Driving liberals, dhimmis and illegal alien apologists absolutely insane since 2005...

Child Safety Or Convenience For Illegal Aliens?

By Greg L | 27 November 2007 | Illegal Aliens, Prince William County | 44 Comments

A new security plan for Prince William County Public Schools will require anyone entering schools to present a government-issued photo identification in order to screen for sex offenders and other potential hazards, according to WTOP.  This seems like a good idea, given that current security measures don’t detect fake identification documents, and schools are clearly a vulnerable target for terrorists and criminals.  At least if we can detect that someone who shouldn’t be at a school is trying to gain access when they attempt entry, it should significantly improve the security posture for what remains a soft target.

Starting next month, the school system will require anyone entering any of its 86 schools during school hours to present a government-produced picture ID that will be scanned and checked.

Your photo will be scanned into a database and compared with the photo you have on record. And, it will be checked against Virginia’s sex offender registry, says Rob Crowe, security services coordinator for Prince William County schools.

Of course this is going to cause all sorts of headaches for illegal aliens, who don’t have legitimate government-issued photo identification.  Just watch for them to raise all sorts of heck about this, claiming that we should forgo security enhancements because they might inconvenience someone who has enrolled their children in our county schools despite their unlawful presence in our country.

This is going to force a major gut-check for the School Board.  Do you institute measures to protect our children, or make sure illegal aliens aren’t inconvenienced?  After Milt Johns is sworn in as Chairman of the School Board, I’m pretty sure they’ll stand firm with the first option, but that doesn’t mean at all that citizens shouldn’t be weighing in on this at every opportunity.  You should let them know how you feel about this, just in case.



The opinions expressed here are solely the views of the author, and not representative of the position of any organization, political party, doughnut shop, knitting guild, or waste recycling facility, but may be correctly attributed to the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. If anything in the above article has offended you, please click here to receive an immediate apology.

BVBL is not a charity and your support is not tax-deductible.

You can follow the discussion through the Comments feed.

44 Comments

  1. John Light said on 27 Nov 2007 at 10:58 pm:
    Flag comment

    I agree, this is a good start. Question, if an illegal comes in to see their child and cannot produce ID, are they not able to get the child out of school? Here we are teaching them, but we refuse to let the child go to the parent. Will the office escort the child to the parent? Which is worse, handing the child over to the illegal parent with no ID or to a parent who has ID but is in the middle of a known custody battle and there is a chance the child will be kidnapped?

    Personally, I do not believe we should be giving a first rate education to an illegal’s child. That is like me robbing someone of their cash and then buying nice clothes for my children who otherwise would be in rags.

  2. Anonymous said on 28 Nov 2007 at 3:41 am:
    Flag comment

    Anyone who is a terrorist or who wanted to go on a school rampage would simply shoot the person at the front and continue on their way. The only way I see this working in that situation is to have an armed school resource officer at the front as a physical deterrent. As far as illegal aliens go, the plan would work fine for them and seems to be the real purpose of the changes.

  3. Rick Bentley said on 28 Nov 2007 at 6:42 am:
    Flag comment

    This is a real opportunty to confront or highlight the double standard between the way citizens are treated and the way illegals are coddled.

    Supposedy the kids have a right to go to school but the parents have no legal right to set foot in the school. ICE should deport them if and when they show up.

  4. anon said on 28 Nov 2007 at 7:06 am:
    Flag comment

    The policy for several years has been that you have always needed a picture ID to pick a child up or to go elsewhere in the school to volunteer. PWCS have been very strict about this policy. Even if you are in the school every day that week volunteering in the library, they will still politely ask for an ID each day that you come in. Last year they changed the policy slightly so that visitors actually have to leave the ID at the office for the entire time they remain in the building and then pick it up upon exiting the building.

    I’d never thought about it before but what have illegal aliens been doing all along? They probably don’t volunteer that much, but you would think they would have had to pick a child up at one point or another.

    The only difference with this new policy is that the IDs will actually be scanned and checked. What is the school secretary supposed to do if something pops up during the check? I’m very curious as to how this is going to be implemented.

  5. Anonymous said on 28 Nov 2007 at 7:07 am:
    Flag comment

    Yes but once again if the child is born here they are legal. Should make for an interesting catch 22. The system is the Raptor system and has been in use around the county.

    http://www.raptorware.com/

  6. anon said on 28 Nov 2007 at 7:23 am:
    Flag comment

    The child may be legal, but the parents have always been asked for ID when picking up a child. So what have they been doing for the past 7 years?

