I currently have three children at Sandusky High School, and am glad all levels are wearing uniforms. I'm not a "well-off parent". It's true students are aware of "socio-economic differences" referred to in an earlier letter. It's also true that clothing everyone the same does not change their last name, address, personality, athletic ability, social or financial status. Put that Wal-Mart polo on a student that has money, and put that designer one on a poorer child -- and you'll notice no difference, either.
Things are expensive if you choose to shop stores that sell items for more money, whether uniform polos or jeans or anything else. Uniforms are an excuse for wealthy parents to spend less? Really? Why do they have to buy pricier stuff? "Parenting responsibility" has everything to do with teaching children not to judge or label because of an address or last name -- or where they shop -- and nothing to do with feeling "obliged" to spend more or less.
Anonymity is not a concern. I see basic colors, not sameness. Requiring uniforms is not taking away a freedom. In fact those same troops fighting for our freedom proudly wear the uniform representing our country. Should wealthier ones be allowed -- or feel obliged -- to wear "better" clothes? Do policemen and firemen feel 'glibly and unnecessarily' forced to dress the same? Dressing appropriately is a life skill ALL need to learn and respect. Another life skill they -- and many adults -- need to learn is that you can't always just do what you want.
I'd wager that there are no problems at SHS not found in any other school. "Bridging socioeconomic differences between students, saving families money, and creating an environment more conducive to learning" -- that's a bad thing?