PA Bill requiring abuse risk assessment home visits

[JMDRAD]

http://www.childprotection.state.pa.us/Resources/press/2012-11-27%20Child%20Protection%20Report%20FINAL.pdf

 

Is anybody aware of this? I am not from PA but I thought I'd pass along the info to you all. In a nutshell, anybody withdrawing their children from school will be required to have three home visits to prove they are not child abusers.

[Barb_]

http://www.childprot...eport FINAL.pdf

 

Is anybody aware of this? I am not from PA but I thought I'd pass along the info to you all. In a nutshell, anybody withdrawing their children from school will be required to have three home visits to prove they are not child abusers.

 

 

That is a very long document, but the only mention I see of the above is this:

 

 

Throughout the course of its deliberations, the Task Force compiled a list of

specific issues to address and consider in more detail regarding investigations, including

near fatalities; monitoring situations in which a child who is the subject of a previous

report of child abuse or neglect is suddenly withdrawn from school or daycare and is

isolated from other individuals;

[happypamama]

I saw something about it from CHAP today; the bill seems to indicate that all homeschooled children will be reported to the county, so that the county will conduct a risk assessment. I want to know what would constitute such a risk assessment, and I also want to know how they think they're going to pay for it. I am concerned but waiting to see what develops.

[Barb_]

I saw something about it from CHAP today; the bill seems to indicate that all homeschooled children will be reported to the county, so that the county will conduct a risk assessment. I want to know what would constitute such a risk assessment, and I also want to know how they think they're going to pay for it. I am concerned but waiting to see what develops.

 

I don't live in PA anymore, but we moved from there about 6 years ago so I'm always interested in what fresh hell they are springing on you all there. In this case, however, I think it's a stretch to get from this bill to all home visits for all homeschoolers. They can barely keep up with the portfolios. Seriously, I did a control-F on the whole document for home visit and for withdraw and for home school, and the passage I quoted above is the closest I can get to risk assessments for homechoolers. I think someone is feeding the rumor mill.

[lorisuewho]

 

I don't live in PA anymore, but we moved from there about 6 years ago so I'm always interested in what fresh hell they are springing on you all there.

 

This made me LOL!

 

The initial report from CHAP seemed to say that EVERY homeschooler was going to be reported by the school district to Children and Youth for investigation and they would have to be approved as not abusive. (this was per a memo they received).

 

After clarification and reading the actual bill, it definitely seems to say that homeschoolers who have had a report of abuse by anyone in the home within the past 18 months, will need to be reported by the school district to children and youth.

 

There's a lot I would like to say about the state of PA and its treatment of homeschooling, but I don't believe this is the thread for it.

[happypamama]

Yes, as Lori said, the initial report from CHAP makes it sound a lot worse than it is. I still think it's a bit worrisome, but it could be worse.

 

"What fresh hell they're springing on us" -- LOL! Every time I hear about any new legislation in PA, I want to know just how they think they're going to pay for its implementation.

[Barb_]

Honestly, I loved living in PA. I didn't think I ever wanted to leave, but now that I've been gone a few years, I don't think I'd want to move back. The regulations there are really oppressive. I was there during the days of HB 2560 and was absolutely disillusioned by my elected representatives. What a farce that was!

[lorisuewho]

Thinking about this more. . . .How are school districts supposed to know which homeschoolers to report or not report for further investigation? It isn't like school districts have a list of who has been reported or suspected of abuse in the entire state of PA.

They couldn't have this information; I believe it would be against privacy laws. Therefore, I would guess that the school districts would have to report every single homeschooler.

[junepep]

The issue was caused by this memo: http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/Legis/CSM/showMemoPublic.cfm?chamber=S&SPick=20130&cosponId=11867 - which, when you read through it, sounded like it was going to impact every HS family.

 

The actual legislation is actually fairly narrow: http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/legis/PN/Public/btCheck.cfm?txtType=PDF&sessYr=2013&sessInd=0&billBody=S&billTyp=B&billNbr=0032&pn=0691 - they can only report in cases where there has already been a charge of abuse within the last 18mos.

[lorisuewho]

 

 

The actual legislation is actually fairly narrow: http://www.legis.sta...br=0032&pn=0691 - they can only report in cases where there has already been a charge of abuse within the last 18mos.

 

 

I think this part is the part that has me most confused, though. School districts themselves do not have any way of knowing where there has been charges of abuse.

[Barb_]

Thinking about this more. . . .How are school districts supposed to know which homeschoolers to report or not report for further investigation? It isn't like school districts have a list of who has been reported or suspected of abuse in the entire state of PA.

