Position Statement 46: Opposing the Blanket Application of Zero Tolerance Policies in Schools
Need More Info?
Related Links
Statement of Position
Mental Health America places a high priority on equal access to comprehensive
mental health services and supports, and therefore strongly opposes the blanket
application of zero tolerance policies and practices in schools. A zero
tolerance policy is defined by the United States Department of Education (USDOE)
as a “school or district policy that mandates predetermined consequences
or punishments for specific offenses”(USDOE, 1998).
Beginning in the mid-1990s, the United States Congress and many State legislatures
passed laws that allow and encourage school districts to implement harsh disciplinary
policies –such as expulsion and out-of-school suspension –to reduce
the incidents of students bringing guns and other weapons to school. Since
that time, possession and use of drugs on school property have been included
on the list of offenses to which zero tolerance policies are applied. Many
school districts expanded the scope of zero tolerance policies even further
to include various non-violent acts; in addition, they also broadened the definition
of weapons and drugs to include such things as nail files, plastic knives and
aspirin (Harvard University, 2000).
The harshness and broadness of current zero tolerance policies not only result
in many young children being labeled delinquents or criminals, but also result
in lost educational opportunities for youth, which studies show have long-term
negative consequences for both the child and society as a whole (Harvard University,
2000). In addition, student misbehavior frequently results from unmet mental
health or educational needs, and it is the children with these existing needs
who typically bear the brunt of zero tolerance policies, despite the statutory
protections afforded to them through the Individuals with Disabilities Education
Act (IDEA) of 1997 (Harvard University, 2000). Unfortunately, many of these
protections have been threatened in the 2003 IDEA reauthorization bill, and the
disproportionate effect of zero tolerance policies on students with special education
and mental health needs will likely worsen. Finally, instead of being
coupled with the school- and community-based supports and services that these
children
need, zero tolerance policies often result in placement in highly structured,
restrictive settings.
Data from the USDOE indicate a large percentage of public schools employ zero
tolerance policies for a variety of student behavior; for example, 79% of all
public schools have zero tolerance policies to address student violence and
tobacco use, while 94% of public schools have zero tolerance policies to deal
with student
firearm possession (DeVoe et al, 2002). School districts set their own
definitions for offenses, “violence”and “weapons,”with
some more stringent than others. Mental Health America’s (MHA)
concern regarding zero tolerance policies results from the broad definition
of offenses
and inconsistent application of consequences, especially as they relate to
students from diverse racial, ethnic and economic backgrounds as well as students
with
mental health and special education needs.
As an alternative to zero tolerance policies, Mental Health America strongly
supports the application of disciplinary actions and policies that promote
the health and well-being of students. In particular, Mental Health America supports “no reject, no eject”policies aimed at providing a
child who misbehaves with the necessary supports and resources that support behavior
change in positive, non-punitive ways. These policies stipulate that only
in the most severe cases –such as those for which zero tolerance policies
were originally created (i.e. possession of a deadly weapon) –should
a student be subjected to out-of-school suspension or expulsion; otherwise,
students
should be dealt with in a way that is appropriate for their age, sex, emotional
development, special educational needs and misbehavior committed.
Mental Health America believes that all students should be treated in
a manner that is fair, equitable and appropriate for the offense committed. The
use of culturally competent prevention and early intervention services and
a community-wide response to safety and security promotes the positive development
of children, youth and families and creates healthy communities.
Effective Period
|
References:
Harvard University. June, 2000. Opportunities Suspended:
The Devastating Consequences of Zero Tolerance and School Discipline Policies. Report
by the Advancement Project and the Civil Rights Project. Retrieved online
at: www.law.harvard.edu/civilrights/conferences/zero/zt_report2.html
United States Department of Education. March, 1998. Violence and Discipline Problems in U.S. Public Schools: 1996-1997. Retrieved online at: http://nces.ed.gov/pubs98/violence/98030008.html
DeVoe, J.F., Peter, K., Kaufman, P., Ruddy, S.A., Miller, A.K., Planty, M., Snyder, T.D., Duhart, D.T., and Rand, M.R. Indicators of School Crime and Safety: 2002. U.S. Departments of Education and Justice. NCES 2003-009/NCJ 196753. Washington, DC: 2002. Retrieved online at: http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2003/2003009.pdf
For more information on zero tolerance policies, school-based mental health, and “no reject, no eject”policies please contact the Mental Health America Advocacy Resource Center at shcrinfo@mentalhealthamerica.net or 1-800-969-6642.
Page last updated: 09/20/2007