Addressing the school social worker’s rant
This weekend my grandson came over to the house to play. Almost two years old, little Isaiah has a firmly set mission in life: To find whatever trouble he can, and thoroughly get into it. In our yard, he made a bee-line for the leaky water hose.
“You see what he’s doing?” I asked my daughter.
Moriah shrugged. “It’s just water . . . and mud. He’ll come clean.”
Isaiah picked up the hose and leaned over for a better look, inadvertently squirting himself in the face. He looked up at us, streams of water pouring from his fine blond hair. We were smiling, so he smiled back. He stared at the stream for a moment, and then started lapping at it like a puppy. We laughed while he drenched himself, eventually muddy up to his knees.
According to Catoosa County school social worker Sue Mason, we laughed because we are homeschoolers. We don’t know that children are not supposed to play in the dirt. In her scathing two-part article “My thoughts on homeschooling” and “Homeschooling: the dark side,” Mason presents an alternate reality in which parents homeschool their children just to sleep late and avoid responsibility while their children play in the dirt. I suppose she has never seen all those children on the school playground at recess, playing in the dirt.
I was reluctant to leave the county paper lying around, with columns like these. My teens were really miffed to discover that other homeschooled kids are allowed to sleep late and play in the dirt all day. They had some hard questions about why I made them come to history class at 7:00 a.m. for so many years.
Mason attempts to deflect any objections to her column with the caveat that there are some good homeschool families, and she is not talking about them. Yet, for the length of two articles she goes on about homeschool families who live in trailers, are unemployed, and allow their children to play in the dirt all day long.
In seventeen years of homeschooling, I have never met the homeschool families Mason describes. In fact, Mason’s first homeschool column does not feature a single homeschool family. Instead, she writes about public school parents who cannot make it to school on time, who pay the cable bill but neglect the power bill, and who buy tattoos instead of shoes. If these accusations are drawn from actual cases in our county, Mason should be under fire for printing them in the county paper rather than adhering to confidentiality. If they are not actual scenarios, then they are just lies.
If the stories are true, they are stories of public school parents. When these parents are threatened with court action for their children’s tardies, they remind the county social worker that public education is not mandatory; they can always homeschool their children if they so choose. Mason thinks it is terrible that parents have this freedom and “there is nothing I can do.”
Is it really a bad thing that parents have a way to push back? They are our children, after all. The public school system sometimes behaves like a bureaucratic bully, running over individuals. I have a daughter in public school this year. She's a straight-A high school student working a year ahead of others her age. I still have to stand up for her to get her needs met. I am nice about it, but it goes without saying that if the school system does not offer this brilliant student the opportunities she deserves, they will lose her back to homeschooling.
Homeschooling is not a privilege. Rather, the public school is the one enjoying the privilege of having my talented daughter among their students. Granted, it is not too much to ask that she be to school on time! And she is. But the principle is the same: Families who do not get what they need and want from the public school system have the right to use private or homeschooling instead.
If a particular family needs a different schedule than the public school offers, homeschooling is one way to do that. So long as the child is learning, why should it matter whether classes are held during the morning, afternoon or evening? Learning is organic, and is not really confined to hours or classrooms.What we sometimes forget in this whole discussion is that homeschooling isn't some novel idea. As in the breastfeeding/formula debate, homeschooling IS normal and has been practiced for thousands of years. Sending your kids off to school is the novel idea.
Even today, every parent on the planet homeschools for the first weeks, months or years of the child’s life. We teach our children to walk and talk, processes far more complex than anything learned in grades K-12, and no one suggests that ordinary parents are incapable of teaching their own children to do these things.
The school social worker does not like that public education is not mandatory. Education is mandatory, but not public education. Before homeschooling became popular again, parents did not know they had that option. Parents like the ones she describes (that is, poor) could not afford private education, so they were at the mercy of the public school system. Now, suddenly, parents who are pushed around are pushing back. They are saying, "No, you can't bully me, because the truth is my child doesn't have to be in your school in the first place." And on that score, they are correct.
#
Showing posts with label formula. Show all posts
Showing posts with label formula. Show all posts
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
Thursday, September 25, 2008
Got melamine?
Formula-fed infants are at risk both at home and abroad
As of this writing, approximately 53,000 Chinese babies have been treated for drinking toxic baby formula. The milk was tainted with melamine – the same chemical that killed over 300 American cats and dogs in the recent Chinese pet food scandal. This time, greedy corporations are killing children. So far, four child deaths have been attributed the formula, while tens of thousands of children are still suffering from painful kidney stones or partial renal failure.
