Scenario Analysis: This scenario is professionally challenging because it requires the Certified School Nurse (CSN) to balance the immediate needs of a student exhibiting concerning behaviors with the legal and ethical obligations to involve parents and follow established school protocols for addressing potential ADHD. The CSN must act with discretion and sensitivity, ensuring the student’s well-being while respecting parental rights and the need for a formal diagnostic process. Missteps can lead to delays in appropriate support for the student, erosion of trust with the family, or even legal repercussions for the school. Correct Approach Analysis: The best professional approach involves a multi-faceted strategy that prioritizes the student’s immediate safety and well-being while initiating a structured process for evaluation and support. This includes discreetly observing and documenting the student’s behaviors, consulting with the classroom teacher to gather further objective information, and then promptly and sensitively communicating concerns to the parents or guardians. This approach is correct because it aligns with ethical principles of beneficence (acting in the student’s best interest), non-maleficence (avoiding harm), and respect for autonomy (involving parents in decisions about their child’s care). It also adheres to standard school procedures for addressing developmental and behavioral concerns, which typically involve a collaborative approach with parents and educators, and often lead to referrals for formal assessment by qualified professionals. This ensures that any subsequent interventions are based on a proper diagnosis and individualized plan. Incorrect Approaches Analysis: One incorrect approach would be to immediately implement behavioral interventions or strategies without informing parents or seeking a formal evaluation. This is ethically problematic as it bypasses parental rights to be involved in their child’s education and healthcare decisions. It also risks misinterpreting behaviors or applying interventions that are not appropriate or effective without a proper diagnosis, potentially causing more harm than good. Furthermore, it deviates from established school and district policies that mandate parental notification and a structured assessment process for suspected developmental or behavioral disorders. Another incorrect approach would be to dismiss the observed behaviors as typical childhood activity without further investigation or documentation. This fails to uphold the CSN’s professional responsibility to identify potential health and developmental issues that could impact a student’s learning and well-being. It neglects the duty of care and could result in a missed opportunity to provide crucial support to a student who may be struggling with an undiagnosed condition like ADHD, thereby hindering their academic and social development. A third incorrect approach would be to discuss the student’s behaviors and potential diagnosis with other students or staff members in a non-professional capacity. This constitutes a breach of confidentiality and violates ethical standards regarding student privacy. It can also lead to gossip, stigma, and a negative school environment, undermining the trust between the school, students, and families. Professional Reasoning: Professionals should approach such situations by first prioritizing student safety and well-being. This is followed by a systematic process of observation, documentation, and data gathering from relevant sources (e.g., teachers). Crucially, open and transparent communication with parents or guardians is paramount, respecting their role in their child’s care. The process should then involve collaboration with school support staff and adherence to established school and district policies for evaluation and intervention, ensuring that any actions taken are evidence-based, ethically sound, and legally compliant.

Scenario Analysis: This scenario is professionally challenging because it requires balancing the school’s responsibility to maintain a healthy environment with the family’s right to make healthcare decisions for their child. The Certified School Nurse (CSN) must navigate potential conflicts between parental beliefs and public health recommendations, while also ensuring compliance with school policies and relevant health regulations. Accurate assessment of immunization status is critical for disease prevention and outbreak management within the school community. Correct Approach Analysis: The best professional approach involves a thorough review of the child’s immunization record against the recommended schedule for their age, as outlined by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and state/local public health guidelines. This includes verifying the dates and types of vaccines received. If discrepancies or incomplete immunizations are identified, the CSN should then communicate these findings clearly and respectfully to the parents or guardians, providing them with accurate information about the recommended vaccines, the diseases they prevent, and the rationale for school entry requirements. This approach prioritizes evidence-based practice, regulatory compliance, and open communication with families, fostering a collaborative approach to the child’s health and school attendance. Incorrect Approaches Analysis: One incorrect approach would be to immediately exclude the child from school based on a perceived lack of complete immunization without a detailed review of the existing record and consultation with parents. This fails to acknowledge that records may be incomplete or that the child may have received vaccines elsewhere. It also bypasses the crucial step of communication and education with the family, potentially creating unnecessary conflict and distress. This approach risks violating parental rights and school policies regarding student exclusion. Another incorrect approach would be to accept the parent’s verbal assurance of immunization status without any documentation or verification. This is a significant lapse in professional responsibility and regulatory compliance. School nurses are mandated to maintain accurate health records and ensure that students meet health requirements for attendance, which typically necessitates documented proof of immunization. Relying solely on verbal statements compromises the integrity of the school’s health records and the safety of the school community by not accurately assessing disease immunity. A third incorrect approach would be to provide the parents with a generic pamphlet on immunizations without specifically addressing the child’s individual record or the school’s requirements. While educational materials are valuable, this approach is insufficient because it does not address the specific immunization gaps or concerns related to the child’s enrollment. It fails to provide personalized guidance and may leave parents confused about what steps are necessary to meet school health mandates. Professional Reasoning: Professionals should employ a systematic approach that begins with data collection and verification (reviewing records), followed by analysis against established standards (vaccine schedules and school policies), and then clear, empathetic communication with stakeholders (parents/guardians). When discrepancies arise, the decision-making process should involve educating the family, exploring options for compliance (e.g., obtaining records, scheduling catch-up immunizations), and adhering to established protocols for managing non-compliance, always prioritizing the health and safety of the student and the school community.

