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

[chrissymama]

absolutely not! It's not the way I teach my kids, but it's not something I would alert the authorities about.

[at the beach]

Seriously, not just because of the ps. situation but because my area is also home to three different religious sects that feel pretty strongly about not educating their kids very well and it's based on long held, religious beliefs. We have the Amish, Old Order Mennonite (and by that I mean really, not super more advanced than the Amish, and some Dutch Brethren that hark back to "education breeds rebellion" kind of thinking). The schools for these groups are 1-8 (Mennonite) and 1-8 Amish (though children don't attend until they are 8 or 9; it is hard to take about it in terms of standard grades because the children are spoken to in German only until the age of 9 and so they are beginning as 9 year old kindergarteners when it comes to English - some can read German before that but many are not taught this either). The children attend very, very sporadically. If there is any excuse for keeping the child home to help on the farm, it is done. The school year runs from September - November and January - April. Of those days (I know this personally because again, the Amish school is only two miles from my house and I regularly converse with the 16 year old girl who is the teacher and whose own education I would pin at approximately 5th grade for math and at most 6th grade for reading), 1/3 of those days she ends up going home because she has no students.

 

The Old Order Mennonite School does a little better. They adhere to more of a 9 month school year, use Rod and Staff curriculum for math, english, history, and Bible (they teach NO science of any kind though both Rod and Staff and CLE have science curriculum), and are more dilligent about sending their children. However, the girls are definitely better educated than the boys because most of the boys do not attend school in September and part of October (harvest season) or April and May (planting season). The teacher (again, a sweet lady I've had some good conversations with) is an unmarried young 20 something waiting for Mr. right to propose. She has only completed Rod and Staff math through 8th grade and the english/writing program that goes through 10th grade. She seems to read very well, but her science knowledge is ZERO except animal husbandry and gardening (on those subjects, she is a guru), and her history is rather sketchy. I would pin her English knowledge and basic writing skills at about 8-9th grade but her math at only 6th grade, she however, a voracious reader within the confines of literature that is considered acceptble - that said, she has studied some pretty deep theological works so I do think she reads at a colleg level. She really, really struggled with math (by her own admission) in 7th and 8th grade. Her 7th and 8th graders self-study the subject during class time and she just does the grading from the teacher's manual.

 

The Dutch Brethren I am not too certain about. They do not live close enough for me to have any direct knowledge of their schooling system except that they come into my dad's business often and the children as old as twelve cannot read any English. They are fascinated by the things my dad has on the walls of his business (many times referring to the different heating products he carries, plus a cool poster on the varying kinds of hardwoods and how many BTU of thermal energy can be obtained from their burn rates) and they love to ask him questions...clearly can't read the signs. But, it could be they are all being educated in Dutch and haven't begun English reading instruction at that age. Given that English is the mother tongue of the country in which they live and work, one could call that educational neglect as well though I think there is a lot to be said for being bi-lingual!

 

So, if I am going to respect the religious rights of the Amish,Mennonites, and Dutch Brethren to educate their children as they see fit for their faith based systems, then for me, it would be hypocritical to report the situation mentioned by the OP. Clearly, the parents believe they are doing right by their children based on their personal faith...ie. all of the Bible instruction as the basis of the education itself. Yes, it will limit the children to living the lifestyle the parents have chosen...there is a reason that the Amish do not often have a child leave the order...but that happens every day in this country and it has been a constitutionally protected right. If the OP's children are to be placed under the supervision of CPS in order to receive an education as defined by the majority or the government as a constitutionally protected right, then it would be necessary to adjust the constitution to not include religious freedom protections as it pertains to rearing children and therefore, place all religious groups that restrict educational depth in order to maintain their sect/order/way of life under the guidance of CPS until they adhere to the will of the majority.

 

I sort of like religious freedom for myself and so I'm not real keen on restraining it for others. Though I am also a "classical educator on steroids" type mom, I can appreciate the need for religious freedom even if that occasionally has some rather negative consequences and even if I personally feel sorry for the children educated in such manner.

 

Faith

 

And perhaps some of you might find it interesting that the Amish can and do foster parent and are foster-to-adopt in some cases, which means they sometimes adopt children who have been in protective custody when parental rights have been terminated--and these children were not originally removed from Amish families.

 

I am not making any comment regarding what my personal beliefs are on that. Just thought that it might be an interesting thing to note that the State will place children into homes where the children, if adopted, will not obtain a standard high school education (whatever that may be depending on where a child goes to school).

Edited December 6, 2011 by Violet

[LeslieAnneLevine]

What bothers me about this thread is the hell bent attitude on "religious freedom" at the expense of these kids or anyone else's kid who wants to do wacko things with them based on their religion.

 

 

I have not seen that much on this thread. It's more about people saying that the kids, unless they are being locked up, are still going to be learning and doing and are not being completely cut off from the world. That they may not be getting a great education, but it's not worth calling the authorities over since they are well-cared for, loved and happy. That the system which fails children everyday, may not be the best judge of what is to be done or the solution to this issue.

 

The religious part is actually what bothers me most about this family. I don't care if a child learns to read at 3 or 13.

[Joanne]

That they may not be getting a great education, but it's not worth calling the authorities over since they are well-cared for, loved and happy.

 

 

The religious part is actually what bothers me most about this family. I don't care if a child learns to read at 3 or 13.

 

See, I don't believe that the educational atmosphere speaks to cared for. Loved and happy is elusive, so I can't say for ANY family, really.

 

I do agree with you about the religious issues.

 

For me, it's the the combination that screams neglect and abuse to me.

