Wednesday, October 29, 2014

Connecticut girl barred from school amid Ebola fears; family sues


Article Link


The family of a third-grader, Ikeoluwa, in Connecticut filed a lawsuit against Milford Public School because they have banned their daughter from school for 21 days due to Ebola fears. Her family has just returned from a trip in Lagos, Nigeria for a family wedding, and she was banned from school “based on fears.” Rumors and panic started in Meadowside Elementary School in Milford, and Ikeoluwa was said to have “suffered severe emotional distress” from the decision to ban her. Stephen Opayemi, her father, was told that if he tried to bring his daughter to school, police would be there to remove her.  Ikeoluwa has not been diagnosed with Ebola, and she has not shown any of the symptoms. Do you think that it is right to ban Ikeoluwa? Is it right to make this decision based on fear, not medical information? 

26 comments:

  1. I do not think it is necessary to ban her from school, because the school has fears. Sure this is a life threatening disease, but she has not shown any signs of her having the disease. I think if the school is concerned, then they should pay for her medical bill to get tested for the disease. I can also see the school board's point of view because if she has the disease then it can spread to other people at school. Also from a parents perspective, I would be kind of happy that my child is not going to school with someone that could have ebola. In conclusion, I think it is wrong for the school to ban the girl because she MIGHT have ebola.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think it's unacceptable that a school would ban a child from school based on suspicion that she might have a disease without solid evidence - just because she went to a certain place in a different country. The school definitely should have reacted differently. They could have expressed their concern of the child with her and her family, then gotten her tested immediately. It is completely unfair for her to be prevented from getting her rightful education because they think that she could possibly have ebola. I understand the concern, but the reaction is what's surprising.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I view that it was very unjust to ban Ikeoluwa from school after her trip. Based on fear alone, banning a child from education should not be acceptable. I understand that the school may try to be cautious about the deadly disease that it might spread to their area of the world next, but like Jordan said, the school should really test the child to prove if their concern is something worth having or just a false alarm. Banning a child from schooling should not be out of an assumption or simply out of fear, but the bare facts of whether the child truly has ebola or not.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I think it is totally unacceptable for this girl to be banned from school based on the school's assumptions. She has every right to go to school and receive an education, and the school shouldn't be allowed to take those rights away from her based on their assumptions which are most likely false. Not only were their reactions immature, but they were also very ignorant. Just because she traveled to Africa, does not mean she has ebola.

    ReplyDelete
  5. It is ridiculous to ban this girl based on fear. Facts should always be what is used to make the ultimate decision. If everything in the world ran on assumptions, we would be living in complete chaos. Plus, no child should be deprived of getting education at a public school. This decision should have been based on more reliable medical conclusions

    ReplyDelete
  6. I think the school has no right to ban the girl from school just because they think she has Ebola based on fear. It not fair to the girl because they have these assumptions against her but she hasn't even been test and she has no symptoms of Ebola. I think the only way it would be right to ban the girl would be if they had proof she had Ebola instead of assuming. Just because they think she might have it doesn't mean she does have it.

    ReplyDelete
  7. While I wouldn't exactly say that it is totally ridiculous to ban her from school based off of fear, it is ridiculous to ban her without a clear investigation first. I say that banning out of fear is not totally ridiculous is because fear is natural to humans and it's known to drive people to act irrationally. That said, I can understand why they would do something so extreme; however, they clearly did not take the time to deal with their fear and investigate the situation. Nigeria is so far away from the outbreak that it's just so obvious that they are not only fearful, but also oblivious. That is the most ridiculous thing about this in my opinion. People always tend to see Africa as a country rather than a continent made up of multiple countries. when they think "Africa," they just think "over there" and one country is no different than the other to them. That said, I would say that this could even be classified as racism.

    ReplyDelete
  8. The school definitely overreacted in this situation. Instead of forcing Ikeoluwa out, they should have asked to get her tested before jumping to conclusions. Although I do understand their concerns over the safety and keeping Ebola from spreading to other students, they did not respond to the situation correctly by making the girl feel alienated in a learning environment. The teachers and staff should know better than to act so strongly (threatening her with the police) just based on rumors.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I think they overreacted in this situation. Yet I do understand why they did it because Ebola is a big problem and people are scared and act upon that fear. That still is no excuse for taking her out and like what Ivan said not going through with a full investigation or the simplicity of asking her parents to take her to get tested are the harmless way this whole situation could have been avoided. What also surprises me is the police were there to prevent her from coming in. Did they not think to just take her to a hospital to test it, Instead of backing up on the idea she could have it.

    ReplyDelete
  10. The way that the school reacted toward Ikeoluwa was unjust. Although the scare of Ebola is understandable, it is not right to assume that she has the virus. Instead of banning her from the school for 21 days and even going as far as having police prevent her from entering campus, the school could have just asked her to receive immediate medical care. Furthermore, rather than
    stripping her of her rights to learn, the school could have had her be diagnosed as to whether she has Ebola or not. Even in court the defendant is considered innocent until proven guilty. So why was she treated as "guilty" of having Ebola before proven so?

