Would you report a homeschooling family for educational neglect if...

[Mrs Mungo]

If they were inner-city schoolteachers, we would excoriate them, and rightfully so. Why do they get a free pass because they're doing it to their own kids?

 

Except, there wouldn't be rioting in the streets. Forget inner cities. Mostly white, middle-class suburban schools fail students *every day.* it is *untrue* that people throw fits over this fact.

 

I have a friend who was asking me about math programs for her high schooler. Her son attends a top-ranked public school. He was having a lot of trouble in math. He couldn't retake Algebra because he made a D, same with Geometry. They do block scheduling at his school, so he won't have any math at all until next September (or January, if he has math the second semester instead of the first). He they will move him along, not even giving him another chance.

 

I attended a desirable public school and graduated with kids who could not read.

 

In no way am I suggesting that wrong-doings should be ignored. I am *asking*, would you call CPS on a family whose child who was regularly attending public school was 12 and could not read? What do you think the system would *do* about that? Do you believe *those parents* to be guilty of educational neglect? Do you believe the school is guilty of educational neglect? What do you think the system should do at that point? because it happens *all the time*.

 

I am not making a comparison between homeschoolers and the public schools. I saying that I believe homeschooling parents are being held to one standard by some and public school parents are being held to a different standard. Homeschooling educators are being held to one standard by some in this thread while public school educators are being held to a different standard. Nothing is done to the parents of public school kids who cannot read. Nobody calls CPS on them. Nobody calls CPS and accuses a school system of educational neglect. It is not a red herring to urge that the groups be held accountable in a similar manner.

[creekland]

I have a friend who was asking me about math programs for her high schooler. Her son attends a top-ranked public school. He was having a lot of trouble in math. He couldn't retake Algebra because he made a D, same with Geometry. They do block scheduling at his school, so he won't have any math at all until next September (or January, if he has math the second semester instead of the first). He they will move him along, not even giving him another chance.

 

 

This sounds like you are describing my school district, except we're not top ranked on any official list. Locals think it's a good school even though we fall below the average for both our state and the US as a whole. Kids are shortchanged IMO educationally every year.

 

But I digress. The difference between those is a poor ps and those in this thread is the opportunity to learn. In our ps, some kids do well - a few - but technically, all have the opportunity. Student apathy is one of the big reasons many fail. Most can read to some extent. Ditto that with basic math (esp if you add in a calculator) and science. While the levels tend to be lower than I would like, there's something.

 

It sounds like the kids in this thread don't even get the opportunity for a poor education. They appear to be getting next to nothing.

 

I don't think foster care is the best option, but I like thinking that reporting them might help them in the long run because I suspect the state would turn to relatives first (they do here for foster care issues) and it was stated that relatives homeschool in a more normal manner.

 

I think the father here isn't just patriarchal. I think he has severe control issues. It's possible to homeschool and keep strong conservative values. There are curricula out there for that. I'm perfectly ok with parents who choose to use those even though I, myself, don't choose them. What I'm not ok with is knowing fellow (capable) citizens are being denied the chance to learn even some basics.

[Pamela H in Texas]

What I'm not ok with is knowing fellow (capable) citizens are being denied the chance to learn even some basics.

 

At 6 or 10....not forever. As teenagers, they go to the library and DO have at least some basic 3Rs skills. They may have some limits on what they get to read (as do many kids), but no one said they aren't allowed a book on lizards or the civil war or more maths as they are ready.

 

If you read my blog, you see that though I'm extremely laid back (not sure that part comes out in the blog, but it most certainly has on this board), I *really* believe in early and individualized education. My 5yr old learned to read this summer (got here in April so...). My 4yr old is learning. My 3yr old (who has some significant issues including possible MR) is learning some pre-reading skills. They all are doing similarly with math and writing. Yesterday, they offered to help me with my own paper :)

 

But I don't know that I buy that it is SO significantly better for a child to learn at age 6 that it should be a legal issue if the parents wait 7 years. And how long does it *really* take to get a basic k-12 education? So then if I'm wrong. Let's say kid wants to go to college at 18 or 20 or whenever but has a 5th grade education (but average capacity). It'll take 1½ to 3 years depending, but college remedial classes allow you to start at the beginning.

[Meriwether]

Except, there wouldn't be rioting in the streets. Forget inner cities. Mostly white, middle-class suburban schools fail students *every day.* it is *untrue* that people throw fits over this fact.

 

I have a friend who was asking me about math programs for her high schooler. Her son attends a top-ranked public school. He was having a lot of trouble in math. He couldn't retake Algebra because he made a D, same with Geometry. They do block scheduling at his school, so he won't have any math at all until next September (or January, if he has math the second semester instead of the first). He they will move him along, not even giving him another chance.

 

I attended a desirable public school and graduated with kids who could not read.

 

In no way am I suggesting that wrong-doings should be ignored. I am *asking*, would you call CPS on a family whose child who was regularly attending public school was 12 and could not read? What do you think the system would *do* about that? Do you believe *those parents* to be guilty of educational neglect? Do you believe the school is guilty of educational neglect? What do you think the system should do at that point? because it happens *all the time*.

 

I am not making a comparison between homeschoolers and the public schools. I saying that I believe homeschooling parents are being held to one standard by some and public school parents are being held to a different standard. Homeschooling educators are being held to one standard by some in this thread while public school educators are being held to a different standard. Nothing is done to the parents of public school kids who cannot read. Nobody calls CPS on them. Nobody calls CPS and accuses a school system of educational neglect. It is not a red herring to urge that the groups be held accountable in a similar manner.[/QUOTE]

 

 

Thank you. I wasn't even going to try to order my thoughts this well after the week I had. I'm glad you did. When I taught high school Spanish, there were an unbelievable amount of kids who could not read well. I had kids in my foreign language classes that could not read, could not spell, and did not know the difference between a noun and a verb. If I had reported all the parents of kids who were woefully behind academically, it would have been like crashing a computer site with too many hits. And before people start saying, "But the homeschool family is doing it on purpose," there are many public school children whose families disdain education. Many.

[stripe]

I'm shocked by the level of moral relativism on this thread, particularly from people who I'm pretty sure strongly condemn moral relativism in other contexts.

 

....We're talking about people who are failing to provide their children with the most basic of educations.