They couldn't have this information; I believe it would be against privacy laws. Therefore, I would guess that the school districts would have to report every single homeschooler.

 

 

Possibly. Wouldn't it be easy to cross reference a list of homeschooling families with a list of those reported for child abuse or neglect? It probably won't result in home visits for everyone. As you said, how could they possibly afford to do that?

[Barb_]

The issue was caused by this memo: http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/Legis/CSM/showMemoPublic.cfm?chamber=S&SPick=20130&cosponId=11867 - which, when you read through it, sounded like it was going to impact every HS family.

 

The actual legislation is actually fairly narrow: http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/legis/PN/Public/btCheck.cfm?txtType=PDF&sessYr=2013&sessInd=0&billBody=S&billTyp=B&billNbr=0032&pn=0691 - they can only report in cases where there has already been a charge of abuse within the last 18mos.

 

 

A senator inflating the importance and scope of a pet project? Shocking. LOL

 

I've been a registered democrat since 1987, but living in PA almost turned me to the dark side :D

[junepep]

Thinking about this more. . . .How are school districts supposed to know which homeschoolers to report or not report for further investigation? It isn't like school districts have a list of who has been reported or suspected of abuse in the entire state of PA.

They couldn't have this information; I believe it would be against privacy laws. Therefore, I would guess that the school districts would have to report every single homeschooler.

 

 

According to the PA law code, the people involved in 'founded' charges of abuse are listed in a state-wide central register, therefore I don't think that this would be an issue.

(PA child abuse code: http://www.pacode.com/secure/data/055/chapter3490/chap3490toc.html)

[Barb_]

 

 

I think this part is the part that has me most confused, though. School districts themselves do not have any way of knowing where there has been charges of abuse.

 

 

Yeah, you're right. It looks like every registered homeschoolers and cyber schooler will be reported or children and family services. That must be the "risk assessment" Senator Dinnamin" was referring to.

[stripe]

There was a recent case of a boy in PA who was forced into sex with his mother for about 6 years, who had been homeschooled, wasn't there? Is this a reaction to / attempt to prevent that horror?

[creekland]

School districts themselves do not have any way of knowing where there has been charges of abuse.

 

 

Really? Our school district knows quite a bit about those in "problem" homes especially "legal" issues. It's all kept in guidance with special people unless teachers need to know - then we have to sign forms after we've read what we're supposed to know (generally legal rulings affecting those under our care). Guidance knows far more than we do and will often give us hints about how to better connect with certain students when we can do more. They do not tell us details we aren't supposed to know - but general things.

 

It wouldn't be hard at all to report students who could be of concern if they were pulled out of school and it wouldn't affect "normal" students one bit.

[lorisuewho]

There was a recent case of a boy in PA who was forced into sex with his mother for about 6 years, who had been homeschooled, wasn't there? Is this a reaction to / attempt to prevent that horror?

 

 

I never heard about this, but this is generally what my dh suspected.. . that there was a case somewhere and this is a reaction to it.

 

 

 

 

I never heard about this, but this is generally what my dh suspected.. . that there was a case somewhere and this is a reaction to it.

 

Really? Our school district knows quite a bit about those in "problem" homes especially "legal" issues. It's all kept in guidance with special people unless teachers need to know - then we have to sign forms after we've read what we're supposed to know (generally legal rulings affecting those under our care). Guidance knows far more than we do and will often give us hints about how to better connect with certain students when we can do more. They do not tell us details we aren't supposed to know - but general things.

 

It wouldn't be hard at all to report students who could be of concern if they were pulled out of school and it wouldn't affect "normal" students one bit.

 

The district may or may not be familiar with cases going on with students in their district. They may be aware that a case has been opened up and may know of some of the details. However, I don't believe they can know about homeschoolers who have always been homeschooled. There would be no reason for them to be privy to that information.

[stripe]

I never heard about this, but this is generally what my dh suspected.. . that there was a case somewhere and this is a reaction to it.

http://citizensvoice.com/news/plymouth-couple-convicted-of-sexual-abuse-of-son-1.1413070 is a summary and includes info about their sentencing, but I hadn't realized before that he was enrolled in an online charter school.

[Tarreymere]

I asked DH what he had heard about this, since he works at our county human services. We don't think it will inspire any kind of witch hunt in our county (Crawford) as we aren't the only homeschooling family with an adult who works in human services. It might even be a good thing, because there does seem to be a persistent perception in our area that the only sort of people who homeschool are the kind of people who want to abuse their kids without scrutiny. I've actually been told that by a woman who has a business doing homeschool evaluations. At least this legislation clearly states that a risk assessment is only in order for people who have had a history with children's services for abuse.