[Pamela H in Texas]

What bothers me about this thread is the hell bent attitude on "religious freedom" at the expense of these kids or anyone else's kid who wants to do wacko things with them based on their religion.

 

Are you reading the same thread as any of the rest of us? btw, at 12 pages of 30 posts each plus whatever is on page 13, I wouldn't blame ya if you didn't. Really, considering the leanings of their religion, that would likely work against them in a thread on this board. Mostly, this was about educational philosophy.

[WIS0320]

Are you reading the same thread as any of the rest of us? btw, at 12 pages of 30 posts each plus whatever is on page 13, I wouldn't blame ya if you didn't. Really, considering the leanings of their religion, that would likely work against them in a thread on this board. Mostly, this was about educational philosophy.

 

Posts on page 31 prompted my aggravation (I must have my settings different than yours because I have 37 pages to wade through). It looks like one of them has been removed. This is a huge thread and I am trying to get to the end of it. :) I've been back and forth all day as I've gone about my usual responsibilities.

 

I was also commenting based on what the OP has stated (somewhere in this thread) that the father seems to intentionally be limiting his children educationally to the point that they will absolutely not be capable of higher education without serious remediation. That sounds not like an "educational philosophy" to me, that sounds like control based on religious beliefs.

[Cheryl in NM]

disclaimer: anytime I use "you" I am speaking to the "general you".

 

A child that can read can learn the GED material in 1-2 years and pass the GED. That is the same education required of ps students. Nothing says these parents aren't preparing their children for that. It scares me when homeschooling parents think that it is acceptable to alert the authorities of other homeschoolers who do less than them. Homeschoolers fought, faced jail time, forced ps and removal of their children from their homes for US to have the freedom to educate our children as we see fit.

 

Plenty of ps children graduate illiterate. Are you going to report their parents to CPS? Their teachers? The principal? The superintendent? I've heard of radical unschoolers who didn't actively teach their children anything and all of the ones I've read about and heard of learned to read.

 

There is love in this home. Why cause trouble for a loving home because they aren't living up to YOUR educational standards?

 

BTW, if someone is going against mainstream because of religious reasons it paints a target on their back.

[kiana]

 

A child that can read can learn the GED material in 1-2 years and pass the GED. That is the same education required of ps students. Nothing says these parents aren't preparing their children for that. It scares me when homeschooling parents think that it is acceptable to alert the authorities of other homeschoolers who do less than them. Homeschoolers fought, faced jail time, forced ps and removal of their children from their homes for US to have the freedom to educate our children as we see fit.

 

Plenty of ps children graduate illiterate. Are you going to report their parents to CPS? Their teachers? The principal? The superintendent? I've heard of radical unschoolers who didn't actively teach their children anything and all of the ones I've read about and heard of learned to read.

 

 

 

Bolded mine:

It doesn't seem that they're teaching them to read very much either, given that the OP added the 12yo is at about a 1st grade level and the 10yo is illiterate and frustrated by not being able to move on in math. This, for me, is where it crosses the line. If they were doing nothing other than reading, Bible, and math I wouldn't report.

 

Yes, every radical unschooler you've HEARD of has their child learn to read. A friend of mine teaches at a public school and they recently had two completely illiterate middle-schoolers (one could write their name only, one could maybe read at 1st grade level) from different families placed in their school. I was talking to him and it's not at all the first time it's happened. You don't hear as much about homeschooling failures (which do exist) because a) nobody likes to trumpet failures and b) many who would otherwise have fit into the failure statistics get dumped into school.

[Sahamamama]

Shouldn't we as a society be able to set some very basic parameters for what is and isn't acceptable for other parents?

 

This is easier to say if you are deciding what is acceptable for others, and harder if others are telling you what should be acceptable for your parenting.

[Sahamamama]

.

Edited December 6, 2011 by Sahamamama

[Cheryl in NM]

Bolded mine:

It doesn't seem that they're teaching them to read very much either, given that the OP added the 12yo is at about a 1st grade level and the 10yo is illiterate and frustrated by not being able to move on in math. This, for me, is where it crosses the line. If they were doing nothing other than reading, Bible, and math I wouldn't report.

 

Yes, every radical unschooler you've HEARD of has their child learn to read. A friend of mine teaches at a public school and they recently had two completely illiterate middle-schoolers (one could write their name only, one could maybe read at 1st grade level) from different families placed in their school. I was talking to him and it's not at all the first time it's happened. You don't hear as much about homeschooling failures (which do exist) because a) nobody likes to trumpet failures and b) many who would otherwise have fit into the failure statistics get dumped into school.

 

You missed my point.

 

1. many unschoolered children don't learn to read until 10-12 and then once they learn to read they progress rapidly

 

2. I never said the parents would teach the radical unschooled children to read. The ones I've heard of or read about taught themselve to read when it was important to them.

 

I don't advocate or agree with any of this. But, it's none of my business unless the family is asking me for help. Any time anyone outside the homeschooling sphere hears of a homeschooling failure they make sure they spread the news. Homeschooling is still not very popular which is why I hesitate to give the government more control over what we teach our children.

 

I'm guessing that if the children in the OP's post want to get out on their own at 18 they will seek out the knowledge they need to make this happen. The do have exposure to the outside world. It also doesn't sound like the strictly closed off existence that was originally presented.

[kiana]

You missed my point.

 

1. many unschoolered children don't learn to read until 10-12 and then once they learn to read they progress rapidly

 

2. I never said the parents would teach the radical unschooled children to read. The ones I've heard of or read about taught themselve to read when it was important to them.

 

I don't advocate or agree with any of this. But, it's none of my business unless the family is asking me for help. Any time anyone outside the homeschooling sphere hears of a homeschooling failure they make sure they spread the news. Homeschooling is still not very popular which is why I hesitate to give the government more control over what we teach our children.

