The Fallacy of “Zero Tolerance” Policies in Schools
By Jennifer, Female, Age 15, Yonkers, New York  July 2001

Over the past year or so in our country, we have experienced act upon act of school violence. Many people are scared and confused about this sudden outbreak of shootings and deaths, and because of this, many of our schools have begun to try and take action. The main form of action our schools have begun to take is by enforcing a policy called zero tolerance. A zero tolerance policy is a policy in which no chances are taken and no exceptions are made. Zero Tolerance teaches children that Constitutional rights don’t apply to them. It teaches children that schools consider them violent, untrustworthy creatures. Most of all, it’s clearly ineffective, since there have been more school shootings and threats over the past five years then ever before (Zero Tolerance Follies) . There is one problem however, with the zero tolerance policy. That problem is that most of the people getting suspended or expelled are not doing anything to deserve their punishment. In this paper I will try to answer the question, "has society gone too far with zero tolerance?”

Right after the first widely publicized school shooting at Columbine High School, there has been an epidemic of high school shootings. There have been "copycat" shootings in California, Boston, and even Arkansas. People in today’s society are becoming so paranoid, that they have imposed a zero tolerance policy that is making today’s schools like prisons. Children are being suspended and expelled for doing such harmless things as bringing key chains to school. Yes, something needs to be done, but suspensions, and expulsions are not the answer. Within the next few paragraphs, I have included some of the examples that I feel prove my point, that society has indeed gone overboard with the zero tolerance policy.

We, as the United States of America, have Amendments. Our first Amendment as United States citizens is our right to free speech (US Constitution) . For one high school girl however, this right did not seem to be given to her. A fourteen year old girl was strip-searched and suspended for two weeks for saying during a classroom discussion of the Littleton massacre, that she could understand how ostracized students might turn homicidal. The school officials thought that if this teenage girl could understand it, then she could do it as well. (Chapman 33).

According to the zero tolerance policy, children can’t even have the right to speak what they feel. How are children ever going to be able to speak their opinions if they are so scared of the consequences?

While enforcing the zero tolerance policy, many schools are not making the punishments age appropriate. An Arkansas first-grader has been suspended three days for pointing a chicken nugget at a teacher and saying "Pow, pow, pow" (presumably, the school regulations call for one day of suspension per "chicken nugget pow"). Justifying the suspension, the principal said it "depends on the tone, the demeanor, and in some manner you judge the intent. It's not the object in the hand, it's the thought in the mind." Is a plastic fork worse than a metal fork? Is a pencil a weapon? (Chapman, 43).

Is suspending a first-grader punishing them for what they have done, or is it just telling them that if they act up again they can get three more days where they can stay home from school and watch cartoons? How does a first grader know how serious a suspension really is? Does playing a simple game of "cops and robbers" really deserve to result in a suspension? When four Sayerville New Jersey kindergartners were playing cops and robbers in their school playground, their principal came down extremely hard on them. The principal felt that the kindergartners playing cops and robbers was a serious terroristic threat and suspended the children for 3 days (ZT Too Far?) Instead of sitting down with these four kindergarten students and explaining to them what they did, a principal overreacted and suspended them. This is not teaching children anything, except how to get out of school. This principal had extremely poor judgment in my opinion and needs to review his policy.

How many children collect key chains? Should children have to worry about whether or not a key chain in their collection is considered a weapon? In Georgia, an 11-year-old girl has been suspended because the ten-inch key chain that connects to her Tweety Bird wallet is regarded as a weapon. The ACLU has intervened on behalf of Ashley Smith and her Tweety Bird key chain. I've had occasion to meet Ashley, and I saw the chain in question: It's about the thickness and strength of a licorice whip. (Chapman 57).Just another example that yes, society has gone overboard with the zero tolerance policy.

Some people think that zero tolerance is the answer, and it probably has helped to prevent a lot of violence in schools. However, it may be a good idea in theory, but it is turning out to be a disaster in practice. So many students are getting punished for acts that aren’t threatening or harmful. School officials are having a hard time learning where to draw the line between what would be considered a threat and what is just kindergartners playing games that we all played as children. As writer Jerry Smith has pointed out on page 53 in an article in a newspaper in Chicago:" Zero means none or nothing. Tolerance gestures towards understanding, generosity, kindness, benevolence, justice, and forgiveness. Our children need maximum understanding, sensible standards, benevolence, justice, and then a chance to grow beyond their transgressions. We need to teach tolerance and practice it too."

It’s blatantly obvious that in today’s society there are too many violent acts occurring in our school systems. We as a society have to take charge in an appropriate manner. We have to teach our children in an age appropriate fashion. Yes, they have to learn that they are responsible for their actions, however, they will not learn from their actions if the punishment does not fit the crime. Not allowing children to carry weapons is sensible. Suspending a child for carrying a miniature bat he received as part of a baseball game promotion isn't.

In conclusion, I hope I have given you enough evidence to support my theory that some zero tolerance goes beyond realistic expectations. I believe that students should be able to sit down with their teachers, parents, school officials, and law enforcement to work together in order to try and set up a realistic tolerance policy. Students are in the midst of everything that is going on, and if anyone was to understand what is going on, it would be another student. One day I hope that there would not be any more acts of violence which would require a need for expulsions or suspensions, and that society would have a more tolerant way of handling the youth of America.

[Editor’s note: This editorial was received as an unsolicited commentary. It was written entirely by a 15-year old student in Yonkers, New York. It is published here purely as part of our commitment to “Giving Teens a Voice!”. We reserve the right to accept or reject any submissions of this nature. ]