School confiscating phone

You do have a fair point, however, with the best will in the world, all children are not equal. With my own children, I suspect I could of left DD2 anywhere in the country at that age, and provided she had the money she would have been able to use any public transport to get herself home. DD1, not so much. She could get lost going to the end of a straight road.
The lad in question is very timid. He'd already been bawled out by the teacher who confiscated his phone. I expect he was too scared to ask anyone else for help.
Personally my DS has a couple of quid tucked away in his bag, on the off chance his phone dies or something so he can get home. Although some of the buses only accept bus passes now, as they are not public transport but school transport only, and if you don't have a pass, you can't always get on (depends on the driver). And as the passes are mostly digital, you're stuffed without a phone.

I'm still strongly of the opinion that school should not have the right to keep the phone after school hours, and they should be returned at the end of the day.

‘I would have them all disappear. Even my own. Just go away and never come back’

Agree. I spend too much time on mine. And my 18y anxious daughter says she wishes phones and the internet didn’t exist 😐

Don't be silly, school policies are still subject to the law of the land. Even if you have been made aware of those policies, and signed a document saying you have read them, that does not give a school some sort of 'get out' clause. Try saying 'oh we're exempt from disability discrimination legislation because all our parents have been made aware of our policies' and see what happens. 😂

Having a policy that parents and pupils are aware of in no way undermines the legal requirement for schools disciplinary action to be reaonable and proportionate and to have a duty of care for their pupils.

I'm not saying it's never right for a school to confisciate a child's phone overnight, but it simply being school policy doesn't mean it can be done in any given circumstance without undermining their duty of care to their pupils.

I'm not sure how anyone can defend leaving an 11yo child without a means to make a 9 mile journey home (as people have been doing) as being in line with the school's duty of care. Or indeed, a reasonable response to a phone accidentally falling out of school bag.

"They shouldn't have been dicking about with their phone then should they?"

That's one thing but what about....
Accessing porn
Taking pictures
Filming staff and making memes/ uploading their image to Facebook/ insta/ WhatsApp
Bullying the sen child in the room
Bullying other children
Arranging meet ups
Accessing things that would mean we would have to approach prevent.
Photographing or filming CHIC or LAC.

The possibilities are endless and far more than 'dicking about'
Phones do not belong in a classroom.

On the whole, schools bring these measures in and make parents/new pupils aware of them.

At the end of the day, if parents don't like it then they should move their children to a different school where its run like a democracy (and therefore, shit)

"They shouldn't have been dicking about with their phone then should they?" is not a reasonable justification for a confiscation that leaves a child without e.g. a means for them to get home.

Indeed. And nor is it for confiscating when it is an integral part of managing an ongoing chronic medical condition. So alternative ways of managing the situation, and punishments, must be found.

@annahay that sounds like an excellent solution. Clearly you take a very sensible, and practical, approach. I think you should be advising other schools!

I seem to see this a lot - that the obvious answer to escalating discipline issues is escalating punishment. Which might be true to an extent but there's obviously limits, and there comes a point where confiscating an item of personal property outside of school hours isn't reasonable.

Legally any disciplinary measure has to reasonable and proportionate and doesn't override the school's duty of care to their pupils. "They shouldn't have been dicking about with their phone then should they?" is not a reasonable justification for a confiscation that leaves a child without e.g. a means for them to get home.

There's a piece here about the legalities of it - the writer makes the point that what's reasonable varies depending on the needs of the pupil and that confiscating a phone from a younger child who lives further away from school (as per the example of the 11 year old who ended up walking 9 miles home because the didn't have access to their bus pass app) might not be reasonable: Is a school allowed to confiscate a pupil’s mobile phone? (schoolsweek.co.uk)

Yeah but then it keeps happening. And more and more kids try using their phones in lessons, cos it's not a deterrent.

The teachers have enough on their plates.

Phones are an unhealthy addiction for many people. Schools should be able to confiscate them if they are detrimental to education.

@thing47 one of my students used his phone to monitor his glucose. Obviously we don't confiscate his phone. When I spoke to his parents about him misusing his phone, we agreed it would sit on my desk (within reach of the student as he sat at the front) so it was available if he needed it, but was a deterrent to using it for anything else.

Sure, but this thread is about mobile phone use in schools by children. Work is different as it concerns adults and we all have to make choices about what sort of work we want to do/are able to do, and we may have to accept that certain medical conditions preclude us from doing certain types of jobs, particularly where there is a possibility of it putting other people in danger. I'm sure adults with chronic medical conditions to manage do understand that.

That restriction doesn't apply to DCs in schools because schools don't get to overrule aspects of life which would be covered by the 2010 Equality Act in the same way that an employer can in specific circumstances.

But how is that a deterrent? Confiscate it, but give it back at the time they would be allowed to use it anyway? There are no negatives for the child here.

@thing47 but mobile phones cannot be used in all sorts of workplaces, for far more serious reasons than just "school policy". If they are that vital, then they will need to be disconnected from commercial products with Internet and camera access.

No offence, but you can't do this with Type I diabetes. You can be old school, for sure (I am myself) and use injections, but you can't just switch between old school and new tech because the two approaches are fundamentally different - they use different types of insulin for a start.

A school doesn't get to dictate how a pupil manages a chronic medical condition. If a certain approach is regarded as 'best practice' and the expert medical team deems it the correct management system for the child, then a school will have adapt accordingly.

I appreciate the situation might not have arisen yet. As I said in my previous post, it is still a relatively new approach to diabetes management. But as @CroccyWoccy points out, it is another area of life where smartphones are increasingly going to be enmeshed into everyday life.

Maybe there is a market for mobile jammers for schools.

@stomachameleon We would always make sure children got home safely

I think that’s the key thing - irrespective of the policy, irrespective of how many prior offences the school should be ensuring that depriving the child of the phone doesn’t leave them without a means to get home safely or make essential communication. That doesn’t mean a phone can’t be confiscated, but does mean the school should have a conversation with the child before they leave to ensure the child has the means to get home, an emergency contact is informed of overnight confiscation and the child has an opportunity to make any essential calls before leaving. That would seem to be basic safeguarding.

Yes our school do it. First time they get caught child can collect it. 2nd time a parent has to collect it. They’ve been given a chance, broken the rules again so it’s only fair.

When it happened to my son I took my time collecting it. Think it was 3 days. Tough on him . He knew the risk.

@CroccyWoccy any school I have worked at either have a very strict and well explained phone policy
Or
Confiscation would be for several offences.

We always give pupils the chance to make correct choices eg hand over phone first thing.

We have had situations where burner phones were hidden in the panels of the school toilets for drug dealing so we have to be strict.

And also it's a safeguarding issue. We would always make sure children got home safely and tbh our rule is 'a responsible adult' picks up contraband so they can normally rustle someone up :)

It does illustrate though that society as a whole is increasingly moving towards an assumption that people have access to a (smart)phone. I inadvertantly left my phone at home the other day and couldn't pay for parking. Admittedly your average 13 year old isn't going to need to pay for parking but phones are becoming the default for so many things these days that I don't think schools can just assume that a phone is a "luxury" item that can be confiscated without ensuring confiscation doesn't put the child at risk.

@thing47 I teach with two chronic conditions and am not allowed my phone. I just have to manage things old school sometimes and I know myself well enough that I can judge if I am unwell as an emergency.
They are ways round things. And I think other students would understand if there was a student that needed a phone for medical reasons. It hasn't come up with us yet.