Is it considered discrimination????

[barkley]

i may be way off base, but if this is a performance kind of organization is there any wording in the paperwork regarding recording of performances or using the minor's name/photo in print?

reason i ask this is i used to serve on a theatre board and the paperwork we had parents fill out gave us permission to use their child's name/photo in conjunction with the show they were in. the paperwork also spelled out the legal limitations we were held to pertaining the recording (video or audio) of rehearsals and performances. it was'nt an issue USUALY, but we had at least a couple of situations that could have created some huge problems.

in one case the parents signed the paperwork but then threw a fit when we had our photographer come in to show proofs of the cast photos. the parents did'nt mind that their dd's photo would be in the program, but they balked when they found out that our photographer, at the end of the run of each show, routinely offered (at strictly cost on his part) copies of the group photos for purchase by members of the cast. the parents in no way wanted their dd in any photo that would be available to other cast members. we explained that even the area newspapers sold hard copies of photos they ran to whomever wanted to purchase them on-line which the parents seemed to have no issue with, it was strictly the theatre photos they made a fuss over.

come to find out-the parents had signed the paperwork for their child's participation knowing full well that they had a pre-existing contractual obligation under some modeling type classes the kid attended, that precluded the child from being in any print photos that were "sold". if they had been up front about it, it would'nt have been an issue for us-we could have made accommodations with our photographer to shoot around the child, but they failed to be forthcoming about it such that it cost the theatre a good deal to have to re-take the photos.

in another situation we learned after getting complaints from a parent (not the one who signed their kid up for the show) that the parent who signed the paperwork did'nt have the legal right to do so. the one who signed it, trying to get out of the legal implications of having done so claimed it was'nt their actual signature on the document (tried to lay the blame on their kid) so we were left in the middle of an argument over photos that had already been released. in that case i believe that for subsequent shows, we had our staff personaly witness parents signing forms, and then the staff member initialed the forms to indicate they saw the parents read/sign the forms.

 

[bicker]

Is that discrimination?

It depends on what you mean. The word "discrimination" exists totally apart from its prejudicial connotation. Indeed, it has gotten to the point where in this country the word "discrimination" has come to mean "illegal discrimination" even though choosing one physician over another is actually discrimination, and requiring teachers to have a college degree is actually discrimination.

So in the terms that the question you're asking is typically asked in our society, these days, and since you indicated that it seems to be a matter solely of personal animosity -- no -- it is probably not (illegal) discrimination. It is more like how you discriminate against doctors you don't like.

I wonder, too, is that a proper activity for a notary public?

Yes. That is what Notaries Public do.

I actually had a bank notary not put a medallion seal on a form once. He said they don't put medallion seals on just any type of form. But, medallion seals are a specific type of notary, required for things like stock certificates. I don't know if there are special requirements for plain notarizing. But, I do notice they always read over what I'm having them notarize and ask questions about the document.

There are actually two types of medallions. You're referring to a Medallion Signature Guarantee seal, not a Notary Public acknowledgment seal.

 

[golfgal]

My guess would be that there is a history with this parent and the rules. Perhaps the parent him(her)self did not sign the rules in the past--maybe forgot and had someone else do it and then complained/made trouble.

I am sure he was not singled out without a good reason. I would forget about it and let those that run the organization handle it.

I would guess the same and it would old be discrimination if they were doing it because of skin color, gender, religion, etc. not if they had previous rules violations, etc. It is also quite possible that this step for previous violators or whatever the reason is in the organization's by-laws.

 

[PollyannaMom]

I agree that they most likely had some sort of problem with this parent last year, and are just covering their bases.

 

[Ceila]

It sounds very likely that there were issues in the past with this parent creating problems. Just because you didn't see it on the field doesn't mean it didn't happen. Most of that kind of drama happens behind the scenes.

As for "discrimination," unless the parent is being singled out for race, gender, age, etc., it is not illegal discrimination.

 

[Carly_Roach]

Past problems or not, I guess I just see this as discrimination. If your going to require one family to notarize the form then all families should. And this should be done prior to the kids auditioning for this group not after things are rolling along.
This may be a one time wonder for my DD, we shall see how the rest of the summer goes.

Just wondered what you all thought of it.

First of all, let's put this into perspective: it's just a permission slip for a child's activity. He's not buying a house, going into the armed forces or selling the child.

