A head start on another federal failure
In his State of the Union speech, President Obama called for taxpayer-funded universal preschool for “every child in America.” As a mom of a toddler, I reject that plan.
Babies and toddlers have what experts call an “absorbent mind,” in which they learn primarily by absorbing their environment and the movement and speech of those around them. It is no surprise that they are very attached to home and family in these years. They are not “social” beings yet; their only relationship need is to feel cared for by, and be in close proximity to, the people who love them the most.
The idea of taking these tender souls out of their homes and putting them in some government school makes me shudder.
Obama promises that these early-start schools would have a positive impact on children's later education. But that promise appears empty, given the dreadful report just out on Head Start.
Head Start, the federal program for pre-kindergarten children from low-income families, costs taxpayers $8 billion each year. Congress asked the Department of Health and Human Services to conduct a study of the program's effectiveness, the results of which were available last October (but not released until after the election).
The study tracked the progress of 5,000 children, half of whom had been through the Head Start program from as early as age 3 and half of whom had not. The results are bad news.
Despite the vast sums of money spent to ready these children for school, the study found that Head Start had little to no positive impact on the cognitive abilities or emotional well-being of its participants, and it even showed a negative impact in certain areas.
After nearly 50 years running, the flagship federal preschool program Head Start does not give children any measurable head start at all.
Something that does help children prepare for school and beyond is stronger families, a subject the president also mentioned in his State of the Union address.
According to respected sociologist Dr. Pat Fagan, more than a million American children suffer the divorce of their parents each year.
We cannot have secure, well-prepared, confident children if we continue to sustain a culture of no-fault divorce, cohabitation and “hookups” that produce kids but no families.
And as far as the use of federal dollars goes, I've got a better idea for Obama. Rather than taking our money and setting up government schools for babies, why not give that money back to moms and dads and let them decide what's best for their families?
Cathy Ruse, J.D., is senior legal fellow at the Family Research Council.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Penguins finally break through, defeat Devils at Prudential Center
- UPMC researcher who died of cyanide poisoning committed suicide
- Sting highlights demand for Pappy Van Winkle bourbon
- Rooney says Pittsburgh is ‘good place’ for next northern Super Bowl
- HOF finalist Bettis ‘behind everything’ in 2005 Super Bowl run
- LaBar: WWE not backing down from controversy
- Penguins notebook: Bennett a healthy scratch
- Trib 30 stocks drop to four-month low
- New CEO eager to revitalize Pittsburgh International Airport
- Roundup: Alpha Natural Resources to idle coal mines; Alcoa targets growing demand for aluminium wheels; more
- Dungy, Greene represent more Steelers ties in hall of fame voting