 

We have about a hundred kids in our local school district who are legally homeschooling (PDE website), and probably three times that who are enrolled in a cyber charter school. Our county also includes parts of four or five other school districts. Our local county office simply isn't staffed in a way to do risk assessments on that kind of scale, and further, there is no evidence in the literature to indicate that homeschooling or cyberschooling alone is an identifiable risk factor for abuse.

 

I have a lot of things I'd like to say to the legislator who came up with the original idea.

 

Dh and I have talked about moving to another state, if necessary.

[lorisuewho]

http://citizensvoice...f-son-1.1413070 is a summary and includes info about their sentencing, but I hadn't realized before that he was enrolled in an online charter school.

 

I think that is why cyberschoolers are included in this legislation.

[creekland]

 

The district may or may not be familiar with cases going on with students in their district. They may be aware that a case has been opened up and may know of some of the details. However, I don't believe they can know about homeschoolers who have always been homeschooled. There would be no reason for them to be privy to that information.

 

This never has been about students who have always been homeschooled. It's only about those who are being withdrawn from school. We get students who withdraw for various reasons from moving to homeschooling. It will only affect a small minority of the population.

[lorisuewho]

This never has been about students who have always been homeschooled. It's only about those who are being withdrawn from school. We get students who withdraw for various reasons from moving to homeschooling. It will only affect a small minority of the population.

 

 

I hope you are right, but that is not how I understood the bill when I read it.

[creekland]

I hope you are right, but that is not how I understood the bill when I read it.

 

See post #2 in this thread... ;)

[lorisuewho]

See post #2 in this thread... ;)

 

I understood that link to be the task force's proposal but this to be the bill that is being submitted.

Perhaps I am not understanding this correctly.

[Koerarmoca]

I don't miss my PA homeschooling days. I do feel though that if there is a case of abuse that its good for someone to follow up on the family.

[stripe]

I don't miss my PA homeschooling days. I do feel though that if there is a case of abuse that its good for someone to follow up on the family.

 

The case of the boy in question is beyond revolting, and I can see the concern in a case that (as was argued in his case) that he was so isolated that he had no idea it was wrong for his father to show him porn and for him to have regular intercourse with his mother from a young age. I am honestly not sure what I think of that argument, and not sure how it could be prevented, but it is quite horrific to think that it happened, and for years.

[lorisuewho]

I don't miss my PA homeschooling days. I do feel though that if there is a case of abuse that its good for someone to follow up on the family.

I agree

 

The case of the boy in question is beyond revolting, and I can see the concern in a case that (as was argued in his case) that he was so isolated that he had no idea it was wrong for his father to show him porn and for him to have regular intercourse with his mother from a young age. I am honestly not sure what I think of that argument, and not sure how it could be prevented, but it is quite horrific to think that it happened, and for years.

 

I agree. I had a hard time reading the article it was so horrible.

 

But shouldn't Children and Youth follow up on all cases of abuse? I really don't know what their procedures are, but I would hope as part of their following up on cases of abuse or investigating them, they would know whether or not the child goes to public school or not. It just seems odd to me to say, "Well tell us who isn't coming to public school and we are going to follow up on those cases, but the other cases we will leave it up to the school district to check in on things." This idea makes no sense to me. Plus, I feel Children and Youth should already know who is being homeschooled and who is not in abuse cases. I don't know why the school district has to tell them. Or it is very possible I am naive to the way these things work.

[Jayne J]

Section 223.1. Duty to Notify County.--(a) The school

12 district in which the child resides shall notify the county

13 whenever a child enrolls in a home school program or cyber

14 charter school, is truant or fails to register for school upon

15 attaining compulsory school age if:

16 (1) A child or another child in the child's household has

17 been the subject of a founded or indicated report or received

18 general protective services within the last eighteen months.

(2) The parent or other person the child resides with has

2 been the subject of a report within the last eighteen months.

 

This is cut and pasted from the actual bill linked above by lorisuewho. It states that the schools would only report families on which there are "founded" reports or in which the parent has been reported within the last 18 months. The remainder of the bill goes on to define terms such as "founded"and give additional details about the process after a school does notify the county about such cases.

I agree that the mechanism by which the school decides or knows who to report is murky and should have been/needs to be cleared up, but so far as I understand this bill only applies to those families with documented problems already in existence.