 

If they were inner-city schoolteachers, we would excoriate them, and rightfully so. Why do they get a free pass because they're doing it to their own kids? Those kids aren't their property. They are American citizens who have rights of their own.

You know, Rivka, I have observed on various threads that there are quite a few people on here who do believe the parent gets a free pass to do whatever they please to their children. I have seen time and time again the (hysterical or near-hysterical) threads opposing human rights for children (the United Nations! ack!). Parents have the right to do whatever they want to their children according to some people.

 

Those who oppose any reporting. Would you at any point report a child who was merely truant from school and did absolutely nothing at home due to parental lack of demands/involvement, and would you at any point report incest by a parent?

 

This to me, is key.

 

I do not believe parental power should reign unchecked. There are moral standards that should be upheld.

 

These are my beliefs about parental abuse and neglect, not about these particular parents, about whom I know nothing.

 

Those whose children or neighbor's children are pathetically educated have choices besides CPS. Like the school, school board meetings, or the city council. Do we have a mechanism in place to display our concern for neighbor's children?

Edited December 4, 2011 by stripe

[cdrumm4448]

You know, Rivka, I have observed on various threads that there are quite a few people on here who do believe the parent gets a free pass to do whatever they please to their children. I have seen time and time again the (hysterical or near-hysterical) threads opposing human rights for children (the United Nations! ack!). Parents have the right to do whatever they want to their children according to some people.

 

Those who oppose any reporting. Would you at any point report a child who was merely truant from school and did absolutely nothing at home due to parental lack of demands/involvement, and would you at any point report incest by a parent?

 

This to me, is key.

 

I do not believe parental power should reign unchecked. There are moral standards that should be upheld.

 

These are my beliefs about parental abuse and neglect, not about these particular parents, about whom I know nothing.

 

Those whose children or neighbor's children are pathetically educated have choices besides CPS. Like the school, school board meetings, or the city council. Do we have a mechanism in place to display our concern for neighbor's children?

 

Parents don't have a right to do what they want *to* their children, parents have a right to make decisions regarding the care and upbringing of their children because they are morally and legally responsible for them. Do some people make bad decisions? Sure. You cannot eliminate all bad decisions through legislation.

 

I actually knew one family who did absolutely nothing with their kids. They could have gotten a degree in violent video game playing. Did I report them to DCFS? Nope. I don't live in their house and know what goes on.

Guess where they are today? Back in public school. Overwhelmingly, parents who don't care enough to educate don't care for their children to be around all day.

 

Of course moral standards should be upheld (in everything!) but whose standards? I believe God gave me my children. I love them beyond measure and I believe I am caring for them for Him, so I treat them accordingly. Should my beliefs be forced on you?

[HootyTooty]

Maybe I missed this (this is a long thread).

 

If one of the children wanted to learn something (how to write their name or how to do a math problem or want to learn about the middle ages) would the parents give them the tools they need to read?

[Iucounu]

If one of the children wanted to learn something (how to write their name or how to do a math problem or want to learn about the middle ages) would the parents give them the tools they need to read?

Earlier the OP wrote,

Actively prevent children from learning? Hmm. I do get the impression that the teens are prevented from learning enough to aim for college. Have books in the home? No. Allowed to use the library? Yes. Internet? No. ... Allowed to go to school if they wanted? 100% No.

[Iucounu]

I actually knew one family who did absolutely nothing with their kids. They could have gotten a degree in violent video game playing. Did I report them to DCFS? Nope. I don't live in their house and know what goes on.

:confused: You knew they didn't educate their children, and let them play video games constantly. Hence you knew they were neglecting their children; you just didn't want to get involved.

[Iucounu]

In no way am I suggesting that wrong-doings should be ignored. I am *asking*, would you call CPS on a family whose child who was regularly attending public school was 12 and could not read? What do you think the system would *do* about that? Do you believe *those parents* to be guilty of educational neglect? Do you believe the school is guilty of educational neglect? What do you think the system should do at that point? because it happens *all the time*.

I think you are suggesting that wrong-doings should be ignored, because I understand you to suggest that since the plight of these homeschooled and neglected children is no different from some kids in public school, there's no reason to report.

 

The main difference is that children who are in school are being educated and tracked. At least they're being exposed to knowledge. The proper route wouldn't be to report them to CPS, no, because they're already on someone's radar; that's why reporting would be useless. It's not useless in the case of "homeschooled" children who are victims of educational neglect, because nobody but the neglecting parties is involved; the state needs to know so that some help can be given to the children.

 

Now if, for whatever reason, the children are reported to CPS, the kids get put in public school or parents forced to actually educate them properly, and the children still wind up with a poor education, at least that won't be due to the result of an abusive/neglectful set of choices by their parents (except for the lingering effects of starting so far behind). The children will have hopefully gotten the same chance at a normal life that everyone is supposed to get.

 

ETA: Even if a comparison to public-school children were not doomed from the start, any proper comparison of results would be to "homeschooled"/neglected children, not homeschooled children in general. I can't find statistics on academic performance of children rescued from situations such as the OP describes, or children left in those situations to rot, but I'd bet the outcomes are academically much worse than those of just about any public school (although perhaps due to the sheltered/locked-down lifestyle where the kids are not allowed to live their own lives, the crime rate might actually be lower).

Edited December 4, 2011 by Iucounu

[Laura Corin]

... are the glories of the common-law system: precedent builds up a body of law based on individual cases, rather than relying on the initial, possibly hasty formulations of lawmakers. An unjust prosecution can be appealed against and any successful appeal forms part of precedent.

 

The case you cite, where children have been taught that homosexuality is a sin would, I believe in the US and the UK, fall under free speech. You can teach your child that homosexuality is a sin, so long as you don't teach them to act on this to discriminate against homosexuals in the public sphere. The most recent case in the UK seems to bear this out: a couple who owned a B&B were free to believe what they wished about Gay couples, but they could not refuse one a double room.

 

As a matter of law, it's horrible. Vagueness in the law isn't usually helpful. While it could be interpreted as not being overly prescriptive, its vagueness could also be used to prosecute unjustly.

 

ETA: Just to provide an example: If a conservative Christian family taught that homosexuality was sinful the state could take the position that the family was "reducing the childs ability to adopt some other form of life in later years." And, in that respect, it looks like the wording was intentional.