 

I'm guessing that if the children in the OP's post want to get out on their own at 18 they will seek out the knowledge they need to make this happen. The do have exposure to the outside world. It also doesn't sound like the strictly closed off existence that was originally presented.

 

Being illiterate makes it extremely difficult to seek knowledge.

 

Again, I do not think this is a clear-cut case and respect someone's choice not to report. But for me, illiteracy in a child over ten is something I would report, if the parents were resistant to something like teaching reading.

 

If, OTOH, they were willing to consider alternatives (such as nearly-independent phonics DVDs/self-teaching math books), and work on getting the kids readnig, no, I wouldn't.

[Guest submarines]

Being illiterate makes it extremely difficult to seek knowledge.

 

Again, I do not think this is a clear-cut case and respect someone's choice not to report. But for me, illiteracy in a child over ten is something I would report, if the parents were resistant to something like teaching reading.

 

If, OTOH, they were willing to consider alternatives (such as nearly-independent phonics DVDs/self-teaching math books), and work on getting the kids readnig, no, I wouldn't.

 

Early reading is crucial for classroom management, and not as crucial for homeschoolers who have a lot of parental involvement and a rich learning environment.

[AHASRADA]

I have read the entire thread, with interest, over the last few days, but have avoided participating in what has become a controversial topic.

 

Without getting into the philosophical positions behind reporting or not reporting, but discussing the family in questions only and specifically, I have come to a conclusion (right or wrong) about their situation.

 

Based on the info. given by the OP, the family seems to have chosen homeschooling to promote family closeness, religious instruction, and to protect them from the evils of mainstream culture. These are reasons many board members share.

 

For whatever reason, mom and dad are overwhelmed with the actual implementation of homeschooling. This could be due to sheer number of children and family and home responsibilities, lack of knowledge about how to organize their time to homeschool a large family, etc. I'm sure many of us have felt this way at one time or another. Or, they may have other priorities that come before schooling and it just never gets done.

 

Personally, when I am not doing something that, deep inside, I know I should be doing, and someone calls me on it, I become defensive, possibly even justifying my actions, whether I truly believe my justifications or not. If the idea of tackling this task I am not managing to do becomes too overwhelming, I may even try to justify to myself that it just isn't possible, isn't all that necessary, etc. to make myself feel better.

 

The OP's comment that the family "felt guilty" about not teaching their kids, and then "decided to stop feeling guilty" tells me this is the situation they find themselves in.

 

Particularly the dad, as an authoritarian type, doesn't want to think of himself as a failure regarding his children, or to be seen as such by others, so he has found a way to justify their lack of instruction based on some religious grounds. Knowing that this argument wouldn't be supported by any church or religious organization they might associate with, he has distanced the family from such groups to avoid criticism.

 

I'm sure it doesn't help that they have other relatives who are homeschooling "successfully" and yet they can't manage to pull it off themselves. They have to find some defense in their own eyes, and those who push them into uncomfortable self-doubt are cut off. Not healthy, but understandable.

 

I don't believe this family wants to actively withhold educational instruction from their children. They are caught in a Catch 22. They don't want them in public school, they want them deeply grounded in their faith, they want them to live a family-centered life, and the parents want to be the final authority in their children's education. However, they are unable, whether due to lack of time or knowledge, priorities and distractions, etc., to follow through on the actual "academic instruction" portion of homeschooling.

 

In this case, the family needs guidance and suggestions for how to make education happen in their home, in a way that fits with their schedule and lifestyle. Since the parents are sensitive about this issue and have built a wall of defensiveness around the subject, the OP must (and has) tread carefully in this area.

 

Suggesting curriculum that requires minimal planning and time on the parents' part, as well as things that could be taught by older siblings, would be most helpful. Framing your advice as non-judgmental, "I'm sure you're doing fine, but if you were looking for a good math program, you might consider..." would likely be effective.

 

If the OP does discuss the situation with the grandparents, I would frame it in the manner I have outlined. Ensure that the grandparents offer help in such a way that it does not make the dad feel inadequate or challenged, because that will backfire.

 

When analyzed, I don't believe this family is all that different from those of us who never get around to using a lot of the curriculum we have, or whose schooling gets derailed for months due to illness or a new baby. The difference is they have given up rather than feel like a failure. They need gentle help and guidance that doesn't bruise dad's ego.

 

Best of luck to the OP.

[kiana]

Early reading is crucial for classroom management, and not as crucial for homeschoolers who have a lot of parental involvement and a rich learning environment.

 

There's a difference between "early" as in 6-7, and illiterate adolescents.

 

There's the 12yo who is on about the 1st grade level according to the OP. There's also the 10yo who WANTS to learn math and simply hasn't been taught to read. Those are problems.

 

Again, if they're being addressed, that's one thing. If they're not ... then yes, I do consider it neglect to not have a normal child reading reasonably well by the time they're a teenager.

[SKL]

Wasn't Annie Sullivan (Helen Keller's teacher) like 14 when she started to learn how to read? (In her case, she was a mostly-blind, destitute orphan.) She became quite well-educated between then and the time she graduated high school several years later. And her life was by no means rendered useless.

[Cheryl in NM]

Wasn't Annie Sullivan (Helen Keller's teacher) like 14 when she started to learn how to read? (In her case, she was a mostly-blind, destitute orphan.) She became quite well-educated between then and the time she graduated high school several years later. And her life was by no means rendered useless.

 

Thank you! We don't all have to follow the same plan and be in the same mold.

