Young Girl Facing Charges After Wetting Pants

New Posts

O

opme

New Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2006
Messages
1,666
Reaction score
16
AP) DANVILLE, Pa. A 12-year-old special education student in Montour County was charged with disorderly conduct after authorities said she deliberately wet her pants at school.

Her mother told the Press Enterprise it happened because her daughter was frightened by the principal.

The girl had been preparing a holiday lunch with her classmates and teachers at Danville Middle School on December 20th.

Her mother said when her daughter refused to go to the kitchen to wash some pots and pans, teachers summoned principal Kevin Duckwork, who confronted the girl.

She then wet her pants.

More at link............
http://cbs3.com/topstories/local_story_004113538.html
 
Another idiotic move by another set of school offficials. I swear, there are days when I truly believe we are living in the time when the public school system will implode.

Surely this cannot be the only special needs child in the district? Surely she can't be the only special needs child who wets her pants at school?

Perhaps, if this school district is at their wits end with her and how to deal with her, they need to admit they are failures at educating her. And since it is the child's right under USA laws to be educated, perhaps this school district needs to pony up some money to have her privately educated.
 
I seriously doubt this girl would wet her pants ON PURPOSE. The mom says she did it because she is terrified of the principal, and has wet her pants before in previous dealings with him.

Who in their right mind would charge a little girl with disorderly conduct for wetting her pants????

My first inclination in reading this story is WHY is a disabled 12 year old girl so terrified of the principal that she is wetting her pants when he deals with her----there very well could be a reason behind her terror. The mom needs to get to the bottom of this, because it surely looks like nobody else will. Sure looks like nobody else is advocating for the little girl--as evidenced by "charging" her disorderly conduct.
 
But Danville Police Chief Eric Gill said school officials are at their “wit’s end” with the girl, and they believe her actions were deliberate
Click to expand...

Police Chief Eric Gill is out of control, IMO. are police chiefs voted in to their positions? he should lose his job.

as for the principal, i have no doubt he should find more suitable employment.
 
Okay, so this kid saved up her pee on the off chance that she might meet the principal so that she could wet her pants on purpose? Give me a break.
 
Wow. Why is it impossible for any of you to believe that the girl did this on purpose? The article doesn't give details about any other altercations or why they are at their "wits end" with her. But I think she could have easily done it on purpose. I'd like to know more of her history.
 
Wow, Sally...I was thinking the same thing...

Special Education doesn't mean that the girl was mentally disabled...where I am, a lot of the Special Ed kids have behavior issues. They can't be put with the mainstream children for fear that they will have outbursts or even just for attendance issues. I would like to hear her background also...
 
kgeaux said:
Another idiotic move by another set of school offficials. I swear, there are days when I truly believe we are living in the time when the public school system will implode.

Surely this cannot be the only special needs child in the district? Surely she can't be the only special needs child who wets her pants at school?

Perhaps, if this school district is at their wits end with her and how to deal with her, they need to admit they are failures at educating her. And since it is the child's right under USA laws to be educated, perhaps this school district needs to pony up some money to have her privately educated.
Click to expand...
Perfectly put, thanks:)
 
A disabled child in the need of controlling their environment could and will pee themselves.. .
Freakin ignorant adults...
Yes fed law says they must know...
SO where do we turn???
 
I think there are kids who can wet themselves on demand...but this child is disabled. The principal should be investigated and then fired. :behindbar
 
Sally said:
Wow. Why is it impossible for any of you to believe that the girl did this on purpose? The article doesn't give details about any other altercations or why they are at their "wits end" with her. But I think she could have easily done it on purpose. I'd like to know more of her history.
Click to expand...
Well, for one, because the girls mother said she didn't do it on purpose, and that she did it in response to the principal being called in. The mother stated the girl is terrified of the principal, and that the girl has wet herself before when dealing with the principal.

I also just don't see a 12 year old girl PURPOSELY urinating all over herself. Sure, it COULD happen, and maybe does happen in certain situations---but with the mother stating that the girl was terrified of the principal, I can see how that can happen out of pure fright for a very scared little girl.

I still say that if this principal scares little girls to the point of urinating themselves, mentally disabled or not, he needs to be checked out. Thorougly.
 
What happened to compassion for the disabled child who cannot help herself? I doubt she urinated on purpose!


People have really become ignorant and intolerable of others, and to act this way to a young child is unforgivable and extremely sad. It doesn't say much about our school system and our society in general.

I say it's time to fire the principal of the school.

Gozgals
 
julianne said:
Well, for one, because the girls mother said she didn't do it on purpose, and that she did it in response to the principal being called in. The mother stated the girl is terrified of the principal, and that the girl has wet herself before when dealing with the principal.

I also just don't see a 12 year old girl PURPOSELY urinating all over herself. Sure, it COULD happen, and maybe does happen in certain situations---but with the mother stating that the girl was terrified of the principal, I can see how that can happen out of pure fright for a very scared little girl.

I still say that if this principal scares little girls to the point of urinating themselves, mentally disabled or not, he needs to be checked out. Thorougly.
Click to expand...
And of course parents never have blinders on where their children are concerned. The article says the girl is in special ed. not that she is mentally disabled. I seriously doubt that the school would take the chance of pressing charges against a little girl if there weren't some significant previous actions to back them up. Like I said..I'd like to know the whole story before immediately labeling the principal as some kind of monster.
 