This scenario is professionally challenging because it requires the Certified School Nurse (CSN) to balance the immediate need for information with the student’s right to privacy and the legal requirements surrounding health information. The CSN must navigate the complexities of parental consent, student assent, and the specific health needs of a minor within the school setting, all while adhering to professional ethical standards and relevant regulations. Careful judgment is required to ensure that the assessment is both comprehensive and conducted in a manner that respects the student’s dignity and legal rights. The best professional practice involves a multi-faceted approach that prioritizes obtaining informed consent from the parent or guardian while also seeking the student’s assent, especially given the student’s age and the nature of the assessment. This approach recognizes that while parents generally have the right to make decisions about their child’s healthcare, involving the student in the process fosters trust and promotes their understanding and cooperation. The CSN should clearly explain the purpose of the health assessment, what it will involve, and how the information will be used to both the parent/guardian and the student. This aligns with ethical principles of beneficence (acting in the student’s best interest) and respect for autonomy (acknowledging the student’s developing capacity to participate in decisions). Furthermore, it adheres to the spirit of regulations that protect student privacy and require appropriate consent for health services. An incorrect approach would be to proceed with a comprehensive health assessment solely based on the teacher’s observation without any attempt to contact the parent or guardian or involve the student. This fails to respect parental rights and legal requirements for consent for medical evaluations. It also disregards the student’s right to privacy and potentially their right to assent to procedures affecting their health. Another incorrect approach would be to conduct a superficial assessment that only addresses the immediate concern raised by the teacher, neglecting to gather a complete health history or perform necessary physical examinations. While this might seem efficient, it fails to meet the definition of a “comprehensive” health assessment and could miss underlying issues, thus not acting in the student’s best interest. It also bypasses the opportunity to build rapport and gather essential baseline health information. A further incorrect approach would be to delay the assessment indefinitely while waiting for formal written consent, even if the student’s condition appears to warrant prompt attention. While consent is crucial, there may be situations where a student’s immediate health and safety necessitate a preliminary assessment and intervention, followed by prompt efforts to obtain consent. This approach prioritizes bureaucratic process over the student’s well-being. Professionals should employ a decision-making framework that begins with identifying the core issue and its potential impact on the student. This is followed by a review of relevant legal and ethical guidelines. The next step involves assessing the urgency of the situation and determining the minimum necessary information or intervention required. Crucially, the framework includes a plan for communication and consent, always striving to involve the student appropriately based on their age and maturity, and the parent/guardian, while ensuring all actions are documented.

