Parents told they must stop HS'ing

I was thinking about this very thing earlier (because of this thread). And I realized that unless I loved my children dearly, the thought of being around them 24/7 would drive me batty. lol. If I was a neglectful parent, I'd send them away for 8 hours a day.

[btw, I am in NO WAY saying that sending children is neglect, just that it's a convenient way to ignore your children if that's what you want to do. I hope this is coming across right.]

 

Interesting point.

 

For those interested there's a blog by a Christian homeschooling mom called Principled Discovery and she has a post that explores this issue a little more and talks about the implications of this for homeschoolers in California.

 

Thanks for the link.

 

The ruling is disturbing and the wording will hopefully be remedied quickly, but the WND article is a crock. Here is a bit more background including the longstanding issues of abuse.
http://madisonamps.org/2008/03/02/knee-jerks/

 

I could be completely wrong here, but it seems the original reason the parents were brought into court were not relevant. It appears there were allegations of abuse and during the investigation, it was discovered they were homeschooling and were brought to court on this. The Superior court apparently found that their education was poor but that since homeschooling was protected by the constitution there was nothing they could do.

The decision by the appellate court only talks about this in a cursory fashion and I don't know the details. Instead, the opinion states,

"In this decision we consider whether parents can legally "home school" their children.​

And the answer is "no." Not that these parents cannot homeschool, but that parents cannot homeschool unless they are certified or hire a certified tutor. Additionally they say:

Additionally, the Turner court rejected, and noted that courts in other states also rejected, the notion that parents instructing their children at homes come within private full-time day school exemption in then section 16624 (now section 48222). The court stated that a simple reading of the statutes governing private schools and home instruction by private tutors shows the Legislature intended to distinguish the two, for if a private school includes a parent or a private tutor instructing a child at home, there would be no purpose in writing separate legislation for private instruction at home.​

I wish that this case didn't come to light with a family which is apparently having other problems. But the court's decision seems to deal directly with homeschooling as a practice rather than in this specific case.

I really hope I am wrong about that, but I read the court case before the WND article and I don't see any other way to read it.

 

The original case had charges of educational neglect in addition to the abuse/neglect charges. Evidently that is a common charge to add on in abuse cases. The appeals judge that heard the case went off on homeschooling for some unknown reason. What he did was bizarre and potentially damaging to hs'ing in CA. There are legal remedies being discussed and I think it will be addressed soonl. I just think WND does hs'ing a disservice by portraying this family as a typical hs'ing familiy being unfairly persecuted. The judge stepped out of bounds, but the family was in court to begin with due to their long history of abuse and neglect.

 

I agree about WND. : )

I don't know the case history...only what was written in the decision. It seems from there that there was an allegation of abuse and that is where they discovered the family homeschooling. At that point they went to court, where the court found that their hmeschooling, however poor, was constitutionally protected.

I don't know...that is just the way the decision reads to me.

 

Here's HSLDA's comments, as well as the court's decision. This is a VERY serious situation. And I think they have been waiting for a person they felt they could "legitimately" take on. I've read the abuse reports, and don't see any evidence given to support it. That's NOT to say it hasn't taken place, but it seems to me that the daughter Rachel is being rebellious, and the courts are letting her. If abuse has taken place, the parents need to be held accountable. But if NOT, the courts have no right to interfere.

http://www.hslda.org/hs/state/ca/200803030.asp

 

If you belong to HSLDA you're getting emails from them and some have been on this topic. They state that they did not know anything about this until after the decision was handed down and now they are busily trying to unwind this and correct the damage that has been done. I sure hope that they can.

 

Court records are here: http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cach.../B192601.DOC+JD00773&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us

How is homeschooling is protected by the constitution? Children have a right to an education and parents have the right to instruct their children in their religious beliefs but homeschooling is not addressed.

One more thing about this is that California hs no provision for homeschoolers. There is nothing in the law about them. There is a private school loophole but frankly, it seems to me the HSLDA or state homeschooling situations perhaps should have seen something like this coming awhile ago had should have been lobbying for much clearer legislation long before this.

