I Hold This Truth to Be Self-Evident: A Student’s Right to the Fifth Amendment
I Hold This Truth to Be Self-Evident: A Student’s Right to the Fifth Amendment
by Rainesford Alexandra
It was the “mischaracterization” heard around the nation: High school social studies teacher, John Dryden, was brought before the Batavia, Illinois school board after advising students about their Fifth Amendment rights. Before distributing a survey about “emotional learning,” which included thirty-four questions regarding drugs, alcohol, and emotions, Dryden suggested to his classes that they possessed a right not to incriminate themselves. The surveys were not anonymous. Any student whose answers raised “red flags” was sent to the school’s social workers and counselors.
Though it sounds similar to a quintessential American tale of employing those bases upon which we were founded, the fact that Dryden’s warning was seen as a threat instead of an informed citizen encouraging the development of other informed citizens is the greatest red flag of all. In fact, Dryden’s reminder pleads a question much larger and much more controversial than the general public realizes: Do students, those below the age of eighteen and legal adulthood, have constitutional rights — and if so, is it fair for school boards to dictate where those rights should be exercised?
Possibly the most disturbing piece of information throughout this case — besides Dryden being punished for rational action — is that a class of high school students did not realize they, too, hold the right to stay silent. In a country that proclaims loudly that we are “the land of the free,” it seems that when you are a minor in an academic setting, that freedom comes with certain stipulations. The young people of America should be
It was the “mischaracterization” heard around the nation: High school social studies teacher, John Dryden, was brought before the Batavia, Illinois school board after advising students about their Fifth Amendment rights. Before distributing a survey about “emotional learning,” which included thirty-four questions regarding drugs, alcohol, and emotions, Dryden suggested to his classes that they possessed a right not to incriminate themselves. The surveys were not anonymous. Any student whose answers raised “red flags” was sent to the school’s social workers and counselors.
Though it sounds similar to a quintessential American tale of employing those bases upon which we were founded, the fact that Dryden’s warning was seen as a threat instead of an informed citizen encouraging the development of other informed citizens is the greatest red flag of all. In fact, Dryden’s reminder pleads a question much larger and much more controversial than the general public realizes: Do students, those below the age of eighteen and legal adulthood, have constitutional rights — and if so, is it fair for school boards to dictate where those rights should be exercised?
Possibly the most disturbing piece of information throughout this case — besides Dryden being punished for rational action — is that a class of high school students did not realize they, too, hold the right to stay silent. In a country that proclaims loudly that we are “the land of the free,” it seems that when you are a minor in an academic setting, that freedom comes with certain stipulations. The young people of America should be
