Has anyone seen this court ruling?

[Kate CA]

http://www.alliancedefensefund.org/news/story.aspx?cid=5050

 

Anyone know anything further? This is *super* disturbing to me.

[Renee in NC]

It seems it was a case of the mother wanting to homeschool and the father not wanting her homeschooled? That happened last year in NC as well. I don't know that it has implications outside of that scenario. It also seems from the article that the father did not share the mother's beliefs. That's particularly hard because the child belongs to *both* parents, not just the mother.

[Mrs Mungo]

Did the dad want her in school? Does the dad hold the same religious beliefs?

 

It says:

The parents of the child divorced in 1999.

 

In the process of renegotiating the terms of a parenting plan for the girl, the guardian ad litem involved in the case concluded . . .

 

I'd like to know why the parenting plan was being negotiated and what the dad thought about all of this. Is it something the court arbitrarily decided or is it something that the dad was pushing for?

[wulfbourne]

I don't know. I'm reading through the legal documents right now, and it sounds like it's mostly a parental dispute. I think it's Dad that wants her in public school, and mom wants to continue homeschooling.

 

"Mr. Kurowski testified that he and Amanda both enjoy his parenting time; Amanda particularly enjoys the contact with Mr. Kurowski's other daughter. They rarely discuss religion, although they have, several times in the past. He believes that exposure to other points of view will decrease Amanda's rigid adherence to her mother's religious beliefs, and increase her ability to get along with others and to function in a world which requires some element of independent thinking and tolerance for different points of view".

 

http://www.telladf.org/UserDocs/KurowskiOrder.pdf

 

There is a lot else to read there as well, but that's one of the main points I picked up on. Divorces are messy, and often not fair. One parent can force the other parent to either allow or not allow certain religious things, educational things, vaccinations, etc. It's never fair, and it would be much better for the whole broken family if the parents could sit down and reasonably work things out. Also, the girl is 10 years old, so her opinion should be taken into account as well. I didn't read the whole document, so I don't know for sure if they did or not, but I doubt it because they tend to think of kids as idiots who can't think for themselves. Oh, but wait, that was one of the criticisms, that she didn't have 'independent thinking skills' or something like that. So why would they listen to her.

 

Anyway, I don't think it has implications for homeschooling as a whole, but it doesn't bode well for divorce cases.

[Kate CA]

Did the dad want her in school? Does the dad hold the same religious beliefs?

 

It says:

 

 

 

 

I'd like to know why the parenting plan was being negotiated and what the dad thought about all of this. Is it something the court arbitrarily decided or is it something that the dad was pushing for?

 

Yeah, I don't know if the father wanted her in PS or not. I would like to know why the guardian ad litem was needed. The info in the article does not give much to go on.

[Tutor]

Someone sent me a link to the story earlier today, but I did not see the court documents. I searched HSLDA for info, but nothing was listed on their site, so I sent them an email asking if they thought there would be any implications for other homeschooling families based on the wording of the decision, but I haven't heard back yet.

[Kate CA]

Someone sent me a link to the story earlier today, but I did not see the court documents. I searched HSLDA for info, but nothing was listed on their site, so I sent them an email asking if they thought there would be any implications for other homeschooling families based on the wording of the decision, but I haven't heard back yet.

 

Thanks for doing that! I will look forward to hearing what they have to say.

[kalanamak]

Of note, using the phrase "government-run" instead of the shorter "public" seems to be purposeful and meant to be inflammatory. This makes anything in the article suspect.

[teamturner]

Whether or not the dad wants to discontinue homeschooling or not, what bothers me most is that cases like this might have decisions with wording such as;

 

that the girl "appeared to reflect her mother’s rigidity on questions of faith†and that the girl’s interests “would be best served by exposure to a public school setting†and “different points of view at a time when she must begin to critically evaluate multiple systems of belief...in order to select, as a young adult, which of those systems will best suit her own needs.â€

 

I don't want court cases setting precedents like this even in a divorce case. Who knows what kind of implications it may have down the road to all homeschoolers? These complaints listed here as to the girl's religious beliefs sound very similar to that teacher who wrote this article and also had concerns that homeschooled children were not being taught other religions and thus able to decide for themselves what spiritual path to take.

