Recently our school board met with the District’s attorney to review the legal implications that are involved in the appeals hearings that they conduct for students who have been expelled, had a hearing with a paid hearing officer, and wish to dispute his findings.

Having been involved in many of these hearings in the past, I found the “constraints” that the attorney was advising to be a significant indicator why schools, and general society, may be having some difficult problems.

Typical students using this appeal process admit to “Doing the deed” for which they are being expelled, but do not wish to be excluded from school, often in spite of dubious evidence of scholarship. The school board is provided with a complete record of all discipline incidents that the student has incurred prior to this hearing. Often this list is quite lengthy.

What the District’s attorney was cautioning the Board about this was that they should not be “Judgmental” with either the student or parents!

Isn’t this a significant part of our problem in our society? Are “Judges” the only people who can be judgmental? Is conduct and behavior “Optional?” It seems so. Looking at the reader’s responses to a school district’s decisions in Oregon to fine parents for truant children, it would appear that many do not believe that parents have any responsibility for the actions of their children! I could be very “Judgmental” about this.

In the local paper a feature editorial suggests that we should wear condoms as decorative earrings! I would guess that most would advise job applicants that this wouldn’t be the best choice in dress for an interview. However if an employee were to come to work wearing condoms on their ears, and be dismissed for this, it is very likely that a court case might arise. Why? The supervisor has made a “Judgment,” and we seem to be very condemning about making such a judgment!

As I walked in front of the local movie theatre I noticed a promo that said, “Fall in love, get married, have a baby, not necessarily in that order.” It used to be that the “order” was considered pretty acceptable, and other “orders” were judged as being inappropriate. What we do know now is that when this order is not preserved the likelihood of success, in education, drops significantly. In other words, if you were “Judgmental,” you would probably suggest that this wasn’t a good idea. Today this is a topic for a movie, and I am sure that the negative consequences of this, single parenthood, will not be portrayed in a very negative light, too “Judgmental!”

Is there no longer “Good” and “Bad?” Would it be inappropriate for School Board members to chastise parents and children when they have exhibited repeated examples of behavior that is counter-productive to the child’s future? Evidently so! Have we reached a point where “We don’t care,” about the conduct of children and even adults? Sadly I think we have. Our juvenile court system, and to a great extent our court system seems to want to “Give everyone a second, third, fourth, ……. Chance!” This sends a very powerful positive message to those who believe, often correctly, that “Rules and laws are optional.” “Obligations are something that others have unto me, I have no obligations” seems to be the motto of a very significant portion of our youth.

George Will, featured columnist in Newsweek, this past week made some very relevant comments when he said, “The culture of the boy-men today is less a life stage than a lifestyle. Permissive parenting made children less submissive, and the decline of deference coincided with the rise of consumer and media cultures celebrating the indefinite retention of the tastes and habits of childhood.”

Educators, and many Legislators, have taken to this with great enthusiasm. There are “Second Chances, postponement of goals, and many other evasive actions to avoid any “Judgmental” decisions. These same people would be horrified if this same rationale were to be used in certification of pilots! Why? These same people believe, correctly, that their lives might be in danger. They insist that pilot examiners be “Judgmental!” “High stakes tests” are OK when they have an effect upon us, they are not OK if it is just a matter of inattention in school!

Why is this “Double standard acceptable?”

“Last November, when Tiger Woods's misadventures became public, his agent said: "Let's please give the kid a break." The kid was then 33. He is now 34 but, no doubt, still a kid,” according to George Will.

When do we leave the “Kid” era? When do we decide that kids, and their parents, have to be accountable for their actions? “Personal Responsibility” seems to be an option, and the lack of this should be considered by others in a “Judgmental way” if we are to have an organized society.