 

BTW: The Op's question wasn't whether this was neglect or right or wrong. It was whether it should be reported to government for government intervention. So to those of you who think this is neglect or abusive. Do you really think government intervention is warranted? Should this family cohesiveness be risked because YOU think aren't schooling the right way?

[nmoira]

 

Wasn't Annie Sullivan (Helen Keller's teacher) like 14 when she started to learn how to read? (In her case, she was a mostly-blind, destitute orphan.) She became quite well-educated between then and the time she graduated high school several years later. And her life was by no means rendered useless.

That some people who start out with a severe educational deficit turn out okay doesn't mean we can in good conscience deny children an education any more than the fact that some people experience spontaneous remission of cancer means we should deny those with cancer treatment.

[nmoira]

 

BTW: The Op's question wasn't whether this was neglect or right or wrong. It was whether it should be reported to government for government intervention. So to those of you who think this is neglect or abusive. Do you really think government intervention is warranted? Should this family cohesiveness be risked because YOU think aren't schooling the right way?

Yes, I do in this situation. I would hope that the children were in a state in which this situation could be remedied using existing homeschooling laws. Requirements are minimal in my state, Oregon, with required testing in grades 3, 5, 8 and 10. Many families fly under the radar, but reporting would only result in a tiny fine and a requirement to test. If a child's composite score is not above the 15th percentile, they must test again the next year. This can go on for up to three years of testing, including the original test. If there has been no improvement, then a child can be required to attend public school. A little accountability is not a bad thing. Kids with IEPs (or whatever our equivalent acronym is) are exempt from the testing requirements, but education plans must be on file. Edited December 6, 2011 by nmoira
clarity

[SKL]

That some people who start out with a severe educational deficit turn out okay doesn't mean we can in good conscience deny children an education any more than the fact that some people experience spontaneous remission of cancer means we should deny those with cancer treatment.

 

But I think it can be clearly shown that starting later on one's literacy education does not doom one. I can't think of any examples of intelligent or average people (not given reading lessons in childhood) who did not learn readily once exposed to literacy education at an older age. Can you? This kind of thing happens often to kids in developing countries who have illiterate parents and no access to school until they are older. Their rapid literacy development (often in multiple languages) can be humbling to watch.

 

Abraham Lincoln might be another apt example of someone who didn't have regular literacy lessons as a child (nor books in his house) and yet his life was not wasted.

[Cheryl in NM]

That some people who start out with a severe educational deficit turn out okay doesn't mean we can in good conscience deny children an education any more than the fact that some people experience spontaneous remission of cancer means we should deny those with cancer treatment.

 

I sincerely hope that you didn't mean to equate illiteracy with cancer. :confused: Besides, it is legal to chose alternative methods of treating cancer. The family in the OP is not refusing to teach reading, they just aren't doing it on the most commonly accepted time table.

[beaners]

I don't see how any example of people learning to read at a later age is a reason that these children shouldn't be taught to read now. Right now they ought to have the time and opportunity to learn. It sounds like there isn't an obstacle to their education except the unwillingness of the parents.

 

 

If I personally knew a family with a neurotypical 12 year old reading at that level, and if this family was not meeting the requirements of their state, and if that fact would not be apparent on state-mandated testing or review (for example, they never notified anyone), I would report it. All of those components would need to be in place.

 

 

I doubt I'd remain friends long enough to discover this kind of educational neglect though. I've met plenty of people around here who look down on anything resembling education. I'd assume this family was just as poor a match for us.

[Joanne]

Early reading is crucial for classroom management, and not as crucial for homeschoolers who have a lot of parental involvement and a rich learning environment.

 

Which is why I would not report unschoolers, but this family does not have involvement or a rich learning environment.

[FaithManor]

This is very interesting. For all of those that favor government intervention for educational neglect, not one person thus far has vocalized being pro constitutional amendment to make education a fundamental right of the citizenry, the minimum being defined by the will of the majority, and therefore as a result, the thousands of Amish, Old Order Mennonite, and Dutch Brethren children being undereducated to the point of both reading illiteracy as well as cultural illiteracy, placed under the supervision of government agencies.

 

I don't think you can have your cake and eat it too! Either you believe that is it morally wrong and you would seek to take control of all religious groups that use illiteracy to "control" their society, or you don't. Making a case that just the children in the OP's original post somehow have an inalienable right to a minimal education except the above groups is legal duplicity.

 

I think an awful lot of people want to judge the family and demand action, but don't have the guts to say we should no longer respect the Amish and other similar religious sects' ways of educating or undereducating their children because the naysayers aren't comfortable with sending social workers descending into Lancaster, PA; Holmes County, OH; numerous other counties around these locations as well as in Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin, and Indiana, etc. to begin governmental oversight. Knowing that these communities will not cave because they believe their salvation is at stake, most of these children would have to be placed into foster care.

 

So, the general consensus seems to be, "The family of original post are neglecting their children to such level that the government should intervene and force an education by will of the majority on the these children. But, hey, let's leave all of the many THOUSANDS of other kids alone because, you know, those Amish, Mennonites, Dutch Brethrens, etc. we don't want to look like the bad guy for interfering with them."

 

If you advocate for government intervention on behalf of the children in this thread, then you advocate for government oversight and forced education for ALL groups, period. You can't pick and choose because that is not how the constitution is written. Either they have a religious right to limit their children's education or they don't and if you are against the religious exemption applying to the OP family, then you are against it for these other peoples as well. It is illogical to apply the standard to one and not to the other.

 

Faith

[TammyinTN]

the parents told you that they are only studying Bible and a little math, and that's all they'll be doing next year, too?

