HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

The last couple of comments basically say that the administrators had no choice but to suspend girls for four games, or else Burnsville schools would have been sued. <br><br>I challenge that. There is absolutely an appropriate time to suspend / expel, etc. But I think it's really weak to hide behind possible lawsuits as an excuse. And even more to the point, why 4 games? Why not 1 game? Why not 10 games? Why not a whole season? Obviously my point is that there is judgement involved. They could have suspended the girls for one PRACTICE and said they had dealt with it. What was the basis for a lawsuit? Did the school sponsor the event? Wouldn't it be just as likely - maybe even more so - for the suspended players to sue? <br><br>From the facts that have been presented I still believe that the Burnsville admin significantly overreacted. <br><br>I do agree, though, that there's little that can be done about the situation now, though, than move on. <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p100.ezboard.com/bmnhs.showUserP ... olesfan</A> at: 11/28/05 7:12 pm<br></i>

Zero tolerance allows for little deviation typically from a pre-set policy. At least this is what I've found to be true. Also, if they don't follow through now, they do open themselves up to lawsuits by prior groups that they made follow the standard. Double standards are the most inviting set of actions lawsuit wise I've found. <p></p><i></i>

Zero tolerance does allow for little deviation. I don't want either of my children to be at the receiving end of a policy that is not enforced. When you work in schools with children you get a plethera of difficult situations that arise that put children's lives at risk every day. If you don't believe me, go spend a day at an elementary school or high school and sit in the counselor's or principals office! I have! Thank God we enforce these policies because the minute you let your guard down, it could be your son or daughter. I don't think I need to go on. <p></p><i></i>