  7. One Voice said on 28 Nov 2007 at 8:04 am:
    Flag comment

    I wrote to several board members regarding the 22 year old that was attending Freedom HS. Illegals aside the other issues that came to mind and conveyed in my message to Mrs. Covington, Mr. Royse, Ms. Martinez and Mr. Frederick were: sexual predators, gunman, gang recruiters, terrorist promises that they will attack the schools as in the Belsen seige and so forth.

    Mrs. Covington’s reply to me ” this happens all the time” was as scary as actual event. Ms. Martinez has yet to respond. Mr. (I am very responsive) Frederick of course responded immediately as was concerned with the reply from Covington. I received two responses from the Royse campaign both expressing concern beyond the illegal issue.

    This is one step in the right direction but they need to do this in their admissions office as well.

    I’ve only been involved with public schools for two years, but if I wish to go further than the front office at FPHS, I have to show an ID. Not sure what this is all about.

  8. 999 said on 28 Nov 2007 at 8:41 am:
    Flag comment

    anon said on 28 Nov 2007 at 7:23 am:
    The child may be legal, but the parents have always been asked for ID when picking up a child. So what have they been doing for the past 7 years?

    Probably showing an electric or gas bill!

  9. anon said on 28 Nov 2007 at 8:44 am:
    Flag comment

    I checked out the website…very interesting. Although I did think the digitally animated man who describes the system was very creepy looking….kind of weird for a system that is supposed to be watching for sexual predators.

    The software has a scanner that scans each ID and immediately runs checks through a nationwide system to see if the ID matches any sexual predators. A cell phone call is automatically placed to a security official at the school when a bad name comes up. A sticky badge prints out with a copy of the ID, including the photo, that serves in place of the old Visitor badges where you had to write in your own name and date. The website didn’t say if it checks for other things like criminal convictions or outstanding warrants.

    Badges are only used when you are going to be staying at the school. If you are just entering the building to pick up a child, you just show your ID and then leave with the child (no badge required), although they usually check the ID against the emergency info card to make sure you are an authorized custodian of the child. It will be interesting to see how they handle pick ups with the new system. This same system caught a child predator at an Annapolis high school trying to pick up a family friend recently.

    The system is also integrated to a district wide network. So I’m guessing that they will be able to tell at the school system headquarters exactly who is in each school at any point in time.
    The current system requiring IDs and signing in means that only each particular school knows who is in the building at any one point in time.

    It sounds a bit futuristic and big brotherish, but I guess if the point is to keep kids safe, then it is a good investment.

  10. Keeping Illegal Aliens Out Of PWC Schools « Virginia Virtucon said on 28 Nov 2007 at 9:16 am:
    Flag comment

    […] For more, see Greg L.’s thoughts on this over at BVBL. […]

  11. /\/\3|)iç 64 said on 28 Nov 2007 at 9:23 am:
    Flag comment

    What is wrong with requiring the parents to show gov’t issued ID when they register the children? NOTHING!! I do not have children in the PWC school system any longer, but I am glad to hear the school is stepping up security for the children that are there. Just think of the havoc that terrorists could have with a multiple school take over. Who knows how many other jets were in the air that tragic Tuesday morning in Sept. If they can orchestrate an attack like that, who is to say they won’t do it to the school system as well?? Imagine the great loss and the tragic loss of hundreds of thousands of school children. Mind numbing IMHO! Suicide bombers would have no problem walking into a school and blowing it up for the virgins!!! Imagine the devastation for an entire generation and the fear they would place into that generation.

    What I am talking about could be done with the right planning. The terrorist were caught getting ready to cross the border to do harm to a military base. It is a fortified position, how much easier would it be for a non fortified, non firearm bearing guarded building with people that have no way to defend themselves? I would hate to think of the loss if they decided to go that route. They could easily coordinate something like that and take more American lives than the number lost in the WTC.

  12. CitizenofManassas said on 28 Nov 2007 at 9:24 am:
    Flag comment

    As I commented when I posted this in another link, illegals will be treated differently from everyone else. Yet, all we hear from illegals and those that support them is they want to be treated just like everyone else. Of course we know the school system is most likely going to bend over backward for the illegals.

