Letters for January 16: On vaping and public education issues

Protecting your child: Know the dangers of vaping

Vaping — the use of electronic cigarettes — poses significant health risks to young people. According to the 2021 National Youth Tobacco Survey released by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, over 2 million middle and high schoolers currently use e-cigarettes, 85 percent use flavored e-cigarettes and nearly one in four youth vape daily.

While e-cigarettes do not contain tobacco, most contain nicotine derived from tobacco. Nicotine and vapor exposure put your child’s dental health at risk — reducing saliva, causing dry mouth and promoting increased bacteria, tooth decay and chronic bad breath. Other risks include mouth ulcers, tissue inflammation, gum disease and recession — even potential tooth and bone loss.

Nicotine exposure during a child’s adolescence can also cause addiction and long-term harm to brain development, which can have long-lasting effects on mood, impulse control, attention and learning.

E-cigarettes impact respiratory health as well. The vaping aerosol contains metals, volatile compounds and ultrafine particles that can be inhaled deep into growing lungs.

Vaping is harmful. Education is vital. Talk with tweens, teens and young adults about the serious dangers. Reach out to your family dentist or physician for resources and assistance in helping your child steer clear of vaping.

Ron Inge, DDS, is chief dental officer, chief operating officer and vice president of professional services at Delta Dental of Missouri.

Public schools and those nasty socialists

In spite of all the real, tangible, threats facing us today — pollution, a warming planet, a pandemic, food scarcity, the list is really quite long — lots of folks are choosing to spend their time just making stuff up: JMSU. The political reasoning behind JMSU is to invent boogeymen and then to become outraged. Calling someone or something socialist is a surefire outrage igniter. The outrage machine concocts stories about Anthony Fauci, the CDC, WHO and, of course, government in general.

David Nokes finds himself in good company in this respect. Whether it’s critical race theory, wokeness or, now, socialism in our public schools, he is quite adept at constructing strawman arguments and then becoming outraged by his creations. Mr. Nokes is outraged that Dr. Pam Hedgpeth and the organization she leads, GOCSD, are trying to turn our public schools, and by extension our communities, into hotbeds of socialism.

Socialism, or communism for that matter, is defined as state ownership of the means of production. A public good is defined as one that is non-excludable, that is, use by one person does not prevent others from using that good nor does it reduce its availability to others. Users are typically not barred from use for non-payment. Roads, bridges, sewer systems, and parks are some examples. Also libraries!

Public schools are shining examples of both socialism and public goods. Always have been, always will be. I’m pretty sure that there’s nothing Pam Hedgpeth can do to make them more so. If Mr. Nokes attended a private school, I’m sorry he missed out on a quality public education.

It has been my privilege to have been in the classroom with many outstanding public school educators. Miss Hickman in fourth grade for new math. Mrs. Ray in high school for senior English and word study. Dr. Mills for English and Drs. Wyrick and Wasson for Economics at SMS. Dr. Loschky at Mizzou: a good-ol’-boy from Arkansas who managed to get his Ph.D. from Harvard.

I have not been fortunate enough to have taken a class from Dr. Hedgpeth. I have been in many meetings she has chaired and learned from those that she is a leader with a capital L. I am certain that there are many educators who feel very fortunate to have taken one of her classes at SBU.

I know something else about Dr. Hedgpeth. She is, first and foremost, concerned about the "kiddos." Her agenda is to insure that everyone associated with public schools, administrators, teachers and students alike, is successful. Any other characterization of her is JMSU.

Chuck McDaniel, Battlefield

Proposed “Parents’ Bill of Rights” shows poor grasp of public education

On Tuesday, January 11, the Missouri House’s Elementary and Secondary Education Committee held a hearing on three bills that focus on public education. Though all three bills serve to undermine our public schools, H.B.1995 and H.B.1474, sponsored by GOP Reps. Doug Richey and Nick Schroer, respectively, are of particular concern.

These bills would create a “Parents’ Bill of Rights,” which seems innocuous enough. The truth, however, is that H.B.1995 and H.B.1474 represent the latest attempt by the GOP to leverage growing distrust between parents and public schools to undermine public education and usurp control of school curriculum from trained educators. The so-called “Parents’ Bill of Rights” is a proverbial wolf in sheep’s clothing, and its passage should be opposed by all Missourians who support a strong public education system.

To be sure, it is not my position that parents should not have the right to access and review curricular materials. Indeed, I think it is imperative that parents have access and that schools work to increase transparency where warranted. The reality is that parents do have access to this information. It is also the reality that parents do not, nor have they ever, had complete control over what their children are exposed to in public schools. This notion that parents are or should be the sole deciders as to what their children learn in public schools goes against both the whole logic of a public education, as well as the child’s right to develop into a free, independent thinking person.

Following the American Revolution, Thomas Jefferson and other Founding Fathers began pushing for publicly funded schools in the U.S., noting the importance of having a well-educated citizenry that could ensure the longevity of the fledgling nation. Since its inception, then, public education was never merely about teaching the basics of reading, writing and arithmetic as many conservatives tout today.

Instead, public education was intended to provide young people with the skills and knowledge needed to be active and engaged citizens in U.S. society. More recently, public schooling has also taken on the goal of unifying a population that is becoming increasingly diverse and granting all students equal opportunities, which includes validation of historically excluded group members’ lived experience.

The language in the two aforementioned bills runs counter to these goals. By allowing parents to, in effect, dictate what their children are exposed to in public schools, they not only take away power from the teacher, but they also stifle the ability for children to be exposed to diverse perspectives that will only serve to help them to grow into culturally competent, well-adjusted citizens in an increasingly diverse community.

Parents are an integral part of a child’s public education. They should be partners and eager collaborators of public school teachers and staff. But we have to let our teachers teach and our students learn. And we must work to rebuild the trust between our public schools and parents. The future of our community depends on it.

Kyler Sherman-Wilkins, Ph.D., is an Assistant Professor of Sociology at Missouri State University. His research, teaching, and writing all center on diversity, equity, and inclusion; racial/ethnic disparities in health and aging; and public policy.

This article originally appeared on Springfield News-Leader: Letters for January 16: On vaping and public education issues