Scenario Analysis: This scenario presents a professional challenge due to the immediate and potentially life-threatening nature of a seizure. The Certified School Nurse (CSN) must act swiftly and decisively while adhering to established protocols and maintaining the student’s dignity and safety. The complexity arises from balancing the need for rapid intervention with the requirement for accurate documentation and communication, all within the scope of school nursing practice and relevant health guidelines. The CSN must also consider the student’s individual health plan and the potential for parental involvement. Correct Approach Analysis: The best professional approach involves immediately ensuring the student’s safety by positioning them to prevent injury, clearing the surrounding area, and loosening any restrictive clothing. Simultaneously, the CSN should initiate the school’s emergency response protocol, which typically includes calling for additional trained personnel (e.g., school administrator, other nursing staff if available) and notifying emergency medical services (EMS) if the seizure is prolonged, the student is injured, or if it is the student’s first known seizure. The CSN must then closely monitor the student’s vital signs and neurological status, noting the duration and characteristics of the seizure. Following the seizure, the CSN should comfort the student, assess for any injuries, and begin the process of documenting the event accurately and comprehensively according to school and district policies. This approach prioritizes immediate safety, follows established emergency procedures, and ensures thorough assessment and documentation, aligning with best practices in school nursing and emergency preparedness. Incorrect Approaches Analysis: One incorrect approach would be to solely rely on comforting the student and waiting for the seizure to subside without initiating the school’s emergency response protocol or assessing the need for EMS. This fails to address the potential for complications such as prolonged seizures (status epilepticus) or injury during the event, and it neglects the critical step of activating appropriate support systems. Another incorrect approach would be to administer medication without a specific physician’s order or a pre-approved emergency action plan for seizure management, as this could be inappropriate or even harmful without proper assessment and authorization. Furthermore, delaying notification of parents or guardians until after the immediate crisis has passed, without first ensuring the student’s safety and initiating emergency protocols, could be seen as a breach of communication and parental rights, although immediate safety and emergency response take precedence. Finally, focusing solely on documentation without ensuring the student’s immediate safety and initiating appropriate emergency responses would be a critical failure in professional duty. Professional Reasoning: Professionals facing such situations should employ a structured decision-making process. First, prioritize immediate safety and life preservation. Second, activate established emergency protocols specific to the school environment. Third, conduct a rapid assessment of the student’s condition. Fourth, communicate effectively with relevant parties (e.g., other school staff, EMS, parents) as appropriate and per protocol. Fifth, meticulously document the event and interventions. This systematic approach ensures that critical steps are not missed, even under pressure, and that care is delivered in a safe, ethical, and legally compliant manner.

Scenario Analysis: This scenario presents a common challenge for Certified School Nurses (CSNs) involving a potential breach of infection control protocols within a school setting. The challenge lies in balancing the immediate need to address a potential health risk with the requirement to maintain confidentiality, respect individual privacy, and follow established school policies and public health guidelines. The CSN must act decisively to protect the wider school community while also ensuring that individual rights are not infringed upon. This requires careful judgment, adherence to professional ethics, and knowledge of relevant health regulations. Correct Approach Analysis: The best professional practice involves a multi-faceted approach that prioritizes immediate containment and notification while respecting confidentiality. This includes discreetly assessing the situation, implementing immediate isolation measures for the symptomatic student if necessary and feasible within the school’s resources, and then promptly reporting the situation to the school administration and the designated school health official or district nurse supervisor. This approach ensures that the appropriate authorities are alerted to investigate and implement broader public health measures, such as contact tracing or enhanced cleaning protocols, as dictated by local public health guidelines. Simultaneously, it respects the student’s privacy by not disclosing specific medical information to unauthorized individuals. This aligns with ethical principles of beneficence (acting in the best interest of the student and community) and non-maleficence (avoiding harm), as well as professional standards for infection control in educational settings. Incorrect Approaches Analysis: One incorrect approach would be to immediately inform the student’s classmates and their parents about the suspected illness without proper authorization or confirmation. This violates the student’s right to privacy and confidentiality, potentially leading to stigmatization and discrimination. It also bypasses established reporting channels and public health protocols, which may involve specific procedures for managing infectious diseases within a school. Another incorrect approach would be to ignore the situation or delay reporting it to school administration and health officials, hoping the symptoms resolve on their own. This failure to act promptly poses a significant risk to the health of the entire school community, as it allows a potentially contagious illness to spread unchecked. It contravenes the CSN’s professional responsibility to protect public health and adhere to infection prevention and control mandates. A third incorrect approach would be to directly contact the local public health department without first informing the school administration and following established school district reporting procedures. While public health departments are crucial partners, bypassing internal reporting structures can create confusion, undermine administrative authority, and potentially lead to uncoordinated responses. School districts typically have specific protocols for managing health emergencies and reporting to external agencies. Professional Reasoning: When faced with a potential infectious disease outbreak in a school, a CSN should employ a systematic decision-making process. This begins with a rapid assessment of the immediate risk to the individual student and the wider school population. The next step is to consult and adhere to the school district’s established infection control policies and emergency response plans. Simultaneously, the CSN must prioritize patient confidentiality and privacy rights. The core of the decision-making process involves timely and appropriate communication with key stakeholders, including school administration and designated health supervisors, to ensure a coordinated and effective response that aligns with public health guidance and ethical obligations.