 

Another good blog post on the matter...California Update

 

Well, Dawn, I agree that they SHOULD have seen it coming. but what happens here when someone brings up an issue about what might happen to HS'ing in the future? There's always a good group that says, "Oh, but it could NEVER happen HERE!!! We're too strong!" No, we're not! The government is slowly being taken away from the people, and the Powers that Be make all decisions FOR us. I honestly don't think I will legally be able to hs my youngest through all twelve grades.

 

That's a really good point!

I think that brings up a good point about stayng aware and in touch with state groups. I'm specifically mentioning state groups because they really, more then the HSLDA often is, are the ones on the ground helping to shape legislation and lobby for change.

Which makes a problem for me. I haven't joined a provincial organization...I probably should.

 

The state organization (CHEO) really does work hand-in-hand with HSLDA. I don't think either could be as effective without the other. CHEO will get wind of something, and will contact HSLDA. CHEO and HSLDA both work to contact whoever needs to be contacted, but then HSLDA has the legal clout to write up briefs, etc.

 

I found this statement interesting... so I did a little poking around.... which led me to something even MORE interesting. The following is copied from an article written in 2002:


The State of California is warning parents that they cannot educate their children at home without acquiring a professional teaching credential.

...legal defenders of home-based education argue that "home-schooling" is not even mentioned in California law and is legal under a statute that allows any parent to operate a "private school," even if the student body amounts to one.

Nevertheless, on July 16, the California education department issued a memo that stated:

"In California, home-schooling – a situation where non-credentialed parents teach their own children, exclusively, at home whether using correspondence courses or other types of courses – is not an authorized exemption from mandatory public school attendance."

This is pure deception, contends home-school legal advocate Roy Hanson, director of the Lincoln, Calif.-based Private and Home Educators of California.

"One of the things the school district obviously is trying to do is use this to frighten people into joining the public school program," he said.

The memo, printed on the stationery of state Superintendent of Public Instruction Delaine Eastin, informed local educators of a new procedure that private schools must use to excuse their students from public school attendance. Private schools are required to file an affidavit for that purpose between Oct. 1 and Oct. 15 each year. The new method allows them to file via the Internet, directly with the state office.

The July 16 memo's reference to home-schooling continues:

"Furthermore, a parent's filing of the affidavit required of a private school does not transform that parent into a private school. Therefore, those parents who home-school their children are operating outside the law, and there is no reason for them to file an affidavit."

Michael Smith, president of the Home School Legal Defense Association in Virginia, is amazed by the state's position.

"It's really absurd when you think about it," he said, "because California, supposedly this forward state, would be the only state in the union that would require home-schoolers to be certified teachers."

The state's interpretation of the law has been communicated in various ways for about 10 years and is designed "to intimidate people not to home-school," said Karen Taylor, president of the California Homeschool Network

In spite of the July memo, according to Taylor, home-schooling families will continue this year as usual.

"They can say anything they want to, but the law has not changed," she said. "That is the important thing."

But the memo is being taken seriously by local education administrators.

The San Diego County Office of Education sent a letter Aug. 2 to "private school administrators" – which includes home-schooling families – informing them of "recent and urgent information" regarding the filing of private school affidavits. The fourth paragraph directs their attention to the July 16 memo's warning about home-school instruction.

The San Diego County letter concludes that, "As a result, non-credentialed parents who have home-schooled their children in the past can no longer file affidavits."

Without an affidavit, the letter warns, "your child will be considered truant."

Enclosed with the letter was a list of area programs with "credentialed home-school teachers that can assist you with your home schooling efforts." These are home-school programs conducted with oversight from the local public school district, said Smith, including charter schools and independent study cooperatives.

Hanson said, however, that on Thursday he and other home-school defenders received assurances from a new attorney with the Department of Education, Roger Wolfertz, that the state must accept an affidavit from any parent who desires to teach at home. Wolfertz made that clarification at a meeting of the California State School Attendance Review Board, an advisory body to the superintendent of public instruction.

Will home-schooling families in California be informed that despite the July 16 memo and other communiqués, they can file their affidavits as usual and continue homeschooling?

"We don't expect that," said Jim Davis, legislative liaison for Hanson's group.

Have California parents been deliberately misinformed by the state regarding the legality of home-schooling?

"I would go so far as to say this, they probably have been deceived in the past, and they're being even more deceived now," said Hanson.

