I remember how it was -- JR
Mom wins fight against NYU to allow ‘banned’ baby on campus
A “desperate” mom who’s juggling motherhood and law school scored a victory this week when — with the help of The Post — she successfully convinced NYU to let her previously banned baby onto campus.
After weeks of pleading with officials to allow her three-month-old son onto campus so that she can breastfeed him between classes, second-year law student Devorah Neiger was repeatedly told that only vaccinated guests ages 5 and older can enter any NYU building.
As she’s enrolled in four courses and in class five days a week, Neiger came up with a workaround: Having her baby and his vaccinated nanny wait in an empty space on campus until she could squeeze in a quick feeding session.
But when the infant and nanny were caught in the lobby of the law school’s Furman Hall during the second week of classes, the Director for Diversity and Inclusion emailed Neiger to put her on notice: “This is still a violation of the university’s COVID-19 Visitor Policy which applies to lobby areas as well as interior parts of the building so cannot be a continued practice.”
After The Post began making calls about the baby ban, NYU apparently changed its policy by end of day Thursday — the same time as the deadline The Post gave the school for comment.
Now, the Westchester mom of three will finally be able to have her 12-pound tot wait inside school buildings.
“They’re making an exception for me,” Neiger told The Post on Thursday.
Asked about the sudden change of policy, including the “exception,” Michael Orey, spokesperson for the law school, told The Post: “NYU regularly reassesses its health and safety protocols, and has recently relaxed a number of Covid-19 restrictions. In accordance with that trend, our student, and others who are similarly situated, may now bring their children into NYU buildings.”
The school, which carries a $73,216 tuition, did not respond to questions about whether children under 5 must present vaccination status.
After being rebuked by the Director for Diversity and Inclusion for having her son and nanny in the lobby of Furman Hall, Neiger pleaded with officials on Sept. 8 in an email seen by The Post.
“All I want to do is be able to breastfeed my baby when I literally have just 10 minutes between/during classes. I’m not asking for much,” she wrote. “I am in an intensive academic program where I’m told attendance is mandatory or my degree will be jeopardized. You have a mother who is willing, able (and frankly desperate) to try and give her baby everything he needs while pursuing an education. I am so disheartened and surprised by the university’s response and the roadblocks placed in my way.”
Neiger, who was valedictorian of Baruch College, said she had previously been permitted to bring her son into class by two professors. In an email seen by The Post, one even reminisced about bringing her own young kids to class while she was a law student.
The mom, who said she needs to have immediate access to her son, said that an official had previously suggested two public spaces for him and the nanny to wait for her: one play space in Union Square, another neighborhood entirely; and a public library .8 miles away.
But Neiger said she was uncomfortable with the nanny and her tiny tot traipsing around the crime-ridden Greenwich Village to pass time until she could meet them. “I don’t want my baby in random places in Manhattan, especially in a neighborhood riddled with crime,” she said.
“All I want to do is breastfeed my child at the door of the school,” Neiger told The Post. “I’m grateful to NYU for allowing my baby in. It was a relief to have him close by today on campus.”
https://nypost.com/2022/09/16/mom-wins-fight-against-nyu-to-allow-banned-baby-on-campus/
*******************************************************GOP welcomes end to ‘disastrous’ policy of masking Head Start toddlers
Republicans on Friday welcomed a decision by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to drop a mandate for kids as young as two at Head Start preschool and daycare centers.
"I hope these reports are true that Secretary Becerra is finally ceding to commonsense and will lift the federal mandate that forces certain toddlers to wear face masks on the playground," Senate Minority Whip John Thune, R-S.D., told Fox News Digital. "I’ve been fighting this government overreach since the very beginning. This decision is long overdue."
"Head Start's mask mandates would have continued to hinder the education and social development of nearly a million children from disadvantaged communities," Rep. Michael Cloud, R-Texas, told Fox News Digital. "Finally we're seeing one small step away from virtue signaling and a step toward actual science. I'm glad to see the Biden administration reverse course on their disastrous policy and finally unmask American children."
An HHS spokesperson confirmed to Fox News Digital Friday that it will remove its COVID mask mandate to align with CDC guidelines. The Hill first reported the move.
"Today, the Office of Head Start (OHS) notified programs that, in the near future, it intends to publish a final rule that will formally remove the requirement for universal masking in Head Start programs for all individuals ages 2 and older, which will align Head Start program masking requirements more closely with the updated Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidance," the HHS spokesperson said.
"OHS has not monitored mask use at Head Start programs since February 2022, following updated recommendations from CDC," the spokesperson added. "OHS will continue to not evaluate compliance with the mask requirement during monitoring visits. This applies to all Head Start programs."
The HHS spokesperson did not address a question from Fox News Digital about whether Head Start will continue to require staff to be vaccinated.
The shift came just days after Republicans in both the House and the Senate called on the Biden administration to rescind the mask mandate.
Thune and Health Education Labor and Pensions Committee Ranking Member Richard Burr, R-N.C., led a group of senators asking the administration to roll back both mask and vaccine mandates. Republicans on the House Oversight Committee, where Cloud is a senior member, led a similar letter.
"Numerous studies have shown it is detrimental to children to be continually subjected to mask-wearing; children learning how to speak, interact socially, and interpret the world around them at early ages have the most to lose from this mask policy developmentally, economically, and educationally," the House lawmakers wrote.
The National Head Start Association, which says it's the "central association for the Head Start workforce," also lauded the decision to roll back the mask mandate Friday.
