Related questions with answers

Ohio law provides for a free education for all children between the ages of 66 and 21.21. In 19711971, widespread student unrest took place in the public schools of Columbus, Ohio. Students who either participated in, or were present at, demonstrations held on school grounds were suspended. Many suspensions were for a period of ten days. Students were not given a hearing before suspension, although at a later date some students and their parents were given informal conferences with the school principal. A number of students, through their parents, sued the board of education, claiming that their right to due process had been violated when they were suspended without a hearing.

In Goss v. Lopez, the U.S. Supreme Court decided that public school students who are suspended for ten days or less are entitled to certain rights before their suspension. These rights include (1)(1) oral or written notice of the charges, (2)(2) an explanation of the evidence against them (if students deny the charges), and (3)(3) an opportunity for students to present their side of the story.

The Court stated that in an emergency, students could be sent home immediately, and a hearing could be held at a later date. The Court did not give students a right to a lawyer, a right to call or cross-examine witnesses, or a right to a hearing before an impartial person.

In Goss, the Court considered the due process interests of harm, cost, and risk. The Court ruled that reputations were harmed and educational opportunities were lost during the suspension; that an informal hearing would not be overly costly for the schools; and that while most disciplinary decisions were probably correct, an informal hearing would help reduce the risk of error.

What rights might the students want that they did not receive in this case? What are the arguments for and against providing these additional rights?

R.O. is a 12-year-old girl who lives with her family on a farm in a rural community. R.O. has four siblings who have recently been ill with stomach pains, vomiting, diarrhea, and fever. They were seen by their primary care provider (PCP) and diagnosed wit h viral gastroenteritis. A week later, R.O. woke up at 0200 crying and telling her mother that her stomach "hurts really bad!" She had an elevated temperature of 37.9^{\circ}C (100.2 ^{\circ}CF). R.O. began to vomit over the next few hours, so her parents took her to the local emergency department (ED). R.O.'s vital signs, complete blood count, and complete metabolic panel were normal, so she was hydrated with IV fluids and discharged to home wit h instructions for her parents to call their PCP or to return to the ED if her condition did not improve or if it worsened. Over the next 2 days, R.O.'s abdominal pain localized to the right lower quadrant. she refused to eat, and she had slight diarrhea. On the third day, she began to have more severe abdominal pain, increased vomiting, and fever that did not respond to acetaminophen. R.O. has returned to the ED. Her VS are 128/78, 130, 28, 39.S ^{\circ} C (103.1 ^{\circ}C F). R.O. is guarding her lower abdomen, prefers to lie on her side with her legs flexed, and is crying. IV access is established, and morphine sulfate 2 mg IV is administered for pain. An abdominal CT scan confirms a diagnosis of appendicitis. R.O.'s white blood count is 12,000 mm3.
Discuss why R.O.'s presenting clinical manifestations make diagnosis more difficult. Identify two other possible diagnoses

Question

Ohio law provides for a free education for all children between the ages of 66 and 21.21. In 19711971, widespread student unrest took place in the public schools of Columbus, Ohio. Students who either participated in, or were present at, demonstrations held on school grounds were suspended. Many suspensions were for a period of ten days. Students were not given a hearing before suspension, although at a later date some students and their parents were given informal conferences with the school principal. A number of students, through their parents, sued the board of education, claiming that their right to due process had been violated when they were suspended without a hearing.

In Goss v. Lopez, the U.S. Supreme Court decided that public school students who are suspended for ten days or less are entitled to certain rights before their suspension. These rights include (1)(1) oral or written notice of the charges, (2)(2) an explanation of the evidence against them (if students deny the charges), and (3)(3) an opportunity for students to present their side of the story.

The Court stated that in an emergency, students could be sent home immediately, and a hearing could be held at a later date. The Court did not give students a right to a lawyer, a right to call or cross-examine witnesses, or a right to a hearing before an impartial person.

In Goss, the Court considered the due process interests of harm, cost, and risk. The Court ruled that reputations were harmed and educational opportunities were lost during the suspension; that an informal hearing would not be overly costly for the schools; and that while most disciplinary decisions were probably correct, an informal hearing would help reduce the risk of error.

What happened in the Goss case? What rights did the Supreme Court say the students should be given prior to a brief suspension?

Solution

Verified
Answered 1 year ago
Answered 1 year ago
Step 1
1 of 4

The right to a due process of law essentially means that the government has an obligation to treat all citizens fairly and equally.

Create an account to view solutions

By signing up, you accept Quizlet's Terms of Service and Privacy Policy
Continue with GoogleContinue with Facebook

Create an account to view solutions

By signing up, you accept Quizlet's Terms of Service and Privacy Policy
Continue with GoogleContinue with Facebook

More related questions

1/4

1/7