Cell phones in a divorce situation

[frylover]

What is the name of your state? LA

This is a question out of curiousity...I've been giving it some thought since a situation last school year.

The elementary school I teach at has a strict "no cell phones" policy. Last school year a divorced parent planned to send a cell phone with his child for when the child was with mom to avoid contact with her. Whether the child ever actually brought the phone I don't know....I never asked about it and never saw or heard it.

Would it be likely that a judge would ever order that a cell phone be provided in a divorce situation? And if so, would that court order supercede the school policy on cell phones.

It seems like every year I teach I encounter more divorce situations and just wondered whether this would be a possible part of a court order and what the school's response should be?

 

[Ohiogal]

What is the name of your state? LA

This is a question out of curiousity...I've been giving it some thought since a situation last school year.

The elementary school I teach at has a strict "no cell phones" policy. Last school year a divorded parent planned to send a cell phone with his child for when the child was with mom to avoid contact with her. Whether the child ever actually brought the phone I don't know....I never asked about it and never saw or heard it.

Would it be likely that a judge would ever order that a cell phone be provided in a divorce situation? And if so, would that court order supercede the school policy on cell phones.

It seems like every year I teach I encounter more divorce situations and just wondered whether this would be a possible part of a court order and what the school's response should be?

A cell phone could be ordered in some situations and a court order would supercede the school's policy. One carries the weight of law and the other is just a guideline (guess which one is which). Policies cannot interfere with law or legal orders.

 

[frylover]

Kinda what I figured....thanks!

 

[Zigner]

A cell phone could be ordered in some situations and a court order would supercede the school's policy. One carries the weight of law and the other is just a guideline (guess which one is which). Policies cannot interfere with law or legal orders.

Hrmmm
The school/district is not a party to the action. The court can order the phone to be provided to the child by the parent, but how would that court have jurisdiciton over the school?

 

[frylover]

I guess my point was if a judge orders a cell phone, it is possible that the phone would be at school on days the child switches between parents. So, in that scenario, I was asking if the school would have to allow the phone to be ON campus in the child's possession. My school doesn't ban the USE of the phones by students, it bans the phones themselves.

I was thinking just what Ohiogal said--that in a situation like this the school could still say the child couldn't USE the phone at school but have to allow him/her to have it in his/her possession.

 

[Zigner]

I was thinking just what Ohiogal said--that in a situation like this the school could still say the child couldn't USE the phone at school but have to allow him/her to have it in his/her possession.

Did you consider what I wrote? The school is not a party to the divorce action.

 

[fairisfair]

I would imagine that the judge would have to order the school, not the parent, in order for the school to be required to comply.

 

[Zigner]

I would imagine that the judge would have to order the school, not the parent.

And how would the court, in this situation, have jurisdiction over the school?
If the school does not agree to allow it, it would be a separate action.

 

[Ohiogal]

And how would the court, in this situation, have jurisdiction over the school?
If the school does not agree to allow it, it would be a separate action.

The school is NOT a party to the action -- that is correct. However they cannot allow their policies to force others to break the law. The court order is a law that this family is required to follow. They cannot force this child to be in contempt by forbidding the child from having a cell phone in their book bag or locker (using it during school hours is a different story). So they can't punish the child for following a court order to have a cell phone on days when one parent drops the child off and the other picks him up.

 

[notsmartmark]

This seems like too much fun to sit on the sidelines. Judges, at least in my area, order students to go to summer school during specific times and days when summer courses are not available. We don't develop programs so that the child is not in contempt. I know that it doesn't totally fit. The student could be forced to find services elsewhere during the summer.
We also haves judges order students to go to school during the school year that are incongruent with a school's decision. We tend to view outside information as recommendations that must be considered but not agreed to if the team decides a different course of action. But, we always look for a solution. And . . .
An possible solution is to have the student drop off and pick up the phone when entering and leaving school grounds.
But . . .
I don't think the school would lose in this case if it is policy to not have cell phones on campus. The parents could find other solutions, each could supply a phone. And, these parents seem to need to grow up if they need to give a phone to their child to avoid talking to each other.
But . . .
If it was prescribed by a doctor for medical reasons, then the school would likely eat it big time if it refused to allow it on campus.

 

[frylover]

. And, these parents seem to need to grow up if they need to give a phone to their child to avoid talking to each other.

With THAT statement I wholeheartedly agree!