A 13 year old girl in Illinois got 2 days detention for hugging goodbye 2 friends who she wouldn't see for the weekend...and Monday, in Alabama, another student got detention for hugging a classmate whose parent died. For the school in Illinois it's in their policy that "Displays of affection should not occur on the school campus at any time. It is in poor taste, reflects poor judgment, and brings discredit to the school and to the persons involved."

Poor taste, poor judgement and discredit my rear end, THAT RULE is in poor taste, reflects poor judgment and brings discredit to the school and the people involved. What're they going to do next? Ban all dances so they don't have to touch each other? Maybe ban talking so they can't get anyone else upset? Just what is this world coming to when kids are punished for doing what is within human instinct that isn't hurting anybody?

Oh, that's SAD. Something has definitely gone amiss there.

That is absolute rubbish. The schools in question should be ashamed!

I'll say they should be. I mean WHAT benefit comes from a rule like this? Teaching kids not to act like friends, or to act like humans in general. I say if they want to ban something, ban cellphones, ban 6 inch skirts, ban free condoms from the nurse's office...ban something that actually makes sense, and punish kids who break REASONABLE rules, not something that proves they're human.

Absolutely ridiculous ...............

When I was a child in school, we were actively ENCOURAGED to show kindness and compassion toward others.

On a similar subject ....
At around the age of 6 or 7, I fell over in the playground and badly grazed my knees. I became distraught, and was hugged by my FEMALE teacher - was she interviewed by the police as a potential child molester? Of course she wasn't - she was praised as being a compassionate and caring teacher!
Nowadays, she would have been suspended from her job, and have an appointment in court!

Pathetic, ridiculous, paranoia !

When are the "law makers" going to understand that not EVERY adult who cuddles a child, is a raving paedophile!

I tell you, some instances like this, I'm ashamed to be American...this is supposed to be Land of the Free, but it's becoming Nazi Grounds.

So now they are trying to teach children to be emotionless machines. I am so glad that I don't have kids. When children are punished for being children, someone has pole-vaulted over the ridiculus line.

It's happening in UK too: here and here

"A school has banned pupils from hugging and cuddling each other because it does not want to encourage sexual behaviour",

and in the second case, (there are probably more, but haven't searched any further - too gobsmacked!)

"Steven Kenning banned them from embracing between classes because it was making them late for their lessons and could lead to a “victim” being hugged against their will."

It's just too ridiculous for words - hugging is just part of being a human being! Perhaps the schools are worried about civil action. That's all I can come up with...

Yeah, I was going to suggest the rule was probably originally written to discourage sexual behavior on school property. I think THAT is a reasonable rule. But to extend it to compassionate behavior goes beyond all reasonable limits.

I read this on my Local internet news tonight and was so shocked and sad to see that. I have an almost 14 year old granddaughter that hugs her friends on Fridays, and wishes them a good and safe weekend. She is a Christian and truly cares about them. If this ever happened to her, I will be the first person to be at that school. But thank God, her school would not do that to her or her classmates. She does go to a public school. She goes to a public school that still refers to the Christmas program, as a "Christmas Program' and they still sing songs about Jesus. The rest of the school districts around here call the 'Chistmas Programs' as 'Winter Programs'. That, in my opinion, is what is wrong with this country, ( the United States) these days. As far as taking God out of the schools. This country was founded on principles of God. I guess that we have Marilyn O'Hare to thank for that . And gee where is she? Dead? Ya think. And go figure, the son that she 'fought for' all those years ago, is now and has been for years, a Minister of God.
This article just ticks me off to my core. My heart goes out to this kid. And that school needs to get a clue.
This just 'burns my butt' as they say.
Take Care,
GrandmaHippie

It reminds me of a Duncanville 7 year old who asked a student to cover up their bra strap. That child was accused by the school of sexual harassment and was suspended for two days. Story here.