 

I've made my decision, so I'm not really looking for advice. I'm just wondering how other homeschoolers see such an extreme case of failure to teach, and whether you'd feel a responsibility to report this to any kind of authorities in some way.

 

My decision: I am absolutely not going to say a word to anyone. Not while I personally know many public school graduates who can barely read their own diplomas and don't seem to know anything, and nobody accuses their parents or teachers of educational neglect.

 

Also, I'm not going to help bring about the disruption of a very happy family in which the children are otherwise loved and cared for.

 

That's not to say I'm not horrified. I am very upset.

 

What would you do? There are more than half a dozen children aged 2 to16. They live on the other side of the country from me and we don't meet often.

 

Although I don't personally think what they are doing is best for their children, I wouldn't report them. I would just mind my own business.

[nmoira]

I sincerely hope that you didn't mean to equate illiteracy with cancer. :confused: Besides, it is legal to chose alternative methods of treating cancer. The family in the OP is not refusing to teach reading, they just aren't doing it on the most commonly accepted time table.

I shouldn't have to say it, but it's an analogy about conclusions drawn on the basis of the example of using "some people do x (or have had x done to them) and turn out OK, therefore x is OK" not an equating of the underlying conditions.

 

Reading is a gateway to knowledge, not knowledge in and of itself. There are other gateways, but these are also not a part of this family's "homeschool."

[Meriwether]

This is very interesting. For all of those that favor government intervention for educational neglect, not one person thus far has vocalized being pro constitutional amendment to make education a fundamental right of the citizenry, the minimum being defined by the will of the majority, and therefore as a result, the thousands of Amish, Old Order Mennonite, and Dutch Brethren children being undereducated to the point of both reading illiteracy as well as cultural illiteracy, placed under the supervision of government agencies.

 

I don't think you can have your cake and eat it too! Either you believe that is it morally wrong and you would seek to take control of all religious groups that use illiteracy to "control" their society, or you don't. Making a case that just the children in the OP's original post somehow have an inalienable right to a minimal education except the above groups is legal duplicity.

 

I think an awful lot of people want to judge the family and demand action, but don't have the guts to say we should no longer respect the Amish and other similar religious sects' ways of educating or undereducating their children because the naysayers aren't comfortable with sending social workers descending into Lancaster, PA; Holmes County, OH; numerous other counties around these locations as well as in Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin, and Indiana, etc. to begin governmental oversight. Knowing that these communities will not cave because they believe their salvation is at stake, most of these children would have to be placed into foster care.

 

So, the general consensus seems to be, "The family of original post are neglecting their children to such level that the government should intervene and force an education by will of the majority on the these children. But, hey, let's leave all of the many THOUSANDS of other kids alone because, you know, those Amish, Mennonites, Dutch Brethrens, etc. we don't want to look like the bad guy for interfering with them."

 

If you advocate for government intervention on behalf of the children in this thread, then you advocate for government oversight and forced education for ALL groups, period. You can't pick and choose because that is not how the constitution is written. Either they have a religious right to limit their children's education or they don't and if you are against the religious exemption applying to the OP family, then you are against it for these other peoples as well. It is illogical to apply the standard to one and not to the other.

 

Faith

 

 

This is an aside, but I have to point out that the Amish developed their educational model a long time ago. Many people of that time followed the same educational model. The Amish did not embrace illiteracy to exert control. My great-grandfather was fond of quoting Longfellow and sent his daughter to 9th grade just because she wanted to go. This was at a time when many people in the general population only had an 8th grade education. My grandfather, on the other hand, only went to third grade. He was an outstanding mechanic and could read and do enough math to function as an adult.

[Cheryl in NM]

I shouldn't have to say it, but it's an analogy about conclusions drawn on the basis of the example of using "some people do x (or have had x done to them) and turn out OK, therefore x is OK" not an equating of the underlying conditions.

 

Reading is a gateway to knowledge, not knowledge in and of itself. There are other gateways, but these are also not a part of this family's "homeschool."

 

I understand it's analogy, but it's excessive to make your point and tug at people's emotions. It was unnecessary and in poor taste. People die from cancer everyday. Can you really say the same from illiteracy? No one in this thread is defending illiteracy or saying that it's the best way to go. Some just think that involving the government and possibly having these children removed from the home is excessive, especially since the home is loving.

 

I agree reading is a gateway to knowledge which is why I chose to make sure ds knew how to read, but he wasn't proficient until he was 9, by his own choice. By 11, he was reading at a college level.

 

The family in the OP ARE teaching their children to read; just not when YOU (the general you) think they should. Yes, they are using literacy for control, as many religious groups do. I don't agree with it, but I understand it. It is not illegal. When the children want to read their parents won't be able to stop them. Written word is everywhere, you really can't hide from it.

[Lang Syne Boardie]

This is very interesting. For all of those that favor government intervention for educational neglect, not one person thus far has vocalized being pro constitutional amendment to make education a fundamental right of the citizenry, the minimum being defined by the will of the majority, and therefore as a result, the thousands of Amish, Old Order Mennonite, and Dutch Brethren children being undereducated to the point of both reading illiteracy as well as cultural illiteracy, placed under the supervision of government agencies.

 

I don't think you can have your cake and eat it too! Either you believe that is it morally wrong and you would seek to take control of all religious groups that use illiteracy to "control" their society, or you don't. Making a case that just the children in the OP's original post somehow have an inalienable right to a minimal education except the above groups is legal duplicity.

