Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: FRIDAY, February 15, 1991 TAG: 9102150660
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-6 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE:
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
On the pro side, they are a great equalizer. When everybody dresses in standard-issue outfits, poorer youngsters aren't made to feel inferior because their clothes aren't as spiffy as their classmates'.
Value lessons may be learned. When apparel is uniform, individual traits of personality, intellect and talent shine - surely better criteria for judging peers than designer labels on their jeans or blouses. And where security is a problem, uniforms can help: They make clear who belongs in school, and who does not.
They sure simplify life, for kids and their parents. No more crack-of-dawn what-to-wear arguments: "Mom! You forgot to run the washer last night and my green shirt is dirty and I've got to have my green shirt 'cause they're taking school pictures today." Or: "Young lady, you are not going out of this house dressed like that." Simple uniforms also would save money.
On the con side are serious questions. Don't school uniforms stifle individuality and creativity and freedom of expression? Might they retard children's ability to learn another important value lesson: tolerance of diversity in our society - including acceptance of those who dress differently for cultural, ethnic, religious or stylistic reasons, or because of financial means, or plain kookiness?
This session, Portsmouth Del. Kenneth Melvin introduced a bill allowing local schools to adopt uniforms for their students. Its supporters cited violence in inner-city schools where youngsters who wear pricey sneakers, jackets or other faddish clothing are sometimes assaulted and robbed by envious classmates. It may sound implausible, but as Springfield Sen. Richard Saslaw argued, "This is a deadly serious problem."
Students in prosperous suburban school districts "don't kill for a pair of Air Jordans [but] they don't have the kind of pressure that's on kids who come from homes that don't know where their next meal is coming from," says Saslaw.
The measure doesn't require anyone to institute school uniforms; it only permits them to. Districts, such as in Portsmouth or Richmond, that feel they need such a policy could implement it. No one else has to follow suit.
Even so, Gov. Wilder should veto the bill.
School boards probably already have the authority to implement a school-uniform policy, districtwide or on a school-by-school basis. Some boards evidently believe they need the imprimatur of state legislation to overcome possible resistance from students or parents, including potential legal challenges as an infringement of individuals' rights. But if resistance and legal challenges are going to come, they'll come with or without this legislation.
And the measure remains troubling because it reflects a steady abdication of parental responsibility and a shift of social burdens onto the schools. Surely there must be better ways to produce self-esteem and engender strong values among youngsters.
How about more parental responsibility in seeing that kids don't become materialistic clotheshorses who would die - or kill - for trendy threads?
by CNB