This letter may not be popular with many parents, but part of the population will nod in agreement. Why do so many parents now believe that the general public should be responsible for their child care? [“Voters should thwart attempts to hijack mayor’s pre-K mandate,” Opinion, June 19].
Why are the supporters of Initiative 107 pushing a system that provides child care, not specific educational initiatives? Is it just to add members to the union? Why do people have kids if they don’t have the ability to pay for child care and education?
If you choose to have one or more children, that is your choice, and the subsequent financial responsibility is yours also, not responsibility of the city or the state. While the state does mandate that a public education will be provided, and most of us agree with that, it does not in any way imply that child care or convenience be part of that promise.
Let’s look for value in education, not convenience for parents. My parents made sacrifices so that one parent was home to raise children. There was no pre-K; my mom filled that role. All five of her children are college-educated and she completed a bachelor’s and master’s degree while raising us.
Ed Fannin, Seattle