 

I think an awful lot of people want to judge the family and demand action, but don't have the guts to say we should no longer respect the Amish and other similar religious sects' ways of educating or undereducating their children because the naysayers aren't comfortable with sending social workers descending into Lancaster, PA; Holmes County, OH; numerous other counties around these locations as well as in Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin, and Indiana, etc. to begin governmental oversight. Knowing that these communities will not cave because they believe their salvation is at stake, most of these children would have to be placed into foster care.

 

So, the general consensus seems to be, "The family of original post are neglecting their children to such level that the government should intervene and force an education by will of the majority on the these children. But, hey, let's leave all of the many THOUSANDS of other kids alone because, you know, those Amish, Mennonites, Dutch Brethrens, etc. we don't want to look like the bad guy for interfering with them."

 

If you advocate for government intervention on behalf of the children in this thread, then you advocate for government oversight and forced education for ALL groups, period. You can't pick and choose because that is not how the constitution is written. Either they have a religious right to limit their children's education or they don't and if you are against the religious exemption applying to the OP family, then you are against it for these other peoples as well. It is illogical to apply the standard to one and not to the other.

 

Faith

 

I made a spinoff thread here. This thread has been tagged "die thread die" and I think the tagger has a point! Maybe on the other thread we can speak more generally about educational neglect and the law as concerns the general population.

[MegP]

Here is something I have not seen asked- Is the family in question breaking their state law?

 

As you all know, each state has different laws. Some states require that the children be pretty much on grade level, while other states have no such requirement and in fact, have no requirements save a letter that the parents send in once at the commencement of homeschooling. I am aware of families who live in highly regulated states who have children who are not on grade level, and have had their right to homeschool revoked. Some states can even require that you have your child tested if the powers that be have reason to believe your child is behind.

 

Some states have a homeschooling department at the local or state level to whom one would report a family, if one chose to, while other states do not. So it is not necessarily CPS to whom the OP would report this family (if he or she were doing so).

Edited December 6, 2011 by MegP

[StephanieZ]

This is very interesting. For all of those that favor government intervention for educational neglect, not one person thus far has vocalized being pro constitutional amendment to make education a fundamental right of the citizenry, the minimum being defined by the will of the majority, and therefore as a result, the thousands of Amish, Old Order Mennonite, and Dutch Brethren children being undereducated to the point of both reading illiteracy as well as cultural illiteracy, placed under the supervision of government agencies.

 

I don't think you can have your cake and eat it too! Either you believe that is it morally wrong and you would seek to take control of all religious groups that use illiteracy to "control" their society, or you don't. Making a case that just the children in the OP's original post somehow have an inalienable right to a minimal education except the above groups is legal duplicity.

 

I think an awful lot of people want to judge the family and demand action, but don't have the guts to say we should no longer respect the Amish and other similar religious sects' ways of educating or undereducating their children because the naysayers aren't comfortable with sending social workers descending into Lancaster, PA; Holmes County, OH; numerous other counties around these locations as well as in Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin, and Indiana, etc. to begin governmental oversight. Knowing that these communities will not cave because they believe their salvation is at stake, most of these children would have to be placed into foster care.

 

So, the general consensus seems to be, "The family of original post are neglecting their children to such level that the government should intervene and force an education by will of the majority on the these children. But, hey, let's leave all of the many THOUSANDS of other kids alone because, you know, those Amish, Mennonites, Dutch Brethrens, etc. we don't want to look like the bad guy for interfering with them."

 

If you advocate for government intervention on behalf of the children in this thread, then you advocate for government oversight and forced education for ALL groups, period. You can't pick and choose because that is not how the constitution is written. Either they have a religious right to limit their children's education or they don't and if you are against the religious exemption applying to the OP family, then you are against it for these other peoples as well. It is illogical to apply the standard to one and not to the other.

 

Faith

 

Uhh, have you used Amish or Mennonite schooling materials at all? Having extensively used Pathway Readers (Amish) and Rod & Staff English (Menonite), I would argue that literacy is obviously fundamental to their educational system. I would argue that a child who has successfully completed R&S English 7 is vastly better prepared in basic english competency (grammar, reading, composition) than the typical highschool graduate. Similarly, Pathway Readers provide a solid phonics based reading foundation that is definitely at or above the grade levels they are designed for. I have not used other materials from these publishers, but from what I have read, I understand that they provide a similar solid foundation in fundamentals.

 

Likewise, arguing for what is right and wrong is not the same as believing there should be a constitutional amendment dictating such. That is totally out-there. I am a pretty opinionated person, but there are HUGE leaps between what I believe:

 

1) is morally right and wrong

2) should be legally allowable and

3) should be constitutionally protected.

 

Personally, I believe that a decent education is a human right, and should definitely be legally protected as such via state and federal laws. I would not particularly object to that right being protected by the constitution (if it was worded carefully), but personally, I'd make it a priority to have equal protection of the sexes a higher priority, and we haven't even gotten the ERA to pass. Next, my priority would be equal protection based on sexual orientation, and somehow I don't think that is going to pass in my lifetime either. Changing our constitution is and should be extremely difficult.

 

Note, also, that when you lump the Amish and other communities in with random groups of nonconformists, you are mixing apples and oranges. The law has (and should) made distinctions in the legal protection of formal religions vs personal conscience. If there is a formal religion advocating raising children in illiteracy, they can take that religious objection to the courts, and should welcome prosecution under neglect laws as it will provide them the opportunity to argue their cause and establish case law to protect their entire community's right to neglect their kids' educations. (Good luck doing so if they have uneducated adults as well as children.) The courts will balance the religious rights of the parents against the rights of the children. This is how these cases are decided -- in medical neglect cases, educational neglect cases, etc. Parents don't have unfettered rights to make all decisions for their kids.

