School trips and human rights

[Curious George]

Premise: The European Court of Human Rights is correct in finding Russia guilty of violating the human rights of three women on the grounds that Russia did not prevent their husbands from committing acts of domestic violence against them, even though the Russian police had received complaints prior to the violence in question.

I think "even though" should be "when" in order for this to make sense.

However, I think you are still mischaracterizing this. I think it would be better to say, A government is Negligent when they fail to provide a framework to address future domestic violence, when sufficient evidence indicates future harm to citizens is both imminent and reasonably preventable.

Conclusion: If a school allows a child, who is known to be badly behaved, to go on a trip to a public place, and on that trip the child harms a member of the public, the school has violated the human rights of that person.

It seems watertight to me. What am I missing?

Schools can be government or private institutions. In the case of private institutions, what duty of care is owed to the general public?

Students are often minors. Most countries view adults and minors differently.

What does "badly behaved" mean? That is a very vague and subjective concept.

Their is a huge difference between restricting someone's freedoms by preventing them from interacting with an individual with whom a person has a history of escalating abuse and preventing someone from interacting with "the public."

I think these are just some of the holes that illustrate how the parallel is not water tight.

But your general sentiment- can a school be negligent, and therefore liable, to private citizens based on actions of students on a field trip?- i would say yes, but it is very dependent upon the facts of the case.

 

[Curious George]

Schools are not an institution of law enforcement, and were never meant to be - that is the police's job, ostensibly. I strongly doubt that this is different in the US than literally anywhere else.

I would disagree. Schools have always been designed for enforcement within their jurisdiction. One of the major causes of the school to prison pipeline in the U.S. is the schools increasingly will call the police of matters which could and likely should be handled in house. Students have always committed crimes such as assault, battery, theft, harrassment, slander, libel, forgery, vandalism, and where applicable drug possession, use, distribution. This is not to mention the violations based on age such as breaking of curfew laws, or consumption of alcohol.

Both schools and parents have dealt with these behaviors, but the idea that schools are not meant to deal with such behaviors and should contact law enforcement agencies, is more of a modern concept.

 

[Kooky]

They will call the police, yes. If a school news to call law enforcement to enforce laws, then to me, that implies very strongly that such a school is not itself a law enforcement agency.

Also, it would simply be silly to hold schools accountable for crimes committed by their students.

 

[David Young]

Post #21: It is the ECHR which is describing the Russian case as a human-rights abuse. They are not simply saying that the state is negligent in its duty to protect, which is itself a moot point.

Personally I think this is massively overstating what a human-rights abuse is, but that is the new standard.

However, if not stepping in to prevent a possible human-rights abuse is now a human-rights abuse in itself, the idea that this only counts when it is the police or another organ of the state is hard to make. Even if it only applies to the police, there are quite a lot of aggressive policing policies which it would seem now have the green light. Riot control anyone?

 

[Kooky]

Post #21: It is the ECHR which is describing the Russian case as a human-rights abuse. They are not simply saying that the state is negligent in its duty to protect, which is itself a moot point.

Personally I think this is massively overstating what a human-rights abuse is, but that is the new standard.

Perhaps you should have built an argument for your support of Russia's alleged human rights abuses, rather than leading with a nonsense argument that led to nowhere.

Riot control anyone?

You mean, what cops are already doing throughout the world whenever their bosses let them?

 

[David Young]

If the ECHR are correct, then the police need to do that more. In fact, if they don't do it so much that all harm caused by rioters ends, they should be prosecuted for human-rights abuses. That is at the same time as rioters complaining that the police are committing human-rights abuses by the way they intervene in riots.

Good luck squaring that circle.

 

[Kooky]

If the ECHR are correct, then the police need to do that more. In fact, if they don't do it so much that all harm caused by rioters ends, they should be prosecuted for human-rights abuses. That is at the same time as rioters complaining that the police are committing human-rights abuses by the way they intervene in riots.

Good luck squaring that circle.

I actually agree with you, in practical terms the police have no obligation to actually protect anybody's rights.
That is not, after all, why they exist, and has never been their function in society.

 

[David Young]

Should the ECHR reverse their ruling on Russia in this case?
Should anybody be making noise in the political sphere about this, especially considering the wider implications?

 

[idea]

Autism is on the rise, so many more emotional and educational needs within schools who struggle with enough funding to provide adequate personnel. For me, it comes down to a question of which is more important - funding the military, or funding schools? To me, our most precious national resource is our kids - I think there is justification for using tax$ within our own borders. Put your own air-mask on first principle - until you have everything internal taken care of, it is not good to start reaching beyond borders into other people's business.

 

[David Young]

Post #29: With all due respect, that really does not have anything to do with the original question.