In Keller, (suburb of Ft. Worth) a girl had been reprimanded because she and a friend were holding hands in the hall. A teacher called it as PDA, and told them to stop. Story here.

In all of these cases, it is ridiculous what schools are doing now. If you even brush someone in the halls, you get detention. Some school halls are extremely narrow, and people may end up with no choice there. What happens if someone's loved one passes? Are students not allowed to care? The schools sure feel that way.

This hasn't happened in my school yet, and I hope it never does. There are so many couples wandering around hand in hand, or with an arm around the other's shoulder. It rarely goes beyond that, and if it does, so what??? It is human nature.

It really is kinda pathetic that things have come to "this place" in such matters. The saddest thing is, for me, that I slightly understand it. And by that, I mean only that I understand it as a reaction to current events as they've happened. Know that I, personally, find it to be a ridiculously LARGE reaction and not the right sort of one. By a mile. But it's how "we" seem to do things now. Something bad happens, unexpectedly and out of the realm of the "managerial"? We 'knee-jerk' to the moon. We become this large, controlling think-we-can-stop-every-problem-before-it-might-or-might-not-happen mass of misfired behavior. I am sure that there are any number of parents (notably several near Columbine High School and other schools across the world) who have lost children to horrific events that have happened in their places of education. Those parents might think these bloated safeguards in Illinois (and elsewhere) falling into place are "good" things - meaning only that they're thinking that, had these structures been in place before their children were victimized, then their sons or daughters might still be here. In regard to those parents, I fully understand how martial law tactics might sound "right". To not understand it would be to not empathize or respect their pain and/or loss. However, those (in numerical terms) isolated incidences ought not become common law across all lands, civilized or just slightly so. To do that would be to make those random acts of unimaginable violence the "norm" around which we are expected to live our lives. While it might make accountability handier (or something) for teachers/staff to prevent children from touching just in case they hurt one another, all it really does is get all people involed (hopefully) through a day with every effort taken that nothing can go wrong. Such plans might work in terms of an 8-hour attendance at a school. It doesn't really apply to those other 16 hours in a day spent outside in society where almost anything might befall anyone. And it really needs to, yes? After all, the underlying purpose of a school is to prepare it's students both intellectually and socially to function in the "world", isn't it?

But, then, I remember. Not long ago, near where I live, we had a school shooting. It took less than one second of news coverage for everybody in earshot to blame the schools and the people who manage them for almost all of it, top-to-bottom. What they didn't do to prevent it. What they should have done to see the potential for it coming. And so forth. I believe it was the next day, in a different school some short distance away, where the story was about how having those militaristic rules in place for some time (the very same ones the other school was rather suddenly demanding should have been in place in theirs) yielded mixed results and served no purpose other than to stomp on the civil rights of the student body there. In the "controlled" school the parents and students were in a mighty uproar about having to endure such unfair treatment. Were it to have happened that, in the next week (God forbid), a shooting were to occur there - would the complaints have totally reversed in both theme AND tone? One week the administration is being TOO careful. The next week, depending on events as they unfold, the same administration might be dubbed NOT CAREFUL ENOUGH. The line has become so blurred and reactionary, I'm sure that nobody's sure what the best thing to do is in any direction! And the worst of that is? When everything is going in two directions at once, science itself tells us where said thing advances to. Nowhere.

Just my random thoughts, though...

It's a shame. My son, who BTW is nearly eight years old, would have little girls chase him around in pre-school kissing him and hugging him; one little girl even wanted to marry him. Both her mother and I thought it was just cute that they would be so affectionate at such a young age and laughed it off. Now it's a different story, whereas my son had to be moved to another seat on the bus because another little girl's mother didn't approve that my son kissed her daughter's cheek. We try to encourage friendship but have to respect personal space and it's a fine line these days because what's harmless to one is too much for another. Very confusing for kids these days, that's for sure.

