We don't need 67-year-old teachers

Thank you for your April 24 and 27 articles on pensions. It was clear and unbiased reporting on a very controversial and difficult subject.

I taught for 28 years in Bensenville and have been retired for many years. I am very grateful to receive my almost $4,000 check every month. I do not receive Social Security because I never paid into it, and I do not receive my late husband's social security because my pension is too high. I feel I have earned this money.

As you pointed out, it is not just the taxpayers who fund our pensions. Some of the money comes from the district and some came from my pocket. In my last few years of teaching I was putting a lot of my salary into the pension system. I have a Master's Degree and I spent many summers taking courses to upgrade my skills.

The future of our country depends, in large part, on the education of our children. For that we need competent, caring, dedicated individuals in the classroom and in the administrative positions also. We don't need 67-year-old people teaching our children. Spend a few hours in a classroom and I think you will understand why most people of that age would not have the vitality, perseverance or patience - especially in the elementary grades.

We need assurance that when we have proven our worth, we will receive a decent salary followed by a decent pension. We don't need a legislature that finds many other places to put the money that was promised to the pension fund.

I am sad for the children who will not get to be engineers or doctors or scientists because our nation forgot that our children are our most important resource and didn't provide the necessary environment for maximum learning.

Charlene Sebert

Carol Stream