March 6, 2008...4:49 pm
NO RIGHT TO HOMESCHOOL
This ruling should send chills down the spines of anyone who supports the right of parents to teach their children at home.
The 2nd Court of Appeals in Mexifornia has ruled that parents who homeschool their children must be credentialed, licensed teachers.
Parents who lack teaching credentials cannot educate their children at home, according to a state appellate court ruling that is sending waves of fear through California’s home schooling families.
Advocates for the families vowed to appeal the decision to the state Supreme Court. Enforcement until then appears unlikely, but if the ruling stands, home-schooling supporters say California will have the most regressive law in the nation.
“This decision is a direct hit against every home schooler in California,” said Brad Dacus, president of the Pacific Justice Institute, which represents the Sunland Christian School, which specializes in religious home schooling. “If the state Supreme Court does not reverse this . . . there will be nothing to prevent home-school witch hunts from being implemented in every corner of the state of California.”
This is the frightening part:
“Parents do not have a constitutional right to home school their children,” wrote Justice H. Walter Croskey in a Feb. 28 opinion signed by the two other members of the district court. “Parents who fail to [comply with school enrollment laws] may be subject to a criminal complaint against them, found guilty of an infraction, and subject to imposition of fines or an order to complete a parent education and counseling program.”
In other words, parents who refuse to comply will be subjected to criminal prosecution and sentenced to mandatory state-ordered counseling and parent re-education camps.
Back in 2006, the 9th Circus Court ruled that the rights of parents stopped at the door of the gummint-run skoolz.
Parents’ rights were not violated when a Southern California elementary school conducted a psychological survey of their children and asked them about sexual feelings and masturbation, a federal appeals court ruled Wednesday.
The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco pointedly refrained from commenting on what the judges termed “the wisdom of … some of the particular questions” that were asked of children in grades one, three and five in the Palmdale School District in Los Angeles County. But the court said parents, while entitled to make basic decisions about a child’s upbringing, have no constitutional right to control what they are taught at school or what questions they are asked.
From Protein Wisdom comes this observation:
First parents are told they have no rights beyond the public school threshold, now they are told they have no right to opt out of government schooling.
Think this doesn’t affect you here in Wisconsin? Think again. Witness the war being waged by the educational elitists against virtual schools and draw the logical extension.
From Darleen’s Place:
No wonder vouchers plans and homeschooling are hated by the Education Elites … it interferes with their Great Social Experimentation on a legally captive audience.
More proof that Mexifornia is the World’s Biggest Bowl of Granola: a collection of fruits, nuts and flakes.
And now fascists as well.
Update: al-LA Times may have gotten the ruling wrong, according to Ace of Spades (H/T to Charlie Sykes).
Read here to see what Ace has to say, but it doesn’t appear to be as bad for homeschoolers as first thought, since most initial commentary was based on the report from al-LA Times.
5 Comments
March 6, 2008 at 6:49 pm
When will people get it. They’re not your children. They’re the STATE’S children. Now sit back, shut up, write the massive check and allow us to show them how to properly have sex when they enter school.
March 7, 2008 at 3:14 am
Rights are not freely granted top-down by some government authority.
It is only when people feel inalienable rights in their bones can they assert them proudly and openly. Parents should not be meek and humble as supplicants and petitioners in face of government heavy handedness.
Parents have choice in how their children are to be educated, publicly, privately, or at home. This ruling in California is so feudal it sticks out as an outrage in a democracy.
Furthermore, it is parents’ duty to educate their children. School laws across the free world state that. Only in totalitarian countries is home education not permitted.
The first School Laws in America (1642) underlie the system to this day: “Universal education of youth is essential to the well-being of the State. The obligation to furnish this education rests primarily upon the parents.”
Parent groups should evolve their own Charter of Parent Rights statements and educate their members about what is decent and proper in this day and age. I am providing a link to such a statement, compiled in 1977 in Canada, and which can serve as a good starting point for others.
I was heavily involved in Home Education causes in the 80’s and do know such statements empower parents to confidently do what is right by their children.
http://www.theschoolsweneed.com/forums/attachments/43.pdf
Tunya Audain
March 7, 2008 at 9:07 am
Well, the only thing I have to say to the nuts, the flakes, the fruits, and the facists is when THEY carry all of my babies 42 weeks, suffer through either a c-section, or NATURAL birth with the nine of them, and nurse them for 18 months afterward, plus work 94+ hours like my husband did … THEN the liberal IDIOTS can tell us what is best for our children. They are ours, and we will raise them with OUR values. I don’t care if you are a homeschooler or not, this should scare the pants off of ANY parent that truly cares about their children. The first step to losing any of your lawful rights, is to allow the court to take away someone else’s lawful rights. Why do non-homeschoolers see this as a “win” for education, I see it as a loss for ALL parents!!!
