Homeschoolers Anonymous

[Tanaqui]

We have a moderate ( ie not perfect but good enough IN THEORY) system. It doesn't work to "catch" abusive homeschool families. Because the families who are invested in hiding their abuse don't register.

 

Are you sure it doesn't catch ANY abusers?

 

You can continue to insist that teachers are finely honed instruments for abuse detection if you want. That's not my experience.

 

I didn't say that, and you can't quote me saying that either. My argument hinges on the fact that teachers do catch a non-zero number of abusers, and not on a belief that they are the greatest thing since sliced bread.

 

If this conversation is mostly going to be you putting words in my mouth, I'll leave you to it. Make up something more interesting next time, though - perhaps "Nitwit! Blubber! Oddment! Tweak!" or something along those lines.

[Rosie_0801]

You can continue to insist that teachers are finely honed instruments for abuse detection if you want. That's not my experience.

 

 

And even if they were, what could they do about it?

 

Call CPS? We have enough threads on here about why people don't want to call CPS to know that isn't much of a solution.

 

 

 

Most forms of abuse are legal so there is nothing law enforcement (whether police or CPS) can do about it. Family courts don't look favourably on strategies put in place to prevent or limit abuse by the other parent so they are put in a position of having to enable it. They might even have court orders forcing them to enable it. Too often in abuse cases there are no ways to make it better but a few quoted "solutions" that will make it worse. 

Edited January 24, 2016 by Rosie_0801

[LMD]

*hugs* Sadie and others. I'm so sorry for what you had to live through.

 

Sadie, here's what I do, my small contribution to normie homeschooling:

 

I mix with a range of homeschoolers, I don't only play in a white, Christian bubble.

I call out garbage when I encounter it- especially amongst the Christians. I had many fierce discussions when the duggar stories first came up.

I come alongside newbies and encourage them to follow their own instincts and do their own research.

I encourage aiming for a high level of achievement, I told someone that yes, they definitely do need to teach algebra and followed it with helpful ideas and encouragement. I have freely given books from my own library to people struggling.

I also try to do a good job of homeschooling, my kids are educated, happy, normal-ish. I try not to be a bad ambassador, even though I may fit some of the stereotype.

 

But this is all just in the context of daily life, I don't go protesting or starting groups. I will though, if the NSW laws are introduced in vic.

I'm sure you have a grass roots effect, unintentionally perhaps, in your community. Heck, you impact me from across the interwebs!

[Jean in Newcastle]

I support the basic homeschooling laws that are already in place in my state - registering and yearly testing.  But . . . I agree with Sadie, that those intent on not being regulated in any way just don't register.  The only way they are caught is if someone were to report them or if they were caught in abuse that brings it all to light.  And honestly, being reported for not registering would probably just result in them promising to do it and then fading off of the radar.  Or moving. 

 

PS - When I was a public school teacher we had one  child in particular that we knew was being abused.  We did report it to CPS.  But there wasn't enough proof and so nothing was done.  Our hearts broke but we were left trying to document whatever we could (the abusers were savvy to what kinds of things we would document and tried not to leave evidence for us).  The child was mostly non-verbal so we could not rely on her reporting her parents and honestly many abused children will not report even though teachers and CPS will act if they do.  (I understand the reasons why they don't - just putting out the general facts.)

 

 

[Ms.Ivy]

I think it is this: theory and practice are two different things.

I've seen a lot of cases in the US recently in which medical doctors reported parents to the state for medical abuse, in a preemptive attempt to avoid these parents reporting malpractice to the state medical board (or to prevent the parents from transferring to a different hospital). CPS always goes along with whatever a doctor says, even if other doctors disagree with the reporter. I'm sure when we made doctors mandated abuse reporters, no one would have dreamed it could be used like this.

 

Also, most of the child murders I've personally read about, done by fake homeschoolers or not, seem to have occurred after CPS was already alerted to problems.

 

Another thought I've had.... Child abuse prevention is an area where we have to guess who might hurt or kill a kid before it happens. It's crime prediction. It's a messy business. So I think it's not unreasonable for people to be concerned about what might be used as criteria for predicting that someone will commit a crime.

[SporkUK]

I think their point of view is valid and their information on abusive charismatic figure heads and ways homeschooling communities can keep an eye out for and help kids and young people in need can be valuable to many. We may not be a homogeneous community, but we're all still part of communities and - to me - watching out for and caring for the more vulnerable in the community is everyone's task and a difficult one that requires to listening to a lot of voices as even my on history of abuse may prevent me from seeing it in other contexts. I'm always going to be pro talking about these things as not talking about them is never going to make anything better. 

 

To these people, their homeschooling communities supported their abusers and I don't think their choice to focus on trying to help others within their communities to heal and/or improve the situation is mis-aimed - particularly when many of them are also working on abuse in patriarchal and/or Christian communities. For some, their homeschooling community was the main and/or first support for abuse. Any community can have a problem with abuse. Openly discussing these abuses and how to prevent them is one way of helping individuals within those community see and deal with it. 

