Board delays interrogation/investigation policy after members say photographing students at school "gives too much exposure"

During a lengthy review of Policy LD/AJA (interrogations and investigations), Boardmember Mary P. Bagby objected when staff read language that allows the presence of a principal or designate at student examinations or photographing at the discretion of DFCS or local law enforcement. Bagby said the provision "gives too much exposure to our children and taking away parental rights," and argued that schools are not the appropriate clinical setting for examinations and photographs.

"This is giving too much exposure to our children and taking away parental rights," Bagby said, pressing for specificity such as same-sex examiner preference and clearer limits on where examinations occur. Linda Davis and other board members echoed concerns about discretion and the role of schools, arguing that medical facilities are generally safer and that discretionary language could invite inconsistent or discriminatory application.

Dr. Lisha Gant and other trustees asked whether social workers, counselors, and child-protection representatives have been consulted; staff responded that the policy contains portions added to distinguish DFCS interviews from police investigations and agreed to involve those stakeholders in the next review. Staff also noted that compliance with court orders does not create district liability but acknowledged other clauses that allow some activity without a court order and committed to revising language to reduce ambiguity.

Outcome: After prolonged discussion the board directed staff to take the policy back for additional revision and a fifth read. Staff said they will consult social workers, counselors and relevant agencies and return a clarified draft for future consideration.

Why it matters: The policy defines when and how external agencies may conduct interviews, examinations or photographs on school property; the language affects student privacy, parental rights, mandated-reporting duties and the district's legal responsibilities. Trustees sought to ensure the policy protects students and does not place schools in a role better handled by medical professionals or create discretionary loopholes that could be applied inconsistently.

Next steps: Staff will pursue further review of the policy with social workers/counselors and agency partners and return a revised draft at the next scheduled read.