March 7, 2008 at 5:36 pm
Yes, this California ruling is a loss for ALL parents.
Only when parents see that their duties and rights have been systematically, aggressively, and blatantly usurped by political agendas and power elites will we set the education machine back on track. That is, education systems have to be turned 180 degrees around, back to serving their constituents, not dictating to them. Parents and guardians who CHOOSE to enroll children into public schools are the true constituents, not the multitudes of employees and middle-men who feed off a self-serving system with very few accountability measures. The near monopoly system, with few escapes or choices, makes this current entrapment so much more frustrating.
In the early pioneer days pamphlets were used to educate people about the issues — liberty v obedience to the state or a distant monarchy; slavery v freedom; etc. With our new wonderful Internet possibilities we can now spread our conversations out a lot more easily than in the horse-and-buggy days.
I feel strongly that this one issue — the California ruling saying that only parents who are credentialed teachers can home educate — provides us with a great opportunity to discuss the issues and stimulate a groundswell not only for education reform generally but for the empowerment of individual citizens.
Please consider again my suggestion that the Parents Rights document I mentioned in an earlier comment be used as one such vehicle or statement for circulation, discussion, and greater empowerment of individual citizens.
See Parent Rights and Their Children’s Education:
http://www.theschoolsweneed.com/forums/attachments/43.pdf
What we need in this effort are well-developed statements (beyond our general debates and opinions on blogs) that can be circulated. They should have a Title and well-developed arguments, research, etc. that can be passed around, and printed off, yes as pamphlets. The Parent Rights I mentioned has been printed in pamphlet form since the 70’s.
Are there any other such statements now available that we can pass around for discussion and education?
Tunya Audain
March 11, 2008 at 12:47 am
As a grandmother of the early home education movement in North America, naturally I was concerned about the recent court ruling in California which basically criminalized about 200,000 home schooling parents lacking teaching credentials. Hopefully, if it is not overturned by the Supreme Court, Governor Schwarzenegger has promised legislative remedy: “Parents should not be penalized for acting in the best interests of their children’s education.”
I am very impressed by the extent and depth of feeling and outrage expressed by supporters. But, I am disappointed at the hostility and shallowness of those who are opposed, either out of self-interest (teacher unions) or basic intolerance. (Just Google California home schooling ruling…)
It is because this case even came up in 2008, and because the hostility and threat can be reasserted at any time, that I would like you to read my publication in 1987 which was useful in two ways: 1) to encourage home educators, and 2) to put the education establishment on notice about the legality and imperatives driving this movement. In the article I quote John Holt as saying: “Today freedom has different enemies. It must be fought for in different ways. It will take very different qualities of mind and heart to save it.”
Published in a prestigious educator magazine, it carries weight to this day, often quoted.
My history in home education goes back to 1972 when, after being credentialed from a Teachers College, I traveled with my children to Mexico to study under Ivan Illich of deschooling fame.
There I met with John Holt. He knew I had two young children with me, ages 3 and 5, and asked if I would be enrolling them in school soon. I said I might educate them at home.
He thought this was illegal, but I said I found from my readings at Teachers College that the “otherwise” clause in most Education Acts allowed it.
He then commented that at least I would be qualified to do it, having obtained a teaching certificate. Again, I enlightened him with the fact that this was not a requirement.
He then posed the thoughtful but predictable question about socialization, and we chatted about the various community opportunities available and the negative aspects of socialization that parents wanted to avoid.
His parting comment was: “Smart City!”
Using his mailing list which he used to encourage education reform, he soon embraced home education and in 1975 started a new publication, “Growing Without Schools.
Meanwhile, Dr. Raymond Moore was spreading the word amongst his mainly Christian audience and paid frequent visits to Vancouver, especially when we held Home Learning Fairs.
You can download the 5 page article: Home Education: the third option to see concerns of 20 years ago reappearing today……
http://www.theschoolsweneed.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/ubb/showflat/Number/543/Main/543/#Post543
Leave a Reply