Make Sex With Students A Crime? Not In My State You Ain't!

[Skwim]

.

"Both Teachers’ Unions Oppose Bill That Would Make Sex with Students a Crime

​

Yesterday at a hearing for a bill (HB 5817) that would make sex between school employees and students a crime—even after they’ve turned 16, the legal age of consent in Rhode Island—both teachers’ unions made their objections known. NEA RI didn’t have anyone testify but Pat Crowley did sign in to the hearing and note his opposition to the bill. I suspect the NEA also submitted written testimony. James Parisi of the United Federation of Teachers (UFT) did testify—in fact, we sat beside one another, each offering our very different opinions on the bill.

As it currently stands, Rhode Island is one of a few states where it is perfectly legal for teachers and other school employees to have sexual relations with their students once they turn 16. It’s literally a dirty little secret—almost no one seems to be aware of this loophole in the law and yet it leaves high school students without any protection from those who would sexually abuse them after their 16th birthday. We are also a state who, after a year long investigation by USA Today, received a grade of D for how well we track and share information about teachers who are also alleged abusers.
source​

.

 

[Woberts]

Huh. Look at this bill's sponsors. Quite telling, if I do say so myself.

 

[Revoltingest]

Huh. Look at this bill's sponsors. Quite telling, if I do say so myself.

Why would the bill's sponsor, Alex Marszalkowski, matter?

 

[Woberts]

Why would the bill's sponsor, Alex Marszalkowski, matter?

Guess.

 

[Revoltingest]

Guess.

Not in the teacher's union?

 

[sun rise]

We know of many cases where sex between a boss and an employee was a bad idea and ended badly for one if not both. The power relationship makes this a problematic situation.

Teacher/student is to me much the same if not worse due to the relative age of the student.

I would call it unethical for the same reason boss/employee sex is unethical and can be a firing offense.

Here's one example of a web site and a large jury award that resulted https://www.spigglelaw.com/employment-blog/sex-boss-sexual-harassment/

 

[Twilight Hue]

Nanny State strikes again.

(Although 18 would be more appropriate as age of consent)

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

We know of many cases where sex between a boss and an employee was a bad idea and ended badly for one if not both. The power relationship makes this a problematic situation.

Of course! Unequal power relationships make everything problematic. It should be clear to anyone with any ethical sense at all that when you are in a position of authority over another person, then a sexual relationship between you is not in the cards.

(Now, one does have to note that in many beliefs, sexual relationships automatically elevate the power of one...usually the male...over the other. But that seems to me to be just antiquated thinking, best left in the past.)

 

[Woberts]

Nanny State strikes again.

(Although 18 would be more appropriate as age of consent)

The irony here is astonishing.

 

[Twilight Hue]

The irony here is astonishing.

Sounds more like something for an Ethics Committee to pounder over rather than a legislative bombing raid. Just raise the age of consent then. Issue solved. Jeeze. How hard can it be?

 

[Woberts]

Sounds more like something for an Ethics Committee to pounder over rather than a legislative bombing raid. Just raise the age of consent then. Issue solved. Jeeze. How hard can it be?

Because it doesn't need to be raised. They're addressing a loophole.
All hail the nanny state.

 

[Lyndon]

Nanny State strikes again.

(Although 18 would be more appropriate as age of consent)

So I take it you're pro sex with students???

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Sounds more like something for an Ethics Committee to pounder over rather than a legislative bombing raid. Just raise the age of consent then. Issue solved. Jeeze. How hard can it be?

With stuff like that, Ethics Committees have already pounded over it, legislators took the advice, already because someone already did something they really shouldn't have. Or do you think there shouldn't be legislation preventing another Tuskegee Experiment?

 

[Twilight Hue]

So I take it you're pro sex with students???

I have nothing against consensual sex between adults period. I see this as more of an ethics question rather than a legal one.

As a rule it's obviously better if there wasn't a teacher-student relationship due to conflict of interest. But if the two like each other enough, then it should be nobody elses business although of course, its advisable that the teacher dosent teach the student anymore and the student finds another teacher in favor of the relationship.

 

[Salvador]

When I was in 8th grade, I had a very beautiful biology teacher with whom I was sexually attracted. If she had molested me, I would have welcomed it. So then, in some cases, sex between a student and her pupil should be legally allowed.

 

[Rational Agnostic]

When I was in 8th grade, I had a very beautiful biology teacher with whom I was sexually attracted. If she had molested me, I would have welcomed it. So then, in some cases, sex between a student and her pupil should be legally allowed.

I mean, when I was that age, there were lots of adult women whom I was sexually attracted to. But that certainly doesn't mean that they should have the legal right to "molest" their students. I hope you were being facetious and not actually advocating for this.

 

[Augustus]

Sounds more like something for an Ethics Committee to pounder over rather than a legislative bombing raid. Just raise the age of consent then. Issue solved. Jeeze. How hard can it be?

Enacting a law banning sex between teachers and high school students = nanny state legislative bombing raid
Enacting a law banning sex involving anyone under the age of 18 = smart, common sense solution