 

And, to someone else's comment about alternative care for cancer . . . Indeed, the courts have and will step in to force acceptable medical treatment if the alternatives chosen by the parents are not deemed adequate. You are free to make whatever choices for YOURSELF as an adult that you wish . . . but you do not have unfettered rights to make those decisions for your child if they are deemed to be irresponsible and harmful to the child.

[stripe]

I think an awful lot of people want to judge the family and demand action, but don't have the guts to say we should no longer respect the Amish and other similar religious sects' ways of educating or undereducating their children because the naysayers aren't comfortable with sending social workers descending into Lancaster, PA; Holmes County, OH; numerous other counties around these locations as well as in Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin, and Indiana, etc. to begin governmental oversight.

I would like to point out that the Amish went all the way to the Supreme Court to get the right to stop educating their children after grade eight, not to remain illiterate. (Instead of forcing them to go to tenth grade.)

 

And Wisconsin v. Yoder was in 1972, not centuries ago.

 

They are preparing their children for Amish life. The problem is when their children leave Amish life. They then have to sort out their educational deficiencies. I have seen a few such young adults on tv programs discussing taking the GED and so forth.

 

Most homeschoolers do not have a totally separatist way of life.

[Meriwether]

I just mentioned Wisconsin v. Yoder in the spin off. Actually, I didn't say anything else. It isn't like this is a new discussion.

[Guest submarines]

Which is why I would not report unschoolers, but this family does not have involvement or a rich learning environment.

 

They are probably learning trades and life skills. I doubt they sit in cages all day. If they know are learning to sew, knit, crochet, cook, scrapbook, preserve, build with wood, garden, balance a checkbook, take care of pets and animals and babies or any combination of skills relevant to their lives, they ARE learning and developing as individuals.

 

They read / listen to the Bible. They are absorbing a lot just from that, even without a curriculum. They are developing a strong moral compass and character. These will be people you can trust to hold your wallet in a store, or look after your child. They won't be helpless when they grow up. They fit into their subculture.

 

This said, from everything that has been disclosed about them, I'd worry about the kids--just because I'd want more for them, than just the Bible and math. I'd be one of those trying to reach out and offer choices.

 

BUT...I don't think the way they are educated warrants reporting.

[Jane Elliot]

The religious part is actually what bothers me most about this family. I don't care if a child learns to read at 3 or 13.

 

LeslieAnne (and Joanne), are you saying that the fact that they're religious bothers you more than their educational philosophy? I might have missed something, but it seems to be what you're saying, so I wondered if you could clarify.

 

ETA: LeslieAnne, I went back and read some of your other posts, and now I think I know what you meant by that statement. I really want to follow this thread. It's so interesting (and sometimes confusing), but my own kids' education is going to suffer if I spend too much time on it.

Edited December 6, 2011 by Luann in ID

[Joanne]

LeslieAnne (and Joanne), are you saying that the fact that they're religious bothers you more than their educational philosophy? I might have missed something, but it seems to be what you're saying, so I wondered if you could clarify.

 

ETA: LeslieAnne, I went back and read some of your other posts, and now I think I know what you meant by that statement. I really want to follow this thread. It's so interesting (and sometimes confusing), but my own kids' education is going to suffer if I spend too much time on it.

 

The religious extremism, observed through the constellation of issues:

 

1. Patriarchical

2. Bible "only"

3. Lack of traditional, western, focus on culture and preparation for life

4. Lack of affiliation with traditional, mainline church (not wanting to be "under authority" would not bother me in and of itself, because I don't believe in that church function in the way many conservatives do)

5. The extreme relaxed academic standards

[SKL]

I have to say that I don't agree that the fact that the family is patriarchal is "that" concerning. Short of lobotomizing the daughters, nobody can stop their brains from figuring out the basic realities, e.g., girls are not dumb and can do important things without a man overseeing.

 

Not long ago, nearly every family was patriarchal. I may not agree with it myself, but I consider it an extreme stretch to call it evidence of abuse or neglect.

 

I wonder how much different this thread would be if religious bias could be separated from our feelings about other things.

 

I mean, if they were reading Shakespeare daily instead of the Bible, would this give so many people the creeps?

[Joanne]

I have to say that I don't agree that the fact that the family is patriarchal is "that" concerning. Short of lobotomizing the daughters, nobody can stop their brains from figuring out the basic realities, e.g., girls are not dumb and can do important things without a man overseeing.

 

Not long ago, nearly every family was patriarchal. I may not agree with it myself, but I consider it an extreme stretch to call it evidence of abuse or neglect.

 

I wonder how much different this thread would be if religious bias could be separated from our feelings about other things.

 

I mean, if they were reading Shakespeare daily instead of the Bible, would this give so many people the creeps?

 

Disagree with the bold. I do not believe nearly every family was patriarchal in the way I mean when I use the term. The Proverbs 31 Wife, for example, doesn't operate in a patriarchy. She goes back a while. ;)

 

And I disagree that it is easy to transcend learning and conditioning of early childhood that sends gender-based messages on worthiness, ability, and what is available as adults.

 

But the part I think was missed was the constellation of issues. Picking one out to argue against misses my point that the concern is due to all the issues.

[Jane Elliot]

I mean, if they were reading Shakespeare daily instead of the Bible, would this give so many people the creeps?

 

I asked dh this exact question when we first began discussing this thread. I wonder this, too.

Edited December 6, 2011 by Luann in ID
notebook fell on the keyboard right before I posted

[SKL]

But the part I think was missed was the constellation of issues. Picking one out to argue against misses my point that the concern is due to all the issues.

 

I guess I'm not smart enough (I am a female, after all) to understand how including religion in the constellation makes it relevant.

