Op ed: Frivolous bans or conscientious objections?

By Donna O'Keefe
Posted 6/1/23

Certain segments of our society insist that minor children have a constitutional right to read or view whatever they choose in public schools.  And that educators know better than …

This item is available in full to subscribers.

Please log in to continue

Log in

Op ed: Frivolous bans or conscientious objections?

Posted

Certain segments of our society insist that minor children have a constitutional right to read or view whatever they choose in public schools.  And that educators know better than parents what information their children should access. But are these true? 

Supporting common sense restrictions on student accessibility and concern for age and content appropriateness don’t make parents political or religious “extremists”. PEN America’s recent assertion that 2,532 books were banned from school libraries in the 2020-2021 school year is inaccurate and agenda driven. Investigation found that 74% of the titles remain available.  

So who should decide appropriate content? Publishers? Authors? The American Library Association? School Library Journal? The U.S. Department of Education? And in which category do controversial materials belong? Fiction, history, sciences, or sex education?  

Nine-year-olds don’t think or act like 12-year-olds, nor do 12-year-olds think or act like “young adults”. Neither group understands complex sociological problems and human relationships. Human brain development ends at age 25, not 12. Arguing that sexually explicit materials are simply “instructional” for kids under 18 is ignorance.  

Young brains can respond the same to simulated and actual situations. Studies show that early sexualization is emotionally harmful. Porn addiction in teens is on the rise because of unlimited smartphone access. With student mental health issues increasing, do schools need to put more fuel on the fire or address the causes of emotional distress?  

The perceptions of one marginalized person or group are not representative of universal truths. Europe is recognizing that social contagion in youths via the internet is contributing to gender confusion and that puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones and transition surgery are often irreversible mistakes. Unrelated mental health issues need to be addressed before taking such extreme actions. 

Likewise, fiction cannot accurately reflect group experiences, and scientific facts can be manipulated. In 2018, millions of children feared their young lives would end unless adults listened to 15-year-old Greta Thunberg’s climate change warnings. Paul and Anne Ehrlich’s 1968 book The Population Bomb  predicted world famine catastrophe in less than a decade, yet population has doubled with human ingenuity preventing largescale starvation.   

Please, educators and board members, if the shoe fits, spend more time addressing misunderstandings and potential negative consequences of what you provide for learning. The trust of many parents is dwindling. The demand for transparency is growing. And high-priced consultants are waiting to solve every problem with unproven solutions.  

Give students all sides of complex issues. Separate fact from fiction and opinion. Ask why Social Emotional Learning (SEL) wasn’t needed 20 years ago to address discipline problems and disordered behaviors. 

Alert all parents to controversial or biased content at the start of each school year so they can knowledgably exclude their children from lessons they question. Challenged book ratings are available online. Ratings for online resources and speakers are not.  

Section 118.019 of Wisconsin’s education statute wisely requires any public school with courses in human growth and development to have a defined advisory committee for choosing course materials and content. A recent Wisconsin Assembly hearing on revisions to that mandate revealed that many districts have ignored it or interpreted it differently. Where do our county districts stand? 

Finally, include community members of varied backgrounds on advisory boards evaluating controversial materials for classrooms and media centers. Investigate how to counter the negative influences of students’ constant viewing on smartphones. And, to decrease conflict and improve community relationships, accept parents as committed partners in curricula content instead of adversaries.  

Donna O’Keefe, of River Falls Township, is a retired corporate librarian and researcher, former public school disability management aide and tutor, freelance writer and former conservative columnist in the River Falls Journal, parent and grandparent of former River Falls public school students.  

book banning, education, parents, opinion, editorial