[shawthorne44]

Seems to me like this is a step in the direction of home visits for all homeschoolers.

[stripe]

But shouldn't Children and Youth follow up on all cases of abuse? I really don't know what their procedures are, but I would hope as part of their following up on cases of abuse or investigating them, they would know whether or not the child goes to public school or not.

I can say from personal experience, I was NOT impressed by the inaction (insufficient action, anyway) on the part of a private school teacher when she suspected/knew of abuse in a student's home. She was the one who told me about it. I honestly lost a great deal of respect for her after that. I always thought teachers were mandatory reporters anyhow.

[lorisuewho]

I can say from personal experience, I was NOT impressed by the inaction (insufficient action, anyway) on the part of a private school teacher when she suspected/knew of abuse in a student's home. She was the one who told me about it. I honestly lost a great deal of respect for her after that. I always thought teachers were mandatory reporters anyhow.

 

 

Well, that is completely sad. And yes, teachers are indeed mandatory reporters at least in the state of PA.

 

This is what I was forwarded by my mother from the American Family Association of PA today:

 

"Turns out the current homeschool law already addresses the issue of child safety – and to an even greater extent. The following is a portion of what Maryalice Newborn, a member of the Pennsylvania Home Educators Association Advisory Board, sent to all members of the Senate Education Committee:

The Home Education Program Law (24 P.S. 13-1327.1 (B)(1)) currently prohibits home education of children when ANY adult living in the home has been convicted of an extensive legal list of crimes in the last five years, including:

homicide,

aggravated assault,

stalking,

kidnapping,

unlawful restraint,

rape,

statutory sexual assault,

involuntary deviate sexual intercourse,

sexual assault,

aggravated indecent assault,

indecent assault,

indecent exposure,

incest,

concealing the death of a child,

endangering the welfare of a child,

dealing in infant children,

prostitution and related offenses,

obscene and other sexual materials and performances,

corruption of minors,

AND sexual abuse of children.

Pennsylvania’s current law is far more restrictive than what is in SB32. Provisions are already in place to prevent children from being home educated in a dangerous situation. There is a complete lack of logic in legislating home visits to residences where a person has been subject of a child abuse report in the last eighteen months (SB32), since the law already prohibits a Home Education Program if a conviction has occurred within the last five years."

[Jayne J]

I hadn't thought of that! I do remember that part of the law, now that you mention it.

[Momof3littles]

Agree with the quote from Maryalice in that the law already addresses this. When that new part of the law went into effect, we had to put it in our affidavit anyway. The only thing I wonder if they'll raise as an issue is that the existing law mentions "convicted of" vs. the parent being the "subject of a report" which is the language in the new proposed bill.

[lorisuewho]

Agree with the quote from Maryalice in that the law already addresses this. When that new part of the law went into effect, we had to put it in our affidavit anyway. The only thing I wonder if they'll raise as an issue is that the existing law mentions "convicted of" vs. the parent being the "subject of a report" which is the language in the new proposed bill.

 

 

My children are too young to fall under the homeschool law, so I have never done the affidavit. Is this already in the affidavit?

The more I read the more I'm confused about the purpose of the new bill.

[Sahamamama]

Honestly, I loved living in PA. I didn't think I ever wanted to leave, but now that I've been gone a few years, I don't think I'd want to move back. The regulations there are really oppressive. I was there during the days of HB 2560 and was absolutely disillusioned by my elected representatives. What a farce that was!

 

Barb -- We live in NJ and the taxes here are ridiculous. We looked into moving across the river (5 miles!) to PA... just couldn't do it. Living in PA (close enough to NJ) wouldn't have saved us enough money to justify the hoops we'd have to jump through to HS there. It's good to hear someone else say it's oppressive. Some PA people we talk to say, "Oh, sure we have to submit this and this and this and that, and test, and have an evaluation, and submit a portfolio, and a reading log, and blah, blah, blah -- but it's not really that bad. And we can have guns here." :blink:

 

FWIW, there are places in PA that are just beautiful, and we wish the HS regs were different. Sigh.

[happypamama]

We can have raw milk here too. :)

 

PA's a mixed bag -- we really like some of the laws, but others are annoying, and potentially very dangerous. Generally, I really love living here, though (enough that we pay a hefty commuting cost for DH so that we can live here instead of across the line, closer to his office; of course, we'd pay more for a house if we lived closer to the office too, so it's probably a toss-up). There are some really aggravating things that I dislike about living here, though, but I suppose nowhere is going to be perfect for us for all things. (I'd like the money that CA charter schools give to homeschoolers, but there are a lot of things I really wouldn't like about living there too.)

