Our citizens are shielded from so much that goes on in the real world, this may have been bad judgment, but why did she do it, I didnt see answer in link.

Yes, I think children should be shielded from videos of human decapitation.

I agree with you, I am just curious.

But trust me, by the time they're 15 most kids these days can recite all the Saw and Hostel movies (and a lot more besides) chapter and verse.

What a world.

and not just the 'garden variety' movies, either...

and murder occurring throughout the world, not just in Syria.

and we lass out at people who understand. after the monster timothy McVeigh slaughtered innocent Americans, he was put in jail. The attacks from his sick twisted view stopped at least for some time. with isis, it never stops. it just keeps getting worse and worse.

I, too, would be interested to find out why she did the absolute wrong thing.

I'd still fire her ass, though.

I think it is important that 8th graders know what the heck is going on in the World. They need to know the evil of the World. It also helps the Democratic Party with the stance on peace in the World.

I thought only courts and professional sports leagues could do that.

local churches for food.

few years back a local school took all kinds of flak for shindlers list.....

8th graders are on their way to being middle teens, and all too soon, texting, tweeting, hunched over their phone adults.

Should they be protected from the Holocaust? From Stalin's purges? From PolPots massive crimes against humanity? Should our own civil war be ignored because so many were killed in battle, and even more died from flu, typhoid, and other diseases?

I do not think so. With the proper context, explanation, and warning, and permitting those who did not want to watch to leave, I think this was appropriate. Just because our earth has some extremely nasty events happening, is that any reason to whitewash it and pretend it never happened?

You can convince me that I am wrong. I often am. BUT I am very interested in your reasoning that this was improper. I will read and respond.

If there were video from inside the nazi death chambers when the people were suffocating, do you think it would be okay for 8th graders to see that?

Witnessing acts of brutality can have negative psychological impacts on young people and adults.

Our media and culture will easily permit death, even graphic death on the screen, but they will ban a beautiful image of a mom loveingly feeding her infant by breast as porn.

Violence exists in Iraq as much as it does elsewhere. The horrors are real and frequent. At what point and under what circumstances should they learn about the nasties that prowl out there?

I am not saying you are wrong.

I wouldn't watch the beheadings myself. I think the teacher should be fired.

What is the difference, when you really get down to the basics?
As humans, we are limited severely by our senses. Our sense of taste sucks. Our smell? Nothing like my lovely dog. Our sense of feel? Can you feel a mountain? A hill? An atom?

Color?

Ah, now we talk about our (so called) most powerful sense. Which is so limited as to be considered virtually blind in the more realistic sense. We cannot see infrared, X-ray, ultraviolet, we cannot sense most of the spectrum. In fact, what we can "see" is incredibly small and inefficient.

So, what is real?

people have been hard at work FAKING the gory scenes. (I wouldn't let my kids watch "Saw", by the way...)

"Real" is that fact that someone is actually feeling pain and being killed.

and remember seeing "The Godfather" and Sonny's death at the toll booth. It really didn't bother me a lot, mainly because I knew it was a movie and that James Caan was alive and acting in other movies.

However, a few years later (maybe around 1979) I remember when the Sandinistas were close to overthrowing Somoza, there was a clip I saw on the nightly news that showed an American reporter (I think he was with ABC) being made to lay down on his stomach in the street by one of Somoza's National Guard. The reporter completely cooperated, kneeling with his hands up before getting face-down on the street. The soldier stood over him, pointed his machine gun at the reporter's head and shot him dead.

That haunted me for days (it still bothers me to think of it, actually).

I can still watch "The Godfather" and enjoy it as one of my favorite movies. I really don't want to see that reporter getting shot again.

There's no either/or here -- i.e., no false choice of viewing the video or remaining ignorant of and insulated from the harsh realities of the world and of history. Reading a description of a lynching or a massacre can convey the horror of both without requiring photographic evidence.

As for this case, it raises professional and ethical issues. Administrators, parents, and students can all weigh in on what's going on in any classroom, and it would astonishing if a case like this didn't bring questions about the teacher's judgment and boundaries.

Others here are simply rude.

I appreciate it.

So, I take it that you agree that kids should be educated and exposed to the facts of life, no matter how unpleasant, but in a way that educates, and not disturbs them?

Judging by the story at the link -- and it was short on detail -- the students' reactions were key in the response here.

The pressure is on for parents and educators to discuss both current and past events in a way that is appropriate to the ages of the students, touches on the larger issues, encourages them to think, yet doesn't backfire by desensitizing them (something that ought to be a real concern nowadays, given how simulated or real violence is available at a touch) or traumatizing them.

I'd also mention that the use of the video raises the question of whether the teacher is, after a fashion, giving its makers just what they wanted -- i.e., the propaganda angle -- while at the same time possibly disregarding the wishes of the families and friends of the man whose death is being showcased. There are differing viewpoints on that.

This brings up another issue that I've wondered about of late: how elementary and high school history teachers address lynching as part of their lessons. In those cases as well the participants and onlookers made a record. Do we show kids the images? Do we just provide the horrifying contemporary descriptions? And most of all, what do those murders and the photographic/written records of them tell us?

Wish I had an easy answer.

While nobody is ever "ready" to see such things, some of us need to be able to it, and their education is important.

If a mature 13 year old feels up to that challenge, I don't see a problem.
It's the world we live in, now, unfortunately.