  13. Dolph said on 28 Nov 2007 at 9:37 am:
    Flag comment

    /\/\3|)iç 64,

    I agree with you about the potential for mass terrorism directed at schools. What better way to bring Americans momentarily to their knees. I thought of this on 9/11. This is why it is critical that we secure our borders and know who is in our country.

    I am glad to see this new security measure, but it really is a false sense of security against terrorism.

  14. Riley said on 28 Nov 2007 at 11:03 am:
    Flag comment

    The inability for illegal aliens to enter a school where they may want to enroll their children could in turn further discourage them from settling in or remaining in PWC. (Just think of the impact the resolution has already had and it has not yet even been implemented!) This is obviously not the intention of this policy, but that is exactly why it could withstand any judicial scrutiny as there is a rational basis for doing this other than to deny children of illegal immigrants a public school education as the U.S. Supreme Court wrongly decided in the 5-4 Plyler v. Doe decision. Ladies and gentlemen, I think that we may have just stumbled into the loophole that will effectively gut that decision.

  15. Bob Sentz said on 28 Nov 2007 at 11:24 am:
    Flag comment

    If they don’t have ID, they can probably just sign an affadavit. Like they do for everything else.

  16. /\/\3|)iç 64 said on 28 Nov 2007 at 11:26 am:
    Flag comment

    Dolph, It sure is because nothing stops a truckload of explosives from driving right into the school building.

    Riley, You are exactly right. How can any court uphold or listen to arguments about requiring ID to gain access to a school? Who in their right mind would oppose this? Your train of thought was in my mind as well.

  17. /\/\3|)iç 64 said on 28 Nov 2007 at 11:30 am:
    Flag comment

    COM, I do not want PWC School system to bend over backwards. I would hope the teachers do not encourage it either. It is their safety as well as the children’s that is jeopardized if they do. I hope the teachers stand up for the security measures in place and even for tighter ones just for the reasons I stated above.

  18. Turn PW Blue said on 28 Nov 2007 at 11:48 am:
    Flag comment

    At an Advisory Council meeting at my daughter’s school last night, we were told that those without adequate identification would not be given guest badges and would need to have an escort when in the building. The badges are only required if you are staying at the school for any length of time. Picking up a child or dropping something off at the office will not require ID checks in the system. Given that, I don’t see this as the “loophole” that “will effectively gut” Plyer v. Doe.

    There are several other reasons for this new system in addition to controlling who enters the school. It also serves as a register of who is in the building in the event of a disaster. It allows for more detailed head counts for search and rescue teams, for instance. It will also be used for schools to track volunteer hours and numbers (both metrics in each school plan).

  19. CitizenofManassas said on 28 Nov 2007 at 11:59 am:
    Flag comment

    \/\3|)iç 64 said on 28 Nov 2007 at 11:30 am:
    COM, I do not want PWC School system to bend over backwards. I would hope the teachers do not encourage it either. It is their safety as well as the children’s that is jeopardized if they do. I hope the teachers stand up for the security measures in place and even for tighter ones just for the reasons I stated above.

    Well, we will have to wait and see.

  20. 999 said on 28 Nov 2007 at 12:38 pm:
    Flag comment

    A bit off of the topic but I have a question that no one seems to be able to answer. The Supereme Court has ruled and we are mandated to educate illegal aliens. The key word here is “educate.” Why then are we (the taxpayers) also have to provide them free or discounted meals at school. Is there anything in the court’s ruling that say we have to feed them (illegals) also?

  21. /\/\3|)iç 64 said on 28 Nov 2007 at 12:38 pm:
    Flag comment

    Turn PW Blue, It may not gut Plyer v Doe, but it will make the illegals think twice about the chance of being caught. This will help with the self deportation effort in place. The more chances you give the illegals to be caught, the fewer risks they will be wanting to take. The sanctuary cities are looking real good right now. The noose is tightening and the pressure is squeezing them out. This is exactly what Americans want.

    I feel that if the illegals didn’t raise attention to themselves and went about their business, assimilated to their surroundings and took up the American way of doing things, most if not all people wouldn’t give them a second look or question their status (not kicking a sleeping dog comes to mind here). They are going about this all wrong. If they want to stay in the US, adapt, assimilate and overcome their weaknesses in English and no one would be the wiser or probably challenge them in any way.

    However, you flaunt your law breaking ways in the faces of law abiding citizens and you have just kicked the sleeping dog laying on the porch. He is up barking and ready to bite.

