This is a response from Kathy Witterick to the outcry that followed the Star's story about her baby Storm and the family's decision to keep the baby's gender private.

The bus driver smiled at me, my three children, the snacks that were rolling in all directions and the grocery bags hung too heavy on the back of the stroller. As always, he said, “You got everyone?” Then he added, “I haven't seen you this week!” I was so relieved. “I'm glad to hear that,” I said.

We went to soccer, played in the park, read books at the library, learned about dinosaurs and observed butterflies that hatched just yesterday from chrysalises in our kitchen. An ordinary day.

My name is Kathy Witterick. I'm shy and idealistic, and my entire career I've worked in abuse and violence prevention. I married a teacher, David Stocker and we have three children. Jazz is 5. Since he was a baby, he's enjoyed colour and texture. At 18 months, he loved to wear wildly striped clothing and when his grandparents took him to get his first pair of shoes, he chose the ones with orange toes and pink flowers on the side. When his brother was born, I joked I'd grow old as a woman in a man's world.

Jazz's love of colour (especially pink) and fabric (especially dresses) continued, and he wanted to grow his hair. The older he became, the more he met with pressure from peers and adults to “act more like a boy.” Jazz remained committed to his own style. I re-read research and studied the approaches of Alfie Kohn, Barbara Coloroso, and Adele Faber to find ways to support him. The firm rule around self-image became: it has to be clean and healthy, but colours and lengths are yours to choose.

When Storm was near arrival, Jazz was listening to "Free to Be You and Me," a gift from a friend. He wondered if people would respond differently if they didn't know the baby's sex. What gifts would they bring? If Storm was a boy, would he be allowed to wear dresses? Pink? There are moments as a parent when you wish your child would bring a different issue to the table — but there it is, plop! — and if you mean what you say about being kind, honouring difference, having an open mind and placing limits thoughtfully, then you better walk the talk. We agreed to keep the sex of our new baby private.

It is true that an infant is still learning to recognize themselves — to look in the mirror and think, ‘hey, that's me!' — and is not ready developmentally to find a place in a gender binary. It is demonstrated in research and the day-to-day world that gender stereotyping causes suffering to both men and women. So surely, we thought, people would understand a 5-year-old's curiosity about why people need to know baby's sex. Last week's events suggest otherwise.

We have received many letters of support that are intelligent, heartfelt, research and experience-based. We've also heard articulate and meaningful concerns. We've witnessed a discussion erupt that could be transformative. It's important to challenge orthodoxies and raise questions, because the discussion that emerges not only “outs” issues (in a rush to pass judgment, people articulate prevailing prejudices and misconceptions), but also has the effect of helping people examine whether they believe the status quo to be the best that we can do.

The strong, lightning-fast, vitriolic response was a shock. These voices demonstrate how much parents are in the world's critical eye — in particular mothers, who are judged, based on little (mis) information and not offered opportunities to grow, learn and be supported and celebrated by the community to raise children.

The psychologist on the Today Show was willing to make strong, unqualified conclusions about a family he had never met, based on (generously) 1 per cent of what there is to know about that family. Will that behaviour help grow healthy children?

Ironically, the idea to keep the baby's sex private was a tribute to authentically getting to know a person by responding to meaningful cues given by the person themselves.

This short letter won't help you to know my family. And to protect our children from the frenzy that we did not anticipate, we have declined over 100 requests for interviews from all over the world, including all-expenses paid trips to New York City to tell our story on American morning television. We have learning to do, parks to visit and butterflies to care for.

But we do feel it's important to correct factual errors in the media. Our attempts to make thoughtful, unconditionally loving choices and provide guidance and structure to our children have been labelled “a social experiment.” It's a moment for people everywhere to scrutinize what they hear and see in the media, because it's quite possibly not true.

I would never tell my children (or anyone) to keep a secret. Secrets are not safe and healthy. I, like many parents, have taught my children that some things are private matters, and when you share them, do so honestly with sensitivity and consideration. If I had to convince my children not to share Storm's sex (which I don't because my children simply are not interested at this point) — I would teach them that someone else's genitals and sense of how they relate to their gender is their private business, to be shared by them or in a context where safety and acceptance are paramount.

Storm will need to understand his/her own sex and gender to navigate this world (the outcry has confirmed it!), but there has never been any question that within our family, the issues of sex/gender and decision-making around it are open for age-appropriate discussion.

In my heart of hearts, I squirm when my son picks a dress from the rack (won't people tease him?), even though I know from experience and research that the argument that children need a binary gender orthodoxy taught to them in order to feel safe is simply incorrect. My children know who they are, through facilitated experience with their world, and I avoid hypocrisy, inaccuracy and exhaustion by saving my energy for non-negotiable limit-setting related to safety, kindness, self-respect, health, fulfilment and fairness.

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

None of my family members are gender-free or genderless. It is true that Jazz has challenged my (and traditional) notions of what boys should wear, look like or do. Jazz has a strong sense of being a boy, and he understands that his choices are not always acceptable to his community. He chooses freely to do them anyway, because he also has learned to respect difference, love himself and navigate the world in a way that is true to his own voice. Kio also self-identifies as a boy, and his choices are different but have an equal amount of 2-year-old integrity.

Storm has a sex which those close to him/her know and acknowledge. We don't know yet about colour preferences or dress inclinations, but the idea that the whole world must know our baby's sex strikes me as unhealthy and voyeuristic. This is what I know — someday soon, Storm will have something to say about it and in the meantime, I'm just listening carefully.