The exact page text, read by your browser's voice.
AUDIT ROW #300 · TEENSCREEN AND THE RHOADES CASE · BOUNDARY SIZE, HOLDING STATED
The consent fight over school mental-health screening came to this county in federal court — against Penn-Harris-Madison, in Penn Township, not against John Glenn — and it is printed at boundary size as the local equivalent, with the boundary stated in its first sentence so no reader seats it here. The national programme was TeenScreen, a Columbia University screening instrument administered in schools; the local case was the Rhoades family's: parents sued Penn-Harris-Madison after their daughter was screened at Penn High School without their prior consent, in a 2005 federal action that made the district's screening a national consent controversy and ended the programme's local run. A Walkerton-seat equivalent — a JGSC screening fight, suit, or board controversy of the same kind — was tested for and none stands in the records reached; the John Glenn board's own contested-health record in this build is the dress code (fashion addendum), which is a speech case, not a screening case, and the two are not merged. The item closes mixed: the county's consent fight printed whole at its true ground, the JGSC limb a tested negative.
Principal sources: the Rhoades v. Penn-Harris-Madison TeenScreen litigation record (N.D. Ind., 2005) at reported strength; settlers named for any JGSC-seat equivalent — JGSC board minutes and the federal docket.