 

Personally, as someone whose local communities and school communities and the church we were mostly either passively or actively supported my abusive parents, I get really upset when I see locally a lot of home educated parents who act like any discussion of abuse within any home schooling community or any mention of trying to change child protection laws or include child protection awareness or rules within home education groups is somehow a personal insult against them and an affront to general homeschooling. Yes, they may mostly be talking about a tiny sub-culture but it still includes a lot of people and many of the things mentioned could happen to any group -- and a lot of the smaller signs could show overwhelmed parents who could use support that communities can help with to stop before it gets to the stage of harm and before wider systems are needed. 

[Faithr]

I have no problem with people advocating for change or for healing and support.  None whatsoever.  It is a good thing!  But you know Alcoholics Anonymous didn't name themselves Beverages Anonymous, even though beverages are what caused their addiction.   It was a subset of beverages that caused the problem and actually, it was a subset of that subset, the ones who drank those particular beverages and became alcoholics, that the group is for.

 

If Alcoholics Anonymous had chosen Beverages Anonymous, but then only talked about a specific type of beverage when they were advocating, that might be confusing.  Maybe other people would say, hey, my beverage isn't dangerous or a problem.  Quit talking about it as if it is!  But that doesn't mean they don't think AA is important or a good group, it is just objecting to the misrepresenting title, that is all.  Have you read the FAQ about their name?  It is miles long because apparently a lot of people don't like what they call themselves and they have to spend a lot of time justifying it.  And a lot of their justification is rather meandering and fatuous.  So. . . 

 

They could have called themselves something different.  How about ACHE (Abused Children of Homeschooling Evangelicals). Something like that.  That would have been a great acronym and it would have pinpointed exactly what they are!

 

[Faithr]

LOL!  Why in the world did they pick that acronym!  

[Faithr]

Oh well, HA if you are listening in, I am so sorry for your terrible experiences and I applaud your efforts to expose the crazy cruelty and give support and comfort to the wounded.  

 

But please do not besmirch the educational choice of homeschooling.  

 

It is an unjust thing to do.

 

Clarity is really important here.  My point is there are unintended consequences that hurt others or could hurt others if you are unclear in your communication.   Your organization is about healing from hurt, right?  So boldly say who you are and what you are fighting for!  But be accurate about it.  It is the decent thing to do.

[Faithr]

Maybe they are working on clarifying it.  Good on them, if they are!

[Jean in Newcastle]

I can sympathize with their pain but I reject their conclusions. 

[Jean in Newcastle]

Yeah. Basically.

 

See, I have some pretty bad stories to tell of boarding school.  I know of others with some pretty bad stories too.  Boarding school can be an environment that can leave kids vulnerable to abuse.  But. . . I know that others have some good stories of boarding schools.  I don't think I could ever imagine a situation where I would put my child in a boarding school.  And I have warned people of some of the red flags to look for in boarding schools.  But I am able to recognize that being categorically against boarding schools is not objective and I've chosen to have a more balanced view of them - at least theoretically for other people. 

 

I also have some pretty bad stories to tell of public school.  And I know of others with some pretty bad stories too.  Public schools can be an environment that can leave kids vulnerable to abuse.  But. . . I know that others have some good stories of public schools. . . .

[abba12]

See, I have some pretty bad stories to tell of boarding school.  I know of others with some pretty bad stories too.  Boarding school can be an environment that can leave kids vulnerable to abuse.  But. . . I know that others have some good stories of boarding schools.  I don't think I could ever imagine a situation where I would put my child in a boarding school.  And I have warned people of some of the red flags to look for in boarding schools.  But I am able to recognize that being categorically against boarding schools is not objective and I've chosen to have a more balanced view of them - at least theoretically for other people. 

 

All this, with the word public instead of boarding. Awful things happened, from students AND teachers and other circumstances. I have some horror stories people wouldn't believe happened. I can't imagine sending my kids to a public school knowing their flaws and pitfalls as well as I do (we are in it for the long haul with homeschooling). 

 

But I'd be considered absolutely crazy to say public school is bad and no one should ever go there because they will all endure awful stuff. Anyone on this forum who says they will not ever consider public school is shot down by posters saying they don't know what the future holds and public school isn't that bad. And they're right. Many people have great experiences, and obviously the majority of the population is going to continue using it. There's a lot of people here defending HAs right to blame homeschooling and call it evil. If I said the same things about public school that HA says about homeschooling, if I blamed public school the same way they blame homeschool, would I be defended by these same people? Doubtful. I'd be reminded that it was those teachers/students, not everyone, that not all schools are that bad, that many people have great experiences at public school. If I petitioned for public schools to be shut down because of my experience and the blame I assign them, I'd be the sort of person homeschoolers distance themselves from. Homeschooling was no more the cause of their problems than public school was of mine. 

 

Since it appears someone from HA may be reading this... I get it, I get your stories and I totally respect them. My husband had the same upbringing as you and is psychologically damaged from it in ways that effect our family now, my 7 brothers and sisters in law had the upbringing and I see the same struggles in their lives. Many of my childhood homeschooling friends had it. ALL of my husbands childhood homeschooling friends had it. It was a huge problem at the time and awful things happened. I was there, I saw it. I even, at one point, tutored some girls who came from that community in basics like math and writing.  I'm so sorry for your stories, just as I am for the stories of my own family and friends. I've been involved as a spectator and support for this community, this subset of homeschooled students, for a very long time. I GET IT. 