Sally said:
And of course parents never have blinders on where their children are concerned. The article says the girl is in special ed. not that she is mentally disabled. I seriously doubt that the school would take the chance of pressing charges against a little girl if there weren't some significant previous actions to back them up. Like I said..I'd like to know the whole story before immediately labeling the principal as some kind of monster.
Click to expand...
Well, it looks like the charges have been dropped.

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/nation/20070104-1933-pants-wettingcharge.html


Here where I live, a "special ed" child is mentally disabled. Children who have behavioral issues or simple attendance issues do not go to the special ed classes---if their behavior is serious enough, they go to an "alternative " school specifically designed for children who cannot succeed in the normal classroom setting. Children who have mental disabilities need a controlled, structured atmosphere and cirriculum that would be in jeopardy if the district lumped together children with behavioral issues and children with mental disabilities. These kids are apples and oranges.

I don't see a girl, practically a teenager, subjecting herself to the embarassment and shame of purposely urinating on herself UNLESS she had some issues mentally. Yes, children with behavioral problems could do this, but that is something more along the lines of a much younger child, not a 12 year old girl. To me, the fact that she is 12 years old and did this in front of others, and has done so before, tells me that she does indeed have a mental disability.
 
Sally said:
And of course parents never have blinders on where their children are concerned. The article says the girl is in special ed. not that she is mentally disabled. I seriously doubt that the school would take the chance of pressing charges against a little girl if there weren't some significant previous actions to back them up. Like I said..I'd like to know the whole story before immediately labeling the principal as some kind of monster.
Click to expand...


Special ed usually does mean some disabilities and that could be mental, learning, ADHD, or physical problems. I imagine that the girl is considered disabled because the schools will really give parents the run around due to not wanting to put a child into special ed in the first place. Behavior problems can go along with any of the other disabilities and there should be a behavior plan in place to deal with these issues. Schools are out of control, resentful, and just don't want to deal with it. I'm so sick of hearing of all these disgusting charges being filed against little children who are being treated like grown people. Grown pedophile, drunkard, dopeheads, etc. people aren't even treated this badly. Even if her behavior caused her to urinate on purpose, which I don't believe, big deal. That is not something to charge a child with a crime. Clean it up, get the school nurse to help, they're used to that type thing, and call the parents to come to the school.
 
Floh said:
Police Chief Eric Gill is out of control, IMO. are police chiefs voted in to their positions? he should lose his job.

as for the principal, i have no doubt he should find more suitable employment.
Click to expand...
I think a job as a prison guard might be a good fit.
:banghead:
 
julianne said:
(snipped)

I don't see a girl, practically a teenager, subjecting herself to the embarassment and shame of purposely urinating on herself UNLESS she had some issues mentally. Yes, children with behavioral problems could do this, but that is something more along the lines of a much younger child, not a 12 year old girl. To me, the fact that she is 12 years old and did this in front of others, and has done so before, tells me that she does indeed have a mental disability.
Click to expand...
julianne, this is an excellent point. I can think of many other things a 12 yr old might do on purpose other than embarrassing herself if she had that kind of control.

Geez, it takes police here 6 hours to respond to a home break-in. I can't imagine how long it took LE to respond to this phone call.

For what its worth, the principal's last name is "Duckworth" from what I've seen on the net.
 
Sally said:
Wow. Why is it impossible for any of you to believe that the girl did this on purpose? The article doesn't give details about any other altercations or why they are at their "wits end" with her. But I think she could have easily done it on purpose. I'd like to know more of her history.
Click to expand...

I'm going out on a limb w/ Sally and Emmie. I know of two kids who do stuff like this deliberately. Both have Down's Syndrome. One throws up (he prefers on the person with whom he is angry) and one pees (she is thirteen). While I believe calling the police was out of line and these educators need to have some remedial coursework in child development and exceptional children, I can understand their frustration if this girl has some of the same issues as the children I know and have personally experienced. The parents of both children give the kids whatever they want when they have these episodes of puking/peeing; they have no clue that it is deliberate. They believe emotional upset causes it. Uh huh. The one kid was across the room from me when he became "upset": he eyed me, walked over deliberately, looked up at me, bent over, puked on my shoes, then looked up and grinned!
 
julianne said:
Well, it looks like the charges have been dropped.

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/nation/20070104-1933-pants-wettingcharge.html


Here where I live, a "special ed" child is mentally disabled. Children who have behavioral issues or simple attendance issues do not go to the special ed classes---if their behavior is serious enough, they go to an "alternative " school specifically designed for children who cannot succeed in the normal classroom setting. Children who have mental disabilities need a controlled, structured atmosphere and cirriculum that would be in jeopardy if the district lumped together children with behavioral issues and children with mental disabilities. These kids are apples and oranges.

I don't see a girl, practically a teenager, subjecting herself to the embarassment and shame of purposely urinating on herself UNLESS she had some issues mentally. Yes, children with behavioral problems could do this, but that is something more along the lines of a much younger child, not a 12 year old girl. To me, the fact that she is 12 years old and did this in front of others, and has done so before, tells me that she does indeed have a mental disability.
Click to expand...


That's the way it is handled in my state. I agree that she must be mentally handicapped. I'm glad the charges have been dropped.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 130 more.
Total: 3,920 (members: 131, guests: 3,789)

Online statistics

Members online
131
Guests online
3,789
Total visitors
3,920
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,854
Messages
17,960,058
Members
228,624
Latest member
Laayla
Back
Top