Sen. Jane Cunningham, R-Chesterfield, whose Amy Hestir Student Protection Act was signed into law today by Gov. Jay Nixon, says the legislation has guaranteed the protection of Missouri chlidren from teacher/sexual predators. My question, who will protect Missouri children from Sen. Cunningham, since she is also the legislator who proposed the removal of child labor laws?
The text of Mrs. Cunningham's news release is printed below:
Today, Senate Bill 54, sponsored by Sen. Jane Cunningham, R-Chesterfield, was signed by the governor. Senator Cunningham’s legislation will create the “Amy Hestir Student Protection Act,” and will help protect children from sexual assault in Missouri schools.
“I’ve fought for this legislation and for our children for five years, and I’m proud to see this act finally receive the governor’s stamp of approval,” Sen. Cunningham said. “This legislation is vital to protect our children from sexual predators in our schools — places meant as safe learning environments. Aside from mandatory extensive background checks, my bill will make it possible for school officials to be aware of sexual misconduct exhibited by potential hires and their employees when making staffing decisions. This will serve as an invaluable tool for protecting our children.”
Amy Hestir, for whom the legislation is named, is a Missouri woman who was continually molested and assaulted by her junior high school teacher. The teacher was employed by several school districts, even winning a “Teacher of the Year” award, before retiring. The practice of sexually abusive teachers moving across the state is so common that the Missouri Department of Education has termed the practice, “Passing the Trash.”
Senator Cunningham’s legislation also specifies that school districts in Missouri are allowed to discuss information about their employees with other school districts. School districts will be liable for damages if they dismiss an employee or allow an employee to resign for reasons of sexual misconduct, and then fail to disclose those reasons in a reference request from another school district.
“With the passage of my bill, our children will have solid protection from these predators,” Sen. Cunningham said. “I am very glad the governor saw the importance of my legislation.”
Senator Cunningham’s legislation was unanimously approved by the Senate on April 7. Her legislation will go into effect on Aug. 28.
11 comments:
We're all getting tired of your use of the Joplin tornado as an excuse to possibly endanger children. You have used the tornado for your own political cause. It's such a hollow argument—teachers did not FIND those kids.
@Anonymous, I think that you are suffering from a fundamental misunderstanding that somehow technology is to blame. Cathy Davidson, Duke professor of Interdisciplinary Studies and author of the informative book "Now You See It", remarks on a recent posting on HASTAC.org "It's NOT the technology, stupid." In other words, as Caesar said "The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, But in ourselves..."
The web is useless if it is not kept wide open and free. It is a false pretense to suggest that Facebook or any other social media can be held responsible for the moral flaws of its users. That would be like blaming the campsite for the sexual abuse of counselors comitted on scouts, or the grass behind the gym for my sister's English teacher teaching her favorite student about smoking pot.
Oddly, technology has become the modern day witch upon which we are apt to blame all our social woes. But if we think carefully and not reactively, we know that the fault is in us.
Anonymous,I believe you have made the argument before on another one of my posts about teachers did not "find those kids." If you go by a narrow definition of the word "find," you are correct, but obviously, if we did not know where they were and we were able to discover that information, we found them. If you are so tired of reading my views, then please feel free to find another blog to read. There is no sense in subjecting yourself to something you hate so much unless you are a masochist.
Have you read the child labor law bill? Or are you just assuming it brings back "the good old days"? Senator Cunningham is a smart woman who sponsored a bill to update child labor laws that were written 100 years ago when things were very different. I have found that most people who criticize her have not even read the bill.Isn't it about time parents decide when and if their child works. Let's take the government out of this equation.
I have read the bill. It, like nearly every other bill Mrs. Cunningham has sponsored over the years, is unnecessary. And like many of her other legislative offerings, it is also dangerous and appeals only to her far-right following. There is a good reason why she rarely has any co-sponsors on her bills.
@Anonymous. Isn't inconsistent that the far right, which claims to want less government, is always pushing for controlling people's behaviors? Can you explain this to me?
MIDWAY, Ga. (AP) -- Police in Georgia have shut down a lemonade stand run by three girls trying to save up for a trip to a water park, saying they didn't have a business license or the required permits.
Midway Police Chief Kelly Morningstar says police also didn't know how the lemonade was made, who made it or what was in it.
The girls had been operating for one day when Morningstar and another officer cruised by.
The girls needed a business license, peddler's permit and food permit to operate, even on residential property. The permits cost $50 a day or $180 per year.
One girl, 14-year-old Casity Dixon, says the three had to listen to police and shut down.
The girls are now doing chores and yard work to make money.
This is what we don't want....us on the far right. Also Nixon just signed her bill to protect children from sexual predator teachers. Is this unnecessary? How about standing up to mandatory healthcare? Unnecessary? How about school reform? Unnecessary? I think not.
Mr. Turner, now it's time to turn up the heat on Gov. Nixon and his continuing failure of leadership.
Did I strike a nerve, Randall?
I guess you should ban teachers from HAVING any kind of phone. This allows access to students. What about the US postal service? Teachers should not have access to the postal service either based on these absurd arguments.
I read the child labor law she proposed. It specifically allowed little girls to work at hotels. That seems really safe...
34 of the 35 pages of SB 54 are just fine. The couple of paragraphs about websites are insane. The issue deserves more than that and needs to be much more specific. It fails to define the word "available" for one. If a parent asks for their student's Moodle login, does that mean I have made it available? I don't know.
I also don't understand why Jane can have private electronic communications with my child, but my child, a former student, I am no longer allowed to email without the school administration having access to that account. That is the way the law is written. That is insane.
This part of the bill needs to be well thought out. Good intentioned or not, this issue can't be legislated with a couple of paragraphs. That section of the law needs to be repealed. The issue needs its own specific law.
Post a Comment