[beaners]

I asked dh this exact question when we first began discussing this thread. I wonder this, too.

 

But to be fair, it would be read to them. It isn't the children reading, right?

[Laura Corin]

I mean, if they were reading Shakespeare daily instead of the Bible, would this give so many people the creeps?

 

I would still think they were not doing enough. It would still be a very constrained education. Not to mention that there's been no mention that I remember of any writing going on.

 

Laura

[MegP]

It is people like this who make things harder for those of us who ARE following the laws. Most of us homeschoolers work hard and don't really need to jump through more hoops. The Powers that be look at a few homeschoolers who are breaking the law and conclude that there is a huge problem of homeschoolers out there who are clueless or lazy and do nothing to teach our children, and then they make the laws tougher for all of us. Just because they are fellow homeschoolers, does not mean we need to protect them. I assert that they are not homeschooler at all, but imposters. There was a thread here in the past about homeschool imposters. They are doing their children a huge disservice that we as society will have to pay for. How unfair to refuse to teach your children to read! (Or math, writing, etc.) What do they expect their children to do when they are grown?

 

OP, I would find out what the homeschooling laws are in the state where this family lives-it is likely they are breaking the law.

Edited December 6, 2011 by MegP

[sassyscrapperinid]

It wouldn't even have occured to me to report them.

 

Me either... I understand someone being concerned about something like that, but in my opinion, unless the children are showing signs of physical abuse, I feel it isn't appropriate to get involved. I would perhaps maybe invite the family to participate in some kind of weekly learning day as has been previously mentioned by other posters. It kind of irritates me that people feel the need to over rule what other parents believe is best for their family. It's true, those kids will need some sort of education to survive in the world. I mean, even if they only work fast food or walmart, they have to know how to count money, etc. From personal experience, some old neighbors (teamed up with a disgruntled adopted child) decided to file false allegations against my husband and I for educational neglect and a whole bunch of other lies in an attempt to gain my children as foster children and make money. The CPS agent that came over asked to see proof that we are homeschooling in the form of curriculum that I have. I pulled it all out- 3 stacks 3 feet high of workbooks and other textbooks. Then they went down stairs and saw our education room with maps, computers, etc. She laughed and said there is no doubt that there is no basis for the accusation. Now, I have 5 adopted RAD kids and 4 other children. I have unschooled most of their lives and wish I had been able to pull myself out of the severe depression I was in to do something different, but I also have learned a lot since then. Over the years, I actually only had one other homeschooling mom make a comment about the way my children learned. However, are my children "up to grade level"? Probably not. In fact, I'm sure they're not. Im sure what we do is vastly different than most homeschoolers. I have spent hours and hours preparing schoolwork for my children, only to have my RAD kids flat refuse to do it. They sit there and stare into space and/or draw on the worksheets. So they have had to learn what they need in real life. My other children however have their GED and are attending college. One of which is only 16. They also have access to everything they need to gain "book smarts" in my house. They wouldnt even have to go to the library if they didnt want to. I think the bottom line is that there is more than one way to learn and at some point children have to take responsibility for their education. If those teens don't know how to read, my question would be to those teens, "would you like to learn to read?" And if they dont, then my next question is why not? I think the teens should understand that they will need to support themselves one day and they will need a way to do that. To the OP: Are you close enough to the family that you could ask the parents how they are preparing the teens for the world?

It's a shame that people have to judge based on the little bit of knowledge they have.

[mcconnellboys]

Many of the unschoolers I know do not learn to read until they are in their teens (if then). They do not really do any sort of academic work, except, for some, a little math. This sounds just like a lot of the unschoolers I know, save that they don't read their Bibles and do play video games all day long....

[Joanne]

From personal experience, some old neighbors (teamed up with a disgruntled adopted child) decided to file false allegations against my husband and I for educational neglect and a whole bunch of other lies in an attempt to gain my children as foster children and make money.

 

 

Now, I have 5 adopted RAD kids and 4 other children.

 

:confused:

 

If paragraph 2 is true, you know that paragraph #1 represents a progression of events that don't happen. Children are not specifically fostered into families that make reports. This is a very unique, or odd, situation.

[mcconnellboys]

Wow, I can think of a million ways that one could "retard" any particular child's academic development. If you don't give a gifted child what they need, then you are technically retarding their potential development. I think that your intent is to look at the basics, such as rudimentary reading and writing, but as others have stated (Strider, for instance), children who come to learning later may pick it up remarkably quickly. There was a whole school of thought for a number of years (which is still around in some quarters) of "better late" in terms of reading, for instance.

 

I'd have to know a lot more about this family's dynamic in order to make a decision about something that might change all of their lives forever, and not necessarily for the good, as most examples I know about where CPS have gotten involved with families have been nightmarish....

[Spy Car]

The children CAN NOT READ.

 

CAN NOT READ

 

This is abuse. Plain and simple.

 

Bill

[MegP]

It is wrong and likely to be ILLEGAL as well.

[Pamela H in Texas]

If paragraph 2 is true, you know that paragraph #1 represents a progression of events that don't happen. Children are not specifically fostered into families that make reports. This is a very unique, or odd, situation.

 

Actually, she said that they were teamed up with a disgruntled adopted child. That means they had a relationship with the family to some degree or another. The family could, in many states, claim to be fictive kin in order to try to get the children. We were fictive kin foster parents 14 years ago. We did get money from the state to keep the kids after it was officially through the state (we had the kids with mom's blessing prior to the state taking custody). It wasn't enough to make money though! It isn't enough to make money NOW and Texas' foster care stipend is MUCH higher than Louisiana's stipend was back then. Maybe those people just didn't know it costs money to raise children!