Court OKs Sex Between Teachers, 18 yr. olds

Puzuzzu · Jan 14, 2009

marleyisalegend said:
This is EXACTLY what we need. MORE kids getting grades they don't deserve so we can have MORE doctors and scientists and researches and architects who don't know what the fuck they're doing but coasted by on yet another advantage.

dude.....depends on the university.....because this should be policy not law

kevbo · Jan 14, 2009

Puzuzzu said:
dude.....depends on the university.....because this should be policy not law

Exactly.

Any sex between two consenting adults should not be illegal at all. Ever.

However, I'm guess the school does have a policy of conduct within student/teacher relationships, and such an act like this could ruin a teachers career.

SonOfSlobone · Jan 14, 2009

Shouldn't there be a difference between legal and ethical? I wouldn't want to see a teacher, or anybody else, thrown into jail for having sex with somebody who's over the age of consent. But I can see how the school board might see it differently...

LilBit · Jan 14, 2009

SonOfSlobone said:
Shouldn't there be a difference between legal and ethical? I wouldn't want to see a teacher, or anybody else, thrown into jail for having sex with somebody who's over the age of consent. But I can see how the school board might see it differently...

That's the point that half the posters are trying to make, and the other half are failing to understand.

From a legal standpoint, it would be dangerous to illegalize sex between two consenting adults based on their professional relationship. That could lead us down a very slippery slope.

Yes, teacher/student sex is a serious violation of professional ethics, as is doctor/patient sex and, depending on the work environment, boss/employee sex. But that doesn't mean that these relationships shoudl be banned by law; they should be banned by the institutions: the schools, medical licensing boards, workplaces, etc.

BabiGayPimp · Jan 14, 2009

I agree whith those who say "unethical" is not the same thing as criminal. 18 year olds are adults. Fire the teacher? Yes. Jail the teacher? Absolutely not, unlesss some other crime was committed (false imprisonment or forcible rape).

Alpha1851 · Jan 14, 2009

marleyisalegend said:
. . . BUT, instead of addressing any of that, our court is worried about letting teachers fuck their students. Typical fucking American bullshit; to hell with education, let's let students and teachers fuck! That's the single most pressing issue we have facing us right now, everything else is in fine, working order. . .

Uh, no. That's not what the crt is saying at all. Read their opinion, it's on the WA Appl. Crt website. The crt is concerned with anything that comes to its docket. Why not check out their website and take a look at all the cases they've herd and how their decisions impact those who live in WA. Check out oyez.org to see the cases that the U.S. Supreme Crt. has herd and how their decisions impact us all. There's some profound stuff going on. Seriously, if you think the judiciary is concerned w/ allowing a teacher to hump his student, then???

The crt is interested in upholding the law. The teacher couldn't have committed sexual misconduct of a minor when the student isn't a minor. We can't change the law and then charge him w/ under the new law b/c that's a violation of his Due Process Rights. Thank goodness we have these laws in place.

Keep in mind that this teacher allegedly committed these acts. He hasn't been convicted and he denies any sexual conduct w/ the student. It's almost as though some of you are ready to hang the man. The teacher isn't free and clear. He can still face other charges and can still be brought to civil crt. The judiciary did its job.

Some of the WA legis. have already begun re-working the statute in question. That's the legis. job. I believe they've got it covered.

backpacker · Jan 15, 2009

Sounds like a sloppy job of drafting legislation. Looks they have some work to do in Washington.

NineOfClubs · Jan 15, 2009

Puzuzzu said:
well...if they are 18....why not?

Agreed, it's between consenting adults.

The government, and all you confirmed prudes, should butt out.

broadwayboi · Jan 15, 2009

I think the court is in the wrong on this one. I just went through this type of situation with my new boyfriend. He's 17, I'm 21. In the state of Kentucky, we can have sex, and it's not illegal. However, I was supposed to be one of his directors for a show. The state of Kentucky saw me as a "person of authority or special trust" and I cannot be with a minor. Now...I realize in that case the student was 18, but still, a teacher is a "person of authority or special trust" and should not be in a relationship with students other than teacher/student.

Alpha1851 · Jan 15, 2009

broadwayboi said:
I think the court is in the wrong on this one. I just went through this type of situation with my new boyfriend. He's 17, I'm 21. In the state of Kentucky, we can have sex, and it's not illegal. However, I was supposed to be one of his directors for a show. The state of Kentucky saw me as a "person of authority or special trust" and I cannot be with a minor. Now...I realize in that case the student was 18, but still, a teacher is a "person of authority or special trust" and should not be in a relationship with students other than teacher/student.

The two situations are not comparable. Why? These are two different states w/ different laws. Undoubtedly, KY must have a law which states someone who is "a person of authority or special trust" cannot have sex a/ a student or something of this nature. On the other hand, WA does not have this law. Additionally, you cannot separate the law. If your guy had not been a minor, you probably wouldn't have gotten in trouble. And, if your guy was of the age consent and you were not his director, you probably wouldn't have gotten in trouble. Not under that particular statute at least. All the elements of the crime must be met!

By the same token, the age of consent in WA is 16. In my state it's 17. Different states have different laws.

Kulindahr · Jan 15, 2009

Shepherd 2 said:
Yes it is wrong, and will always be wrong. The difference between an 18 year old student and a teacher is one of power. It is in appropriate behavior even if it is not illegal for any teacher to have sex with a student regardless of age.

Shep+]

If the student isn't in any of that teacher's classes, there's no power difference to speak of. Say the kid is heading for art school, and the teacher does only advanced math classes -- there's no problem.
Of course there are exceptions to that -- say, if the student is looking to a phys ed carreer, and the teacher is a coach who might be asked to write a recommendation, there's a problem. But unless there's a possibility of the student getting some benefit from the teacher (in professional capacity) other than the relationship, no big deal.

Puzuzzu said:
dude.....depends on the university.....because this should be policy not law

Absolutely.

marleyisalegend said:
There are schools where the teachers are only educated a chapter or two ahead of the students, especially in math. We have teachers who don't know the material they're teaching, we have teachers who pass students that can't read. We've got 16 year olds reading at a 2nd grade level, and all of these estudious fuck-ups are being pushed through the system to become doctors and politicians. The US educational system is completely inadequate and an embarrassment to the country that's supposed to be a superpower.

Maybe in your state. In Oregon, you have to have a master's in the subject you're going to teach, or comparable experience. A few exceptions can be made subject to approval by the school principal and the department head, but that's it.
Yes, occasionally you get a home ec teacher heading up a biology class, but it's not common.