A Letter To The Commissioner
Donald Stover, clinical psychologist with 45 years' experience serving
Maine's public schools, wrote the following letter of refusal to
Commissioner Albanese. His only regret is that he was not more vocal last
year, but felt that to speak out publicly against the law might jeopardize
the necessary trust that one in his position--dealing with abused
children--must have unequivocably to remain effective. Now of course he
can no longer serve such children within the schools of Maine. And so
mounts the toll of this misguided law.
June 29, 2000
J. Duke Albanese, Commissioner
Department of Education
23 State House Station
Augusta, ME 04333-0023
Re: certificate renewal
Dear Dr. Albanese:
I am a clinical psychologist with over 45 years experience in education and
human services in four states. I received a Maine Psychology License in 1972,
and I have held a certificate as a School Psychological Service Provider
for as long as that certification has been required. Since 1972 I have
provided psychological consultation to at least 6 different Maine school
districts.
Much of my professional training and experience has involved work with
physically and sexually abused children. Early in my career I was a child
protective worker in the State of Delaware. I have been a research director
in a residential treatment center for seriously disturbed children. I have
published research concerning child and family treatment. I have taught in
university
departments of Psychiatry and of Education, and at two of Maine's
prestigious small colleges. I have been a consultant to the Department of
Human Services where I frequently work on cases involving seriously abused
children, and I have been called as an expert witness in District Courts.
In my career I have dealt with a number of situations where a child was
sexually abused by a teacher or other school staff. In none of those cases
would the present Maine law about fingerprinting and background checks have
prevented the abuse. In all of those cases, appropriate professional
supervision of the
personnel involved would most likely have prevented the abuse.
I find the current law requiring fingerprinting to be personally offensive and
abusive of my civil liberties. While this law may appease hysterical
thinking about child sexual abuse, it is unlikely to help any children. In
point of fact, as a group, teachers are virtually devoid of sexual abusers,
and have been responsible for the appropriate identification of children
who are at risk of abuse. The fingerprinting law is denigrating to those
who work in schools in that it strongly implies that such persons are not
to be trusted. Further, fingerprinting opens the door to other civil
liberties abuses that could seriously threaten the kinds of academic
freedoms that are essential to a good school system.
At no time in my career have my professional qualifications, judgment,
actions or personal character been subject to question. I cannot in good
conscience as an American citizen or a professional psychologist submit to
fingerprinting to maintain my school certificate.
Sincerely,
Donald O. Stover, Ph.D.