Confiscated phone…unreasonable or not?

[Fruitflylady]

Just had an email from DS’s school to say he’s had his phone confiscated, and that they’re keeping it until Friday!
They introduced this new sanction this term, so it’s my first experience with it. He’s never had his phone confiscated before, and I don’t know why it’s happened now as I can’t get through to the school to ask.
I’m happy to accept he’s made a mistake in using it when he shouldn’t have, and fair enough that they confiscate it for the day, but it seems out of order for them to keep it for the rest of the week. We use it to keep track of where he is when he’s walking home, and he can call to ask for help when he needs it.
How would everyone else approach this situation?

See what HoY says. I'd want it back asap.

So you see when it isn't a clear rule it comes down to probably doing something and then that will lead to accusations of unfairness and more time wasted.

Maybe they should do what they do at my GCs schools, two local schools, where they get a chrome book and are expected to look after with fines if they don't. They are set up so they can't access anything dodgy. I don't know how they fund it.

Ours schools policy is no smartphones in school. If they re going to have one it is confiscated for the rest of the term. I fully agree with this - they have no place at all in schools.

Children are allowed to take a non-smartphone, but must keep it on silent or turned off and in their bags at all times on school premises. They will be confiscated for a week if they don't stick to this.

I fully support the school with this policy.

Get him a cheap traceablle temporary phone for emergencies

Yes, they can. They have the legal right to do so as I explained up thread. The Education and Inspections Act 2006 S91 gives them the powers they need. Provided the school is not acting unreasonably, they can confiscate, retain or even dispose of a pupil's property. The bar for the courts to find that the school has acted unreasonably is very high. The schools actions in this case don't get anywhere near being legally unreasonable. It is not theft and any legal action based on the idea that it is will fail automatically. Section 94 of the Act mentioned above gives the school and the teachers immunity.

So done with schools exceeding their authority

They aren't. If you think they are, that is your problem, not the school's. Parliament has given them the legal authority to behave in the way the OP describes.

@Iwasafool you're right - it should be one rule for all. That should be the phone confiscated until the end of the day - not week.
The week could be too long meaning the child can't access their homework for several days.

What would be the point of confiscating the phone until the end of the day?

A law abiding student can't use their phone all day.
A non-law abiding student may as well try to sneak in using their phone, because the worst that will happen is they won't be able to use it for the rest of the day.

I find it highly unbelievable that a secondary school child would not be able to access their homework for several days without a phone. They would simply use another device or someone else's phone, or access it at school or somewhere like a library.

That stops the interruptions but it isn't actually a sanction for the student, they shouldn't be using the phone during the school day and if it is removed for the day they can't but they are then just doing what they are supposed to do. If schools want them to stop using phones in school there needs to be a sanction, like you know removing their phone.

Maybe I was right many years ago when I let my dc have a secret phone with her which the teachers didn’t know about. It saved her ( and her teachers) bacon on several occasions as it was a tri band phone.

@Iwasafool other punishments could be given - detention etc.
I don't think confiscating a phone for a week is on because it's a persons piece of everyday equipment that is used for many things and is needed (possibly shouldn't be but the technology based life is what we've got).
Would you be happy if your child's coat was confiscated for a week because they were caught wearing it indoors (a rule for many schools) meaning they have to walk home in rainy winter with no coat.
They broke a school rule? So conficate the coat?
The schools need to come up with better punishments.

rather than getting het up and furious about the denial of a phone, or coming up with lots of possible scenarios which might make a phone something that simply cannot be taken away for a very small number of students (medical)

@WombatChocolate I wasn't 'coming up with a possible scenario' but rather outlining a major technological breakthrough which is going to make managing Type I diabetes exponentially easier for thousands of young children. You may have read that there is a huge increase currently in people suffering from the condition.

The point I was making is that imposing a blanket ban on smartphones in schools – as many on this thread have suggested – would almost certainly not be legal. It would fall foul of the 2010 Equality Act and its anti-disability discrimination clauses.

The fact that this isn't directly relevant to the OP does not make it unworthy of pointing out, that's all.

My DC's school has a complete ban on phone use during the day but specifically excludes phones that are required for medical purposes.
I would imagine other schools have similar exclusions in place.