 

You mean, you think the wording is deliberately focused on the issue of homosexuality or conservative Christianity? In the UK, as opposed to the US, most home educators are counter-cultural hippy types. I suspect that support for or opposition to homosexuality was not at the top of lawmakers' or judges' minds; they were probably more worried about too many years spent picking flowers from hedgerows or drumming in the woods.

 

Laura

Edited December 4, 2011 by Laura Corin

[kalanamak]

Should my beliefs be forced on you?

 

We do force at least moral behaviors on people: murder, we arrest you; appear naked and babbling on a frosty December morning, the police will trot you to an ER and then a mental facility.

 

Forcing *beliefs* on a normal adult is expensive (kidnapping and brainwashing isn't cheap), but we do demand some behaviors that go along with those beliefs.

 

Doesn't sound like these kids will end up in PS.

And if mummy and daddy don't support them, are you willing for them to live off the shelter system, the remedial education system, etc. etc that we all pay for? (This is to say nothing of producing people ill-equipped to participate in a democracy.)

 

 

I don't know that "reporting" these people in my state would raise an eyebrow. CPS is under fire and doing its darnest to keep kids with parents, even homeless mentally ill parents*. And no one checks up on the state requirements for homeschooling. I imagine if the proverbial stuff hit the fan, they could trot that out in a case they wanted to bring anyway.

 

*This is not conjecture or some scary once-off in the paper-- I work with these people.

[kalanamak]

. I suspect that support for or opposition to homosexuality was not at the top of lawmakers' or judges' minds; they were probably more worried about too many years spent picking flowers from hedgerows or drumming in the woods.

 

Laura

 

Laura ....... I love you. :lol:

[Laura Corin]

Laura ....... I love you. :lol:

 

I'll take all the love I can get.

 

Laura

[Mandy in TN]

Grant Colfax didn't learn to read until he was 9yo. There were no learning issues. He later graduated from Havard and went on to medical school. Woodrow Wilson was homeschooled and over 10yo perhaps as old as 12 when he learned to read and yet at 17yo he was admitted to Davidson College. There may have been a learning difference there.

 

These men were far more than a year behind the reading level required of today's fourth graders. If reported in the state of TN today, the parents of these men would have at the very least had the state breathing down their necks requiring them to jump through hoops.

 

Although there are no annual requirements to meet in grades K-4, if a family is reported for educational neglect testing may be required. In grades five (5), seven (7) and nine (9) home school students are required to take the same standardized tests required of public school students. If a homeschool student falls behind here are the repercussions:

(6) (A) Consultation between the director of schools and the parent-teacher if the home school student falls three (3) to six (6) months behind the home school student's appropriate grade level, based on the test required in subdivision (b)(5);

 

(B) If a home school student falls six (6) to nine (9) months behind the home school student's appropriate grade level in the home school student's reading, language arts, mathematics or science test scores or such of these areas, regardless of the term used on the test, as are actually tested for the student's grade level, based on the tests required in subdivision (b)(5), the parent shall consult with a teacher licensed by the state board of education and having a certificate or endorsement in the grade level or course or subject matter in which consultation is sought. The parent and teacher shall design a remedial course to help the child obtain the child's appropriate grade level. The parent shall report the remedial course for the child to the local director of schools;

 

© (i) If a home school student falls more than one (1) year behind the home school student's appropriate grade level in the home school student's comprehensive test score for two (2) consecutive tests based on the tests required in subdivision (b)(5) and if the child is not learning disabled in the opinion of a teacher licensed to teach at the child's grade level, the local director of schools may require the parents to enroll the child in a public, private or church-related school, in accordance with this part, and the parents shall have all rights provided by law to respond to this requirement;

(ii) If a test indicates that a home school student is one (1) year or more behind the home school student's appropriate grade level, the same test shall be administered to the child not more than one (1) year later, notwithstanding the required testing schedule in subdivision (b)(5)(A)

 

Having a family in TN consult with the director of schools for a child falling 3 to 6 months behind grade level is bizarre considering the abysmal performance of the TN public schools.

 

Mandy

[cdrumm4448]

:confused: You knew they didn't educate their children, and let them play video games constantly. Hence you knew they were neglecting their children; you just didn't want to get involved.

 

No, I didn't know anything except what I saw when I saw them once a week for a few hours, over the course of a few months (and not in their home). I just ASSUMED they didn't do anything from comments they made and their behavior.

 

I really would like to know if the OP has scoured every inch of their home for books. Was she present when the children asked to learn something and they were told no? A lot of what is being discussed here is conjecture, based on someone's opinion of another's situation.

 

And, to be crystal clear, I do NOT equate physical/emotional abuse and assumed educational neglect. And I do not make a habit of involving myself in the care and upbringing of other people's children. You raise yours, I'll raise mine.

[cdrumm4448]

I think you are suggesting that wrong-doings should be ignored, because I understand you to suggest that since the plight of these homeschooled and neglected children is no different from some kids in public school, there's no reason to report.

 

The main difference is that children who are in school are being educated and tracked. At least they're being exposed to knowledge. The proper route wouldn't be to report them to CPS, no, because they're already on someone's radar; that's why reporting would be useless. It's not useless in the case of "homeschooled" children who are victims of educational neglect, because nobody but the neglecting parties is involved; the state needs to know so that some help can be given to the children.

 

Now if, for whatever reason, the children are reported to CPS, the kids get put in public school or parents forced to actually educate them properly, and the children still wind up with a poor education, at least that won't be due to the result of an abusive/neglectful set of choices by their parents (except for the lingering effects of starting so far behind). The children will have hopefully gotten the same chance at a normal life that everyone is supposed to get.

 

ETA: Even if a comparison to public-school children were not doomed from the start, any proper comparison of results would be to "homeschooled"/neglected children, not homeschooled children in general. I can't find statistics on academic performance of children rescued from situations such as the OP describes, or children left in those situations to rot, but I'd bet the outcomes are academically much worse than those of just about any public school (although perhaps due to the sheltered/locked-down lifestyle where the kids are not allowed to live their own lives, the crime rate might actually be lower).

