David Parker controversy

In April 2005 a controversy over a book at Joseph Estabrook Elementary School, an institution teaching kindergarten through 5th grade in Lexington, Massachusetts erupted. A 'diversity book bag' was made available to kindergarten students to take home as part of normal school activities. The book bag contained a book entitled Who's in a Family by Robert Skutch that told about different kinds of families and had activities for the child to complete with his/her parents/guardians. The book showed families that were divorced, single parents, a family with two fathers, and many other types of families. The book bag program is optional although the books contained within the book bag are or were available at the Estabrook school library.
One local parent, David Parker, concerned that the schools might be raising sensitive, age-inappropriate issues with his kindergarten-age child, began a several month long dialog with the Lexington school officials, asking them if they could notify him before any such issues were raised in the classroom by an adult employee of the schools such as a teacher or a guidance counselor. Parker has consistently said he has absolutely no problem with anything said about these issues by other children at the school. Invited to his child's school to discuss the issue, Parker asked to have Lexington school officials sign a notice that they would abide by his wishes. School officials worked with Mr. Parker for some time on the wording of such a notice but, without any explanation, declined to sign such an agreement. Mr. Parker then said since he was the child's parent and legal guardian he should have the final say as to how issues of human sexuality are taught to his children, and that he would not leave the school until he had the signed agreement. The schools then contacted the Lexington police and had Parker arrested.
According to a joint press release by Interim Superintendent of Schools William J. Hurley and Lexington Chief of Police Christopher Casey:
The Administrators explained that granting the parents’ request was not required by the Policy or statutory language. In addition, they explained that implementation of the parents’ request was simply not practical, since children could even discuss such matters among themselves at school. The Administrators informed the parents that they could appeal the response both within the school department and, if necessary, to the Commissioner of Education. However, the father replied, “Other people have tried that and it did not work.” The parents stated that they would not leave the school until their demands were met.
With the hours passing and the parents refusing to leave the school building, the Lexington Police were notified. While the mother chose to leave before police arrival, the father did not. Two plain-clothed detectives arrived at 5:20 p.m., followed by a Police Lieutenant at 6:00 p.m. All attempted to coax the father to leave voluntarily. However, he made it clear that he would not leave unless his demands were met and that he knew he was engaging in “civil disobedience” and was willing to accept the consequences.
The father declared “If I’m not under arrest then I’m not leaving.” He also used his cell phone to make a number of phone calls, and a small group of people began arriving with cameras.
Finally, when it became necessary for the administrative staff to leave and secure the building, the police arrested the father at 6:24 p.m. The group with the video camera was waiting behind the police station and photographed the father’s arrival. He was processed at the police station, afforded all his rights, and after using the telephone, chose not to be bailed. He was held overnight at the Lexington Police station and in the morning was transported to the Concord District Court for arraignment.
Parker argued that in refusing his demands, the schools were not complying with Massachusetts state law:
Lexington Public Schools stated that granting the parents’ request was not required by the school policy or statutory language:

The story was reported by many news sources nationally. Then-governor of Massachusetts Mitt Romney, an opponent of same-sex marriage, said: "Schools under our parental-notification law are required to inform parents...of matters relating to human sexuality that may be taught in the classroom and to allow that child to be out of the classroom for that period of the education." Parker and the head of Massresistance.cin, an anti-homosexual group, continues to characterize the incident by saying "Father arrested while asking for parental notification", instead of "Father arrested for refusing to leave the school when the conference concluded".
A year after his arrest, Parker claimed that his son was attacked on the playground by a group of students who were angry at the controversy. This claim garnered much attention on conservative blogs. However, after an investigation, it was discovered that the incident was a fight between Parker's son and another student over a cafeteria seat.
In April 2006, David Parker, his wife, and another couple sued Lexington Public School officials over the book. On February 23, 2007, the lawsuit against the Lexington Public Schools was dismissed on a technicality under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), failure to plead, by the US District Court of Massachusetts. The plaintiffs in the suit have appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit.

Main Menu

See Also

Main Menu