BCT Editorial – 9/29/10

The editorial says, “One reason for letting parents slide is because it presents an inconvenient truth for the left and the right.  The left is uncomfortable with making parents responsible for their children’s readiness and willingness to learn because doing so amounts to blaming the victim.  The left finds it easier to make excuses for parents than it does to prod them into doing what is best for their children.”  I find it interesting the editorial considers the parents to be the victims, not the children.  Perhaps that’s a result of the leftist mindset.

The editorial continues to say, “The right is uneasy with holding parents accountable because doing so would acknowledge that not all families have the same values, that not all parents do what is best for their children.”  I haven’t heard anyone on the right absolve parents of their responsibility, have you?  I have no data to back this up, but I suspect the majority of parents who take their children out of public schools to home school them are probably on the right.

When responsible parents do the best they can to help their children but still end up being held hostage by a poor school or school district, does the Times support these parents?  No.  Editorials since at least 2002 spoke out against charter schools and vouchers.  To my knowledge, the only exception was “Death watch” (6/10/04) in which the Times said, “Have Aliquippa declared a school choice community and find pro-voucher backers to provide the needed funding.  This is no reflection on the job being done by the school district.  Its teachers, administration and school board are working as hard as they can to improve the district.  However, the sad reality is that many people won’t buy homes in the city because of its schools.  Decoupling the two would eliminate that concern.”