 

You are assuming that the government has the ultimate responsibility to educate children. Many people disagree (there is no Constitutional support for the government being responsible for educating anyone-they are required to FUND it, yes, but that's where the responsibility ends in the Constitution). I do acknowledge that there are many, even here, who feel the Constitution is a "living" document that must be dragged along into our modern times to be relevant. I disagree.

[cdrumm4448]

We do force at least moral behaviors on people: murder, we arrest you; appear naked and babbling on a frosty December morning, the police will trot you to an ER and then a mental facility. Moral behavior is not forced on anyone. There are consequences to immoral behavior that are in force to discourage that behavior. But everyone is still free to break a law, or commit an immoral act. You'll just usually pay for it.

 

Forcing *beliefs* on a normal adult is expensive (kidnapping and brainwashing isn't cheap), but we do demand some behaviors that go along with those beliefs.

 

Doesn't sound like these kids will end up in PS.

And if mummy and daddy don't support them, are you willing for them to live off the shelter system, the remedial education system, etc. etc that we all pay for? (This is to say nothing of producing people ill-equipped to participate in a democracy.)

 

You have no idea what will happen to these children. Assuming the worst doesn't make it happen. None of my grandparents graduated high school and they were very successful. There are many ways to get educated.

 

I don't know that "reporting" these people in my state would raise an eyebrow. CPS is under fire and doing its darnest to keep kids with parents, even homeless mentally ill parents*. And no one checks up on the state requirements for homeschooling. I imagine if the proverbial stuff hit the fan, they could trot that out in a case they wanted to bring anyway.

 

Homeschoolers who believe we all need to be under the thumb of the government are certainly within their rights to believe that. Although I heartily disagree and I work very hard to keep it from happening.

 

*This is not conjecture or some scary once-off in the paper-- I work with these people.

 

;)

[Mrs Mungo]

It sounds like the kids in this thread don't even get the opportunity for a poor education. They appear to be getting next to nothing.

 

My Algebra 2 teacher in high school was Vietnamese. She did not speak English well at all. She was far too meek to control a group of 30 high school kids. Aside from the fact that I had an Algebra 2 text in my possession, I was given no instruction.

 

 

I think you are suggesting that wrong-doings should be ignored, because I understand you to suggest that since the plight of these homeschooled and neglected children is no different from some kids in public school, there's no reason to report.

 

Go back and read my other posts. Ignoring and not reporting are very different things. I did not report my acquaintance who was homeschooling and whose 9 year old couldn't read. I got help for her family through other channels. I am not going to report my friend whose son is in public school and doesn't understand Algebra, I gave her a list of tutoring sites and the name of a tutor who does free tutoring for military kids.

 

That is not ignoring.

The main difference is that children who are in school are being educated and tracked. At least they're being exposed to knowledge. The proper route wouldn't be to report them to CPS, no, because they're already on someone's radar; that's why reporting would be useless.

 

Whose radar? The school that is failing them? What good does that do?

[TracyR]

My first question would be. Have you sat in on their homeschooling session to see if this truly is the case? I know that some people don't like to indulge much about their lives. I've had people speak in few words just because they feel that others maybe intruding in their lives. Some people are just like that.

Late on you find out much more about them then what they tell you.

 

So unless you've sat in on their sessions at home , you can't say that's it, that's all they do is just Bible and math. If they have access to the computers how do you know that they don't have access to technology? There are computers in libraries you know. Unless you've physically have seen their parents deny them the use of a computer in a library, its all still just hear say.

 

Also there is The Better Late than Early philosophy as well. Do I agree with it? Not sure, but I'd much rather see my children do things early than late when it concerns certain things. I know my oldest just couldn't get reading until she was the age of 9. No matter what I did. Plus she was my first and I was very inexperienced in teaching children period. I didn't have the direction or help at the time those many years ago to have a clue as to what I was doing. As I've become more of a 'veteran' my philosophies have changed and I've geared our education to what works. I don't call myself a Classical homeschooler, or an Unschooler, or a traditional homeschooler, etc. I just do what works. Even if we incorporate all those methods in one day. Do I fell guilty about not identifying myself to one train of thought when it comes to teaching? Absolutely not. This maybe this mother's case as well. They probably just does whatever works and goes from there. So therefore they do not identify themselves with any one type of model of educating.

 

Another thing, unless you live close by , she maybe unaware of what is available out there. I know there are some curriculums that use the Bible as the main spine.

There is Student of the Word

Judah Bible Curriculum

Heart of Wisdom

I know a homeschooling mom who is using Student of the Word in her home. Are her kids as far ahead as mine? No. But its what works for them.

 

As long as they are following the laws of their state I would stay out of it. YOu can suggest things, talk about things that you are using in your home. But other then that, once you start turning people in then the law starts to butt in to homeschooling. Then your state will end up like PA , where they feel the need to be in every aspect of your homeschooling. NOt that its unbearable. Its not. But I definitely could go without the government oversight of portfolios, standardized testing, and evlautions every year. I know there is a saying in our state" Don't do more than what the law tells you." That's because once you go one step more , the state starts to expect more than what you really need to do.

 

Children are always learning, in spite of us . Its impossible to keep them from learning things. I know when my youngest was born we didn't do much in the homeschooling realm that one year. I was busy taking my baby to doctors appointments , being in the hospital with her when she was hospitalized or when we were facing another surgery. But throughout it all my girls really continued learning despite the circumstance. I was surprised and still at times surprised with what they learn on their own.

 

Will your friends kids be on track with your children? NO. I've met public school students that aren't anywhere near what my girls are in their education? My 2nd has learning issues so she isn't as far as some students in the private school they are in at the moment. Their curriculum is actually more advanced then the K12 curriculum we used.

My brothers are adults now, and my 5yr old reads better than they do, and they attended brick and mortar school.

 

How do you know her children may not have some underlying learning disabilites that she may not know about. Its amazing how many parents will ignore problems. I see it all the time. Even more so with children who attend brick and mortar school. I always hear, " Not , MY child!"

 

 

So no matter which way you go , if you were to report them, they could go through a brick and mortar school and be passed along like my brothers were, and be educationally neglected there, OR they can be at their home , and still be ''educationally neglected" . Its definitely a no win situation. Period.

 

 

I think we definitely don't have all the information one would need to prove its educational neglect. It maynot be the way you would teach YOUR children. But its the way they teach theirs.

