Uniforms' benefit questionable

I realize that uniforms in the public schools are supposed to level the playing field, make schools safer and remove the decision of what to wear each day.

Lanier teachers, in the 1950s , were the dress code. Pants up, shirts tucked in, no Bermuda shorts. Dresses, skirts and blouses were demure. Parents backed the teachers. There was no recourse, no back talk, no exceptions; or else.

Many people say that uniforms remove the supposed stigma of wearing old clothes or being poor. Uniforms are supposed to help self-image grades, and school behavior.

All students know where they all live. They know who is "free breakfast/lunch." Students will find a way, be it jewelry, bracelets, shoestrings, shoes, nail polish, belts, etc, to make a statement that they are the in crowd and others are not.

Obviously there is nothing inherently wrong or particularly distasteful to vote in uniforms, but it will require additional wardrobe expense. Children will not wish to wear the uniform at other times. The bell rings, and shirts come out and pants pockets drop to ankle level. Check Capitol Heights Junior High School or Lee High any afternoon when the bell rings.

There is a half-life for all change. One can only wonder at the next innovative superficial changes implemented to replace parental responsibility.

West Marcus
Montgomery