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.
Another assertion that Nick has underhandedly made about me here is in regard to my marital status. I am widowed, I am also divorced. I was married twice. Nick has occasionally made comments about me being divorced and having been married to an abusive man, that is UNTRUE. My divorce had nothing to do with any abuse. It’s sickening that Nick has put me in the position of having to speak of personal things on a public forum, but I feel I now must because I need to let commenters here know what he says about me in his veiled sneaky ways are gross misrepresentations or outright lies. Nick feels he can get away with this because he actually has for so long. Now other commenters are beginning to understand, like Bettykath.
Annie – this is going to come as a big shock to you, but the abuse thing I know about only because YOU said something about it. Same thing with being a widow.
BTW, how is the new grandchild?
Karen,
You are probably right, but we are allowed to disagree with each other’s premises here. I would like to see you open your eyes and see a clear picture of the tactics that get employed here on a daily basis. As Professor Tuley said, we are still held to the civility rules despite provocations, that would include not invading other commenter’s privacy, grossly misrepresenting what they THINK they have found and then actually posting the fallacious assertions on a public forum.
Now once again I have been put in the position of clarifying my nursing credentials. I was an LPN for many years, I returned to school and obtained my BSN and then my MSN from Marquette University in Milwaukee WI. Nick and Paul continue to make underhanded comments about LPNs, knowing I was once one. Nick believes I never obtained my RN because he has invaded my privacy by looking on the Wisconsin DRL to see if I have my RN lisence, which I do not, as I could no longer work in the field of nursing because of several serious health issues. I have my diplomas LPN, BSN, and MSN on my study wall, I’m proud I obtained them, I’m proud that I worked hard to support my family as an LPN for many years, it ruined my spine and my knees, but it is a noble profession unworthy of ridicule. Karen I would tell you to be wary of the company you keep, I saw the comment in which Nick offered you his email, no doubt to feed you facts that are not in evidence, as he obviously has done with Paul. So the next time Paul and Nick speak of my nursing credentials, know what they are trying to do.
Annie – when I spoke of LPNs in the schools I was accurate. And the nursing home my brother was in and died in was staffed with LPNs. My comments have nothing to do with you. Actually, I was being supportive of LPNs. They were very good to my brother and they do a fine job in the schools.
When I first started teaching I taught Interpersonal Communications to Nursing students. I enjoyed working with them and developed a course just for them. I have friends who have BSNs and MSNs and so I know the amount of work it take to get them. You should be proud. I have my degrees on my wall. I am proud of them. Worked my butt off for them.
Please do not read something into my comments that is not there. This seems to be a habitual problem on this blog. I am really tired of people thinking I said something that I did not. I am about as subtle as a jackhammer. I say what I mean. Don’t look for a hidden meaning.
You may be a future Guest Blogger, Karen. Keep writing and researching. You provide some needed, substantive, balance.
Karen, You are a light in the darkness. I am so grateful you are here.
Annie, using terms such as rat excrement and swine butts does not foster intelligent discourse.
It has been rightly argued that a teacher would have been challenged to come up with a “need” for her wants vs needs lesson in spending. I agreed about the difficulty, but not with her choice. And it has been argued that since the child chose not to use her money to go to the bathroom, that she learned a tough lesson. Those are valid points, but I would have taught that lesson another way. And I certainly would not have provided my child’s real name to the merciless internet.
There are valid points to be made, and we can all talk about the pros and cons of each point without brawling.
Nick,
You are the greatest offender of the civility rules. You attack and then go mea culpa. That is hypocracy at its height. I won’t state you are a brown noser, but you are something. As soon as you realize you are the problem, maybe something can be done. I have never dealt with someone who is like you, so I’m really not sure how to. But you give Jeffrey Dalhmer a definition cl
There IS a pernicious element that pervades this blog, yes indeed. Rewriting history is never a good idea, readers are intelligent enough to see through it.
Annie – we both got our hands spanked, don’t try playing innocent now. 😉
Thank you, Jonathan. This thread had a lot of potential. If read entirely, there are flashes of substance. There is a pernicious element attacking this blog. Maybe a “no anonymous” policy will mitigate the constant alias changing and trolling. As you have noted previously, while anonymity is important, there is the natural checks and balances when you use your real name. That is the case w/ all blogs. That was the case w/ this thread.