It doesn't sound like they are doing nothing in their homeschool. Now if you came to us and said, " All they do is sleep all day, watch TV, and play video games." Then that would be more of a concern to me then to hear, " All they do is read the Bible, do some math, get out and do activities as a family." Sorry, that's doing something. If they told you they were unschoolers, who have no prescribed curriculum whatsoever. Would it make it better and right in your eyes because what they do now has a label to it?

I'm sorry. I just think this is a huge line you don't want to cross.

Edited December 4, 2011 by TracyR

[TracyR]

And, to be crystal clear, I do NOT equate physical/emotional abuse and assumed educational neglect. And I do not make a habit of involving myself in the care and upbringing of other people's children. You raise yours, I'll raise mine.

:iagree:

[TracyR]

Sadly, I lean toward 'can't be bothered.' I've offered everything from curriculum catalogs to my own books. I floated the idea of myself teaching a class or two over the internet and they had no interest in that. I didn't offer to cover the 3Rs or anything comprehensive, just to share in some neat things I was doing with my own children at the time. I hoped it would get me in the door as an online teaching resource for the children, but the parents didn't want anything to do with that idea.

 

I truly don't understand these decisions on their part.

 

 

There just are some people out there in this world we'll never understand. I've quit trying to understand other people, and worry about my own family. Its sad that they don't want to have the help. I'd love some , especially with my 13 yr old. LOL But no one offers. So its their loss.

 

They'll have to live with the consequences when their kids tell them they were lousy teachers.

 

But then again, most of us have educational inadequacies that we've had to make up for just by attending brick and mortar school. I know I"m catching up on some myself and relearning things I never learned in school myself. So maybe if they chose to homeschool their own children , or if they are motivated. They'll catch up on their own.

[Harriet Vane]

Ignoring and not reporting are very different things.

 

:iagree: Well said.

[creekland]

My Algebra 2 teacher in high school was Vietnamese. She did not speak English well at all. She was far too meek to control a group of 30 high school kids. Aside from the fact that I had an Algebra 2 text in my possession, I was given no instruction.

 

 

You don't need to convince me. I work at an underperforming school that is almost definitely going to be going under state control (whatever that means) next year for not performing up to standards 3 years in a row.

 

Last Friday I was in for one of our math teachers and came home more frustrated than usual due to what I saw in the classrooms.

 

I'm definitely not one to say ps has all the answers, but it's better than no school. My preference, in this particular case, would be to see the parents or other relatives opt to use one of the conservative Christian curricula for at least the basics.

 

Then your state will end up like PA , where they feel the need to be in every aspect of your homeschooling. NOt that its unbearable. Its not. But I definitely could go without the government oversight of portfolios, standardized testing, and evlautions every year.

 

For the record, PA doesn't require standardized tests every year. They require them in 3rd, 5th, and 8th grades for homeschoolers. Ps students get tested in 11th and will have Keystone tests to pass too, but those are not requirements for homeschoolers.

 

I'm in favor of portfolios and evaluations yearly as my state requires - not because I need them, and I suspect 99% or higher of parents on here wouldn't need them, but it helps protect the kids of people similar to the OP (with religion not being an issue). There are "homeschooling" parents who do absolutely nothing or very minimal and their kids ARE getting shortchanged if the state does nothing about it. They may not be interested in getting a college prep education, but they ought to be learning something IMO. The standards one needs here are quite minimal.

[Mommy22alyns]

Except, there wouldn't be rioting in the streets. Forget inner cities. Mostly white, middle-class suburban schools fail students *every day.* it is *untrue* that people throw fits over this fact.

 

I have a friend who was asking me about math programs for her high schooler. Her son attends a top-ranked public school. He was having a lot of trouble in math. He couldn't retake Algebra because he made a D, same with Geometry. They do block scheduling at his school, so he won't have any math at all until next September (or January, if he has math the second semester instead of the first). He they will move him along, not even giving him another chance.

 

I attended a desirable public school and graduated with kids who could not read.

 

In no way am I suggesting that wrong-doings should be ignored. I am *asking*, would you call CPS on a family whose child who was regularly attending public school was 12 and could not read? What do you think the system would *do* about that? Do you believe *those parents* to be guilty of educational neglect? Do you believe the school is guilty of educational neglect? What do you think the system should do at that point? because it happens *all the time*.

 

I am not making a comparison between homeschoolers and the public schools. I saying that I believe homeschooling parents are being held to one standard by some and public school parents are being held to a different standard. Homeschooling educators are being held to one standard by some in this thread while public school educators are being held to a different standard. Nothing is done to the parents of public school kids who cannot read. Nobody calls CPS on them. Nobody calls CPS and accuses a school system of educational neglect. It is not a red herring to urge that the groups be held accountable in a similar manner.

 

I wish I could just quote all of Mrs. Mungo's posts in this thread and add :iagree:. A similar situation was hotly debated on another board I visit and nobody seemed to want to acknowledge that educational neglect happens with PS kids too. They wanted to call CPS for the SOLE reason that these kids were being homeschooled. Very frustrating.

[kalanamak]

 

I attended a desirable public school and graduated with kids who could not read.

 

I am (very) curious as to your opinion of why they couldn't read.

[Katiebug_1976]

Absolutely not! You don't know what their long range goals are (what they have already done/studied and what they plan to do in the future), and there are so many different ways to learn everything. I'm sure over the course of the year they will be introduced to many language, science, nature things (and may more)without even trying. Even if they need a break from everything and are only focusing on bible & math for a year, I don't necessarily see that as a concern. Just my thoughts...:)

[Iucounu]

And, to be crystal clear, I do NOT equate physical/emotional abuse and assumed educational neglect. And I do not make a habit of involving myself in the care and upbringing of other people's children. You raise yours, I'll raise mine.

I don't equate them either. They're different forms of mistreatment, for sure, with different effects. Both can have long-term effects. The effects of physical/emotional abuse would be physical and emotional; the effects of educational abuse would be academic, and represent lost future opportunities for a child.

 

I don't make a habit of involving myself in other people's business, either. Still, when I see abuse, mistreatment, or neglect of a child, I do something about it. That does seem to set us apart; we have a different perception of just how much a parent should be able to act to the detriment of a child without some sort of correction.

 

You are assuming that the government has the ultimate responsibility to educate children.