When my older son was little, there was a family across the street from us, who had a little girl in the same grade as him... The mother of the little girl was always wanting my son to come over to play with her children - she also had a son a couple of years younger - The mother was a SAHM, but she always dressed in very short shorts, bra-tops, and often, when she and I would be speaking with one another out on the sidewalk, she would comment, "Did you see how that guy was looking at me?" when somebody would drive by...

Well, duh..., I would think, she certainly was letting it "all hang out..."

But the part that truly bothered me, was how her daughter acted toward my son... she was very flirtaceous, at the tender age of 8! I was very much concerned with allowing my son to retain his innocence as long as possible, so I didn't like the fact that the little girl seemed to be obsessed with a "girlfriend/boyfriend" type of relationship. I eventually cooled the relationship between our families to a great extent, as I believed at that age that they certainly didn't need to be concerned with those kinds of issues. I couldn't blame the little girl, though, as she was obviously guided by her mother... who seemed to be somewhat obsessed with it herself.

By the time my younger son reached this age, I was so disgusted by what kinds of behaviors I would see in school, I finally removed him from the system entirely and home-schooled him. It wasn't only the sexual awareness issues, but the bullying, the peer pressure, and the disrespect that was displayed. It is a decision that I'm glad I made, as my older son who attended public school throughout all his childhood is far more influenced by "public opinion" or peer pressure... even in his thirties, he's much more concerned about what I consider to be "false values..." My younger son, however, is definitely his own man... very confident, but very compassionate... and very practical.

It is sad that the rules that were enforced in the schools regarding hugging came about because of today's society being so "sue-happy," and quick to take offense... Obviously these were extreme rules, but they were a reaction to today's realities, I'm afraid.

BTW, I love how you "think out loud" in your posts, Gatsby! LOL! Overly wordy... convoluted... Exactly my kind of thinking!

- sigh -

I'm prone to the same thing...

Obviously none of you is a teacher. SURE the kid is claiming it was a "hug goodbye". Where do you draw the line? I see kids giving "hugs goodbye" with their hands all over each other's butts or other parts ALL the time! Where do you draw the line? How do you draw the line? How do you know that hug is wanted? Lots of people are afraid to speak out against their attackers.

You all have jumped to a conclusion based on 2 paragraphs from someone who wasn't there! The school's job is to keep kids SAFE first--not raise them. You raise your kids at home. We'll keep them safe and educate them--in partnership with you.

Allright, you tell me...how many kids would you estimate hug their friends? Furthermore, if a hug isn't allowed, WHY should schools allow dances and sports where there's bound to be FAR MORE unwanted touching than you could ever get in a hug? Hey, maybe they should forbid every student from coming within 3 feet of each other and ban them from saying a word so nobody gets upset over anything. That's how much sense it makes and that seems to be the direction in which this could go.

Actually, we don't have kids hugging at our dances. Why on earth do you think they have to? And our kids have huge fun! Our dances make a killing in revenue for student council!

And how often are they hugging on the football field? What kind of football do you play?

Delboy--You quote me and then misenterpret me in the same breath! Look at your quote: The SCHOOL's job is to keep kids SAFE first. I didn't say "educator". And you have given NO evidence to support your theory that teachers like me mean society needs help. It seems to me you have reduced yourself to name-calling because you have nothing intelligent to say. Perhaps you should go back to school.

Gatsby722 makes a good point. The difference is that we don't play slow dances anymore. Modern dancing in your typical school to a "fast" song does not involve touching.

The point isn't because we want to make sure kids aren't hugging. The idea is to keep them from fighting or humping so we can actually help them make lives for themselves. Where I live, we have the 8th-highest teen pregnancy rate in the country. Since these children are frequently being raised by children, the parents will not get involved in their education. We're expected to teach them, raise them, and keep them safe all at the same time. If "no hugging" helps me do that, than I'm all for the greater good--which is helping kids focus on graduating high school.

Forgive me Ma'am, perhaps I should tear up my Masters degree, and remove the letters from after my name .......