A similar atrocity occurred in Japan in 1955, when arsenic-tainted milk powder poisoned over 12,000 newborns. Not until 1981 did the nation admit the extent of their baby milk atrocity: At least 600 deaths, over 6,000 people still suffering 26 years later, and 624 people afflicted by severe mental retardation, developmental difficulties, and paralysis caused by brain damage.
This is not the first baby milk massacre in China, either. In 2004, thirteen infants died from drinking counterfeit baby formula made from flour and water, and 170 others suffered serious malnutrition.
As in 2004, the current tragedy is no accident. Melamine (a substance used in plastic and fertilizer) was actually added to the baby formula as a way to increase corporate profits. Melamine mimics protein in some tests, so when the dairy farmers watered down the milk to cut costs, they added melamine to cover their tracks.
The investigation continues to unfold. So far Chinese authorities have detected melamine in 20% of the nation’s dairy milk. Twenty-two brands are affected. China initially claimed that the tainted milk was never exported beyond its borders. However, Chinese milk products have now been recalled from Bangladesh, Yemen, Gabon, Burundi and Myanmar.
Hong Kong regulators pulled Chinese milk, yogurt and ice cream off the market after finding that eight of thirty samples tested contained the poison. Hong Kong authorities found traces of melamine in two Nestle products – a follow-on formula for babies over a year old, and a type of milk used for catering. Nestle denies that their products are tainted, pointing out that Hong Kong recently made their melamine standards more stringent than U.S. and European standards.
The Chinese government is talking tough and taking action now, but the evidence indicates China knew about the poisoned milk weeks ago and chose not act until the end of the Olympics and Paralympics.
Chinese authorities will have no mercy on their designated scapegoat. After all, their government responded to the pet food scandal by executing the head of China’s food and drug safety agency. Perhaps in this case a fitting punishment would be a steady diet of Sanlu baby formula.
As China faces another hit to its national image, parents around the world wonder, “Could this happen here?”
The answer is a resounding yes. Here in the U.S., the FDA has issued a warning against all Chinese-produced baby formula. Although it is illegal to import baby formula from China, officials cite examples of Chinese brands being sold in ethnic stores.
All formula-fed infants are at risk for various types of contamination, both intentional and accidental. Formula-feeding is not like breastfeeding, in which the milk passes directly from source to destination without risk of contamination, and the breast milk itself even contains substances that kill off foreign organisms like Salmonella.
Instead, formula-fed babies are exposed to contamination risks throughout production, canning, distribution, and even at home as the artificial milk is poured into a plastic bottle containing BPA, a substance known to be hazardous to humans since the 1930’s. The bottle itself may also contain microorganisms, unless it has just been sterilized. Unfortunately, heat increases the release of BPA. Bottle-fed babies just cannot win.
The American formula industry issues product recalls every year. In May of this year, Abbott issued a recall because of product oxidation, which can cause nausea, vomiting and other gastrointestinal problems in infants. Past recalls have been issued by various U.S. formula manufacturers because of glass particles, unsanitary production conditions, Salmonella, incorrect mixing instructions, and other serious safety problems.
Intentional tampering has also occurred here in the United States. In 1995, the FDA seized 45,000 pounds of counterfeit infant formula. The milk trail led to ten factories in eight states that were making bogus formula with counterfeit labels. The fake formula was being sold in supermarkets under brand names.
More often, formula fraud occurs after manufacturing. Fraudulent wholesalers offer retail stores stolen, damaged or re-labeled formula. In one instance, a man and wife simply bought cases of cheap formula off the shelf, relabeled it as an expensive dairy-free formula, and then returned it to the store. The couple netted thousands of dollars before being caught. Several allergic babies were harmed by drinking substances they could not tolerate.
The FDA offers parents suggestions for avoiding counterfeit formula: Know how your baby’s formula looks, smells and tastes. It is interesting that they fail to recognize the simplest safeguard of all: Avoid baby formula.
In all but the rarest cases, babies are much better off drinking mother’s milk. Breast milk is full of nutrients that provide lifelong benefits to the child. Just as important are the substances you won’t find in breast milk -- melamine, arsenic, and Salmonella, to name a few.
