someone 22 or so just out of college teaching 17 and 18 year old high schoolers, who in some ways are still in the same age group.

[merithyn]

No, dps, the solution is obvious. Since all women just HAVE to have bad boys, per Drakken, and can't control themselves around them, women should just never be allowed to teach or work in an environment where there is potential for a man to have a tattoo, wear leather, or have a scar. Simple!

[crazy canuck]

BB the position she hold puts the consent in question under Canadian law.  Cant tell from the article what the Law is in the US.  You are just conflating the two now.

But it doesn't put it in question unless there's evidence she abused that position.  And there is none.

and I made it clear I was mentioning Canadian law.

A teacher having sex with students isnt an abuse of a position of authority.  All the pedophiles will surely be happy to hear this news.

[Barrister]

BB the position she hold puts the consent in question under Canadian law.  Cant tell from the article what the Law is in the US.  You are just conflating the two now.

But it doesn't put it in question unless there's evidence she abused that position.  And there is none.

and I made it clear I was mentioning Canadian law.

A teacher having sex with students isnt an abuse of a position of authority.  All the pedophiles will surely be happy to hear this news.

Not unless they use that position to coerce consent, it is not.

A fact PDH is eternally grateful for.

[Drakken]

No, dps, the solution is obvious. Since all women just HAVE to have bad boys, per Drakken, and can't control themselves around them, women should just never be allowed to teach or work in an environment where there is potential for a man to have a tattoo, wear leather, or have a scar. Simple!

I'm not talking about those who can, I'm talking about those who can't/don't/don't care.

[dps]

Generally I agree, but the quetsion would be whether she used the authority of her position to goad/coax the students into sex.

Sure, the abuse of authority issue is why it should be a fireable offense.

I don't have a problem with the law.  We should hold teachers to a higher standard than the general public.

Making it a fireable offense for a teacher to have sex with an 18 year old student already holds them to a higher standard than the general public is held.  For a 28 year old who flips burgers at McDonalds, or runs a cash register at Walmart, or who is the executive assistant to the CEO of a Fortune 500 company, having sex with an 18 year old high school student wouldn't be a fireable offense.

It could be depending on the company.

Since most US states have at-will employment, you could[/b] get fired for it, but it would be considered termination for poor cause.

I was thinking of places with non-fraternization clauses.

Those generally apply to co-workers.  If my employer had a non-fraternization policy, I could get fired for having sex with an 18 year old high school student who worked part-time for us, but not for having sex with an 16 year old high school student who didn't work for us (age of consent is 16 in NC).

Interesting twist in the law in NC with regards to school personnel, btw.  No employee of a K-12 school can legally have sex with a student at such a school.  This doesn't just apply to teachers and other people in positions of authority, so an 18 year old hired as a janitor at a high school is guilty of a crime if they have sex with a senior who has already turned 19.

[garbon]

Those generally apply to co-workers.  If my employer had a non-fraternization policy, I could get fired for having sex with an 18 year old high school student who worked part-time for us, but not for having sex with an 16 year old high school student who didn't work for us (age of consent is 16 in NC).

It didn't occur to me that you just meant sex with an 18 year old high school student - I misread that earlier.  I don't think that's a comparable situation as there isn't any institutional similarity in your example.

[jimmy olsen]

And pay them much less.

Than we pay the general public?

They have it so good, why didn't you consider teaching then?  After all, sounds like a real money gig.  I hear grumbler drives an Aston Martin.

It would have been a pretty cushy job, you're right.  No real standards to have to abide by, guaranteed raises not tied to performance, and a guaranteed job after a few years.  But teaching just wasn't for me.

There's a hell of a lot of work if you're doing your job right. It's definitely way more than a 40 hour work week, and that doesn't even taken into the account the burden of classroom management.

[garbon]

There's a hell of a lot of work if you're doing your job right. It's definitely way more than a 40 hour work week, and that doesn't even taken into the account the burden of classroom management.

Welcome to most professional jobs?

[mongers]

There's a hell of a lot of work if you're doing your job right. It's definitely way more than a 40 hour work week, and that doesn't even taken into the account the burden of classroom management.

Welcome to most professional jobs?

The modern office environment is like a classroom ? 


edit:
Yeah, actually that figures.   

[garbon]

One should always be learning.

Also at my last job a bunch of us were accused of being a clique.