[Loupelou]

It seems unfortunate that the guardian ad litem who has the responsibility to:

" only job is to represent the minor children's best interests"

 

has arbitrarily decided that despite the fact that all evidence points to this child being well educated and well adjusted, her religious views do not fit in to social "norms" and therefore she must be forcibly integrated into the public school system so that these views can be broadened. That goes for the judge as well.

 

Also, in the briefing it was noted that another counselor mentioned that she "lack some youthful characteristics†- what could that be? Perhaps, she can think for herself, doesn't prattle on about nonsense, has more in her head than the latest gossip going around school?

 

 

What public elementary school teaches religion? How about the religion of the texting god, or the "we only wear AE & Abercrombie", or even "What do you mean you don't have a boyfriend yet, everybody has a boyfriend!!":lol::lol:

 

Okay, I took it too far, but really. It's too bad these parents couldn't figure it out on their own.

 

Hopefully all will be righted. The motion for reconsideration has a few typos:D, but otherwise looks pretty comprehensive. The judge ought to be shaking in her boots anyway, especially when the Constitution is thrown in her face.

[Kate CA]

Of note, using the phrase "government-run" instead of the shorter "public" seems to be purposeful and meant to be inflammatory. This makes anything in the article suspect.

 

What part of "government-run" is incorrect? Public schools absolutely are.

[Kathleen in VA]

What part of "government-run" is incorrect? Public schools absolutely are.

 

Yes, I'm wondering the same thing. And I, too, am wondering how the judge thinks the girl is going to be "taught" other religions in a public school. I thought that teaching religion of any kind was a no-no. Is there a course in her elementary school on comparative religions?? Oh, and while we're at it, why don't they shut down all the parochial schools? Don't they teach just one worldview? Weird!!

[kalanamak]

What part of "government-run" is incorrect? Public schools absolutely are.

 

I did not say incorrect.

[mrsrevmeg]

And I, too, am wondering how the judge thinks the girl is going to be "taught" other religions in a public school. I thought that teaching religion of any kind was a no-no.

 

When my oldest was in public school he was taught about several religions. Not Christianity. In December he would bring home worksheets about Hanukkah and about a Muslim holiday. They were religious in nature. His Christmas worksheets were all about Santa. A friend of mine who is a teacher said St Patrick's Day is her favorite holiday of the school year because they are told specifically they can not teach Christian beliefs at Christmas and Easter, but she is able to slip in under the radar and teach about the Trinity on that day. The school just thinks she just really likes the color green!

[ThatCyndiGirl]

.....they are told specifically they can not teach Christian beliefs at Christmas and Easter, but she is able to slip in under the radar and teach about the Trinity on that day. The school just thinks she just really likes the color green!

 

 

 

And this is exactly why my kids don't go to public school.

 

 

Is that considered a xian thing to do? Sneak around and not follow the rules as long is it fits your purpose? <---not painting all xians with that brush, just asking because it, ya know,....seems to be against the "xian rules", too.

[mommaduck]

And this is exactly why my kids don't go to public school.

 

 

Is that considered a xian thing to do? Sneak around and not follow the rules as long is it fits your purpose? <---not painting all xians with that brush, just asking because it, ya know,....seems to be against the "xian rules", too.

 

Just about any teacher, regardless of faith, will insert some part of their faith in their teaching....intentionally, not intentionally, bluntly, subtly....all because their faith, lack of faith, questioning of faith is part of WHO they are. I've seen this out of Christians, Jewish, Muslims, Atheists, Agnostics...Conservatives, Liberals, Independents, Authoritarians, Hippies....

[anotherclassicmom]

Personally I don't see any reason why you can't teach your children about other religions. I teach my kids about them, and why we disagree with them. I want them to be prepared to hear, and able to defend their own beliefs. Right now I inform them why we believe the way we do, but someday they will have to make it their own. If I can give them the information and tools now, they will hopefully not be fooled later.

 

I am most concerned that this judgment could be used against homeschoolers who teach their children any form of religion.

[Spy Car]

Of note, using the phrase "government-run" instead of the shorter "public" seems to be purposeful and meant to be inflammatory. This makes anything in the article suspect.

 

:iagree:

 

The article seems to be one of those "fair and balanced" type "news" articles (read: it is anything but) than only gives one (distorted) side of the picture, and tries to inflame rather than inform.

 

But these tactics are standard operating procedure on the far-right these days. Sad.

 

Bill

[Catherine]

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Education/Default.aspx?id=659638

 

Wow, I think the first article was just a bit inflammatory in totally neglecting to leave this vital detail out of its article!

