By Darren Smith, Weekend Contributor
The mother of a third grade girl attending Mill Plain Elementary School in Vancouver, Washington is demanding changes in a school room program where students are required to pay to use the bathroom. The program was to be a lesson in money management where students received and worked for Monopoly Money to buy items in the classroom but the teacher required a payment of M$50.00 in order to use the bathroom.
Jasmine Al-Ayadhi told reporters her nine year old daughter, Reem, did not want to pay to use the bathroom and ultimately had an accident, causing her both discomfort and having to endure teasing by other children. In agreeing with the need to teach children the value of money Jasmine said, “Work for your money, to earn it, to buy like a little toy or a little squirt gun or a little ball. When it comes to a bathroom issue, when a child has to pay money to use the bathroom – that’s wrong. It’s inhumane. That’s a health issue.”
Reem said the students in her class earn money by doing things, such as good deeds, being nice, and finishing school work. She said she uses the money to buy treats like popcorn and pizza.
She also said each student in her class has to pay their teacher M$50 dollars in pretend money to go to the bathroom.
On Thursday, Reem was down to her last M$50. She also had to go to the bathroom. She wanted to buy popcorn, like her friends were doing. She said she wasn’t allowed to go to the bathroom because she didn’t want to pay. She then had an embarrassing accident.
“When it comes to using the bathroom, having to hold her pee, and if she wants to use the bathroom, you make a choice,” Jasmine said. “OK, if you want to use the bathroom it’s going to cost you M$50, but then you don’t have money to buy popcorn. What do you think a child’s going to do?”
The school gave Reem a change of clothes, a pair of royal blue boy’s basketball shorts. Reem said the other kids made fun of her for having an accident, and then for having to wear boys clothes.
“It didn’t feel so well because I had to wear boy pants and I did get teased,” Reem said.
Jasmine said she talked to the principal on Thursday, who promised to follow up about the issue on Friday. As of Friday night, Jasmine said she hadn’t heard back.
“This is a school,” Jasmine said. “This isn’t a jail. This isn’t a prison. We send our kids to school to learn and to get a good education.”
The school’s spokeswoman released a statement.
“We were made aware of the situation Friday evening. We will investigate as soon as possible Monday morning. We work hard to ensure the health and safety of every child and will make sure we do not have any classroom rule that prevents that.”
A similar incident occurred in Lebanon, Oregon and was reported by news station KATU of Portland, Oregon and the school principal dropped the payment requirement after the story aired.
A pediatrician was consulted and provided an opinion of this based upon his experience. Dr. Bruce Birk is a Portland pediatrician. He says that there’s consensus in the medical community on this issue.
“It would be chaos in a classroom for teachers not to have a system,” says Birk. “Holding in the classroom in between well-established potty breaks has not been shown in any sense of the word to be harmful to kids.”
Yet the message this might be teaching children is something that some parents are going to have much objection to. But not only the parents have concerns, the incident at Mill Plain Elementary could have been interpreted as close to violating state law, at least in the sprit of the law as noted by the state legislature.
In 1977, when bathrooms requiring payment were more common, the legislature enacted a law in the state’s Public Health and Safety code to address the issue of those needing to use restrooms and facility owners demanding payment for their use. The law reads:
RCW 70.54.160
Public restrooms — Pay facilities — Penalty.(1) Every establishment which maintains restrooms for use by the public shall not discriminate in charges required between facilities used by men and facilities used by women.
(2) When coin lock controls are used, the controls shall be so allocated as to allow for a proportionate equality of free toilet units available to women as compared with those units available to men, and at least one-half of the units in any restroom shall be free of charge. As used in this section, toilet units are defined as constituting commodes and urinals.
(3) In situations involving coin locks placed on restroom entry doors, admission keys shall be readily provided without charge when requested, and notice as to the availability of the keys shall be posted on the restroom entry door.
(4) Any owner, agent, manager, or other person charged with the responsibility of the operation of an establishment who operates such establishment in violation of this section is guilty of a misdemeanor.
While many could see this as making a mountain out of a mole hill, one has to ask what kind of lesson a policy requiring payment by nine year old students to use a bathroom teaches children.
By Darren Smith
Sources:
KATU
Revised Code of Washington
The views expressed in this posting are the author’s alone and not those of the blog, the host, or other weekend bloggers. As an open forum, weekend bloggers post independently without pre-approval or review. Content and any displays or art are solely their decision and responsibility.
Paul,
“Malo – actually, I know who you are now. 🙂 Just took a little while. The principle I was speaking of was aimed at adults, you are an adult, I assume.”
If you know who I am then why are you presuming I’m an adult? Don’t you know, as you said?
