Relationship Between Student Victories in the Courts and Student Violence in the Schools

• NCJ Number: 73143
• Journal: CONTEMPORARY EDUCATION Volume: 50 Issue: 4 Dated: (Summer 1979) Pages: 226-230
• Author(s): R J Rubel
• Date Published: 1979
• Length: 5 pages
• Sale Source: UMI Dissertation Services
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: *This document is currently unavailable from NCJRS.

Annotation

This article contends that a series of Supreme Court decisions on juvenile rights has forced school administrators to tolerate unruly student behavior with a consequent rise in school crime.

Abstract

The legal basis for schools' control of students is found in the in loco parentis concept which holds that school authorities stand in place of the parent while the child is at school. The U.S. Supreme Court's 1967 reversal of the Arizona Supreme Court's ruling in the Gault case and subsequent decisions, however, have altered juvenile justice and diminished school authority. The Court first stated that juveniles could not be expelled from school without notification and hearings in the 1961 Dixon v. Alabama State Board of Education case. The due process rights mandated in the Dixon and Gault rulings have been applied successfully to other cases involving suspensions and corporal punishment. Other Supreme Court decisions have upheld the rights of students to express opinions and defy dress codes as long as they do not interfere with school operations or the rights of others. Research on the extent of crime and violence in public schools has demonstrated that in the 1960's offenses against school property increased dramatically until school security offices were established and that during the mid to late 1970's offenses against property were major problems for suburban schools while offenses against persons were prevalent in large city schools. Other studies in the 1960's found that the eruptions of violent behavior were nonpolitical, but usually centered on some aspect of the in loco parentis doctrine which was resolved successfully by school administrators. As juveniles were granted due process rights in the 1970's, local school administrators grew wary of suspending students and extended their tolerance for misconduct throughout the school. This has not occurred in all schools, but is most likely to affect institutions where authorities have only a general knowledge of the court rulings and have been unduly influenced by the media. Unchecked by traditional disciplinary sanctions, this environment of fearful and unruly behavior forms the breeding ground for serious criminal acts in school. The paper contains 17 footnotes.