[FriedClams]

This is a very, very disturbing ruling. I will be contacting HSLDA with my concerns on Monday. Disturbing.

[Kathleen in VA]

There is another thread on this board about the star of the tv show, Blossom, Mayim Bailik, homeschooling her children. In the interview she mentions that their family is Jewish and that celebrating her faith with her children creates a special bond with them. She is imparting her faith to her children. Although she doesn't specifically state that she is not presenting Islam, Christianity, Buddhism, etc. as equally viable choices for a religion, I can't imagine that she is based on the what she did say about her faith. Should she be required to send her children to public school so they get taught other worldviews? There are huge ramifications to this court ruling. I am appalled. What difference does it make that it is a custody battle. The ruling was not about custody - it was about the education of the girl and it was not based on sound reasoning.

[Elizabeth Conley]

What's really annoying about the cases where courts decide to terminate a child's home schooling is that the cases wouldn't come up if the parents in question weren't so silly.

 

Many of the cases reach the courts due to child neglect or abuse. In this case, it seems that we simply have parents who can't get along. Instead of settling their differences, they demand court room drama to score points against each other.

 

The real casualty of these parents' foolishness is their own child's well being, and potentially the home schooling rights of other families.

 

One wonders why Whiny Dad didn't simply decide to spend more time with his daughter, rather than reduce the time the child spent with her mother. What a jerk! I'm sorry to say that his daughter is probably correct in her assessment that her father loves her less than her mother does. It's pretty obvious that if he loved her he'd engage in a closer relationship with his daughter, rather than trying to prevent her from being educated at home by her mother.

 

As for the mother, what color is the sky on her planet? Didn't she see the risks inherent in having her child attempt to aggressively proselytize everyone in sight, including Dad and the counselor?

 

If Mom lacked common sense, she could have read her Bible. There are times when a bit of discretion can save a lot of trouble.

 

Mathew 10:16 Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.

 

I hope the damage done by this bad court decision can be repaired. HSLDA has worked hard on previous cases where they had to repair the damage of similar court decisions. I wish people would work out their differences outside of court. The ramifications of some bad court decisions is that the rest of us are imperiled by "legislation from the bench". I wonder how much money and time will be expended fixing this mess.

[chiguirre]

It seems it was a case of the mother wanting to homeschool and the father not wanting her homeschooled? That happened last year in NC as well.

 

I remember that case, too. There were some articles complaining about hs rights being infringed. But, when the court documents were made public, it turned out that the mother was a member of a cult and her own parents testified on behalf of the husband in the divorce. I doubt we know enough yet about the NH case to truly form an opinion of how dangerous this decision is to hsing rights in general.

 

ETA: Hey Renee, I just realized you're not a Drama Queen anymore. Congratulations on the name change!

[Alison in KY]

I saw this from a local homeschooling site:

 

New Hampshire Court orders Christian homeschooled girl to attend public school

Pete Chagnon - OneNewsNow - 8/26/2009 4:45:00 PM

 

Updated 8/27/2009 3:00 PM (Central) A Christian homeschool girl in New Hampshire has been ordered into government-run public school for having "sincerely held" religious beliefs -- and the Alliance Defense Fund is troubled by the ruling.

 

The case involves divorced couple Martin Kurowski and Brenda Voydatch and their 10-year-old daughter, Amanda. The couple split in 1999 when they were living in Massachusetts, and the proceedings moved to New Hampshire after Voydatch relocated to that state with her daughter in 2002.

 

Although Voydatch has primary custody over Amanda, both parents agreed to a parenting plan that included joint decision-making responsibility. A court-appointed guardian served as a mediator.

 

A source of contention between the parents has been the mother's decision to home school Amanda since first grade. Amanda's father believes she should be sent to public school, while the mother is adamant about home schooling. Since both parents have failed to reach common ground, the issue moved to the court.

 

The situation was then analyzed by the court-appointed guardian, who made a recommendation to the court. During the evaluation process it was determined that Amanda was excelling in her schooling and used curriculum that was approved by her school district. The curriculum used in her home schooling was created by certified teachers, and Amanda routinely took standardized tests.

 

Furthermore, Amanda attended her local public school to take art, Spanish, and P.E. classes. Her public school instructors also commented on the fact that Amanda was well-rounded in her social skills. But a sticking point arose concerning Voydatch's Christian faith.

