Ooooo, a parenting/school Dilemma.

[the_bob_delusion]

The Telegraph reports that Holli McCann and two of her fellow Year Six classmates tucked into the contraband on the first night of their excursion to the Isle of Wight.

While she wasn't caught eating the chocolate, teachers opened a sealed letter to her mother, Kerri, telling her about the sweet treat.

After reading the letter teachers removed the lining of her suitcase and tipped out her toiletries bag to find the hidden stash.

Kerri McCann was ordered to drive 260 kilometres through the night to come and pick her up, otherwise Holli would be forced to sit and watch her classmates undertake the week of fun activities.

The children were all forced to sign a behaviour contract before the trip of which Holli was found to be in breach of.

 http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/parenting/holli-mccann-kicked-off-school-trip-to-isle-of-wight-for-...

Who's right or wrong in this circumstance? or more right or more wrong?

[***super_nova***]

Was having the junk snacks against the rules?  If it was, and the girls smuggled them in, especially if it was obvious the mum knew, then yes, I think it was reasonable to ask the parents to collect the children involved. 

I did not give my kids junk food, and would prefer if it was not offered to them by others.  But more importantly, many of these snack could contain nuts and there are many kids now allergic to nuts, so for 11 years old sharing secretly this sort of food could be dangerous.  The camp has duty of care, and they should not be expected to accept responsibility for kids who go out of their way to break the rules.

[toysartnstuff]

couldn't they have just taken the stuff and either gotten rid of it or shoved with one of the teachers?

sounds a little harsh to me and what if her mum hadn't had transport or the ability to get out there?

[this-one-time-at-bandcamp]

It's a bit of a conundrum.  On the one hand, if possessing chockies violated the agreement the kid signed, the organization was within its rights to punish her.  On the other hand, intercepting a privileged communication, at least in the US, without a court order is a violation of the girl's rights.

It would have been far more apropos for the school to confiscate the goodies, and provide suitable punishment upon her return to school.

[catsnknots]

Teachers in the wrong for opeing a sealed letter to the mum... 

What if it is was a letter complaining about a teacher.... was that going to put the child at risk of punishment from the teacher? 

it was a personal letter that the teachers had no right to complain about. Invasion of privacy... 

I snuck treats onto a school camp.. it was part of the fun... 

the kid was not doing drugs... 

[lionrose.7]

Sounds more like boot camp then a school trip, not right at all.

[freakiness]

---

@lionrose.7 wrote:

Sounds more like boot camp then a school trip, not right at all.

---

As kids have been doing that sort of thing forever it does sound like rather extreme punishment.

[azureline**]

Ridiculous over reaction and the teacher had no right to read the letter.

[i-need-a-martini]

Ridiuclous - everyone knows you are meant to provide the kids sweets for midnight snacks at camp. Kids have been doing the same since the day dot.

[the_bob_delusion]

---

@i-need-a-martini wrote:

Ridiuclous - everyone knows you are meant to provide the kids sweets for midnight snacks at camp. Kids have been doing the same since the day dot.

---

You're missing the point. It was a contraband to start off with. We're not debating whether it's should be a contraband or not.

We don't know exactly the circumstances of how the teacher came to know about the letter or read it.

Supposely the teacher accidentaly found out about the letter and the contraband. How has the situation changed.