Secondly, unless the family or parents are members of protected classes, it is not considered discrimination.

And finally, none of this would be any of my business. It's between that family/father and the group requiring him to notarize his permission. If this is a highly unusual request that this one father has to comply with, then there's a pretty good chance that the organization has information or actual experience that made them make that request of him. Just because you don't know what that information or experience is and haven't given your stamp of approval for them asking for it, doesn't mean that the company doesn't consider their request to be a valid requirement for this family.

These are the rules of the organization. Everyone has the opportunity to decide whether or not they're going to participate. If it bothers you, then pull your child from the activity. That's about all you can do unless the father is a member of a protected class. (Minority, handicapped, sexual orientation, etc.)

 

[The Mystery Machine]

Past problems or not, I guess I just see this as discrimination. If your going to require one family to notarize the form then all families should. And this should be done prior to the kids auditioning for this group not after things are rolling along.
This may be a one time wonder for my DD, we shall see how the rest of the summer goes.

Just wondered what you all thought of it.

I don't see as "discrimination".

To me discrimination would be not allowing the child to participate based on the parents issue with the documents.

Perhaps the organization made getting the document notarized as part of the child joining based on the past issue?

Either way it is weird and without the details of the infractions hard to say if it was the right thing to do.

As far as your claim that everyone should get it notarized, that is not needed unless you committed the same infraction the previous yr.

 

[golfgal]

I don't see as "discrimination".

To me discrimination would be not allowing the child to participate based on the parents issue with the documents.

Perhaps the organization made getting the document notarized as part of the child joining based on the past issue?

Either way it is weird and without the details of the infractions hard to say if it was the right thing to do.

As far as your claim that everyone should get it notarized, that is not needed unless you committed the same infraction the previous yr.

Even that isn't discrimination--if they parents don't like the rules set forth, they have made the choice, not the league, as to whether their child participates or not.

 

[cabanafrau]

Is this possibly a situation w/ a divorce, custodial/non-custodial issue? Perhaps the organization has tangled with one of the parents in the past & wants to make sure they are legally protected?

 

[Ceila]

OP, you don't seem to know the family in question personally. Why are you choosing to give THEM the benefit of the doubt and not the organization? Is it just because you haven't personally witnessed a problem with that parent? You admit yourself that you are new - how could you know what has happened in the past?

Honestly, it doesn't directly concern you, so I would stay out of it. Are you thinking that you may be the one required to get something notarized in the future? If you're really that worried about it, why don't you just ask the organizers if there are any circumstances where you would be required to get something notarized?

 

[mjkacmom]

I agree that they most likely had some sort of problem with this parent last year, and are just covering their bases.

 

[LuvOrlando]

Sounds like either this parent is quick to throw out the "I'll Sue" card or is one of those that behaves horribly and swears he/she had never seen or agreed to any of the rules so they don't apply. I don't think anyone would ever make such a big deal out of it unless something pretty significant happened in the past to prompt it. If it bothers you this much maybe you should let the heads of the group know it made you uncomfortable and ask them to explain things. If thy are just being spiteful because this one parent won't toe the line then yes, you are probably right to cross them off the list because there is a chance the organization is a bunch of bullies too. Don't you just LOVE when you can't tell the parents from the children?

 

[Scurvy]

OP - it sounds like there is more to the story to me. Like maybe there have been issues in the past with forged signatures or instances where the parent signed documents and they later said the didn't......claimed to be unaware of rules, etc.......the organization has been burned by the parent in some way and it is trying to cover itself and prevent it from happening again.

I agree with this. An organization I was working with had to do something similar in the past. One family was constantly doing something that was incurring additional fees, and then refusing to pay. It was clearly stated in our rules that if you did this thing, you had to pay $X amount per episode. They kept insisting they hadn't been informed and wouldn't pay. The next year we required them to sign something stating they had been informed of the rules and have it notarized. They actually refused and so we refused to allow the child to participate. They were costing us too much money to allow them to repeat the behavior for a second year. No one else was required to sign and notarize that particular contract because no one else had behaved that badly the year before.

Secondly, unless the family or parents are members of protected classes, it is not considered discrimination.

I don't think it would be illegal discrimination even then. It would be if they were treated differently because of their race, religion, etc, but not just because they were treated differently and they also happened to be part of a protected class.

