First Draft: Letter to the Editor

March 31, 2009
Letter to the Editor: Teen Curfew Really THAT Bad?
Is asking impressionable teenage students to be in school from 9 am until 2 pm really that absurd? Is it really that big of a burden for parents to know where their children are during the day? Is it understandable that Dallas city residents do not want truant teenagers running through the streets? These basic questions are ones that I think local Dallas writer Michael Tate needs to consider before writing another piece about the newly enforced daytime curfew that will go into effect at the end of Spring 2009 here in Dallas, Texas.
According to Sharon Grigsby, an editorial columnist for the Dallas Morning News, the new proposal would call for children (16 and under) to remain off city streets between the school day hours of 9am and 2:30 pm. The punishment for violating this ordinance could be as mild as a warning or as severe as a $500.00 fine and potential police detention.
The opinion piece by Michael Tate that was published through KERA has both some well thought out ideas and some poorly constructed thought processes that lack logistical and analytical thought. What is wrong with a daytime curfew for teens who are already supposed to be in class during those times? I agree with the stance that this is not way to fix the problem of truancy within the city, but does anyone propose a better idea for the current situation? If this curfew is so “absurd,” then why has no one come up with a superior solution? Sure, it is easy for all of us to complain about these teens, but no one is doing anything about it. At least the City Council took some initiative and proposed a new ordinance.
I also could not agree more with the comment that it is the parent’s responsibility of knowing where their children are all day long, not the local police force. There are graver issues for the limited and underfunded police forces to be dealing with other than rounding up children for a pow wow at the police station and talking to them about staying in school. This is an absolute loss of valuable time and limited resources. It is without question the parent’s responsibility to know where their children are and whether or not they are staying at school for the whole day. I would have offered parenting classes as a solution to the truancy problem seeing as the parents of those teenagers that are truants rarely care about what their children do with the rest of their lives, not to mention whether or not they graduate high school.
One item that particularly concerned me was the commenting of his “stint” occupation as a teacher that Tate attempted to use as a justification of his credibility when presenting his argument against the daytime curfew. When he remarks that some students in his classes didn’t need to be there because they were dropouts waiting to happen, I was absolutely appalled. “Great” I thought, that is exactly the attitude of an educator that I want teaching my son or daughter. I thought educators were supposed to support increased attendance by students?
I attended a public school in a very affluent community where almost every parent and educator cared immensely about the successes of each individual student; my parents were very involved as well. When I was in high school, I did my fair share of “cutting” or “skipping” class. I would cut class at least once a week, if not more, I never got caught and I was in the perfect learning environment. Now, although those teenagers growing up in the Dallas community compared to where I grew up in Northern California are experiencing a much different environment of teachers and parental guidance, the reason for truancy is still the same: the children are BORED. I was bored in class as a student because I wasn’t challenged and those who skip class in Dallas are also bored, but because they cannot find a reason why education will be valuable to them in the future when their own parents and role models may have not even graduated from high school. The underlying problem here is the truant’s parents and the School District Boards.
It is said in the editorial by Michael that the curfew does not make any sense and that it does not address any of the underlying problems of the issue and while I agree with that, it is a first step. I support the daytime curfew for teens because getting them to stay in the physical location of the school is the beginning stage of mentally involving them in education.
Rachel “Stop Complaining and Do Something” Kakures