[4_2_it]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Every year my kids and I have to sign a form acknowledging that we have read, understand and agree to follow the school's code of conduct (it includes a rule against cell phone and text message use). If one of my kids gets caught breaking any of the rules then I have no problem with there being consequences.

[/ QUOTE ]

Its not like your really "agreeing" to anything though. It shouldn't be thought of as a real contract. You "have" to sign it and you have no bargaining power.


[/ QUOTE ]

There is no coercion and both parties get consideration and to my acknowledge none of the rules are encroach upon existing municipal or state laws. How is this not a binding contract?

You guys are funny trying to justify bad parenting by blaming the school when it does something that any good parent would have done long before the situation ever reached this point.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not justifying parenting. I think there are both good and bad parents that want/don't want their children carrying cellphones.

I'm suggesting that it could be thought of as non-binding to an extent because you don't have any bargaining power to negotiate the terms of the contract. This has been an issue in cases involving form contracts.

Also, there probably isn't consideration for the contract either, because the rule seems reasonable and the courts would surely enforce it even if parents weren't asked to make an agreement. It appears to be a contract because you're promising your kids will follow the rule and they're promising to give your kids an education. The problem is, they could make your kids follow the rules anyway. From their standpoint the contract is unneccessary so they aren't really getting anything. Thus its an illusory promise and and its effect is that neither party is bound.

Again, none of this is to say that the kids don't have to follow the rule, just that a document signed by the parents isn't the basis for the rule's validity.

[/ QUOTE ]

One legal point I think you are missing is that the school can refuse to accept the student if the parent does not agree to this so that the school gets consideration in the form of parental agreement that his child will abide by the rules.

I agree it is silly and most courts will use common sense in a situation like this, but it baffles me why people (not u luckboxer) get all up in arms about stuff like this. From a parent's perspective, I am happy when a school administration takes a tough line on discipline. I'm all fro giving a kid a second chance (after all they are kids), but if violating teh rule sdo not have consequences then why bother having rules.

Another pint: I bet this guy is less angry with his kid about the behavior than he is at the thought of someone exercising 'control' over some possession of his (be it his phone or his child).