You can be assured that on this website you will find some highly educated people, with a wealth of knowledge across a broad spectrum. To suggest that I or any other member should "Go back to school" simply because we express an opinion which conflicts with yours, is at the very least, patronising.

I do however accept the fact, that you as a teacher, are "On the front line" as it were. For this reason, your role and your influence upon our youngsters, is of paramount importance, - but I and others, cannot help feeling that the "Good old days" are long gone, and that our children now have to be FORCED to comply with a common code of decency, that in my day, was taken for granted.

It is very true, as others have said, that many teachers nowadays are afraid of being sued for the most ridiculous of things. Heaven help any teacher who so much as physically defends him/herself from attack by a pupil - and yet little Johnny or Jenny, are allowed, it seems, to do and say whatever they like, and have the full weight of the law behind them ..........

Delboy--Physician, heal thyself!

You said, "If YOUR opinion as a "teacher" is the opinion shared by the majority of teachers - then God help society!"

You offered no reason for this, and it was not nice.
That is not constructive criticism. That is a plain insult. I don't care if you have seven doctorates. Ignorance is ignorance.

Any school who considers it's primary job to be keeping my kid safe and not to be educating my child, with safety quite secondary, is going to be one student shorter. That's ridiculous. Is keeping kids safe a priority? You know it. Do I want my child to go to a school where her education is considered secondary to ensuring a completely sterile environment? Heck no. I'm jumping to conclusions myself here, because I think I can safely assume that you didn't actually mean education comes second to safety, but that isn't what you said, and I'm going to address what you said.

And also... you know, public school teachers work for me. They work for ME. I pay their salaries. I expect, from the money I pay, that I can trust the teachers at the schools my daughter attends to be role models for her. It isn't a school's job to raise kids? Ridiculous. It isn't a school's job to raise kids alone, but you bet your sweet bippy that every teacher at every school in this country ought to feel a very real obligation to HELP raise those kids. It's my job as a parent to raise my child, but any time my child is in the care of another adult, it is THAT ADULTS job to continue where I left off, plain and simple. And if I have any concerns whatsoever about whether they're capable of doing so, they aren't worth the money I PAY for them.

I am not a teacher. But I have been. And I've been a student, too. And now I'm a parent. I'd say I'm highly qualified to make a judgement here. And I would say that what I said before stands. A rule intended to discourage sexual behavior on school property is reasonable and I approve. But taking that rule to a limit where normal, compassionate, caring behavior between friends is a punishable offense goes beyond all reasonable limits. Was that the case in the above stories? I don't know and I don't really care. They still illustrate a potential problem.

OK, calmly now, I understand how difficult it must be to balance the demands of parents, the needs of students, the costs of services and all the other things that have to go into running a school district. A rule that discourages sexual behavior can no longer be applied only to a boy/girl couple. Just because its two girls hugging doesn't mean it's "just friends". And ANY contact between students could be dangerous contact, it's true. So how can a teacher be expected to know whether any given hug is wanted or not wanted, sexual or not sexual? I have a simple answer: pay attention to the kids. When I think of my high school, I can tell you which teachers where the best teachers and which were the worst teachers. And I can guarantee that every single one of the good teachers in my high school would be able to tell just based on which two students were hugging what kind of hug it was. Why? Because they knew who we all were friends with, they knew when we had troubles with each other, they knew when we had troubles at home and needed to be comforted, they took part in our lives because THEY DID feel that obligation to help raise us into amazing adults. They KNEW it was part of their jobs. I didn't go to a small school. My graduating class had over 750 kids in it, the whole school was close to 3500 kids. Maybe thta isn't a huge school, but it isn't like we all knew each other because there were so few of us.

I know it's parental uproar that makes teachers put up a barrier between themselves and the students. It's a darn shame, too. But at the same time, at least in my area, the teachers and school districts have just rolled over and let a couple of reactionary parents build a wall for them, without fighting back, without fighting to do the job they know is RIGHT. And that's as much the teachers' faults as it is the parents.