"The Head Start community is grateful for today’s announcement that finally gives us the clarity we have been seeking. It will go a long way to allow programs to do what they do best in a safe, healthy, and community-driven manner," the group said in a press release. "We appreciate the Administration’s work to restore the local authority that is vital to programs and their ability to serve as many low-income children and families as possible."
The HHS decision comes near the start of the third full school year of the post-COVID era, which finds children and parents grappling with the effects of masking, shutdowns, virtual learning and learning loss.
"Prior to the pandemic, two thirds of students in the U.S. didn’t read at grade level anyway," Erika Sanzi, director of outreach at Parents Defending Education and a former educator, told Fox News Digital this week. "Things were bad already. Now, the house is on fire more than it already was."
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/gop-welcomes-end-disastrous-policy-masking-head-start-toddlers
*************************************************************My High School’s ‘Antiracist’ Agitprop
I was educated in the school district ranked by Niche.com as America’s third-best. Immigrants from around the world come to Great Neck, N.Y., to raise their children. My best friend’s father was at the Tiananmen Square massacre. My classmates left behind their families in El Salvador. My mother escaped revolutionary Iran, and my grandfather escaped the Nazis.
Lately, though, the area’s diverse and liberal-minded residents may have reason to think their local school officials aren’t as open-minded as they thought. In 2021 Great Neck North High School directed the student government to give $375 of student funds to a “racial equity” group to speak to the student body about “systemic racism.” I was the student government’s treasurer, and I felt we didn’t know enough about the organization and its mission to disburse the funds. So I refused to sign the check.
In response, the teachers who advise the student government berated, bullied and insulted me at our next meeting, which took place over Zoom for my parents to overhear. They began by announcing that my social studies teacher would be present. Together, the three adults told me that the principal himself found my stance “appalling.” I had made them and the school “look bad,” they told me. One teacher said the situation gave her “hives.”
When I suggested that students might not need or want a lecture on systemic racism, my social-studies teacher asked whether I’d also oppose a Holocaust survivor’s presentation.
I objected to that comparison, but she cut me off: “If you’re not on board with systemic racism, I have trouble with that, girlfriend.”
When I didn’t back down, she made a bizarre accusation: “The fact that you think slavery is debatable . . .”
I logged off Zoom and started crying. My parents comforted me, and I decided I wasn’t going to sign that check.
That’s when I noticed how illiberal my liberal high school had become. I once expressed disagreement with the narrative of the “1619 Project,” and that same social-studies teacher snapped that I was opposed to hearing other perspectives. I had signed up for her class because it was described as “discussion-based,” but certain discussion seemed forbidden.
Later, a friend showed me a lesson from his English class—a Google Slides presentation urging that students pledge to work “relentlessly” in the “lifelong process” of “antiracism.” According to these slides, America is a place where racism is “no better today than it was 200 years ago.” I disagreed but didn’t mind the debate. Yet this wasn’t about debate: Immigrant children were being told to “pledge” to defend a view many of them don’t hold.
I doubt students could have comfortably objected in class. The lesson pre-empted criticism by imputing to them “white fragility,” which means they “close off self-reflection,” “trivialize the reality of racism,” and “protect a limited worldview.” The adult presenting this accusatory material was a teacher who had the power to grade them and affect their prospects of getting into college.
When parents caught wind of this presentation, their group chats exploded: “I feel like I live under a rock.” “I did not realize the extent of this at all.” “If you too are troubled by this, join us at the upcoming school board meeting.”
I decided to tell the school board about my treatment at the hands of teachers and school officials. I was nervous but I made my case. The response, to my shock, was a standing ovation. I also received many expressions of support from fed-up parents, from teachers who silently abhorred their one-sided “professional development” courses, and from students who had been punished by administrators for questioning the orthodoxy of systemic racism. (One of those students had been sent to the principal’s office for refusing to sign an “antihate” pledge.)
That experience prompted me and a few like-minded others to look into our school’s curriculums. What we found was an arsenal of lopsidedly race-obsessed lesson plans. One was about the American Psychological Association’s “Apology to People of Color” for its role in “Promoting, Perpetuating, and Failing to Challenge Racism.” Another was titled “White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack.” My favorite: “A Critical Race Theory Approach to The Great Gatsby.”
The schools in our district had always followed the guidelines of New York state’s comprehensive social-studies curriculum, which included teaching about the pervasiveness and evils of slavery, mistreatment of Native Americans, discrimination against Chinese immigrants and so on. What we discovered was something else—partisanship and race essentialism, mixed in with administrative intimidation and bullying that our officials refused to address.
District officials responded in the way school officials often do when criticized. They ignored us for as long as possible, then delayed taking action for as long as possible, clearly hoping everybody would forget the controversy and move on. They didn’t respond to my father’s freedom-of-information request until the day before a contentious school-board election. The board then promised to further investigate the curriculums, but we never heard anything after that. My school brought in a member of the state Education Department’s Board of Regents, to discuss curriculums, but that resulted in nothing.
I graduated last spring, but no one has moved on. Students and parents across the country are finally asking tough questions about anti-American curriculums. Immigrants like my mother and grandfather found refuge in America because for all its problems, it’s a wonderful place full of generous and open-minded people. The nation’s schools have a duty to teach students that basic truth.
***********************************
My other blogs: Main ones below
http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)
http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)
http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)
http://australian-politics.blogspot.com/ (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)
http://snorphty.blogspot.com/ (TONGUE-TIED)
*******************************
No comments:
Post a Comment