As of this writing, approximately 53,000 Chinese babies have been treated for drinking toxic baby formula. The milk was tainted with melamine – the same chemical that killed over 300 American cats and dogs in the recent Chinese pet food scandal. This time, greedy corporations are killing children. So far, four child deaths have been attributed the formula, while tens of thousands of children are still suffering from painful kidney stones or partial renal failure.
A similar atrocity occurred in Japan in 1955, when arsenic-tainted milk powder poisoned over 12,000 newborns. Not until 1981 did the nation admit the extent of their baby milk atrocity: At least 600 deaths, over 6,000 people still suffering 26 years later, and 624 people afflicted by severe mental retardation, developmental difficulties, and paralysis caused by brain damage.
This is not the first baby milk massacre in China, either. In 2004, thirteen infants died from drinking counterfeit baby formula made from flour and water, and 170 others suffered serious malnutrition.
As in 2004, the current tragedy is no accident. Melamine (a substance used in plastic and fertilizer) was actually added to the baby formula as a way to increase corporate profits. Melamine mimics protein in some tests, so when the dairy farmers watered down the milk to cut costs, they added melamine to cover their tracks.
The investigation continues to unfold. So far Chinese authorities have detected melamine in 20% of the nation’s dairy milk. Twenty-two brands are affected. China initially claimed that the tainted milk was never exported beyond its borders. However, Chinese milk products have now been recalled from Bangladesh, Yemen, Gabon, Burundi and Myanmar.
Hong Kong regulators pulled Chinese milk, yogurt and ice cream off the market after finding that eight of thirty samples tested contained the poison. Hong Kong authorities found traces of melamine in two Nestle products – a follow-on formula for babies over a year old, and a type of milk used for catering. Nestle denies that their products are tainted, pointing out that Hong Kong recently made their melamine standards more stringent than U.S. and European standards.
The Chinese government is talking tough and taking action now, but the evidence indicates China knew about the poisoned milk weeks ago and chose not act until the end of the Olympics and Paralympics.
Chinese authorities will have no mercy on their designated scapegoat. After all, their government responded to the pet food scandal by executing the head of China’s food and drug safety agency. Perhaps in this case a fitting punishment would be a steady diet of Sanlu baby formula.
As China faces another hit to its national image, parents around the world wonder, “Could this happen here?”
The answer is a resounding yes. Here in the U.S., the FDA has issued a warning against all Chinese-produced baby formula. Although it is illegal to import baby formula from China, officials cite examples of Chinese brands being sold in ethnic stores.
All formula-fed infants are at risk for various types of contamination, both intentional and accidental. Formula-feeding is not like breastfeeding, in which the milk passes directly from source to destination without risk of contamination, and the breast milk itself even contains substances that kill off foreign organisms like Salmonella.
Instead, formula-fed babies are exposed to contamination risks throughout production, canning, distribution, and even at home as the artificial milk is poured into a plastic bottle containing BPA, a substance known to be hazardous to humans since the 1930’s. The bottle itself may also contain microorganisms, unless it has just been sterilized. Unfortunately, heat increases the release of BPA. Bottle-fed babies just cannot win.
The American formula industry issues product recalls every year. In May of this year, Abbott issued a recall because of product oxidation, which can cause nausea, vomiting and other gastrointestinal problems in infants. Past recalls have been issued by various U.S. formula manufacturers because of glass particles, unsanitary production conditions, Salmonella, incorrect mixing instructions, and other serious safety problems.
Intentional tampering has also occurred here in the United States. In 1995, the FDA seized 45,000 pounds of counterfeit infant formula. The milk trail led to ten factories in eight states that were making bogus formula with counterfeit labels. The fake formula was being sold in supermarkets under brand names.
More often, formula fraud occurs after manufacturing. Fraudulent wholesalers offer retail stores stolen, damaged or re-labeled formula. In one instance, a man and wife simply bought cases of cheap formula off the shelf, relabeled it as an expensive dairy-free formula, and then returned it to the store. The couple netted thousands of dollars before being caught. Several allergic babies were harmed by drinking substances they could not tolerate.
The FDA offers parents suggestions for avoiding counterfeit formula: Know how your baby’s formula looks, smells and tastes. It is interesting that they fail to recognize the simplest safeguard of all: Avoid baby formula.
In all but the rarest cases, babies are much better off drinking mother’s milk. Breast milk is full of nutrients that provide lifelong benefits to the child. Just as important are the substances you won’t find in breast milk -- melamine, arsenic, and Salmonella, to name a few.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