 

The court order stated: "According to the guardian ad litem's further report and testimony, the counselor found Amanda to lack some youthful characteristics. She appeard to reflect her mother's rigidity on questions of faith." The guardian noted that during a counseling session, Amanda tried to witness to the counselor and appeared "visibly upset" when the counselor purposefully did not pay attention.

 

The guardian also noted that Amanda's relationship with her father suffered because she did not think he loved her as much as he said he did due to the fact that he refused to "adopt her religious beliefs."

 

According to the court order, the guardian concluded that Amanda's "interests, and particularly her intellectual and emotional development, would be best served by exposure to a public school setting in which she would be challenged to solve problems presented by a group learning situation and...Amanda would be best served by exposure to different points of view at a time in her life when she must begin to critically evaluate multiple systems of belief and behavior."

 

Furthermore the court order states that despite Amanda's mother insisting that her daughter's religious beliefs were her own, "it would be remarkable if a ten-year-old child who spends her school time with her mother and the vast majority of all her other time with her mother would seriously consider adopting any other religious point of view."

 

Although the court noted that it "is extremely reluctant to impose on parents a decision about a child's education," it ruled that Amanda must attend public school.

 

Alliance Defense Fund-allied attorney John Anthony Simmons has filed a motion to reconsider. He says this ruling is dangerous to home schoolers because it will set a precedent for other cases.

 

"Every time you have a court order that uses a wrong standard or misapplies constitutional law, everyone's rights are eventually at stake," the attorney explains. "Because what happens with precedent is it gets expanded -- it gets cited in other cases."

 

Simmons believes this case goes beyond the initial divorce and custody battle with this ruling because the standard used in the decision contained in the court order is troubling. He contends that the child's religion should not have played a role in the decision, and that the court should have focused solely on the academic merits of Amanda's education which proved to be excellent.

[PiCO]

I searched HSLDA for info, but nothing was listed on their site, so I sent them an email asking if they thought there would be any implications for other homeschooling families based on the wording of the decision, but I haven't heard back yet.

 

The HSLDA does not get involved in custody issues. I'm pretty sure even if you're a member they won't help you out in these cases.

 

I'm interested in hearing what they have to say about this issue.

[Kate CA]

What's really annoying about the cases where courts decide to terminate a child's home schooling is that the cases wouldn't come up if the parents in question weren't so silly.

 

Many of the cases reach the courts due to child neglect or abuse. In this case, it seems that we simply have parents who can't get along. Instead of settling their differences, they demand court room drama to score points against each other.

 

The real casualty of these parents' foolishness is their own child's well being, and potentially the home schooling rights of other families.

 

One wonders why Whiny Dad didn't simply decide to spend more time with his daughter, rather than reduce the time the child spent with her mother. What a jerk! I'm sorry to say that his daughter is probably correct in her assessment that her father loves her less than her mother does. It's pretty obvious that if he loved her he'd engage in a closer relationship with his daughter, rather than trying to prevent her from being educated at home by her mother.

 

As for the mother, what color is the sky on her planet? Didn't she see the risks inherent in having her child attempt to aggressively proselytize everyone in sight, including Dad and the counselor?

 

If Mom lacked common sense, she could have read her Bible. There are times when a bit of discretion can save a lot of trouble.

 

Mathew 10:16 Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.

 

I hope the damage done by this bad court decision can be repaired. HSLDA has worked hard on previous cases where they had to repair the damage of similar court decisions. I wish people would work out their differences outside of court. The ramifications of some bad court decisions is that the rest of us are imperiled by "legislation from the bench". I wonder how much money and time will be expended fixing this mess.

 

I agree with you, Elizabeth! I shudder to think about the ramifications for many many families due to this kind of case.

[Kate CA]

What difference does it make that it is a custody battle. The ruling was not about custody - it was about the education of the girl and it was not based on sound reasoning.

 

I know - that is what concerns me too. Where is the logic if this is only about her education?

[kalanamak]

I know - that is what concerns me too. Where is the logic if this is only about her education?

 

 

Seems like this is about religion, not education, but that school is the vehicle the dad is trying to use to give his daughter a broad enough view of the world she doesn't feel it is her way or the highway. I'd be troubled by a 10 year old (probably) parroting the custodial parent about how I didn't love her adequately because I wouldn't embrace her religion.

