On Cates legislation, I understand the concept, but I have to question the fairness.

If all this bill did was say that any teacher who is convicted of a crime that would have barred them from getting their teaching license in the first will now have that license automatically revoked, and I'd say no problem.

But to require a person to be "immediately" removed from the classroom simply for being formally accused of a crime, with no adjudication of their guilt yet, strikes me as fundamentally unfair. People do get charged with crimes they didn't commit, after all.

Should you be suspended from your job simply because someone has accused you of a crime?
Modern Esquire | 04.28.08 - 5:28 pm | #

If your job puts children in your care, I think we are all better off having the accused be suspended -- with pay if necessary to acquit your sense of fairness -- than have something bad happen to child that could have been prevented. That's my view of it...your mileage may vary.
Matt Hurley | Homepage | 04.28.08 - 8:09 pm | #