    ReplyDelete
  11. I believe that is was completely unnecessary to ban this young girl from school. It makes no sense as to why they feel like it was just to ban her. Just because she is coming back from an area that is known for Ebola means she needs to be ban? She hasn’t shown any symptoms of Ebola and doctors have found no sign of Ebola in her. I think that the school should have gotten her checked out by doctors before they came to the very rational decision of banning her from the school. It is ok to be fearful of this disease but taking away ones education is crossing the line in my eyes.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I agree with Carter and Jenney because it is unnecessary and unjust for the school to ban this girl just because she is coming back from an area that is known to have Ebola and they did not even test her for it. It would have been wise for the school to have tested her for Ebola before banning her because they are depriving her from her education without a proper reason.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I believe it is unnecessary for the school to ban this girl just because they think she has ebola and they did not even test her for ebola. She showed no signs of having ebola so they did not have the right to ban her and plus it was unjust. It would have been better if they tested the girl for ebola first instead of just banning her because of fear.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I believe it is extremely unnecessary for the school to banned her from school for 21 day. Although she has her family has come back from Nigeria, the chances of them having ebola are slim to none. Lastly she has not shown any symptoms therefor it is unnecessary to keep her away from school.

    ReplyDelete
  15. I believe that this is pretty unnecessary for the school to ban the girl from school for 21 days. Although, her family was just in Nigeria, I believe the chances for the family to have ebola are very slim. With her showing no symptoms of ebola, there was no need to keep her away from school.

    ReplyDelete
  16. I think the school definitely overreacted. They should have just checked to see if she had ebola and let her come to school when it was clear she wasn't sick. It's unlikely that she would have had it anyway, and it sounds like she didn't show any symptoms so they had no real reason to fear her coming to school.

    ReplyDelete
  17. While I agree with the other commenters here that it seems unfair to the girl, health concerns regarding a deadly epidemic can be justified. Quarantines have been policy for preventing disease entering the U.S. since the late 1800s, and preventing the girl from going to school seems like a good way to prevent the spread of ebola. However, I also think the school needs more information before jumping into a decision like that.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I don't think that this was the right decision be the school. Since there are no actual evidences showing signs or symptoms of this disease, there is no proof that she is diagnosed with Ebola. Besides, the U.S government checks people at airports who come from African countries that might have the potential to carry this disease. So this was not a professional decision by the school, and I believe that this child's family has the right to react to this faulty determination.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I think this is completely unfair towards the child. Because there was no actual diagnosis or any symptoms which would indicate that she has the disease, I cannot understand why the school would make this decision. It was defiantly a lapse in judgement on the school's part, and she should be allowed to return to school immediately.

    ReplyDelete
  20. This is honestly one of the most idiotic things ive seen in a while. Ebola is the way for the goverment to avoid our attention from ISIS and were buying it up. They havent put in the news about those doctors who were cured from thier ebola. This is really dumb.

    ReplyDelete
  21. To almost all of you, I understand your point of view about this topic. It is unjust to deprive this young girl of her education and ban her from the school. We also have to think of the other side, would you rather risk the lives of everyone of that school with getting ebola, or would you rather just ban a girl for only 21 days in case she does have ebola? To me this is only precaution for the school, and they are only preventing the spread of ebola. It is said that the symptoms of ebola enact from 1-21 days and this is reasonable to tell if this girl has it or not. After 21 days and she does not show any symptoms, she can return to school. Isn't that better than risking students' and teachers' lives if she does have ebola?

    ReplyDelete
  22. no matter what people say they will still say that its better to be safe than sorry and i bet you cash that the pta was behind it in fear for their over acheivers

    ReplyDelete
  23. I believe that it wasn't right to ban her due to fear of her having ebola. The only way that they should have been able to ban her from the school is that if she actually had it, and not just the school making assumptions just because she was on a trip to Nigeria. They shouldn't have jumped to conclusions and spread rumors about it either. It is just unfair.

    ReplyDelete
  24. I agree it was ridiculous to ban her. This whole ebola scare is becoming outrageous and I think people are making it bigger than it is. We are now begininng to became assumptions about people just because of things we hear. If someone sneezes we automatically say they have ebola, even if its jokingly. Just because this girl traveled to africa, does nit mean she has the virus! I think the girl sgould have been checked before she was banned, the banning was cruel and unfair.

    ReplyDelete
  25. I agree that banning this child from school is outrageous. This ebola scare is spreading by the minute in this country. It was not right to ban this little girl from school. They should at LEAST tested her. If she was tested positive, then the ban should of been fair. If the test came negative, then the ban should be justified and the school should be sued.

    ReplyDelete
  26. I would agree with banning the girl from the school if she had shown any symptoms of Ebola. I think it is excessive to ban a girl from school just because she had taken a trip to Nigeria. I agree with Max when he said that they should have at least tested her. That would be reasonable for taking proper safety precautions to protect the other children at the school.

    ReplyDelete