Scenario Analysis: This scenario is professionally challenging because it requires the Certified School Nurse (CSN) to balance the immediate health needs of a student with the legal and ethical obligations regarding parental notification and consent. The CSN must act in the best interest of the child while respecting parental rights and adhering to school district policies and relevant health privacy regulations. The urgency of the situation, coupled with the potential for misinterpretation or overstepping boundaries, necessitates careful judgment. Correct Approach Analysis: The best professional practice involves the CSN providing immediate, appropriate first aid and stabilization to the student, recognizing the emergent nature of the situation. Simultaneously, the CSN should initiate the process of notifying the designated school administrator or counselor to ensure a coordinated response and to facilitate the subsequent notification of parents or guardians as per established school policy and legal requirements for emergency medical situations. This approach prioritizes the student’s immediate safety and well-being while ensuring that established protocols for communication and parental involvement are followed as soon as practically possible, without compromising emergency care. This aligns with the ethical principle of beneficence (acting in the best interest of the patient) and the professional responsibility to provide care within the scope of practice and institutional guidelines. Incorrect Approaches Analysis: One incorrect approach would be to withhold immediate care until parental consent is obtained. This fails to meet the ethical and professional obligation to provide emergency care when a student is in immediate danger. Delaying care in a potentially life-threatening situation constitutes a failure to act in the student’s best interest and could lead to severe harm or death, violating the principle of non-maleficence (do no harm). Another incorrect approach would be to administer treatment and then immediately contact parents without involving school administration. While contacting parents is crucial, bypassing the designated school administrator or counselor in an emergency situation can disrupt established communication channels and potentially lead to confusion or a lack of appropriate support for the student and family within the school system. This deviates from established school protocols and can hinder a comprehensive response. A further incorrect approach would be to assume the student is old enough to consent to treatment and proceed without attempting to contact parents or guardians at all. While mature minors may have some rights regarding medical decisions, the default professional and legal expectation in a school setting is to involve parents or guardians, especially in emergent situations, unless there is a clear and documented legal emancipation or a specific policy allowing for independent minor consent in such circumstances. This approach risks violating parental rights and legal guardianship responsibilities. Professional Reasoning: Professionals should employ a decision-making framework that prioritizes immediate safety and well-being, followed by adherence to established protocols and legal/ethical guidelines. This involves a rapid assessment of the situation, immediate intervention if necessary, and concurrent or immediate subsequent communication with appropriate stakeholders (school administration, parents/guardians) according to policy. The framework should also consider the scope of practice, legal reporting requirements, and ethical principles governing healthcare provision in an educational setting.

Scenario Analysis: This scenario is professionally challenging because it requires the Certified School Nurse (CSN) to navigate the complex interplay between student privacy rights, parental consent, and the school’s responsibility to maintain a safe and healthy learning environment. Balancing these competing interests demands careful judgment, adherence to established policies, and a thorough understanding of relevant regulations. The CSN must act as an advocate for the student while also ensuring compliance with legal and ethical obligations. Correct Approach Analysis: The best professional practice involves a systematic and policy-driven approach. This means first consulting the existing school district health policies and procedures regarding communicable disease reporting and management. If the policy is unclear or insufficient, the CSN should then initiate the process for policy review and potential revision, involving relevant stakeholders such as the school administration, legal counsel, and the school board. This approach ensures that actions are grounded in established guidelines, promotes transparency, and allows for a standardized and equitable response to health concerns. It upholds the principle of acting within the scope of established authority and procedure, which is a cornerstone of professional practice in healthcare and education. Incorrect Approaches Analysis: Implementing a new, unapproved protocol for reporting without consulting existing policies is a significant regulatory and ethical failure. It bypasses established governance structures, potentially violating student privacy laws if not handled correctly, and undermines the authority of the school board and administration who are responsible for policy development. This approach risks inconsistent application and legal challenges. Directly reporting the student’s condition to the local health department without exploring internal policy or parental notification, where appropriate, is also problematic. While public health reporting is crucial, the method of reporting must align with school district policies and privacy regulations like FERPA (Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act) in the US context, which governs the disclosure of student education records. This approach may violate privacy rights if not executed through the designated channels. Seeking advice from colleagues informally without documenting the consultation or following established policy review procedures is insufficient. While peer consultation is valuable, it does not substitute for formal policy adherence or the necessary steps to ensure a policy is legally sound and ethically appropriate for the entire school district. This approach lacks the necessary rigor and accountability. Professional Reasoning: Professionals should employ a decision-making framework that prioritizes policy adherence and ethical conduct. This involves: 1. Identifying the core issue and its potential impact. 2. Consulting existing policies and procedures relevant to the situation. 3. If policies are inadequate or absent, initiating the formal policy review and development process, involving appropriate stakeholders. 4. Ensuring all actions comply with relevant legal and ethical standards, particularly concerning privacy and confidentiality. 5. Documenting all decisions and actions taken.

