Private School Expels Student to "Protect" Its Reputation

[overedge]

And of course the student and her parents are suing.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...rticle1556963/

at "Volvo mafia"....

[genevieve]

They don't mention if the boy was expelled too...I'm guessing not? Or maybe he wasn't a student there.

[PDilemma]

Nowhere in the article does it say or imply that she was expelled to "protect the school's reputation". It says she was expelled for having sex at a school function. It also says that the school's policy is to expel students for "sexual misconduct" which probably means inappropriate sexual behavior at school or school events or harassment of other students or staff.

The problem here is not that the school has the rule in place or that the school expelled a student for violating the rule. The problem is that there is no substantial proof that the student violated the rule. She was expelled based on an unfortunate circumstance and gossip. That is what is wrong in this story.

[overedge]

Nowhere in the article does it say or imply that she was expelled to "protect the school's reputation".

But it does in this one:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...rticle1558123/

[IceKween]

Not surprising. I went to a christian university that was recovering from a lawsuit from a young woman who became pregnant. She was expelled, the father was allowed to remain in school. All of it was settled with 'no comment' on the settlement. I hope she sues. It's gender discrimination pure and simple. But then again, that's what I see in christianity and conservatism these days. Why any woman would want to be a member of this club, to me just shows extremely low self-esteem and fear. Fight it, fight the good ole boy christian sexism.

[Really]

The original article I read in the Calgary Herald said nothing about the school's reputation. Strathcona Tweedsmuir is well-known in Alberta. It has a good reputation for academics, but that's about all I've ever heard (except for the fact that it's private, and expensive).

[Ziggy]

Jesus Christ, hello 21st century. Being expelled from school for having sex?

And I understand her boyfriend wasn't expelled (it's not explicitly mentioned in the article)?

There's just no words...

[pollyanna]

Jesus Christ, hello 21st century. Being expelled from school for having sex?

Worse than that, it's for ALLEGEDLY having sex, as in it's gossip with no proof, no witnesses, and a firm denial from the expellee.

Maybe we should start some gossip about the principal and teachers at the school so they will get fired. Then start some rumors about the Volvo mafia so their kids get expelled. That would be just as acceptable, wouldn't it?

[Prancer]

Jesus Christ, hello 21st century. Being expelled from school for having sex?

So if they had been having sex on the counter in a women's restroom, you'd be cool with that?

I mean, sex is one thing. Having sex in the open in a public restroom during a school function would get a kid bounced from just about any school, I would think, especially if the students were intoxicated.

And yes, I know that's not what happened; I was addressing what Ziggy said, not the testimony--which, apparently, did not include any statement regarding the school's reputation (as that part is not a quotation) and also explicitly said that it was not known whether or not the student had had sex. The first article (very sympathetically, I must say) presents the case offered by the girl's family; the second focuses more on the testimony of the defendants; there do seem to be quite a few differences in perception of events there.

Was her boyfriend also a student at the school? Because if he was and it was believed that he was having sex with an intoxicated girl, I find it hard to believe nothing was done about it.

[Ziggy]

So if they had been having sex on the counter in a women's restroom, you'd be cool with that?

Fine it it was in a closed cubicle, not fine if it was on the counter.

[pollyanna]

And yes, I know that's not what happened; I was addressing what Ziggy said, not the testimony--which, apparently, did not include any statement regarding the school's reputation (as that part is not a quotation) and also explicitly said that it was not known whether or not the student had had sex. The first article (very sympathetically, I must say) presents the case offered by the girl's family; the second focuses more on the testimony of the defendants; there do seem to be quite a few differences in perception of events there.

Phfffft! I never let facts get in the way of my righteous indignation.

[MOIJTO]

Why should we be surprised that something like this happens, it happens everyday.

[Prancer]

Fine it it was in a closed cubicle, not fine if it was on the counter.

But she was on the counter, he was standing in front of her...

Why should we be surprised that something like this happens, it happens everyday.

Something like.....what? The expelling of the students? Students getting drunk? Gossip in the schools? Sexual activity (or not) in public restrooms?People not reading links before expressing judgments? Posters making vague comments?

[Gazpacho]

Was her boyfriend also a student at the school? Because if he was and it was believed that he was having sex with an intoxicated girl, I find it hard to believe nothing was done about it.

That's what I'm interested in as well.

However, I do know a case of an intoxicated date rape at an elite boarding school, and the school did zero about it because the guy was a star athlete.

[genevieve]

Something like.....what? The expelling of the students? Students getting drunk? Gossip in the schools? Sexual activity (or not) in public restrooms?People not reading links before expressing judgments? Posters making vague comments?

All of the above.

[Ziggy]

Prancer, we can just backtrack now on the fact that it was just gossip and the sex wasn't proven.

[Prancer]

Prancer, we can just backtrack now on the fact that it was just gossip and the sex wasn't proven.

Well, we could, but I'm not really sure why we would. While the first article implies that there was gossip before the expulsion, the actual testimony that was given was about gossip took place after the girl was expelled (not surprising, given the time frame). I don't see much relevance.

The expulsion was the result of an eyewitness who walked into the restroom, saw the girl on the counter with her skirt hiked up and the boy standing between her legs, and then reported what she saw to the principal of the school--who says that the woman did not say to him that the two were having sex. The girl testified that the woman accused the couple of having sex at the time, and from what the principal said, the woman certainly implied it in what she said to him, but the "former principal said it didn’t matter whether the teen was actually having sex in the public place. It was enough that a 'prominent member of the community' witnessed 'inappropriate behaviour' to result in removing student Julia Oram from the school."

For the record, the girl agreed that that is what the woman saw, but both she and the boy said that he was cleaning vomit off her shoes.

But of course, everyone actually read both links before posting and knows that already. I'm just, you know, refreshing your memory.

If you ask me, the only actual question here is whether the expulsion was warranted by the school's own policies. The girl had been drinking and admitted it; the school's typical response to that has been suspension (but the article says "usually," not "always.") Students are expelled for sexual misconduct. However, it's not just a matter of what the school has done; it's also a matter of what the school CAN do and whether it has followed its own rules, and what reason was given for the expulsion at the time. None of that is at all clear in the articles; both seem surprisingly unprofessional to me.

The rest is just so much smoke blowing, IMO. I mean, really, are we supposed to believe that this expulsion alone so devastated this girl that "it took stints in two additional schools to obtain her diploma – and she is now working in retail at a local mall. The episode derailed her plans and threw her life in turmoil."



I guess she was on the fast track to a full academic scholarship to McGill before "the incident." You'd think that might have merited a mention in the articles, too, given how mistreated poor Julia was.

[MOIJTO]

Something like.....what? The expelling of the students? Students getting drunk? Gossip in the schools? Sexual activity (or not) in public restrooms?People not reading links before expressing judgments? Posters making vague comments?

Mine was a general statement as to the reasons behind expelling/removing students, some are ligit and some are manipulated, it happens in all kinds of schools.