 

[allison443]

I just dont see why he would have to get his "rule form" notarized but non or the rest of the parents do.
And if he doesnt follow the rules, why let them participate anyway. Its not a public thing, the kids audition to get in. Tell the kid they didnt make it in this year if you dont like that parent.

Would you want your kid to audition and not make something because the person running the show didn't like YOU??
It sounds like the organization is trying to be fair to the kid, while covering themselves and making sure the rules are followed. Is the parent complaining about getting the form notarized?

 

[southernbohemian]

I guess I am a big believer that if you are going to make one parent do something, they should all do it. Even if that one parent caused problems last year and you want proof that they signed it, I would still make everyone notarize the form. You can't predict that one of the other parents won't cause the same issues this year. It's just easier.

Yes, it sucks that we can't always trust everyone. I went to a high school that when it started had very few rules because they thought that students like us (smart, living away from home, etc.) could be trusted to make good decisions. Then, as students caused problems, they added rules - for everyone. Not just that student. When I got there 15 years after the school opened, we had a sizeable rule book that several classmates got expelled for not following. If you are running an organization and find that people are abusing the system, you need to change the system.

I don't think it's right that only one parent needs to sign. It sounds like the leaders are being petty and want everyone to know that this person was a pain last year. It's just creating drama. Instead, they should have learned - "Okay, so-and-so did this last year so we'll have all the parents notarize the forms so no one can claim that they didn't know the rules."

 

[Mickey's Minion]

I think that you are already getting sucked into parent drama your first year in.

Since you don't know the circumstances, nor what transpired in past years, I would give the organization the benefit of the doubt.

As a parent who has served on the admin side of many of my kids' sports programs, I can assure you that there is way more that is going on behind the scenes than a parent can even realize.

And it is usually the parents being pressed or their friends that create so much drama it causes the other parents to paint the admin side of the program as "evil" without even knowing the facts and the reasoning of doing what they were doing.

While it can happen, it is the very rare program that just dumps on a family or a kid without some background reason. Most programs will do anything they can for the child, even if it means having to deal with very, very difficult parents in creative ways.

This matter is really between the family and the program and has no bearing on you or the other parents. You don't know the reasons, so don't assume. If your child likes the program and you are satisfied with how you are being treated, that is really all that is important.

Now, if the program is routinely mistreating the kids in the program, then I would rethink my involvement.

 

[Scurvy]

I guess I am a big believer that if you are going to make one parent do something, they should all do it. Even if that one parent caused problems last year and you want proof that they signed it, I would still make everyone notarize the form. You can't predict that one of the other parents won't cause the same issues this year. It's just easier.

Yes, it sucks that we can't always trust everyone. I went to a high school that when it started had very few rules because they thought that students like us (smart, living away from home, etc.) could be trusted to make good decisions. Then, as students caused problems, they added rules - for everyone. Not just that student. When I got there 15 years after the school opened, we had a sizeable rule book that several classmates got expelled for not following. If you are running an organization and find that people are abusing the system, you need to change the system.

I don't think it's right that only one parent needs to sign. It sounds like the leaders are being petty and want everyone to know that this person was a pain last year. It's just creating drama. Instead, they should have learned - "Okay, so-and-so did this last year so we'll have all the parents notarize the forms so no one can claim that they didn't know the rules."

I definitely feel just the opposite! I hate it when everyone is penalized because of the bad behavior of a few problem parents. It's a hassle to get things notarized (unless of course they always have a notary present at a meeting that parents are already required to attend) and I would resent having to deal with that just because someone else didn't follow the rules in the past. Now if they really are wanting to make an example of this parent and are making a big deal to the other parents about the fact that this parent has to take extra steps, I don't think that's appropriate. But if they are handling it discretely and the problem parent is making a big deal of it, then that isn't the organization's problem.

 

[luvmy3]

It's not out of the ordinary. A person can have any document notarized where they want documented verification that the person signing is who they say they are.

OP - it sounds like there is more to the story to me. Like maybe there have been issues in the past with forged signatures or instances where the parent signed documents and they later said the didn't......claimed to be unaware of rules, etc.......the organization has been burned by the parent in some way and it is trying to cover itself and prevent it from happening again.

 

[trip]

Anyone else really curious about what happened that led to the need for the notarized document?

 

[mickeyfan1]

I say unless the OP is the parent asking to have the signature notorized, she needs to MYOB.