[Jayne J]

 

 

My children are too young to fall under the homeschool law, so I have never done the affidavit. Is this already in the affidavit?

The more I read the more I'm confused about the purpose of the new bill.

 

It is already in the affidavits. Several homeschool associations in PA offer an affidavit form to download, fill in, and notarize to be sure you are covering all the requirements of the law, and this particular requirement (re: crimes within the last 5 years) is specified. Here is another cut and paste from a sample affidavit from the PHEN website:

 

"I certify that the subjects as required by law are offered in the English language, that an outline of proposed educational objectives by subject area is included; that each child has been immunized in accordance with the provisions of section 1303 © and (d) and has received the health and medical services required for such students of the child’s age or grade level in Article XIV or has a medical, religious, strong moral or ethical exemption; that the home education program shall comply with the provisions of Act 169 Section 1327.1 and that this affidavit shall be satisfactory evidence thereof.

 

 

This certifies that I, all adults living in the home and persons having legal custody of the child or children in the home education program have not been convicted of the criminal offenses enumerated in subsection (e) of section 111 within five years immediately preceding the date of this affidavit.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 

I attest that I have a high school diploma or its equivalent."

 

(I have changed the formatting to highlight the section I am referring to, since I cannot bold or italicize on my iPad)

[lorisuewho]

We can have raw milk here too. :)

 

 

 

Love the legal raw milk!

[lorisuewho]

Thank you, urpedonmommy!

[LucyStoner]

 

http://citizensvoice.com/news/plymouth-couple-convicted-of-sexual-abuse-of-son-1.1413070 is a summary and includes info about their sentencing, but I hadn't realized before that he was enrolled in an online charter school.

 

People like this make me wish I believed in hell. Eternity is too short of a time for them to suffer.

[justasque]

There *is* language in the affidavit that you cannot home educate if there is someone convicted of nasty crimes living in your home, as mentioned above.

However, the school district can't/doesn't routinely enforce/check this. There's no way for the school district (who gets the affidavit) to know who is living in your home. They are basically taking the parent's word on it.

 

Realistically, all that clause really does is to provide grounds for disallowing or discontinuing the home ed program if it comes to light in some other way that the family is breaking this rule.

 

Note also that this rule (and the proposed bill) don't apply to those kids who are privately tutored, or who use a church school as an "umbrella school".

[at the beach]

"...Pennsylvania’s current law is far more restrictive than what is in SB32. Provisions are already in place to prevent children from being home educated in a dangerous situation. There is a complete lack of logic in legislating home visits to residences where a person has been subject of a child abuse report in the last eighteen months (SB32), since the law already prohibits a Home Education Program if a conviction has occurred within the last five years."

 

Children's services cases involve the status of a child--abused, neglected, dependent. When children's services agencies decide to file a complaint, that complaint is filed in juvenile court. Criminal convictions of adults and adjudications of children are completely different. Not all children who end up adjudicated abused, neglected, or dependent live in the home with parents who have criminal convictions for things that would prohibit those parents from homeschooling. I wouldn't think the new requirements do anything to alter the restrictions already in place. The new requirements would address another group of people, those who have reached a certain level of involvement with a children's services agency.

[stripe]

People like this make me wish I believed in hell. Eternity is too short of a time for them to suffer.

 

Especially when her "defense" is that she is too big to have sex.

[lorisuewho]

There *is* language in the affidavit that you cannot home educate if there is someone convicted of nasty crimes living in your home, as mentioned above.

However, the school district can't/doesn't routinely enforce/check this. There's no way for the school district (who gets the affidavit) to know who is living in your home. They are basically taking the parent's word on it.

 

Realistically, all that clause really does is to provide grounds for disallowing or discontinuing the home ed program if it comes to light in some other way that the family is breaking this rule.

 

Note also that this rule (and the proposed bill) don't apply to those kids who are privately tutored, or who use a church school as an "umbrella school".

 

This might be because a private tutor has to submit all child abuse clearances each year to the district, so this is already covered to some extent (although it doesn't address the adults in the home). I don't believe PA has church umbrella schools.

[justasque]

This might be because a private tutor has to submit all child abuse clearances each year to the district, so this is already covered to some extent (although it doesn't address the adults in the home). I don't believe PA has church umbrella schools.

 

Call me cynical, but I'm guessing private tutor isn't included in the proposed bill because the author of the bill doesn't know it exists.

