DT> MS>SK> -> A mother who said her "night owl" son does not like to go 
DT> to
DT> MS>SK> -> bed early was placed on 90 days probation because the boy 
DT> was 
DT> MS>SK> repeatedly
DT> MS>SK> -> late for kindergarten
DT> 
DT> MS>    This case is an example of an improper role for a criminal 
DT> court
DT> MS>judge  if ever there was one, and also of a sentence that can 
DT> achieve
DT> MS>nothing.     Even if defendant Mommy puts Junior to bed at a 
DT> "proper
DT> MS>time", she  cannot make him go to sleep.  
DT> 
DT> I rather like this judge.  This idea of kindergartners being 
DT> repeatedly 
DT> late to school as a result of being too tired because of late nights 
DT> hits close to home.  Whose in charge here?  The kid or mom?  
    As any parent could tell you, the _kid_ is "in charge" of whether he gets 
enough sleep (even if Mom puts him to bed early every night).  The _kid_ is 
the only person who can effectively decide whether he will get out of bed as 
soon as Mom is asleep.
DT> 
DT> But I fear you are right here Matt....I don't think the courts can 
DT> effectively "police" poor parenting skills.  
    I just don't think so either.
DT> There is no easy answers for this type of problem.  I certainly don't 
DT> think the judge is that far out-of-bounds  (at least in what he is 
DT> _trying_ to accomplish here).
    (Sort of _inconsistent_ with what you said above.)
    In law, we use the word "remedies" when talking about what a judge can 
order.  I just don't think any "remedy" in such a case will be effective.
--- Simplex BBS (v1.07.00Beta [DOS])
---------------