Some words on the article, "Immobilized" which appeared in our Oct. 22 issue.

I was very upset and distraught that a parent would criticize a teacher and school system for trying to help her child stay focused and learn in class.

The article says Samantha Rodriguez was approached by her son's teacher, Ann Sullivan, in front of other parents and stated that she had tried a weighted vest on him. Samantha was "humiliated and near tears." I guess she wasn't that humiliated because now she is telling everyone who reads the Advocate.

What upset me the most was how Samantha perceives weighted vests. I think she thinks of them as a torture device or punishment. These vests are therapeutic tools used for a wide range of children and reasons. The notion that having your child wear a harmless vest for a few minutes a day so he can focus is the same as "tying him to a tree" is ludicrous.

My child and many others that I know have benefited both in and out of school with weighted vests. I think this mom should have had a more open mind and been a little more appreciative of what her son's teacher was trying to do for him. Hats off to Ann Sullivan for attempting to further today's youth.

Beth Thompson
Vernon

I am puzzled as to what the big deal is. To summarize the facts as stated in the article: A mother enrolls her 3-year-old son in West Hartford's highly regarded pre-school program at Aiken (note: there's a long waiting list for this program). She is informed by the teacher that a "weighted vest," an approved and accepted occupational therapy device, had been used on her son the previous day. The mother and grandmother were not happy about this; however, after meeting with Aiken's principal and contacting the assistant superintendent for administration that same day, the situation was quickly resolved by an apology, assurance that the vest would not be used again, and the transfer of the boy to the another pre-school program.

Bottom Line: The system works!

In fact, the grandmother was quoted as stating that the assistant superintendent was fair and resolved the issue in a professional manner. So why did the Advocate feel it necessary to devote a full page to this story?

Unfortunately, since school officials rightfully declined to comment on this issue because of privacy concerns, the article also included a one-sided telling of the story and subjective comments that may or may not have been relevant to the story. As a result, I feel that the Advocate did a disservice to the teacher and to Aiken.

I am the proud father of three African-American boys who attend Aiken and am very pleased by Aiken's principal, teachers and staff. What a shame that the Rodriguez boy will no longer attend school there and have Ms. Sullivan as a teacher.

Gerald F. Murphy
West Hartford

Send letters to editor@hartfordadvocate.com