Good luck!

Or has it taken practice and effort?

Complete failure to understand the impact of witnessing acts of brutality.

Want to see some blood and guts? Join the infantry. That's where I spent half my life. I don't think people should have to see things I saw. I know what it did to me.

But, since such things do occur, someone has to learn about them and deal with them.

I think you could argue that 13 is too young, even if the desire to learn is there. That's fine.

But, much younger see things that are just as bad. Not to mention those that actually experience the events firsthand.

You can't keep kids in bubble-wrap. Although I agree that SOME children should not be exposed to it. It should be approached according to the individual. That's why I said make it voluntary.

actual or you-tubed. So, I could not disagree with you more.

But, they have to learn about them sometime. And some people will have to be able to watch such footage to analyze and learn from it.

If they want to self-select at 13, I say let them.

It's not like they can't find it on the internet if they choose to look for it.

Maybe they csn "find it on the internet if they choose to look for it", but that's different than having an adult not only sanction it, but encourage your viewimg of it..

is to keep my students safe. I did watch a decapitation video, and as a 51 year old I deeply regret having done so. It sickened me. What a hideous, stupid thing that teacher did. Hideous.

Your name is obviously a misnomer.

It's hard to believe how truly callous (or just clueless) people can be about children and their vulnerability...I have a friend who, like me and you, is well into adulthood, and can't view ANY violence in films due to being exposed to an extremely violent film as a kid.

of exposing a video like that to children who have already witnessed or been the object of violence in their own lives.

The laissez-faire attitude here is profoundly ignorant: Well, they're going to be exposed to shit like this in their lives anyway, may as well get it over with IN SCHOOL. JEEEzus!

Just hoping those expressing that laissez-faire attitude have no kids of their own, or responsibility for anyone else's.

I think it has always been the world we live in. We are spared the sight of war and brutality for the most part. We are fortunate

Last edited Wed Mar 23, 2016, 08:30 AM - Edit history (1)

want to go the voluntary viewing route for any video, you would be an absolute idiot to not pass it by administrators. A beheading video would not be approved and the administrator would be right in asking you why you thought it might be.

both my bosses and students.

bragging about how precise they were. I'm glad only evil people die when we bomb things.

and consequence-free.

But, apparently I'm the sick one.

Oh well....

I would not even show this to high school or possibly college students. It says she was teaching at the Academy for Applied Media .. I get that, and I don't know how sophisticated these children may be, or mature enough to handle this type of journalism, but personally I can't watch this type of material and I'm 60.

I don't think the teacher should have been fired but I think she got off pretty lightly.

I don't want to be haunted by them. I can't imagine my school teacher making me watch this shit.

Individuals have a wide variety of reasons for not wanting to see graphic violence including a personal history that could lead to re-experiencing trauma. Even if one believes 13-year-olds should see such a video for educational reasons, common sense would dictate that forcing such viewing is grossly inappropriate. I don't know that this teacher should have been fired as her entire record as a teacher would have to be taken into consideration. Also, the article makes it seems as though she was unaware of the full contents of the video so it's possible that she did not actually intend to show the decapitation. In that case, she is still guilty of negligence but a one year reassignment during the inquiry was probably viewed as sufficient "time served" on suspension.

What a child, no matter the age, should or should not see should be determined by the parents, first and foremost.

I think this was a bad idea. At the very least, parents should've given permission for their kids to see this.

The teacher should have a warning put in her file. There is no need to fire her. Teachers are human too and make mistakes on the job just like everyone else. She is probably young and will learn from this.

And what is this about fining a teacher? That doesn't sound quite legal to me.

the stuff of nightmares. She is a despicably ignorant person who shouldn't be a teacher.

Are kids under 16 allowed in R rated movies? No they are not. I realize they watch such stuff online and on cable but that's not the point. The teacher decided that every student was mature and desensitized enough that this wouldn't bother them. That IS NOT the teacher's decision to make. As a parent, I would raise holy hell.

Hollywoods kids probably couldn't handle it. Africa's Child Soldiers have probably witnessed worse. How does it compare to what these kids may have already witnessed and what was the intended goal in showing it? The Nick Berg audio reminds me of what a terrible thing it is to be murdered. Had the class been glorifying the murder of others then perhaps something like this might shatter the holywood image of death. But it seems a bit young to me.

It's a paradox in 2 ways, since many of our own ancestors experienced war first hand at that age, and also because children of today see so much "fake" violent images flashed across their eyeballs on TV. That was paradox #1 and paradox #2.

Oh by the way, if you think teaching pre-teens and teens is such an easy and disposable job, how about you try it? Let's see how long you last!

And if it was okay in the year 900, well by golly, it should be okay today.

Of hundred years.

Women were the weaker sex. Kids must be cocooned, despite shit that happens to their best friends in real life. And men are the earners and protectors of kids' sensitivities?

What the Hell do you do in real life that makes you so pure, clean and incredibly more knowledgeable than us, when I deal with this shit every single day?

what possible justification did she have for showing this?

The teacher needs to be fired for inflicting one on her students. And if I were a parent of one of those kids - who may have been traumatized by this - I would sue the hell out of the teacher.

To what end?

live bodies in surgery. A recorded actual murder is too grotesque for children of middle school age, as well as adults. Shame on her.