It's more that children deserve to have certain opportunities that their parents shouldn't be allowed to take away, including the chance at an adult life where they live happy, fulfilling lives of their own choice-- perhaps even attending college if they choose. There's plenty of legal precedent for this; for example, parents are not allowed to refuse life-saving medical treatments either because of their own religious convictions, or, as sometimes claimed, "for their children's sake" either.

Edited December 4, 2011 by Iucounu

[Iucounu]

Ignoring and not reporting are very different things... Whose radar? The school that is failing them? What good does that do?

Fair enough. I guess I'm in agreement that the less immediately detrimental to a child a situation is, the more an approach should be taken where the parents are encouraged to change before involving the state. It's only if the parents refuse to adequately provide for the kids in such a case that I'd actually report them.

 

Re: radar, it's simply not possible to justify turning a blind eye to educational neglect in the home, for supposedly homeschooled kids, on the basis that kids are sometimes not well-educated in the system. The difference is that kids in the public school system have the opportunity for an adequate education; where parents control every aspect of their child's life, they have the power to deny that opportunity.

 

And again, reporting on a child in the public school system for parental educational neglect doesn't make a lot of sense; it would be a mechanism for correcting something different. The ways to change a child's experience in the school system would be to advocate on a child's behalf with the school system, run for the local school board or attend meetings and advocate there in general, etc. They're simply different problems with different solutions.

[tricia]

No, I would not report. Besides, who's to say exactly WHAT a child is to learn? I mean really, can we depend on the government to tell us that. THEY can't handle anything themselves. Perhaps if they had only studied the Bible and math we would all be a lot better off here in our great country.

[cdrumm4448]

There's plenty of legal precedent for this; for example, parents are not allowed to refuse life-saving medical treatments either because of their own religious convictions, or, as sometimes claimed, "for their children's sake" either.

 

Life-saving treatment is not the same as an education. You can live without an education. And, I do not agree with the government getting involved in the slippery slope of medical decisions based on legal precedent. Again, you're putting the government in the position of supreme decision-maker in areas they have no business being involved.

[cdrumm4448]

Fair enough. I guess I'm in agreement that the less immediately detrimental to a child a situation is, the more an approach should be taken where the parents are encouraged to change before involving the state. It's only if the parents refuse to adequately provide for the kids in such a case that I'd actually report them.

 

Re: radar, it's simply not possible to justify turning a blind eye to educational neglect in the home, for supposedly homeschooled kids, on the basis that kids are sometimes not well-educated in the system. The difference is that kids in the public school system have the opportunity for an adequate education; where parents control every aspect of their child's life, they have the power to deny that opportunity.

 

And again, reporting on a child in the public school system for parental educational neglect doesn't make a lot of sense; it would be a mechanism for correcting something different. The ways to change a child's experience in the school system would be to advocate on a child's behalf with the school system, run for the local school board or attend meetings and advocate there in general, etc. They're simply different problems with different solutions.

 

Again, who is the judge? You or me? A school? The government? You are repeatedly attempting to install any institution or entity in the place of parents. Should not happen. But, sadly, it is happening all too often today "for the good of the children".

[Mrs Mungo]

I am (very) curious as to your opinion of why they couldn't read.

 

I think mostly for some of the exact same reasons that some homeschooled kids can't read: parents not involved enough in educating, the value parents place on formal education, educators (formal or parental) who don't care enough, learning disabilities, lack of money for educational materials (it happens in homes and schools), etc.

 

Fair enough. I guess I'm in agreement that the less immediately detrimental to a child a situation is, the more an approach should be taken where the parents are encouraged to change before involving the state. It's only if the parents refuse to adequately provide for the kids in such a case that I'd actually report them.

 

Let me explain my position better. I think parents (or a parental figure) *must* be involved in educating or caring about the education of children in order for kids to be adequately educated and to care about their educations. I think if you are reporting one set for educational neglect and not the other, then *I* think you are creating a double standard in which homeschooling parents are being held to a different standard when it comes to educational negligence.

 

Re: radar, it's simply not possible to justify turning a blind eye to educational neglect in the home,

 

I will repeat: I AM NOT ADVOCATING TURNING A BLIND EYE IN ANY CASE.

 

on the basis that kids are sometimes not well-educated in the system. The difference is that kids in the public school system have the opportunity for an adequate education; where parents control every aspect of their child's life, they have the power to deny that opportunity.

 

I am talking about how you react to parents not providing a good education in one case versus another. The system ALSO has the power to deny the opportunity of a good education. There are scads of books written on the subject. I'm not saying that one is okay and the other isn't. I'm saying that neither is okay and reporting one set of parents and not the other is a double standard.

 

And again, reporting on a child in the public school system for parental educational neglect doesn't make a lot of sense; it would be a mechanism for correcting something different. The ways to change a child's experience in the school system would be to advocate on a child's behalf with the school system, run for the local school board or attend meetings and advocate there in general, etc. They're simply different problems with different solutions.

 

So...are you doing that? Is Spycar? Because there are entire school systems full of kids whom the system has failed. It's a moral outrage if you don't advocate for those kids, ACCORDING TO YOU (not me).

[Iucounu]

Life-saving treatment is not the same as an education. You can live without an education. And, I do not agree with the government getting involved in the slippery slope of medical decisions based on legal precedent. Again, you're putting the government in the position of supreme decision-maker in areas they have no business being involved.

It's not that slippery of a slope. The state can step in where parents are harming their children. This is good for children, and good for society. There may be mistakes made in some cases, and loss of control may anger parents involved, but in the end it's much better than simply ignoring a mistreated child.

[nmoira]

It's not that slippery of a slope. The state can step in where parents are harming their children. This is good for children, and good for society. There may be mistakes made in some cases, and loss of control may anger parents involved, but in the end it's much better than simply ignoring a mistreated child.

:iagree:

 

Tour the Followers of Christ graveyard if you have any doubts.

[Iucounu]

I think parents (or a parental figure) *must* be involved in educating or caring about the education of children in order for kids to be adequately educated and to care about their educations. I think if you are reporting one set for educational neglect and not the other, then *I* think you are creating a double standard

Except that I'm not creating a double standard. Children failed by their parents without anyone being the wiser are not being given the same opportunities as children who for one reason or another are not doing well in the public school system. In making others outside the home aware of the parent-created problem, I'd be making sure that the parents aren't allowed to continue to harm their children without anyone knowing.

