There is no doubt this is generally the right approach and one our criminal justice system could do more of.
The danger, however, is that the pendulum has swung so far in favour of rehabilitation that many students and their parents believe that any form of adverse consequence or dare I say it "punishment" is both unnecessary and undesirable.
They advocate that if their child assaults another student, steals or takes drugs the default position of the school should be to offer anger management, counselling and addiction therapy.
Responsible schools, of course, do this.
When principals advise, however, that in addition to these supportive measures that because their child has caused harm, a natural consequence is they must accept some form of punishment.
This often includes community work, detention, litter duty or removing graffiti. Admittedly these activities can be unpleasant, hard work and cut into a teenager's social life since they often done after school.
Parent push-back on these consequences is unhelpful and I would contend doing their child no favours.
They miss out on an invaluable life lesson namely "when you make poor decisions which adversely affect others you must accept the consequences of your behaviour even if you would rather avoid them".
This approach can also put students at risk as they emerge into adulthood.
While courts today are more inclined to take a therapeutic and educative approach to offenders, the reality is if you "do the crime you do the time". Parents can't negotiate prison time with a judge for their child.
It is far better to learn this lesson at school rather than in a prison cell.
The "consequence lesson" is also instructive on drink driving, borrowing money and turning up late to work where teenagers are often shocked about the outcomes.
In the world of "social media" some teenagers have become tyrants in their own homes.
Meal times and bed times are built around social media engagement with parental requests ignored or yelled at.
At school if cellphones are repeatedly used inappropriately they are confiscated.
Distraught teenagers who have come to see their phone as a life preserving device similar to an oxygen mask will bully their parents into pleading or threatening the school to return it immediately.
These teenagers learn a difficult lesson that while tantrums and coercion might have a high measure of success at home they won't work at school.
It does place the school and home in unnecessary conflict.
It would be far better if parents and teachers were on the "same page" with the misuse of social media including consequences.
As the new academic school year nears for 2019 my plea is that parents give their children a belated Christmas present, namely that they love them enough to accept "all" the consequences of their behaviour if they slip up at school.
Patrick Walsh is principal at John Paul College and former president for the Secondary Principals Association of New Zealand