You are an exceptional man to inflate the world of a third-grade girl into your political needs and wants.
Malo – For all I know you are a 13 year old girl leaving in the basement and typing on your Barbie iPad.
I realize that this may be a leap too far for you but every state has a curriculum it requires to be taught each year. Since math and English are continually tested they are always taught, while other courses are left to the side. If the curriculum says you are going to cover money, you cover money. Money is going to show up on the state test either that year or the next. That kid is going to see it on the test. It is unlikely that even the teacher knew that she was teaching about ‘opportunity costs’ but she was, since that is what economists call it. But that is not what you would tell a third grader and I think you are just being obtuse.
100% of commenters have been in third grade and many have had children and most understand a child’s embrassment and wish to protect all children from humiliation.
Those who don’t – carry on. It is your own reputation that suffers.
It’s so sad when a business fails, lack of clients due to shoddy practice must be awfully embarrassing.
Perhaps failed PI’s tell their clients to go look up the info themselves, too lazy to do the leg work, that would cause a PI business to flop, for sure.
I’ve also heard that private decyectives too lazy to do the research often have failed businesses.
Elaine is a teacher that obviously doesn’t agree with you Paul and hasn’t been run out of a classroom, unlike some other teacher here, I’m only guessing of course. Guessing about people and posting their assumptions on a public forum can be quite tricky, watch and see.
Annie – you should be in a faculty meeting to see how teachers agree with each other. It is different on the elementary level, because each teacher has a specialty grade they are dealing with and the others don’t interfere. But get into high school and every teacher thinks they can teach every subject. And I know of one university setting where two faculty members take turns going to the faculty meetings because they cannot get along. Someone takes notes for the missing member.
Paul, And I think many school nurses are only LPN’s.
Nick – school nurses have been dropped from many schools as a cost cutting measure and replaced with LPNs. Now for most of what school nurses do an LPN is perfectly suited, so I have no problem. The nursing home my brother was in the staffing heads were LPNs not RNs.
Paul, That is dispositive, don’t ya’ know. The majority of commenters on this thread say it is so. Obviously that settles it w/ metaphysical certitude.
How many girls have started their first period at school and been humiliated by having to go to the school nurse? They got past it.
How about not teaching lessons that may cause humiliation to a third grader? How about the teacher having the forethought that such a scenario could indeed happen? Poor teaching, lack of empathy, that should also be evident, it is to the majority of commenters on this thread.
Annie – 95% of the commentators have never been in a classroom and if they were would be run out in a week. Shit happens. It is not poor teaching. This is something you just don’t plan for. I am not sure I would have run the scenario but I am not sure I would not have. Teachers don’t run their class rooms based on the majority opinion of the public. 3rd graders do not frequently pee their pants but they do it frequently enough that it is not a rare occurrence. It is usually rare by the fourth grade. What ever minor humiliation she might have suffered initially was compounded by the staff and then by her mother. If we take them out of the mix. It is a very minor incident.
By allowing a third grader to wet her pants? Isn’t there a better way to teach needs vs wants? Shouldn’t that be evident?
Annie – my guess is that when you look at the teacher’s lesson plan you will not see an section where it says “Student pees pants.” The idea is for the student to trade the Monopoly money to go the the restroom. The girl made the choice not to go at a severe cost to herself as it turned out, thanks to the office staff and mother. It is possible that her needs and wants changed. She needed the popcorn but only wanted to pee. 😉
You do seem quite disturbed.
Malo, and that two teachers would not understand that treating third graders thusly is wrong, is most disturbing of all.
“It depends what the meaning of the word, “is,” is.”
Karen, When I first got here I would answer all questions, no matter how silly, ludicrous, etc. because I was trying to be helpful. I saw after awhile that was a waste of my time and effort. I sense you are beginning to see you have to pick and choose the questions worthy of a response. Good.
Karen, disagreeing with and disparaging someone’s flawed premise is not the same as calling the person the descriptive term, even if that may indeed be the case.
Annie @ 11:08 was characterizing someone’s statement as “baloney…with some rat droppings …”. That’s not calling someone a name.
Karen, Brava! You are all class.
Paul,
“I asked you for your translation of your name and you did not give it. I am therefore at the mercy of my Spanish translator.”
Only the surname is Spanish. Try harder, there are lots of mixed bloods out there that carry the history of both ancestors.
“BTW, you have reposted my post several times. I do not understand the purpose.”
Because it encapsulates the narrow mind of “little l’s” so well.
“What I said is economically correct.”
Not for a third-grader, and there’s the rub.
One of my comments just got flushed down the WordPress Vortex of Doom. (Darren, that phrase is forever stuck in my head.)