Are the school stating they will keep it for the week? That would be an absolute no from me. If they wanted him to hand it in every morning to the office and not have access to it, fine, but to leave him without a way to contact you when he's on his way to and from school I wouldn't accept

But you can't have 30 phones ringing constantly and interrupting learning... You need a quick, clear sanction which reminds them to have it on silent (although I do actually agree that confiscation until Friday is too long).

You can get a brick phone for a few quid. Your son had the phone taken off him, I am assuming, because he was behaving like a tit and distracting himself and others with it.

I really, really think that schools are capable of creating rules like “smartphones are allowed in exceptional circumstances like when there is a medical need as signed off by a doctor.”

Really don’t get the whole thing of “Oh! But! You can’t put restrictions on XYZ because one person in 500 may be an edge case and require a special carve-out!!”

Thanks everyone for the interesting conversation. It’s given me lots to think about.
My initial reaction when the school emailed me to say the phone had been confiscated was mixed between outrage at the school and outrage at my son. My feelings have now mellowed to quiet support to the school and supportive encouragement to DS to help him stay within the bounds of the school rules. I understand why the behaviour policy has been tightened up recently. I can only imagine how hard it makes teachers lives with phones constantly available (and accidentally ringing in the depths of school bags).
We accepted the penalty, although happening to be at school in the middle of the week for an information evening my DH was able to see a member of the SLT and after a friendly chat, DS got his phone back a little earlier than he ought to have done.

The headteacher recently told parents that the number one reason teachers cite for leaving the school is poor student behaviour, and this is why the new rules have been brought in. It will be for everyone’s benefit (teachers and students) if this leads to a calmer, more productive learning environment. I hope it works as planned.

An excellent result, @Fruitflylady - I’m glad it worked out.

I would always encourage children to respect the school rules in particular with mobile phones.

Glad it’s worked out.
The thing I’d say as well, is that we are all prone to knee jerk reactions to this kind of stuff, especially when our child is concerned. It’s so easy to be furious and wade in….but a bit of reflection and sleeping on it, often mellows our reactions and makes them more sensible. So good for you OP for reflecting on it and being willing to adjust your initial thoughts about it.

This

My son went to a school that was awkward to get to, poor bus service if you missed the school buses. At induction evening the Head talked about punishments and why detentions would be given. He went on to say he knew it was awkward, knew it would be hard for them to get home, probably mean parents would need to collect and if parents had any issues with that not to bother speaking to him but to speak to your son.

I thought it was good advice and we understood what the rules were and how they would be imposed. My son wasn't an angel but he managed to do 7 years at the school without getting detention, I think he knew I would have no sympathy about him doing the 4 mile walk home and I wouldn't be picking him up.

Clear communication, clear rules, makes life so much easier.

@Iwasafool although there is a big difference between "awkward" to get home and "impossible" to get home.
Admittedly this would have been in circa 1959 but when my mum was at school her whole class was given a detention. This was a school in town that many attended from villages and there was many cries of how they wouldn't be able to get home because they would miss the one and only bus.
Back then many families didn't have phones so they couldn't actually phone parents to collect them but many families didn't have cars either so a parent couldn't come and pick up anyway. I have no clue if there was a decent taxi service in small town 1959.
So the teacher ended up having to drive several of the village girls home in her car. Luckily it was 1959 and you could shove half a dozen kids in your car at one time 😂
Anyway..... depressingly even now it's 2023 many families can't afford to run a car and bus services are actually worse than in many places compared to 1959. Taxi services in more rural areas are frequently terrible or non existent.
If I was living in my mum's village now and my daughter was at the old school in the town (the current village children generally go to a different school now - but it's similar distance away) it would be physically impossible for her to get home if given a detention.
Rules are important, rules should be followed - but sometimes adaptions and a bit of flexibility needs to be given.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/mobile-phone-ban-schools-gillian-keegan-b2422167.html

Very interesting given all the outrage on this thread ( not by the sensible OP I have to clarify), about how they'd be on to the head, causing a fuss etc.

The "fuss" was mainly about the child not being able to have their phone back at the end of the day to use on the way to and from school if necessary. I don't think anyone was saying it's ok for children to use their phones in class. The majority of the debate was about whether the punishment of having the phone removed for a week was fair.

The article you link to mentions that the ban does not apply on the journey to and from the school.

"Under the new guidance, which will not be legally binding, students will still be able to take their devices to school with them - for use on journeys there and back"