The California Homeschool Network's Taylor agrees that the state has been putting out false information "to intimidate people not to home-school." She speculates that the motivation is money.

Hanson explained that funds are allotted according to how many students are enrolled. Each school-age child that does not enroll in the local public school represents lost potential income of $4,000 to $6,000.

California home-school legal defender Gary Kreep, president of the U.S. Justice Foundation in Escondido, near San Diego, agrees that funding is a motivation for rejecting home-schooling, but also believes that some officials don't like home-schoolers because they are independent thinkers.

Home-school watchers in California say recently retired Department of Education attorney Carolyn Pirillo, deputy counsel to the superintendent, was the primary influence behind the state's insistence that home-schooling by parents without a teaching certificate is illegal.

Department of Education communications coordinator Nicole Winger told WorldNetDaily she was not prepared to comment on the state's position on home-schooling but believes the July 16 memo stating that it is not legal without certified teachers "speaks for itself."

The U.S. Justice Foundation's Kreep said his group and others, including the Homeschool Legal Defense Association, are discussing what to do about California's threat to home-schooling.

Kreep said he is concerned that the state will crack down on home-schoolers en masse unless pre-emptive action is taken.

"If we wait for an attack where they are going after homeschoolers in 15 or 16 different counties at the same time, there are not going to be enough resources to fight that," he said.

Kreep noted that he has been involved in the legal defense of some home-schooling families against school districts. But so far, according to Smith, California generally has not enforced its stated position on home-schooling.

"Most school districts don’t have the time or stomach to do it," Smith said. "They kind of figure well, if these kids are being educated we've got bigger fish to fry. And district attorneys, city attorneys don't see this as a high priority."

But Smith emphasized, "It's not because the state hasn't tried. They have, they've tried to get impetus in prosecutions. They just haven't gotten it."

The Homeschool Association of California – which calls the state's interpretation of the education law "fatally flawed" – is convinced that any court hearing a case against a home-schooling family would have to rule in the family's favor.

But the association advises home-schooling families and their friends to not wage a campaign of phoning, letter-writing and e-mailing, believing "these actions can have a very serious negative effect."

"In all likelihood," the group's statement said, "these officials sincerely believe they are correct ... . We think it unlikely that they will revisit their interpretation of the law because hundreds of citizens who aren't lawyers tell them they’re bad and wrong. To the contrary, it will only make them mad. We have seen several instances where this public pressure has, in fact, made things turn out worse for the families involved."

Taylor said her California Homeschool Network has no plans at the moment to challenge the state.

"I think it might be premature to have legal action now," she said. "Those of us in California plan on continuing to home-school, so we will be filing as we always have. We will not back down."

 

I hope it gets overturned too, I just received this in my email.....
California parents without teaching credentials can no longer home school their children, according to a recent state appellate court ruling.
“Parents do not have a constitutional right to home school their children,” Justice H. Walter Croskey wrote in a Feb. 28 opinion for the 2nd District Court of Appeals. Noncompliance could lead to criminal complaints against the parents, Croskey said.

This is just a portion of the article from the Bakersfield News site. I really hope and pray that this is overturned.

 

Laja656,

Interesting quote. Here's another one from HSLDA's Michael Donnelly...this was at an event hosted by German homeschoolers fighting for educational liberty over there:

Another political approach may be to use the existing laws and try to apply other creative approaches to allowing Homeschooling. For example--in California, the most populated state in America, Homeschooling is technically illegal. Why do I sat that when there are more than 150,000 people in CA alone who do homeschool? It is because they do it under the private school regulations--there is no homeschool law or exception in CA. Californians simply register as a private school under existing California private school law. Now this may or may not be possible in some German state. But it may be possible in others especially if you can gain the cooperation of government officials in the ministries of education.​

It seems to me at least there is a recognition here that homeschoolers were operating under a loophole they knew could be closed. As to why they didn't try? There is always the problem of it backfiring. HSLDA is not all-powerful and they have much more established "enemies" with more money and a larger membership, not to mention the fact that most Americans do still think there should be tighter restrictions on homeschooling.

 

I'm sorry I can't post links here but if you are curious about the speech, I will link to it in my post for tonight on my blog. : )

 

I'm looking forward to it! (And if you keep posting, you'll soon be able to post links! :wink