  22. /\/\3|)iç 64 said on 28 Nov 2007 at 12:40 pm:
    Flag comment

    999, It all comes back to PC. We will hurt lil johnny’s fragile disposition if we single him out in the lunch room by not feeding him. I can see a constitution challenge for cruel and unusual punishment.

  23. John Light said on 28 Nov 2007 at 12:53 pm:
    Flag comment

    How about the use of biometrics (fingerprint technology). At the beginning of the school year you enroll your fingerprint into the computer system. Then, whenever the parent has to pick the child up, if they live close to the school and forget their ID all they have to do is “give the computer the finger.”

    Anyone with bad fingerprints (exyma [sp], construction) will have their government ID with picture scanned into the system.

  24. /\/\3|)iç 64 said on 28 Nov 2007 at 12:57 pm:
    Flag comment

    John, That is an excellent idea!! If the person is there to pick up the child and doesn’t have a finger print on file, then they have to produce a gov’t issued ID. The problem is too many can be forged which is the problem.

  25. Turn PW Blue said on 28 Nov 2007 at 1:29 pm:
    Flag comment

    JL:

    How would you propose paying for these biometric units? It’s a great idea, but someone has to pick up the tab.

    Medic64:
    The school lunch program is a Federal program (and Federally mandated). So, while the Supreme Court doesn’t say we have to feed them, the Federal government does.

    In terms of self-deportation, it may scare some, but probably not many. If they weren’t scared to register their children, they’re not likely to be scared to pick them up at school. My guess is that most illegals are not regular school volunteers, so they actually wouldn’t need to use the system very often and even when they did, nothing in the PWCS policy suggests that the schools will be reporting anyone.

  26. Advocator said on 28 Nov 2007 at 2:20 pm:
    Flag comment

    The real reason for the ID check is to place one more obstacle on parents going into a school to observe it. The administrators just don’t want them to know how bad it really its.

    If administrators were really interested in school security, they would obtain concealed carry permits, and carry guns, and require teachers to carry guns, also.

  27. 999 said on 28 Nov 2007 at 2:21 pm:
    Flag comment

    Turn PW Blue said on 28 Nov 2007 at 1:29 pm:
    The school lunch program is a Federal program (and Federally mandated). So, while the Supreme Court doesn’t say we have to feed them, the Federal government does.

    Okay, but how is the determination made on who gets the free meals, who gets the subsidized ones? I assume that it is based on the salary of the parents but what is an illegal going to show for income when the work off of the books etc.? Still mystified as to why free and subsidized meals are offered. If you don’t want to buy your lunch, bring it from home.

  28. Turn PW Blue said on 28 Nov 2007 at 3:48 pm:
    Flag comment

    Advocator:

    That’s about as far from the truth as I could imagine. I have yet to be in a Prince William County School that was not open to parent observation. At my daughter’s school there are over 30 parents a day in the classrooms, most as volunteers, some as observers.

  29. Advocator said on 28 Nov 2007 at 4:05 pm:
    Flag comment

    Just pulling your leg, PW.

  30. me-n-u said on 28 Nov 2007 at 4:14 pm:
    Flag comment

    The illegal’s use there martricular (sp?) I.D. cards to pick up their kids. Right now hey are allowed to use these I.D.’s then are able to DRIVE away. Last I heard, you need a drivers license to drive a car. Will these I.D.’s be acceptable forms of I.D. at the schools?

  31. UnMasmexican said on 28 Nov 2007 at 6:01 pm:
    Flag comment

    Demanding IDs is nothing more than blatant racism or, worse, an attempt to keep recent immigrants out of the schools to better “assimilate” our children. Or perhaps to keep the parents unaware of the weak ESL services many students get.

    Further proof that many of the people in PWC would rather have our children become the American example of Australia’s Lost Generation than truly welcome and accept the emerging Latino culture.

    Viva la raza!!

    (Prove you are not scared by the truth of my views by not deleting my posts!!)

  32. MP Resident said on 28 Nov 2007 at 6:24 pm:
    Flag comment

    I think your posts should be left to stand as they are, “UnMasmexican”.

  33. redawn said on 28 Nov 2007 at 6:47 pm:
    Flag comment

    UnMasmexican.

    I disagree for several reasons.

