2pm
since 14th July 2008
Monster Parent
Tuesday, July 22, 2008 ( 12:40 AM )
'Harried teachers take out 'monster parent insurance'
Look out, teachers, “monster parents” are loose in the community; you better get insured.
In fact, more and more teachers are doing just that, Yomiuri Weekly (July 13) finds. The first policy of the type the magazine wryly dubs “monster parent insurance” appeared in 2000. That year, it attracted 1,300 teachers. By 2007, the number of insured teachers had soared 16-fold, to 21,800.
“Monster parent insurance” is designed to protect a teacher against frivolous lawsuits by a growing number of parents who see cause for complaint everywhere and will sue at the drop of a hat. Once upon a time, teachers had dignity and parents kept a respectful distance. But the lofty social status once claimed by the profession has eroded steadily over the past 20 years. Now, says Yomiuri Weekly, when an irate parent marches into the classroom, the teacher cringes.
And who can blame him or her? What rational response, after all, can be given to a parent with a complaint like this one cited by the magazine: “Since the use of cell phones on school trips is prohibited, I expect the school to pay the portion of my child’s fixed monthly phone bill covering the time he’s away.”
We aren’t told how the teacher handled this, and there’s no indication this particular case ended up in court, but a lawsuit, though perhaps only an intermittent reality, is increasingly perceived as a perpetual threat, which is what insurance is for.
A standard “monster parent” policy, costing about 5,000 yen a year, provides coverage of up to 100 million yen, which gives an idea of the kind of compensation parents ask for when they take a teacher to court.
And what sort of classroom mishaps might get a teacher sued? Yomiuri Weekly cites some examples specified by a typical policy. Suppose, for instance, one pupil stabs another pupil in the eye with a pencil and the teacher finds himself accused of inadequate supervision. Or what if, on a class trip to a factory, a kid causes damage to the machinery? Or if sloppy paperwork on the school’s part damages a child’s eligibility for overseas study? The possibilities are endless.
“It’s a sign of the times,” Yomiuri Weekly remarks, “that disputes which people used to be settle by talking things over among themselves now end up in court.”
No wonder teachers walk on eggshells—especially teachers in private schools. Parents who pay high fees to get their children educated have correspondingly less tolerance for anything going wrong.
One skeptic is Hosei University Prof Naoki Ogi, introduced by the weekly as “well-informed on the ‘monster parent’ problem.”
The threat of lawsuits hanging over teachers’ heads “causes relations between parents and teachers to deteriorate,” Ogi says. “Take a teacher to court, and the teacher will say whatever has to be said for the purpose of self-defense. That means he’ll lie if necessary. And what does this do to the children involved? They learn that teachers can’t be trusted. Parents and teachers seem to forget,” he concludes, “that the children are the most important” actors in this drama.
Credits from "http://www.japantoday.com/category/kuchikomi/view/harried-teachers-take-out-monster-parent-insurance"
Hell.. if parents in Singapore reach that level of absurdity in Japan.. I will NEVER consider a teaching career with MOE. Hands down to support Cookie Monster over Monster Parent.