Does anyone know the outcome of this case? Has the Judge ruled yet?

I don't think the courts should have their hands in high school eligability. If you don't follow the rules and descisions set out by the KHSAA, you shouldn't be playing in member events. If not, the organization has ZERO power.

 

Slavery ended 140 years ago. The children are not owned by any school board. This whole idea that the public educators are entitled to force your child to enroll where they see fit is crazy. Let them attend wherever they want. If a teacher moves, he doesn't sit out, does he? Even in mid year, coaches come and go all the time. It should be the parent's decision until the student is 18. Then the decision transfers to the student.

 

As far as why a child leaves, who cares. It may be as simple as he likes the new mascot better.

Let them move freely. Of course this may point out many faults and raise many questions why children are leaving a particular school. Freedom of choice. The parents are accepting the responsibilty of getting the child to and from school...free transportation was never an intent of the education provision.....let the kid go and the old AD ought to get over himself.....

I also do not beleive that they allow transfers immediate eligibility if transfering for academic reasons. In other words transfering for academic reasons is not a legit reason.

 

Let's face facts, there are some poor teachers out there. There are many outstanding educators as well, but if your child wasn't happy with their situation, and you could not gain satisfactionb from the teacher, you may want to switch to another school....don't you think?

Slavery ended 140 years ago. The children are not owned by any school board. This whole idea that the public educators are entitled to force your child to enroll where they see fit is crazy. Let them attend wherever they want. If a teacher moves, he doesn't sit out, does he? Even in mid year, coaches come and go all the time. It should be the parent's decision until the student is 18. Then the decision transfers to the student.

 

As far as why a child leaves, who cares. It may be as simple as he likes the new mascot better.

Let them move freely. Of course this may point out many faults and raise many questions why children are leaving a particular school. Freedom of choice. The parents are accepting the responsibilty of getting the child to and from school...free transportation was never an intent of the education provision.....let the kid go and the old AD ought to get over himself.....

Well said, couldn't agree more. Who cares if kids transfer for athletic reasons, academic reasons or romantic reasons. Kids shouldn't be forced to sit out a year for any reason other than for perhaps disciplinary problems. If you're a junior place kicker, and you have a teammate whose a junior placekicker, you're both really good but only one of you is going to get the job why not let one of the kids transfer for athletic reasons to another school that could benefit from his talent? The orginal school isn't hurt, both kids benefit and the new school benefits.

Slavery ended 140 years ago. The children are not owned by any school board. This whole idea that the public educators are entitled to force your child to enroll where they see fit is crazy. Let them attend wherever they want. If a teacher moves, he doesn't sit out, does he? Even in mid year, coaches come and go all the time. It should be the parent's decision until the student is 18. Then the decision transfers to the student.

 

As far as why a child leaves, who cares. It may be as simple as he likes the new mascot better.

Let them move freely. Of course this may point out many faults and raise many questions why children are leaving a particular school. Freedom of choice. The parents are accepting the responsibilty of getting the child to and from school...free transportation was never an intent of the education provision.....let the kid go and the old AD ought to get over himself.....

If you live in Jefferson County can you get your driver's licence in Pike County?

Can you live in Robertson County and come to Jefferson County for unemployement checks and/or welfare funds?

If you live in Wayne County, can you vote in the Oldham County races?

If you live in Campbell County, can you attend school in Boone County UNLESS BOONE COUNTY agrees?

 

I think the answers to all above are NO.

 

I think it is pretty well established that the government can and DOES place restrictions BASED ON WHERE YOU LIVE upon the services they provide.

 

Now, on the idea of free choice of education, I am for a voucher system. A new system.

 

But in the present system, the state government has TO AN EXTENT said that children belong to a certain school system. Look at funding. If your child goes to a school district (note district meaning you leave Jefferson and enroll in Nelson) OUTSIDE of the one you live than the $$$$$$ does NOT FOLLOW your child. Your home district does not get it either. Not sure where it goes because if your home district does not give their official okey-dokey, NOBODY gets the money. So, the state of KY has said that your child's financial stake in the government service of providing education belongs to Jefferson County and ONLY Jefferson County unless JCPS says any different.

 

You always have that option as a parent to remove your child from the free public school education and enroll them in a private school option. (For me, please note and don't waste your time saying I am some sort of anti-private school note, I would vote for you to have full control of your tax dollars in choosing your child's education through a voucher system.)

 

 

As far as the last bolded statement, that is urban county thinking. There are many other school districts besides Jefferson County. You don't provide free transportation in rural county schools and they are not making it to school. My last 6 years of my public school education, my parents left for work at 6:00 AM, an hour and half before I left for school. School was not even open then. I got myself up, dressed (at least part of the time I matched.) and ready for school.