 

It is a controversial and very rarely used option, but PA does have church schools. The question is whether a student enrolled in such a school must attend in-person full time or not. (There is also at least one private school that doesn't require students to attend full-time, despite the PDE's interpretation requiring it.)

 

 

24 PS 13-1327 Compulsory school attendance

...

( b ) A child enrolled in a day school which is operated by a bona fide church or other religious body, and the parent, guardian or other person having control or charge of any such child or children of compulsory school age shall be deemed to have met the requirements of this section if that school provides a minimum of one hundred eighty (180) days of instruction or nine hundred (900) hours of instruction per year at the elementary level, or nine hundred ninety (990) hours per year of instruction at the secondary level and:

(1) At the elementary school level, the following courses are taught: English, to include spelling, reading and writing; arithmetic; science; geography; history of the United States and Pennsylvania; civics; safety education, including regular and continuous instruction in the dangers and prevention of fires; health and physiology; physical education; music; and art.

(2) At the secondary school level, the following courses are offered: English, to include language, literature, speech and composition; science, to include biology and chemistry; geography; social studies, to include civics, economics, world history, history of the United States and Pennsylvania; a foreign language; mathematics, to include general mathematics and statistics, algebra and geometry; art; music; physical education; health and physiology; and safety education, including regular and continuous instruction in the dangers and prevention of fires.

The requirements contained in sections 1511 and 1605 of this act shall not apply to such schools. The notarized affidavit of the principal of any such school, filed with the Department of Education and setting forth that such subjects are offered in the English language in such school, whether it is a nonprofit organization, and that such school is otherwise in compliance with the provisions of this act, shall be satisfactory and sufficient evidence thereof. It is the policy of the Commonwealth to preserve the primary right and the obligation of the parent or parents, or person or persons in loco parentis to a child, to choose the education and training for such child. Nothing contained in this act shall empower the Commonwealth, any of its officers, agencies or subdivisions to approve the course content, faculty, staff or disciplinary requirements of any religious school referred to in this section without the consent of said school.

...

[justasque]

Just looked at the bill.

 

It says "The school district in which the child resides shall notify the county whenever a child enrolls in a home school program or cyber charter school, is truant or fails to register for school upon attaining compulsory school age if:.."

 

There is no such thing as "a home school program" in Pennsylvania.

[lorisuewho]

Call me cynical, but I'm guessing private tutor isn't included in the proposed bill because the author of the bill doesn't know it exists.

 

It is a controversial and very rarely used option, but PA does have church schools. The question is whether a student enrolled in such a school must attend in-person full time or not. (There is also at least one private school that doesn't require students to attend full-time, despite the PDE's interpretation requiring it.)

 

 

 

 

 

What I have learned the past few days is that PA law is much more confusing and muddy than I even thought!

 

(I will homeschool my children under the private tutor law, so I never fully immersed myself in the homeschool law, for which I am thanking God right now.)

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

There *is* language in the affidavit that you cannot home educate if there is someone convicted of nasty crimes living in your home, as mentioned above.

However, the school district can't/doesn't routinely enforce/check this. There's no way for the school district (who gets the affidavit) to know who is living in your home. They are basically taking the parent's word on it.

 

Realistically, all that clause really does is to provide grounds for disallowing or discontinuing the home ed program if it comes to light in some other way that the family is breaking this rule.

 

Note also that this rule (and the proposed bill) don't apply to those kids who are privately tutored, or who use a church school as an "umbrella school".

 

Does PA allow for Church schools now? Do you mean schools like Kolbe or Seton or Calvert?

[justasque]

Does PA allow for Church schools now? Do you mean schools like Kolbe or Seton or Calvert?

 

PA has long had a church school option for meeting the compulsory attendance law. (There are several options to meet compulsory attendance, the main ones being public school (including public cyber-charter schools and homebound instruction), private school, private tutoring, a home education program, or a " a day school which is operated by a bona fide church or other religious body".) The question is whether a student actually needs to physically *attend* a private or church school, or whether they only need to be *enrolled*. The PA Department of Education believes attendance is necessary. HSLDA believes it is not. School districts can decide either way; if they decide it's OK with them, then it usually stops there. Sometimes it's a "don't ask, don't tell" situation, where the district may not be fully aware that students are not attending full-time.

 

I think using a school like Calvert, which is probably located too far for the student to physically attend on a daily basis, is likely to be questioned. If the district asks the PDE for guidance, the PDE will tell them it's not allowed, and they are likely to go with this interpretation.

 

It's a grey area of the law.