This scenario presents a professional challenge due to the sensitive nature of student health information and the need to balance confidentiality with effective care coordination. The Certified School Nurse (CSN) must navigate the legal and ethical obligations to protect student privacy while ensuring that educators and parents have the necessary information to support the student’s well-being and educational success. Careful judgment is required to determine the appropriate level of disclosure and to ensure all parties are acting in the student’s best interest within established guidelines. The best professional practice involves a structured, documented approach that prioritizes student privacy while facilitating necessary communication. This includes obtaining informed consent from parents or guardians for any disclosure of health information to educators or external healthcare providers, unless specific exceptions apply under relevant privacy laws such as the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) in the United States. The CSN should clearly communicate to parents what information will be shared, with whom, and for what purpose, ensuring that only the minimum necessary information is disclosed to support the student’s educational needs or medical management. Documentation of this consent and the shared information is crucial for accountability and transparency. This approach upholds the student’s right to privacy, complies with legal mandates, and fosters a collaborative environment built on trust. Sharing a student’s detailed medical diagnosis and treatment plan with all teachers without explicit parental consent, even with the intention of providing support, violates the student’s right to privacy and potentially breaches FERPA regulations. FERPA protects the privacy of student education records, and while health information within those records can be shared under certain conditions, broad disclosure without consent is generally prohibited. Discussing a student’s specific health condition and medication schedule with a parent in a public setting, such as a school hallway or cafeteria, compromises the student’s confidentiality and creates an unprofessional environment for sensitive health discussions. This approach fails to protect the student’s privacy from unauthorized individuals who may overhear the conversation. Directly contacting a student’s external healthcare provider to request detailed medical records without first obtaining written authorization from the parent or guardian is a violation of patient privacy laws, such as the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) in the United States, and FERPA. While collaboration is important, it must be done through appropriate channels and with proper consent. Professional decision-making in such situations should follow a framework that begins with identifying the student’s needs and the information required for effective support. This is followed by a thorough review of relevant legal and ethical guidelines (e.g., FERPA, HIPAA, school district policies, professional nursing ethics). The next step involves engaging with parents or guardians to obtain informed consent for any necessary information sharing, clearly explaining the purpose and scope of the disclosure. Finally, the CSN should document all communications and actions taken, ensuring that all disclosures are limited to the minimum necessary information to achieve the stated purpose and are shared only with authorized individuals.

