Court: Teachers can't have sex with any students

[The Straight Story]

Court: Teachers can't have sex with any students

SEATTLE -- The Washington Supreme Court ruled on Thursday that student age doesn't matter in teacher-sex cases, even if the student is 18 and considered an adult by other state laws.

The case involves Matthew Hirschfelder, a former choir teacher at Hoquiam High School, who had been charged with first-degree sexual misconduct with a minor in 2006. An 18-year-old choir member told police she had been involved in a sexual relationship with him.

Hirschfelder, who was 33 at the time, denies any relationship occurred. He asked a lower-court judge to dismiss the case because the girl was not a minor. The judge refused to dismiss the case and encouraged the Court of Appeals to clarify what state law said on the issue. The appeals court ruled in January 2009 that the statute did not criminalize sexual relations between students and teachers.

A few months later, the Legislature clarified the law, saying all sex between school employees and full-time registered students 16 or older is illegal.

http://www.seattlepi.com/local/6420ap_wa_scow_teacher_misconduct.html

[ZombieHorde]

1. Prudes. nt

[villager]

2. well, wait a minute -- so what about a 25 year old grad student and 28 year old T.A.?

I mean, is this a public-schools-only ruling?

[jancantor]

10. That wouldn't be a violation

Read the article. The cutoff age would be 21. In teacher-student relationships. Regardless, it was an awful decision. It was wrong on the law. The defense attorney had the correct argument, and the argument that the law is clear (the supreme of WA ruling) when even the educated judges split 5-4 is ridiculous

[SoCalDem]

14. But, often colleges have rules against it, regardless of the age..

It's a power-thing.

[jancantor]

15. Rules are fine

making up the law as it doesn't exist is the problem. Not to mention the issues with privacy, etc. in telling 18 yr olds who they can and can't schtup.

But again, this is not an attaboy to the teacher. It's a comment on the law. Which is being wrongly interpreted

[safeinOhio]

3. grade points will

go down.

[immoderate]

4. What if they are married?

Just sayin'

--imm

[Turbineguy]

5. I teach at a private adult education school and

relationships between students and instructors (all adults) go against their code of conduct. Yes, I know, people thrown together fall in love sometimes, but it's a slippery slope.

[sfwriter]

6. heh.. heh... You said "slippery" heh... heh...

:-)

[Dr. Strange]

13. And I'd have no problem with the teacher being fired.

But it shouldn't be a crime. Or, if it is a crime, it should be a crime for ALL adults.

[pipi_k]

7. Well, call me a prude if you must...

although I don't believe my feelings about it have anything to do with prudery.

There are some boundaries one just doesn't cross.


Example...my mother married a guy who had 5 kids from two previous marriages. I found out a year or two ago that the youngest of the boys...my age...had a bit of a crush on me (we were both about 17 when our parents married) years ago.

I never knew it, because he very wisely never said anything. Even if I had known, and even though we were not related by blood, I feel it still would have been inappropriate to cross that line.

School employees and students is the same thing. IMO, anyway.


My bosses were my bosses and not my friends.

My therapist is my therapist and is not my BFF even though we've known each other for 20 years.


My stepbrothers were my stepbrothers, and not potential romantic partners.


Maybe it's just me, but I think it's highly inappropriate for teachers and students to have intimate relationships. Unless it's like 5 or 10 years after graduation or something.

[jancantor]

11. That's a tangential issue

It very well may be inappropriate. But IF the legislature wanted to criminalize that, then they should write a law thusly and let it be challenged. They didn't. The defense attorney is correct here. Awful decision. The appeals court had it correct.

[bluedigger]

8. That's gonna be appealed...

Regardless of their well meaning intent, that is a really poor decision.

[jancantor]

12. I agree

It is not even a close one, imo. Sorry, but the legislature screwed up. The teacher did not break the law as written, and all citizens should be able to rely on the law as written, not as reinterpreted by a court.

[jancantor]

9. bogus decision

The ex-post facto "clarification" by the legislature should not affect the teacher, since that would be retroactive, essentially. If the WA state legislators were too stupid to write the law clearly from the beginning to prohibit such conduct, tough. The court should rule on the law AS IT IS.

The appeals court was correct BASED ON THE LAW. Of course the Seattle-PI does the usual crappy mass media hack job and doesn't actually quote the law, that was the crux of the whole decision.

If the legislatures intent was to criminalize sexual behavior between consenting adults, then it should have been written that way - UNAMBIGUOUSLY. It wasn't

[ManiacJoe]

16. The law as amended in 2009 is very clear in its intent.

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=9A.44.093

It would be interesting to see what the previous wording was.