Lexington C.A.R.E.S.I have heard the complaint that the schools did not make a sincere attempt to reach a compromise agreement with the Parkers and the Wirthlins, and thus avoid being sued. The facts are that Mr. Parker and his attorney have been threatening a lawsuit since at least last summer, long before the Wirthlins became involved.
Furthermore, the agreement Mr. Parker wanted was for the schools to simply accede to his demands for notification and opting out. This would not have been a compromise as some say it would. Rather, it would have been a decision to send the message to all our public school children that gay people and their families are too scary and bad to be included like the rest of us in the conversations and materials in our schools.
Regarding the inevitability of the lawsuit, Mr. Parker has shown he prefers to escalate his behavior to the level of confrontation. At his meeting with school officials on April 27, 2005, Mr. Parker was told he could appeal the school's decision about notification along two different avenues. He chose, however, to get arrested that day at Estabrook School for trespassing, rather than pursue his goals through less confrontational means. Does this demonstrate a desire to work toward mutually acceptable solutions?
According to the press release issued by the police chief and interim superintendent, the Parkers were informed of their ability to appeal the decision, both within the school department and to the Commissioner of Education. David Parker replied, "Other people have tried that and it did not work."
As far back as Aug. 5, 2005, Janet Wu of Channel 5 reported that "Parker's attorney said he's likely to file a civil suit in federal court by this fall." Again, on Sept. 21, 2005, an article in the Minuteman noted that "the Parkers are investigating whether to bring a civil suit against the schools." Clearly, the lawsuit has been in the works for months.
As for the Wirthlins, the book to which they object was read a month ago: They had one meeting with the teacher and principal to discuss the book. They cancelled a subsequent meeting with the superintendent, and shortly thereafter they, together with the Parkers, filed the lawsuit.
These are not aggrieved parents trying to protect their children. As their actions have made clear to all of us, these are people who are using our town as the sacrificial lamb with which to promote their anti-gay agenda. This is not something that the schools brought upon themselves, but something others are pursuing, regardless of its impact on our town, our staff and most importantly, our children.
Peter Hoffman
Rangeway
To my gay friends and neighbors: I'm sorry that you and your families have once again been placed within a glaring unpleasant spotlight. I know those of you who have children, would rather be quietly going about your lives taking the kids to soccer, skating, dance class, etc. I empathize with you, because my family is also considered unconventional.
Like many of you, my husband and I chose to raise our adopted Chinese daughters in Lexington for two primary reasons. The excellent school system and the diverse culture. We hoped to find an accepting and nurturing environment for our different, but beautiful family. I hurt for you as you send your children each day into a world that does not totally understand and accept them. I am afraid for all of us who are vulnerable because we do not fit someone's concept of what a typical American family should look like.
We all witnessed last year how quickly a show of intolerance from a town resident led to vicious hate groups demonstrating at our churches and schools. Some of our fellow residents may think the current issues is about the appropriateness of a story read to grade school children, but we know better than that. The real issue is whether our community honors its cultural diversity, or stands by and watches as our children are made to feel like second-class citizens. Today you, as gay parents are being targeted. If we do not stand together, tomorrow it will be another segment of our community.
Deb Swanson
So the book is called King & King, is it? Well, if I disapprove of monarchy as a form of government, can I ask that my child be removed from the classroom when such books are read?
No, I believe that it is necessary to expose children to all sorts of information, some of it that we do not approve of. It is then our job, as parents, to explain why we do not think it is right.
Alexandra Dohan
Turning Mill Road
My heart goes out to the families at Estabrook school trying to get a handle on the content of the children's education. I myself struggled for years to try and keep my children from learning that their are people who aren't Jewish in the world. Had I been able to remove my kids from lessons which discussed Christians, and people of other faiths, my task would have been made infinitely easier. There would have been one potentially large problem with this strategy, however.
My wife was principally concerned with preventing the children from learning that not everyone in the world is French. Between us, we probably would have been compelled to deny our kids most of the curriculum in any given year. What's a parent to do?
Josh Cochin
Paddock Lane
Could you imagine having to tell your child that a teacher at her school is being sued for reading a story that's a fairy tale version of how her parents met, or that the school system is being sued because a book that includes a picture of a family that looks a lot like her family is available in her classroom and the school library? I couldn't - but that's exactly what we had to do last week.
On the other hand, I certainly prefer the challenge of explaining the Parker lawsuit at the dinner table if the alternative is the school system that the plaintiffs would prefer where my kids would be taught starting in kindergarten to keep quiet about their family.
Celia d'Oliveira (lesbian mom of four)
North Hancock Street
I believe that prior notification should be sent out whenever a book is to be read in a classroom that includes any mention of heterosexual marriage. Heterosexual marriage is for the purpose of procreation, and is thus clearly "primarily involves human sexual issues."
Homosexual marriage, on the other hand, might be done for financial reasons (the spousal death tax exemption comes to mind), or even just for platonic love. No sexual involvement required, and hence no prior notification.
Joking aside, let me be clear: I strongly support the Lexington Public School's position on teaching diversity.
Ben Littauer
Moon Hill Road
The controversy over the reading of "King & King," a positive book on gay families, has me concerned. What makes the book so objectionable that parents are willing to waste our town's time and money on a federal lawsuit to prevent it from being read in class without prior parental notification?
Is it that the book depicts two people who fall in love and share a cartoon-ish kiss? If that's the case, then why not object to the thousands of other books in the school libraries that include a similar story line and kiss?
Is it that the book received a couple of less than stellar reviews? That can't be it because a) the book received several positive reviews from well-respected sources, such as the Horn Book, Kirkus Reviews, and Booklist Reviews; and b) if we allow mixed reviews to be a criterion for eliminating books from our libraries, the shelves will be pretty empty.
No, the reason the family objects to the book is that it provides a positive portrayal of two gay people falling in love, a natural precursor to getting married and starting a family.
Materials like these give the children of gay- and lesbian-headed households the opportunity to see themselves and their families in the same light as the children of straight couples. And, they help foster an environment that welcomes all children, regardless of race, gender or family makeup.
Massachusetts state law is clear on this. Materials that are designed to promote tolerance and respect - including those that reference differences in sexual orientation - don't require prior parental notification.
It's time we stand up for our town's long history of openness, inclusion and respect and not allow a few families to change the course of our future.
Jenny Richlin
Sherburne Road
I want to applaud Lexington School Superintendent Dr. Paul Ash for the way he has handled the recent controversy surrounding the use of a particular book in the elementary school. Dr. Ash has made a rational and intelligent response to the controversy raised by a very small segment of the Lexington community. I believe the majority of Lexingtonians believe, as Dr. Ash believes, that this is a civil rights issue and an issue of acknowledgment of diversity in the community. I encourage the majority of Lexingtonians to support Dr. Ash, in words and deeds, in his response to the very vocal minority.
Judy Izen
Locke lane