RESERVE—A new item was added to the East St. John High School uniform policy this year, and it is one that has caused a firestorm of controversy among school board members and parents alike.
The new policy reads, “TATTOOS MUST BE COVERED AT ALL TIMES.”
|
|
His introduction of the agenda item prompted the calling of a special meeting of the board’s executive committee earlier in the week, apparently to address the way in which agenda items are introduced. This matter caused Sanders to begin his address with the proclamation, “I will not be censored.”
He went on to explain that the policy is not a district-wide policy, but rather one that is specific to East St. John High School.
He also wondered if such a policy could be seen as limiting students’ self-expression and whether or not the same rules would apply during sports practices and sporting events.
Superintendent Courtney Millet countered his argument, saying that, like uniforms, keeping tattoos covered is a way to keep the focus in schools on learning and that it is also a way to keep kids from making permanent, potentially life-threatening mistakes. Millet noted that some studies indicate that commercial tattoos may be the biggest spreader of Hepatitis C, a potentially-deadly liver ailment.
She also offered that, though the district has no policy regarding tattoos, each individual school’s administration has the final say in policy, provided that policy does not violate district policy or any law.
At that point, Sanders requested an injunction be placed on the policy until the board could meet on the matter, a request Millet ultimately denied.
In the ensuing debate in which just about every board member had something to say, a number of issues were brought to the fore, not the least of which was safety concerns.
For instance, Board Member Clarence Triche said that during a visit to East St. John High School, he witnessed a St. John law enforcement officer speaking to the students on the matter. The officer explained to the students that while tattoos and the fad of shaving grooves in one’s eyebrows might just seem like good fun to them, if they walked into the wrong neighborhood, it could have deadly consequences. He was, of course, alluding to the fact that such things often signify gang involvement.
But it seems the measures opponents’ major complaint was that it was not brought to the board in the first place.
Board Member Russell Jack questioned the respect of a school administration that would put such a policy in place without first coming to the board.
Sanders said his only request was that matters go through proper channels. As he noted, “The only thing I ask for is communication.”
He wanted to know how to address parental complaints when they arose.
Ultimately it was decided that the board’s disciplinary committee would meet to discuss the matter and implement a district-wide policy, an action many thought had come too late.
It was pointed out, however, that the district’s current stance on cell phones started out as an administrative policy at one school. So, just because the committee will meet to discuss the policy does not mean that it will be struck down.




Comments
Comment posters are responsible for the opinions they express and the accuracy of the information they provide. We urge comment writers to treat this as a public forum where manners matter. We encourage a collegial, non-insulting tone. All readers comments must be approved by our staff before posting to the Web site. Be aware, in accordance with the Communications Decency Act and provisions upheld in judicial appeal, that you are responsible for comments posted on this Web site. The L'Observateur is not liable for messages from third parties.
DO NOT POST:
* Potentially libelous statements or damaging innuendo.
* Obscene, explicit, or racist language.
* Personal attacks, insults or threats.
* The use of another person's real name to disguise your identity.
* Comments unrelated to the story.
Opinions, advice and all other information expressed in The L'Observateur reader comments represent the individual's own views and not necessarily those of L'Observateur. L'Observateur does not endorse and is not responsible for statements, advice or opinions offered by anyone other than authorized L'Observateur spokespersons.
Thank you for your comments!