    First: there was a 22 yr old that fraudulently enrolled at one of our high schools.
    If a student can do this, then who can come into to our school on a WHIM with no ID and the possibilities are endless.
    This is for the safety of the STAFF and CHILDREN

    here is the link :

    http://www.manassasjm.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=MJM%2FMGArticle%2FWPN_BasicArticle&c=MGArticle&cid=1173353184678&path=

    Man, 22, charged with attending high school

    A 22-year-old Woodbridge man was charged with fraudulently enrolling at Freedom High School, 15201 Neabsco Mills Road in Woodbridge, around 9 a.m. Thursday, said Officer Erika Hernandez, Prince William police spokeswoman.

    Gerson Gamaliel Flores Alfaro, of 14784 Tamarack Place, was charged with possession of marijuana on school property, forging a public document and having a false birth certificate, Hernandez said.

    Police said a school resource officer was investigating an incident in which a student had drugs on school property, and found out that the student had fraudulently enrolled in school, Hernandez said.

    Alfaro was held without bond and has a Dec. 19 court date.

    - Elisa Glushefski

  34. Dolph said on 28 Nov 2007 at 7:19 pm:
    Flag comment

    UnmaskedMexican,

    The ID system has nothing to do with immigration. It has everything to do with security of the kids and the staff. Prince William County needs to know who is in its schools at all times.

    The ID system is not new. New software will improve the old system that has been used for many years.

    Don’t cry racism where none exists. If I were you and being selective, at least you could worry about all the Latino students who might be harmed by a terrorist, child abductor, non-custodial parent, wack job parent, the list of dangers go on. Me? I am concerned over all students and staff.

  35. CJC said on 28 Nov 2007 at 9:14 pm:
    Flag comment

    Sorry this is off topic, but I just talked to a relative in Denver and she said that last night the local tv network (ABC or CBS??) played the Peanuts Charlie Brown Christmas in Spanish. It was not on a Spanish channel, it was on one of the main stations.

  36. Dolph said on 28 Nov 2007 at 11:33 pm:
    Flag comment

    CJC,

    I am surprised Tandredo didn’t have a fit. Why would that be done? Could it have been an accident?

  37. AWCheney said on 29 Nov 2007 at 3:09 am:
    Flag comment

    UnMasmexican said on 28 Nov 2007 at 6:01 pm:
    “Demanding IDs is nothing more than blatant racism or, worse, an attempt to keep recent immigrants out of the schools to better “assimilate” our children.”

    Actually UnMasmexican, the most racist person I’ve noticed on this blog happens to be you. You take a policy that has existed for many years, certainly as long as MY children were in school in PWC (they graduated in 2005) that is merely being tweaked and call it racist. It would seem that you consider anyone that doesn’t look like you, speak like you, or agree with you to be racist. Isn’t that in part how it’s defined? (Note: Not looking for an answer to that.)

    On various occasions you have expressed an almost misogynistic contempt for women: you have been rude and lacking in any reasonable argument in the debate, choosing only to play the “racist” card on every occasion; you have often been crude and insulting, showing an inordinate interest in our young daughters; and, in general, you have shown yourself to be a generally disagreeable person who, in all probability, embarrasses those on your side of the issue who attempt to debate with reason and facts with enough respect for other’s opinions to address them with civility (I count Leila, Lovisa, and even Claire among those). You should keep it up…I strongly suspect that you are becoming the poster boy for the extremists (who do not, btw, speak for me or the vast majority on our side of the issue) on the other side of the issue who are pointing to you (and those like you) as evidence that only extreme measures will ultimately bring this to a conclusion (isolationism). And you wonder why you aren’t winning any friends or influencing people.

  38. anon said on 29 Nov 2007 at 4:12 am:
    Flag comment

    Unrelated story, North Carolina community colleges being forced to accept illegal aliens:

    Raleigh — North Carolina community colleges must accept illegal immigrants as students if they meet admission guidelines, according to a new policy.

    Previously, colleges had the option of rejecting illegal immigrants, even if they were at least 18 and had graduated from high school.

    However, a lawyer for the North Carolina Community College System recently issued a memo saying that all 58 campuses needed to fall into line with a 1997 opinion by then-Attorney General Mike Easley.

    Wake Technical Community College was among the campuses that previously required students to prove legal residency.

    “We will abide by the rules of the State Board of Community Colleges,” Wake Tech President Stephen Scott said.

    More than half of the community colleges statewide already allowed undocumented immigrants to enroll, and state officials estimated that about 340 such students are attending class.

