Posted by parent, a resident of another community, on Dec 3, 2009 at 11:00 pm
Why would the district allow a 21 year old MALE work at a middle school where young girls attend? That's just plain stupid and LOOK WHAT HAPPENED. WOW! Mountain View Whisman School District needs to wake up.
Posted by @ parent, a resident of another community, on Dec 4, 2009 at 2:16 pm
Don't be rude! There are many 21 year old men who would never ever do such a thing. There are part time college students who could use a bit of extra money, so they could work a couple hours at a middle school.
It is completely biased of you to say that! Sounds like maybe you sit around and wait for something to happen, then say how stupid people are for allowing it.
Posted by Prent at Landels, a resident of the Jackson Park neighborhood, on Dec 4, 2009 at 3:26 pm
Just thinking it's pretty funny that there are 3 or 4 comments about this topic, and 2 million gossipy comments about the Geysels article. Just goes to show that people are more interested in talking about gossip than they are in students' safety. Strange.
Parent at Landels. (Jackson Park is not my neighborhood. Mine is not listed.)
Posted by Parent, a resident of the The Crossings neighborhood, on Dec 4, 2009 at 3:39 pm
Prent at Landeld: you obviously missed the point on the Ghysels article. It had nothing to do with gossip, but with spin, corruption, lies, conflict of interest, abuse of power, the creation of an unfair work environment and equal opportunity, and a waste of school resources and funds. Glad I could educate you.
That said. There needs to be better screening of applicants who work around children. Thankfully, this child new how to react.
Posted by reader, a resident of another community, on Dec 4, 2009 at 5:15 pm
"Glad I could educate you." God. Some people hold themselves in such high regard.
The near-eternal Ghysels commentary was not about any of those things mentioned above. It was really about the psychology of a noisy minority. Specifically, it was about fortifying the self-righteousness of people so self-important they actually say things like "Glad I could educate you."
Posted by Parent, a resident of another community, on Dec 5, 2009 at 9:07 am
To the 4th person who placed their comment:
No one can predict what anybody would do. This is not "Fantasy Land" where we can TRUST people to stay on track. We need to stay ONE STEP ahead of these creeps and you do that by carefully screening all applicants, run thorough background checks, gather references, create a stiff probationary period and cameras really should be installed in every classroom to protect the students.
This is not about being biased. It is about protecting the innocent students.
Curious: Do you SINCERELY have a comment ON THIS ARTICLE? OR are you an abuser yourself?
Posted by Anonym., a resident of the Cuesta Park neighborhood, on Dec 5, 2009 at 10:35 am
I thought all school workers had to fingerprinted and given background checks. Perhaps the schools need more screening of these workers. This person was hired to supervise children. What if he was placed in an elementary school?
(I wish people could disagree and debate on here without taking it down to the mud with personal attacks)
Posted by reader, a resident of another community, on Dec 5, 2009 at 9:55 pm reader is a member (registered user) of Mountain View Online
So, the police can't do anything and the district is willing to give the child counseling. Who is responsible for screening applicants and how is it that people can work this closely with students and not have a thorough background check? Is the district still paying this person while they are on administrative leave? Does a yard duty person usually work in a classroom or are they supposed to be outside with many students? How did the student get in a classroom, if there is no teacher in the classroom aren't the rooms supposed to be locked?
Can the Voice find answers to any of these questions? Someone needs to look out for the students in the MVWSD as it appears that the district itself is doing a mighty poor job!
Posted by Martha, a resident of the Waverly Park neighborhood, on Dec 7, 2009 at 3:11 pm Martha is a member (registered user) of Mountain View Online
Of course, there is the (entirely likely) possibility that the school did run the required fingerprint/background check (anyone hiring people to supervise children is required to get the fingerprint check done) but that a) this guy never did anything like this before, or b) he never got caught/convicted of anything before, in which case nothing would show up on the check.
I agree with parent from Monroe Park. The overwhelming majority of young men would NEVER do something like this, so to say that the district should never hire a young male to work with kids is ridiculous. Camp counselors, YMCA sports instructors, after-school care instructors, volunteer sports coaches -- many fine young men are doing an admirable job working with children every day. If you follow the logic of males being a danger to middle schoolers, then age really doesn't matter, so we'd have to fire all the excellent male teachers we have and not let dads do volunteer coaching, etc.
This was a bad thing that happened, absolutely. Everyone is shocked, but the girl did the right thing by telling the principal right away, the school reported it to the police right away and went looking for the employee, the kids in school were told about it and the parents were informed via email the same day. I think the school handled the immediate situation very well.