 

It's not a different standard; parents who choose to exert sole control over choosing their children's education aren't allowed to neglect their education by failing to provide educational opportunities.

 

The system ALSO has the power to deny the opportunity of a good education.

Is there a school system with a 100% dropout rate, that has been completely ignored with no corrective action? :confused: It's completely irrelevant to discuss public school performance, in the context of a discussion about "homeschooled" children who are intentionally not given an adequate education by their parents.

 

So...are you doing that? Is Spycar? Because there are entire school systems full of kids whom the system has failed. It's a moral outrage if you don't advocate for those kids, ACCORDING TO YOU (not me).

It could be a moral outrage, I suppose, if the two weren't completely different situations. One involves turning a blind eye to parental neglect when one's involvement may be the only way of correcting the situation. The other is failing to add one's voice to a discussion about how to improve a situation where scads of educators and politicians are already involved.

 

For example, in my local school district there are Title I schools. Due to "No Child Left Behind", the situation is already being tracked and addressed. As much as we can wrangle about whether the corrective action will bear fruit or is the best possible under the circumstances, something is being done. Nor do all children at Title I schools fail to receive an adequate education; they all at least have similar sorts of opportunities, though some wind up taking advantage of them better.

 

Now, consider the "homeschooled" neglected child. Nobody is involved considering and taking corrective action, misguided or not; there is no opportunity for an adequate education. Without some sort of involvement, the child is 100% guaranteed to be inadequately educated.

[Hikin' Mama]

but absolutely not. It's certainly not an educational approach I would be comfortable with, but I don't think it's worth reporting and putting a family's life into chaos.

[pqr]

It's not that slippery of a slope. The state can step in where parents are harming their children. This is good for children, and good for society. There may be mistakes made in some cases, and loss of control may anger parents involved, but in the end it's much better than simply ignoring a mistreated child.

 

 

Think long and hard about the bolded section, think of all the times in history when the state has made "mistakes" in the raising of children.

 

What you are saying is eerily reminiscent of what many in Europe and Asia said in the last 120 years. Scary stuff and it all started with lines such as "good for society".........this IS a slippery slope at least given your comment.

[Mrs Mungo]

Iucounu, I must be failing spectacularly in communicating with you because you are not hearing what I'm actually saying. I have tried, but I don't think it's possible to get you to understand what I am saying here.

 

Now, consider the "homeschooled" neglected child. Nobody is involved considering and taking corrective action, misguided or not; there is no opportunity for an adequate education. Without some sort of involvement, the child is 100% guaranteed to be inadequately educated.

 

Who should be involved and why they deserve to be involved is where we are in violent disagreement. The system should look at its own failures before it tries to correct those of anyone else. As long as there are kids falling through the cracks of the public school system, then I don't think they deserve control of a family's situation because of a perceived (or real) failure.

[SKL]

It's not that slippery of a slope. The state can step in where parents are harming their children. This is good for children, and good for society. There may be mistakes made in some cases, and loss of control may anger parents involved, but in the end it's much better than simply ignoring a mistreated child.

 

Remember the little autistic boy who was lost in the woods (in the cold/rain) overnight, after running away from school at recess? He had been taken into custody because his parents were restraining him (on a leather strap tethered to something), and someone who did not know them well saw this and reported it. The parents explained that they restrained him because otherwise he would run off. You'd think those who stepped in would at least have taken precautions so he wouldn't run off. But no. (Although the school did put him on a leash during transitions. So much better for the child than the parents putting him on a leash, no?)

 

Oh, and don't forget the way the US government removed Native American children from their homes in order to properly educate them (make sure they could no longer speak their native tongue, among other things).

Edited December 4, 2011 by SKL

[creekland]

Except that I'm not creating a double standard. Children failed by their parents without anyone being the wiser are not being given the same opportunities as children who for one reason or another are not doing well in the public school system. In making others outside the home aware of the parent-created problem, I'd be making sure that the parents aren't allowed to continue to harm their children without anyone knowing.

 

It's not a different standard; parents who choose to exert sole control over choosing their children's education aren't allowed to neglect their education by failing to provide educational opportunities.

 

 

Is there a school system with a 100% dropout rate, that has been completely ignored with no corrective action? :confused: It's completely irrelevant to discuss public school performance, in the context of a discussion about "homeschooled" children who are intentionally not given an adequate education by their parents.

 

 

It could be a moral outrage, I suppose, if the two weren't completely different situations. One involves turning a blind eye to parental neglect when one's involvement may be the only way of correcting the situation. The other is failing to add one's voice to a discussion about how to improve a situation where scads of educators and politicians are already involved.

 

For example, in my local school district there are Title I schools. Due to "No Child Left Behind", the situation is already being tracked and addressed. As much as we can wrangle about whether the corrective action will bear fruit or is the best possible under the circumstances, something is being done. Nor do all children at Title I schools fail to receive an adequate education; they all at least have similar sorts of opportunities, though some wind up taking advantage of them better.

 

Now, consider the "homeschooled" neglected child. Nobody is involved considering and taking corrective action, misguided or not; there is no opportunity for an adequate education. Without some sort of involvement, the child is 100% guaranteed to be inadequately educated.

 

:iagree: I don't think the two of us agree on much when it comes to philosophy from what little I can remember from other threads, but on this one, I completely agree with you. ;)

 

I'm in our public school district. I see its failures. I try to do what I can to make the situation better, though there's no way one person can do a whole lot. There are others trying too. I see no difference in wanting to help homeschooled children. The difference is... there aren't others trying IF they don't know about it.

 

And none of us are setting a "high" bar that all must cross.

[kiana]

There are always slippery slopes.

 

Declaring that causing your child to die because you didn't seek medical care for appendicitis is criminal runs the risk of criminalizing a parent who treats a minor respiratory infection with home remedies.

 

Declaring that beating your child to death is criminal runs the risk of criminalizing parents who give the child a single well-deserved swat on the rear.

 

Declaring that starving your child is criminal runs the risk of criminalizing parents who are unable to feed their child by standard measures or simply don't believe that the USDA food pyramid is adequate.