Slavery ended 140 years ago. The children are not owned by any school board. This whole idea that the public educators are entitled to force your child to enroll where they see fit is crazy. Let them attend wherever they want. If a teacher moves, he doesn't sit out, does he? Even in mid year, coaches come and go all the time. It should be the parent's decision until the student is 18. Then the decision transfers to the student.

 

As far as why a child leaves, who cares. It may be as simple as he likes the new mascot better.

Let them move freely. Of course this may point out many faults and raise many questions why children are leaving a particular school. Freedom of choice. The parents are accepting the responsibilty of getting the child to and from school...free transportation was never an intent of the education provision.....let the kid go and the old AD ought to get over himself.....

 

I guess thats easy to say, but what if the child leaves because the knew school is going to give his parents 20 thousand dollars if he comes to there school and the parents will let the kid keep 10 thousand of that money, doesn't seem so fair. These rules are designed to prevent recruiting plain and simple. While they don't always stop schools from recruiting they can help in some cases. Will some innocent kids suffer who weren't recruited, yes unfortunately. However, this rule is to keep the focus on academics and not allow kids to become cattle at the market going to the highest bidding coach. They need to be focusing on academics before sports and transferring for sports just says that sports are a higher priority than education when in High School that just simply isn't true!

Well said, couldn't agree more. Who cares if kids transfer for athletic reasons, academic reasons or romantic reasons. Kids shouldn't be forced to sit out a year for any reason other than for perhaps disciplinary problems. If you're a junior place kicker, and you have a teammate whose a junior placekicker, you're both really good but only one of you is going to get the job why not let one of the kids transfer for athletic reasons to another school that could benefit from his talent? The orginal school isn't hurt, both kids benefit and the new school benefits.

 

So once again, what if a child leaves due to the fact that he was disciplined by his coach and he didn't like it. Athletics are about life lessons, not selling a kid out to the highest bidder. It should be one year mandatory, no exceptions.

So once again, what if a child leaves due to the fact that he was disciplined by his coach and he didn't like it. Athletics are about life lessons, not selling a kid out to the highest bidder. It should be one year mandatory, no exceptions.

 

 

Are you saying even if I move from Highlands to Paducah for employment???

 

If so ...no way!!!!!:argue:

So once again, what if a child leaves due to the fact that he was disciplined by his coach and he didn't like it. Athletics are about life lessons, not selling a kid out to the highest bidder. It should be one year mandatory, no exceptions.

 

Couldn't disagree more. There are life choices and events that occur. Both parents die in a horrible car crash and the child moves in with grandparents in another part of the state and you are wanting to pile on their misery with NO EXCEPTIONS.

There is only one way to eliminate the what ifs. Some will always be hurt by the process. There is no favortism when you simply say it is the same for all.

I think we have to have some compassion and take each case on its own merits. Sometimes the KHSAA does not do that, and I think they should.

 

Case in point (no school, gender, family situation or name shall be given for privacy reasons): This past year, there was a student athlete who moved here from out of state to live with his/her brother due to the family situation at home. The student athlete and his/her brother did not think about changing his/her legal guardianship. The KHSAA ruled that it did not qualify and ruled the student athlete ineligible for their senior year.

There is only one way to eliminate the what ifs. Some will always be hurt by the process. There is no favortism when you simply say it is the same for all.

 

Don't think that would stand up in court at all.

Don't think that would stand up in court at all.

 

Once again, I do not understand how the court should be able to intervene in KHSAA affairs. The organization will never have any power as long as a judge is allowed to decide the merits of its rulings. For example, do you think that a Campbell County district judge would ever find in favor of the KHSAA when they have ruled a player say from a school like Highlands ineligable. I don't think so.

Once again, I do not understand how the court should be able to intervene in KHSAA affairs. The organization will never have any power as long as a judge is allowed to decide the merits of its rulings. For example, do you think that a Campbell County district judge would ever find in favor of the KHSAA when they have ruled a player say from a school like Highlands ineligable. I don't think so.

 

I prefer to think the judges rule on matters of law and not school affliation.

 

Name something in this country that cannot go to a lawsuit and/or an appeals process.

Once again, I do not understand how the court should be able to intervene in KHSAA affairs. The organization will never have any power as long as a judge is allowed to decide the merits of its rulings. For example, do you think that a Campbell County district judge would ever find in favor of the KHSAA when they have ruled a player say from a school like Highlands ineligable. I don't think so.

 

The KHSAA cannot be immune from the legal system. Even though I am sure some think they are, ... noone or no organization should be immune or consider themselves above the law. If so, why have a legal system, .. as flawed as it may be.