by Wendy Morgan

Created on: September 07, 2009   Last Updated: September 08, 2009

The constitution of the United States of America grants the freedom of speech to any citizen and non-citizen. The President is simply using the same guaranteed freedoms the rest of the nation has. The difference between the President and the rest of the country is that he is guaranteed a medium because of his place in power.

While the President has a right to give a televised speech to school children, parents also have rights. Parents have the right to choose what their children listen to and are subject to. Parents have the right to interject, disagree and share their opinion with their children. Parents are allowed to agree or disagree with the President, and based on their own opinion, can choose to have their children participate or not in viewing the televised speech.

While there is no disagreement for me about whether or not anyone can give a televised speech, the controversy of this particular speech has intricacies that should be addressed to further spur the debate of appropriateness. Whether you agree with the policies of the President or not, personal preference for leadership should be put aside and take a moment to consider a few aspects the speech brought into the spotlight.

First, subject matter needs to be addressed. The bulk of the President's speech will focus on the importance of staying in school and working hard. Children should be given the message of the benefits of staying in school and working hard. It should come from all levels, including parents and teachers. Having the President reinforce the message is a great way to reinforce the message. Having the leader of the United States discuss the importance of education should inspire struggling students and reaffirm the choices of solid students.

Part of the speech will focus on what school-aged children can do for the President. Lesson plans provided to schools from the White House include the children writing letters about what they can do for the President. As a nation, we should support the office of President as a show of respect; that does not include blindly following. As citizens, we can use our own Constitutional rights to agree or disagree with him. The issue with this portion of the speech is that by focusing on the individual in the role of the President, rather than the office and duties of the President, the lesson veers away from civics and begins leaning toward adoration for the individual. To make the lesson more appropriate, the lesson should focus on the position of the President, not on the President.

When the speech was originally announced, it was mandatory for viewing by the children. The response was not what was hoped for by the White House and the rapidly backpedalled and offered an "invitation" for viewing the speech. It has always been difficult to navigate the fine line of personal freedoms, but mandatory attendance at a politician's speech (regardless of title) does cross the line of inappropriate.

It is important for the President to communicate with the citizens of this nation. However, it is important for the message to be appropriate, voluntary and, when addressing children, non-political. To maintain an appropriate balance, the speech should not focus on individual leaders, but individual responsibilities that will help the nation as a whole.

Sources:

www.drudgereport.com

www.ed.gov

www.ft.com

Learn more about this author, Wendy Morgan.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.