    Students without documentation must pay out-of-state tuition – about $7,400 for a full class-load at Wake Tech – which officials said would likely discourage many of them from applying.

    The higher fees also would generate a $2,000 profit per illegal immigrant student for the community colleges, officials said.

    But politicians statewide ridiculed the new policy.

    “This is a stupid policy,” U.S. Rep. Sue Myrick, R-N.C., of Charlotte, said in a statement. “Our community colleges are supposed to educate and train American citizens to enter the work force. But North Carolina wants to educate and train illegal aliens so they can directly compete against American citizens for the same jobs? That is just plain wrong. There is no common sense anymore.”

    Myrick, a Charlotte Republican, has been deeply involved in the immigration debate in Washington, D.C.

    State Sen. Richard Stevens, R-Wake, said he and other legislators would likely push for a change in state law if the policy isn’t reversed before the next session of the General Assembly in May.

    “The key word is ‘illegal.’ It’s against the law, so you should reward someone for breaking the law? Absolutely not,” Stevens said.

    Officials with the Latino advocacy group El Pueblo said the new policy provides an opportunity to a younger generation that has much to contribute to U.S. society.

    “They would like to have an opportunity to continue their education,” said Marisol Jimenez-McGee, advocacy director for El Pueblo. “They came here when they were very young – brought here by the parents – and have since been growing up in North Carolina, alongside every other North Carolina student.”

  39. anon said on 29 Nov 2007 at 6:51 am:
    Flag comment

    This is great and I hope it progresses to the 4 year colleges as well. So when my kids are ready to attend Duke or Chapel Hill, I’ll just let them move illegally to NC and my wife and I won’t have to fork over the dough for out of state tuition.

    Maybe we should start a movement that we should all become illegal since the benefits seem to be growing and growing (can we all move to Mexico and then sneak back over the border?). I could save on taxes, run out on my mortgage, not show a real ID at the schools, drive without a driver’s license (no more worrying about points) and get in-state tuition at the college of my choice. And I’m sure by next week, those in power will have figured out a way to give me even more.

  40. /\/\3|)iç 64 said on 29 Nov 2007 at 8:54 am:
    Flag comment

    UnMasmexican,

    You are so wrong!!! This has NOTHING, I repeat, NOTHING to do with the Latino culture or racism or any other card you wish t play!!! The issue at hand, and I really wish those like you would see it, is LEGAL status. NOTHING MORE!!!!! WHy is it so hard for people coming to America to assimilate?? I am not saying loose your nation culture or heritage, not at all, many are just asking, when in America do as Americans! There is nothing wrong with celebrating who you are, go for it, but when you are in public, speak the language. When you go to vote, speak the language. When you need services, be able to read the language.

    You are like so many that have turned this issue into a racial one. I, like many on the blog from what I have read, have NO issue with LEGAL immigration and following the law!!

  41. /\/\3|)iç 64 said on 29 Nov 2007 at 9:03 am:
    Flag comment

    Seems to me that we all need to go to Canada, renounce our US citizenship, sneak back across the border to become illegal aliens and take advantage of programs we would otherwise not be entitled to. I have an Expedition that I can run between here and the border. It seats 7 additional besides myself (safely), how many want to sign up for the first trip? I can put a trailer on the back to haul extra if the requests are there.

  42. MP Resident said on 29 Nov 2007 at 3:27 pm:
    Flag comment

    “you have been rude and lacking in any reasonable argument in the debate, choosing only to play the “racist” card on every occasion”

    Which is precisely why I suggest that his posts be left to stand as they are.

  43. MP Resident said on 29 Nov 2007 at 3:30 pm:
    Flag comment

    The State Deparment has an informative page about renouncing your US citizenship:

    http://travel.state.gov/law/citizenship/citizenship_776.html

  44. ateacher said on 29 Nov 2007 at 10:38 pm:
    Flag comment

    I worked for years for the Head Start program that encouraged/required parental involvement. Parents however were required to undergo background checks and TB checks before they were ever allowed to enter the classroom. In the reality of every day where I work, anyone parent can enter the classroom, we have an open door system. Yes I supervise, but health checks are not required of the visitors. It’s not to say we send students off with strange adults. However the mentor pgrm btwn my school and high school students does not require, as far as I know, background checks of the teen mentors.

Comments are closed.


Views: 2416