Karen, My wife had the same inclinations as you. The book, Love and Logic helped her a lot. We adopted our son from Colombia when he was ~2. No birth records. We would learn because of being abandoned by his mother as an infant, and spending those critical 2 years in an orphanage, that he suffered from attachment disorder. If you know anything about that, it is a REAL challenge. With the inclination to hover, combined w/ the behavioral problems, my wife needed guidance. We went to shrinks, which helped a little, but there’s really no therapy. There is a radical therapy where you swaddle the child like a little infant. But, it seemed too new age for us. We both read Love and Logic and would discuss it w/ his shrink. My reaction was, “Well, duh.” She chuckled and said that is often the males reaction. A major part of Love and Logic is natural consequences and tough love. Not hovering, letting your child suffer the natural consequences of their choices. Not lecturing, letting the natural consequences speak for themselves. This is stuff that guys get naturally. But, the book does not take away the feminine side of child rearing, it just helps take away the helicopter in some women. The helicopter, particularly in boys, is a liability. Love and Logic was so successful they now have a damn industry, w/ all these tapes, programs, etc. You’re real sharp, just read the book. Having said all this, you are a person here who might understand how this undeniably superb philosophy, was part of my analyzing this interesting post. I mentioned the book, hoping maybe someone else had read it. I was trying to steer this thread to a substantive discussion. I am quite certain this teacher has read Love and Logic or maybe just gets it naturally. This system was predicated on the great lessons of choices/natural consequences and wants/needs. Do you think this kids mom is a helicopter? She’s a damn Black Hawk! But, we had a squadron of Black Hawks swoop in here. Some people making NO substantive comments. Just calling Paul and I “abusive,” “horrible teachers” and other epithets. On the surface, the subject evokes emotion. But, love and logic is what is needed.
Jonathan – if I crossed the line with anyone I do apologize to you and them. I did not think I had, I have tried hard to be careful but evidently I have not. Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxia culpa.
Malum:
Do I agree with the withholding of the bathroom? No, the children are to young but then I dont think bathroom breaks should be part of this. Taking that part out, it is a good exercise.
Leave it to a socialis/fascist to think promoting fiscal responsibility is a bad thing.
Malum:
in regard to your query, do you pay for utilities? Do you forgo a nice dinner out or something you want so that you can meet an obligation?
As I said above, I think this exercise is a good idea for older children, 13 plus because at 7-8 I think it is too abstract.
Byron – the state sets when the kids get the curriculum. There has been some criticism that then new Common Core has kids getting stuff too early and I do not know if this is one of those cases. Again we do not have the full lesson plan or instructions for the students. The price between going to the bathroom and popcorn would seem about right though.
Having said that, we never had popcorn in my high school when I was attending. We did have pizza when I was teaching. Pizza is the food of the gods for teens. It is a great motivator. 🙂
Bryon, I have deleted two comments for violations of the civility rule. I am about to fly back to DC but it appears that the threads have gotten out of compliance in my brief absence. I may not be able to read through them all but I ask that everyone return to adult and civil discourse.
I have now deleted comments from Malo, Byron, Paul, Annie, Nick, Keebler, Els, Alique — many for multiple violations of the civility rule. It is not a defense on this blog that you were merely responded to the juvenile and personal comments of others with juvenile and personal attacks. They are all violations of our rule and, as was previously noted, we are strictly enforcing the rule after recent appearance of false aliases and attacks took over our comment sections. We have suspended a couple of posters who refused to comply and required continual babysitting on the comments. Please comply or simply find another blog.
Byron,
“part of me likes the idea of this but part of me doesnt.”
Good for you. Such a conundrum, isn’t it? I mean third-graders should be able to handle the exigencies of life.
But, then you expose your character:
“I think it would be better for older children but I would offer that little girl a job when she gets out of college, anyone willing to piss themselves for something they want, I want that person on my team.”
Then, Paul salutes you with:
“Byron – I am not sure peeing her pants was part of her business model. ;)”
which you do not respond to.
Why not? Paul’s response is really funny — if you forget this whole thread is about a third-grader.
Paul,
“I look forward to your next drive by.”
I don’t do drive bys, Paul. I park, get out, and talk to the pinche gringos. Much like this thread.
that little emocon didn’t turn out right ;D
way to go, Darren
you’ve shown that the little third grader is still alive in a group of “adults”.
;d
Nick,
“When I first got here I would answer all questions, no matter how silly, ludicrous, etc. because I was trying to be helpful.”
Delusions run deep.
Darren,
“Folks, Karen’s comment is above at 11:38”
Are you a barker now?
@Paul Schulte “Simms – if you read the definition of cognitive dissonance, not being able to feel pain in two places simultaneously does not fit. It might fit with the not being able to be both sympathetic and empathetic simultaneously.”
Cognitive dissonance has nothing to do with the pain issue nor does it mean not being able to be both sympathetic and empathetic. It’s related to your incorrect assertion that we can’t feel two opposing emotions at the same time.
You included both issues in your post. I addressed both in my post.
Simms – cognitive dissonance is holding two dissimilar ideas at the same time. I am not sure how that deals with either thing we were talking about, but I am open to conversation. When I read the definitions you supplied it fit neither scenario.