If a father who was convicted of being a sex offender changed himself over the course of time to be a productive citizen, shouldn't he be allowed to go to school's events to watch his kids do their activities? The school boards are having the debate about this. And I highly doubt they will let these sex offenders get on their school property so easily.
In the article that I've read, it talks about how Cody Mittleider, a "28-year-old married father of three young children spent a year in prison for a 2005 rape conviction, but has since worked to become a respected member of the community" was refused by a school board to let him attend his children's after school programs such as athletic events. Cody worked his way up to be where he is now. And the article further tells that "he quit drinking, attends counseling, got a job at a potato farm and joined the volunteer fire department in this central North Dakota town of about 760 residents." I thought it was very humble of him. Maybe he does deserve to enter the school property to see his kids do extracurricular activities.
The main problem is that the school boards have been identifying all sex offenders as dangers to the school ground. They are afraid that people like Cody Mittleider might not be 100% pure yet. Should they have the same standard for all sex offenders? Wouldn't that be a little bit unfair to parents of their children like Cody? I understand that some sex offenders never change. But they shouldn't assume that to everyone. If they're parents, don't they have the rights to be there for their children anyway?
Luckily, not school boards in every state is like that. There are some who do not allow any sex offenders on to their grounds at all for the safety of their students. Some may determine on a case-by-case basis. Although, I'm not too sure if other parents will agree with that. I know my parents would so freak out if they know we have a sex offender next door or a sex offender working at my school.
Here's the article:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071003/ap_on_re_us/sex_offenders_schools;_y...
I understand that a person can change with time, but they should have thought of the stigma that comes along with sexual assault when they raped someone. Also, 2005 was only two years ago.....I don't know if I would trust that short of a time span to change a person completely. And it's not just small changes that need to be made. When someone rapes, they obviously have violent tendencies and possibly anger management issues.
I would not want a person convicted of rape to be around my person only two years later. Twenty years may be a different story, but not in this case. People argue it is unfair to the father, but it is also unfair to all the parents of childrent hat attend the school.
Times flies like the wind; fruit flies like a banana.