Scenario Analysis: This scenario presents a professional challenge for a Certified School Nurse (CSN) due to the sensitive nature of addressing childhood obesity within a school setting. Balancing the need for effective nutrition education and obesity prevention with the ethical considerations of student privacy, potential stigma, and the requirement for parental involvement is paramount. The CSN must navigate these complexities to ensure interventions are supportive, evidence-based, and compliant with relevant health and educational guidelines. Correct Approach Analysis: The best professional practice involves a multi-faceted approach that prioritizes evidence-based nutrition education delivered in an age-appropriate and non-stigmatizing manner, coupled with a clear protocol for parental notification and collaboration. This approach aligns with the ethical imperative to act in the best interest of the child while respecting family autonomy and privacy. It also adheres to best practices in public health, which advocate for universal interventions that promote healthy lifestyles for all students, alongside targeted support for those identified as at risk, always with appropriate consent and communication. The emphasis on empowering students with knowledge and skills for healthy eating, rather than singling out individuals for criticism, is crucial for fostering a positive and sustainable change. Incorrect Approaches Analysis: One incorrect approach involves directly confronting a student about their weight in a public setting, such as the cafeteria, and immediately recommending a restrictive diet without parental consent or consultation. This fails to uphold student privacy and dignity, potentially causing significant emotional distress and stigma. It also bypasses the essential step of involving parents or guardians, who are key stakeholders in a child’s health and well-being, and may not be aware of or agree with the proposed intervention. Furthermore, recommending specific restrictive diets without proper medical assessment and parental consent is outside the scope of typical school nursing practice and could be detrimental. Another incorrect approach is to implement a school-wide mandatory weight-loss program for all students exhibiting a higher Body Mass Index (BMI) without first conducting a comprehensive needs assessment or obtaining informed consent from parents. This approach risks stigmatizing students and may not address the underlying causes of obesity, which can be multifactorial and influenced by socioeconomic factors, family environment, and individual health conditions. It also overlooks the importance of individualized care and the potential for such programs to create unhealthy relationships with food and body image. A third incorrect approach is to solely focus on distributing generic pamphlets about healthy eating to all students and staff, assuming this will be sufficient for obesity prevention and education. While information dissemination is a component, this approach lacks personalization, engagement, and follow-up. It fails to address the specific needs of students who may require more targeted support or intervention, nor does it account for the diverse learning styles and comprehension levels of the student population. This passive approach is unlikely to lead to significant behavioral change or effectively prevent obesity. Professional Reasoning: Professionals should employ a decision-making framework that begins with a thorough assessment of the situation, considering all ethical and regulatory requirements. This includes prioritizing student well-being, privacy, and dignity. Next, they should identify evidence-based interventions that are appropriate for the school setting and the age group. Crucially, this framework mandates open and transparent communication with parents or guardians, seeking their informed consent and active participation in any health-related interventions. Professionals must also be aware of their scope of practice and collaborate with other healthcare providers or specialists when necessary. Continuous professional development in nutrition and obesity prevention, along with an understanding of cultural sensitivities and socioeconomic factors, are also vital components of effective practice.

This scenario is professionally challenging because it requires the Certified School Nurse (CSN) to balance the immediate need for support with the legal and ethical obligations regarding student privacy and parental involvement. The CSN must navigate the complexities of adolescent mental health, recognizing signs of distress while adhering to established protocols for reporting and intervention. Careful judgment is required to ensure the student’s well-being is prioritized without compromising confidentiality or established reporting structures. The best professional practice involves a multi-faceted approach that prioritizes immediate safety and support while initiating the appropriate reporting and communication channels. This includes discreetly offering the student a safe space to talk, actively listening without judgment, and then promptly and accurately documenting the observed concerns and the student’s disclosures. Crucially, this approach necessitates following school policy and relevant child protection legislation by informing the designated school administrator or counselor and, where applicable, the student’s parents or guardians, in accordance with legal mandates and ethical guidelines for reporting suspected mental health crises or abuse. This ensures a coordinated and legally compliant response that involves the appropriate support systems. An incorrect approach would be to solely rely on informal conversations with the student without initiating formal reporting procedures. This fails to engage the necessary support structures within the school and bypasses legal obligations to report concerns that may indicate a risk to the student’s safety or well-being. Another incorrect approach is to immediately contact parents without first assessing the immediate risk to the student or consulting with school administration, which could inadvertently escalate the situation or violate established school protocols for handling sensitive mental health disclosures. Furthermore, attempting to manage the situation independently without involving other school professionals or adhering to reporting mandates constitutes a significant ethical and legal failure, potentially leaving the student without adequate support and exposing the CSN and the school to liability. Professionals should employ a decision-making framework that begins with assessing the immediate safety of the student. This is followed by a thorough understanding and application of school policies and relevant legal statutes concerning mandatory reporting and student confidentiality. When a mental health concern arises, the CSN should engage in active listening and offer immediate, non-judgmental support, while simultaneously preparing to document observations and disclosures accurately. The next critical step is to follow established reporting protocols, which typically involve informing a supervisor, designated administrator, or counselor, and then proceeding with parental notification as mandated by law and school policy, always considering the student’s safety and the best interests of the child.