 

IME, such things are complex beyond newspaper level, and I withhold judgment.

[Erica in PA]

Wow, I can't believe this!!!! But I shouldn't be surprised.. it is the natural progression of post-modern thinking that has permeated our society for the past decade. A child shouldn't be raised with one particular worldview... it takes exposure to all kinds of belief systems (i.e. and preferably no strongly held religious belief at all) to make a whole, healthy person. Any belief system is okay as long as it doesn't claim exclusivity. Blah, it honestly makes me sick. I certainly hope this mother is able to continue homeschooling. I'd move if necessary. I'm so glad that we do homeschool, and that this twisted society isn't in charge of my kids every day to force them to conform their post-modern propaganda.

[Erica in PA]

:iagree:

 

The article seems to be one of those "fair and balanced" type "news" articles (read: it is anything but) than only gives one (distorted) side of the picture, and tries to inflame rather than inform.

 

But these tactics are standard operating procedure on the far-right these days. Sad.

 

Bill

 

Well here's a copy of the brief filed in the case, if you're having trouble getting past the viewpoint of that particular writer, and are interested in the substance of the particular case being discussed:

 

http://www.telladf.org/UserDocs/KurowskiBrief.pdf

[mommaduck]

It sounds as though the court went about this in the wrong manner. The argumentation of "need to be exposed to other faiths" trespasses on the rights of the parent and freedom of religion. However, we are dealing with two parents that do not agree on faith. The argumentation should have been made for the rights of BOTH parents to be considered. The father has every right to make his argumentation for or against faith or particular faith during his time with his daughter. The claims of the child are that he is not making time for her, but doesn't want her mother having such a majority amount of time or influence on her either. The court SHOULD be looking at the amount of time he is spending with his daughter, directing him that if he wants to be heard and influence his daughter that he should be spending more time with her, not advocating that she be "doled out". She is ALREADY participating in public school and with public schooled peers. Public school does not mean she will lose her zeal for her faith. This appears to be more of a "I don't want to spend time with her, but I don't want her mother to spend so much time with her either so I don't look like the bad guy/or/want to hurt her mother/hurt her and her mother's relationship.

[Tree House Academy]

That is nothing new. When mother and father disagree on homeschooling, the result (decision by the court) is generally in the way of sending the child to public school. When the girl is older, she can thank her FATHER for that! :(

[chiguirre]

I just read the brief and I found the arguments don't really address the issue at hand. It seems to be arguing the case as though the mother's parental rights were being infringed upon by the state instead of being of being limited by the parental rights of the father. This isn't a case of NH forcing a girl to be enrolled in ps because the state considers her religious education too limiting, it's a case of her father being concerned that she's not able to discern when and where it's appropriate to witness to someone which will certainly impact her ability to get along in society.

 

This case doesn't impact the general right to hs and the general right to hs doesn't give one divorced parent the right to hs in the face of the opposition of the other parent.

[mommaduck]

I just read the brief and I found the arguments don't really address the issue at hand. It seems to be arguing the case as though the mother's parental rights were being infringed upon by the state instead of being of being limited by the parental rights of the father. This isn't a case of NH forcing a girl to be enrolled in ps because the state considers her religious education too limiting, it's a case of her father being concerned that she's not able to discern when and where it's appropriate to witness to someone which will certainly impact her ability to get along in society.

 

This case doesn't impact the general right to hs and the general right to hs doesn't give one divorced parent the right to hs in the face of the opposition of the other parent.

 

This is something that generally comes with age and maturity. How many of us as young adults, new to a faith, etc have zealously shared our views with anyone within ear reach. She is already taking public school courses at a public school, just not all of her courses. She is already dealing with peers socially. She is already having these experiences that she will learn from. The rest is simple immaturity. I still believe this is a tug o war between father and mother.

[Erica in PA]

It seems to be arguing the case as though the mother's parental rights were being infringed upon by the state instead of being of being limited by the parental rights of the father. This isn't a case of NH forcing a girl to be enrolled in ps because the state considers her religious education too limiting, it's a case of her father being concerned that she's not able to discern when and where it's appropriate to witness to someone which will certainly impact her ability to get along in society.

 

 

 

I disagree with this... though the case began with that objection from her father, it was the state of NH who ruled that this girl should be forced to go to public school *because* she was not exposed to enough different religious beliefs. That is not the court's place to make such a ruling, as the brief indicates.