 

Because a slippery slope exists does not mean that we should do nothing under any circumstances. It means that we should at all times be vigilant to ensure that we remain near the top of the slope.

[Stacy in NJ]

So, there probably are few or limited precedents - it's untested really.

 

Private organization can discriminate against homosexuals in the USA -see the Boy Scouts of America. So, the part of the law you refer to/paraphrase: "don't teach them to act on this to discriminate against homosexuals in the public sphere" might contrivene existing free association law in the US. You mention "public sphere" and then mention a private business owner, so that part is a bit muddled. Homosexuals are a protected class under some federal and state law as they relate to federal and state institutions - not private institutions, again in the US. Whether or not a privately owned business is private or public is a more complex issue.

 

 

 

... are the glories of the common-law system: precedent builds up a body of law based on individual cases, rather than relying on the initial, possibly hasty formulations of lawmakers. An unjust prosecution can be appealed against and any successful appeal forms part of precedent.

 

The case you cite, where children have been taught that homosexuality is a sin would, I believe in the US and the UK, fall under free speech. You can teach your child that homosexuality is a sin, so long as you don't teach them to act on this to discriminate against homosexuals in the public sphere. The most recent case in the UK seems to bear this out: a couple who owned a B&B were free to believe what they wished about Gay couples, but they could not refuse one a double room.

 

 

 

You mean, you think the wording is deliberately focused on the issue of homosexuality or conservative Christianity? In the UK, as opposed to the US, most home educators are counter-cultural hippy types. I suspect that support for or opposition to homosexuality was not at the top of lawmakers' or judges' minds; they were probably more worried about too many years spent picking flowers from hedgerows or drumming in the woods.

 

Laura

 

Regarding your last paragraph: I mean the wording is deliberately vague in case this type of issue should arise - not necessarily homosexuality. While most UK homeschoolers may be of the hippy-dippy variety, I'd bet there is some awareness of how conservative Christians all over the world, and other conservative religious types - Jews and Muslims, as well, have used homeschooling as a tool to resist state influence. I'd bet they're just hedging their bets with an eye on all religious life styles.

[cdrumm4448]

It's not that slippery of a slope. The state can step in where parents are harming their children. This is good for children, and good for society. There may be mistakes made in some cases, and loss of control may anger parents involved, but in the end it's much better than simply ignoring a mistreated child.

 

Who defines harm? Who defines good? Who defines mistreated? If you were the decision-maker, you would apparently find all children not educated to your standards (whatever those may be) as mistreated. Why should we all adhere to your standards instead of our own?

[cdrumm4448]

For example, in my local school district there are Title I schools. Due to "No Child Left Behind", the situation is already being tracked and addressed. As much as we can wrangle about whether the corrective action will bear fruit or is the best possible under the circumstances, something is being done. Nor do all children at Title I schools fail to receive an adequate education; they all at least have similar sorts of opportunities, though some wind up taking advantage of them better.

 

Now, consider the "homeschooled" neglected child. Nobody is involved considering and taking corrective action, misguided or not; there is no opportunity for an adequate education. Without some sort of involvement, the child is 100% guaranteed to be inadequately educated.

 

So "something" being done (no matter if it's well thought out, or appropriate, or necessary) is better than what you perceive as nothing being done. I heartily disagree. Our society is filled with situations and people who cast about and hastily did something, ANYTHING, just to do something to solve a problem. Usually, that creates more problems than it solves.

[cdrumm4448]

There are always slippery slopes.

 

Declaring that causing your child to die because you didn't seek medical care for appendicitis is criminal runs the risk of criminalizing a parent who treats a minor respiratory infection with home remedies.

 

Declaring that beating your child to death is criminal runs the risk of criminalizing parents who give the child a single well-deserved swat on the rear.

 

Declaring that starving your child is criminal runs the risk of criminalizing parents who are unable to feed their child by standard measures or simply don't believe that the USDA food pyramid is adequate.

 

Because a slippery slope exists does not mean that we should do nothing under any circumstances. It means that we should at all times be vigilant to ensure that we remain near the top of the slope.

 

No one has said to do nothing. The question is whether they would report to DCFS.

[kiana]

No one has said to do nothing. The question is whether they would report to DCFS.

 

As a matter of fact, I've seen several people say that other people's parenting decisions are not their business.

 

But I wasn't even responding to that, but rather to the implicit idea that there shouldn't be laws about that in the first place. I absolutely think that "educational neglect" should be on the books as illegal. Personally I'd define it as being significantly far behind grade level (let's say 3+ grades) in reading/math/writing with a child 10 or older, with no plan for remediation and/or no action taken on said plan.

 

Whether I would then report someone on those laws is a completely different matter.

[Iucounu]

Think long and hard about the bolded section, think of all the times in history when the state has made "mistakes" in the raising of children.

 

What you are saying is eerily reminiscent of what many in Europe and Asia said in the last 120 years. Scary stuff and it all started with lines such as "good for society".........this IS a slippery slope at least given your comment.

 

There has to be a standard by which to judge abuse and neglect, or children suffer. When abuse and neglect is deemed to happen, the state has to step in, or children suffer. This isn't a slippery slope; it's reality.

Edited December 4, 2011 by Iucounu

[Iucounu]

So "something" being done (no matter if it's well thought out, or appropriate, or necessary) is better than what you perceive as nothing being done. I heartily disagree. Our society is filled with situations and people who cast about and hastily did something, ANYTHING, just to do something to solve a problem. Usually, that creates more problems than it solves.

Citations? Any support at all for the idea that intervening in cases of child neglect and abuse is negative on average?

 

Yep, something being done by the state in cases of child abuse and neglect is indeed better than leaving the children to be victimized.

[Iucounu]

Who defines harm? Who defines good? Who defines mistreated? If you were the decision-maker, you would apparently find all children not educated to your standards (whatever those may be) as mistreated. Why should we all adhere to your standards instead of our own?

For the same reasons that we make any laws for the public good. Since some people will make very bad choices which are against the public welfare and some of which infringe on individual rights, we have bodies of decision-makers called "legislators", "judges", etc. There's a long history of deciding important matters by committee.

 

I wouldn't decide on standards for neglect and abuse by myself, because the system doesn't work that way and because I wouldn't want to. But once a definition is in place, you bet I would act to prevent people from being victimized according to the definition.