 

But many of your own peers have come to not blame homeschooling but rather to blame the abusive leaders and their abusive parents. And even if you do blame homeschooling, you have to see that the movement that caused this has all but died out, it's leaders have been systematically exposed over the past few years, it's amazing how many homeschoolers who were involved in these groups have sent their kids to school in the past couple of years in response to all the criminal cases. The majority of homeschoolers now, today, are not abusive. Some focus on academics, some don't, some are religious but in a more moderate setting. But almost all of them would be horrified at the writing of various leaders in that movement. Abuse is nowhere near as rampant among the homeschool community as it was in the 80s and 90s (except for those who are not homeschoolers but, rather, just don't send their kids to school. That is an important distinction. There have been abusive parents who deny their children an education for a long, long time before homeschooling was ever popularized and they should not be lumped in with us. Deciding to homeschool (albeit badly) is different to deciding your children won't have schooling.)

 

If you genuinely recognize that you were victims of the Christian Patriarchy Homeschooling movements, then please consider how you represent yourselves, because you ARE having a real impact on international politics. When media in other countries are referencing your website specifically, you have to consider what you appear to be standing for, and the impact your message is having on people around the world. This is way bigger than telling people in your area about the dangers of some homeschooling groups, you and other groups like yours are impacting international legislation and providing a powerful tool for countries to ban homeschooling completely with societal support, or put good families through extremely intrusive and yet entirely ineffective processes, because I am sure you're all aware that people like your families simply wouldn't have registered to be monitored, just as my husbands family never did. 

 

Keep sharing your stories, people need to know what happened, and what still has the potential to happen. It's an important part of the history of homeschooling. But don't lump it all together as homeschoolers. It isn't, especially not now. We are long past the peak of these groups. You are survivors of abuse (you could even go as far to say abusive homeschooling), survivors of cults and extreme patriarchy, survivors of ATI or survivors of spiritual abuse. But homeschooling itself, as an educational choice, is not what hurt you and has helped many, many people. And you might be surprised how many of your own peers, fellow children from ATI/Gothard/Peals/Whatever have distanced themselves from their childhoods, recognized the major issues, blame the leaders or their parents, but have actually still chosen to homeschool their own children, just very, very differently than how it was done for them. My husband is SO excited to homeschool our kids, he thinks it's great, we are so passionate about it. But it looks nothing at all like how my husband was 'homeschooled' by his fundamentalist parents. We have at least two other people on this thread who grew up in that movement or close to it, who have still chosen to homeschool but differently to how they were. There is more than one way to homeschool, and your horrible, sad experiences do not speak for the majority, not now and not even back then (though you were once a much larger minority than today) 

 

My heart hurts with this whole topic because I am so passionate about it, I have a personal connection to it. I was fortunate enough to not live it myself but I grew up watching it and am dealing with the consequences as an adult of my husband living it. I want so much to get involved with your cause, post his story, warn people, expose what happened. But I can't, because all of the groups doing that work are discounting and demonizing homeschooling as a whole as part of it, and as an equally passionate homeschooling mother I can't support that. I can't contribute to your efforts when I know you're actively harming homeschooling as a whole. I'm not the only one. There are people who would support you and want to be involved if you could just aim your blame where it belongs, at leaders, cults, and naive or abusive parents, instead of aiming the blame at an educational choice which works great for many families, and where abuse is no longer any more common than it is for public schooled kids. 

[albeto.]

But many of your own peers have come to not blame homeschooling but rather to blame the abusive leaders and their abusive parents. And even if you do blame homeschooling, you have to see that the movement that caused this has all but died out, it's leaders have been systematically exposed over the past few years, it's amazing how many homeschoolers who were involved in these groups have sent their kids to school in the past couple of years in response to all the criminal cases. The majority of homeschoolers now, today, are not abusive. Some focus on academics, some don't, some are religious but in a more moderate setting. But almost all of them would be horrified at the writing of various leaders in that movement. Abuse is nowhere near as rampant among the homeschool community as it was in the 80s and 90s (except for those who are not homeschoolers but, rather, just don't send their kids to school. That is an important distinction. There have been abusive parents who deny their children an education for a long, long time before homeschooling was ever popularized and they should not be lumped in with us. Deciding to homeschool (albeit badly) is different to deciding your children won't have schooling.)

 

I disagree. I disagree with the implication that most homeschoolers of yesterday were abusive, or that abuse in homeschooling was "rampant" in the 80's and 90's, but admittedly, I have no information one way or the other. That just seems an awfully dramatic accusation in hopes of alleviating some fear. I disagree that the movement that inspires the abuse as exposed in HA has "all but died out." The Duggars are a prime example of a new generation of spokespersons for abusive, oppressive, patriarchal dominance, delivered through the medium of home education. Arrests in states where prayer over medicine and abuse sanctioned parenting is a sobering example of how this ideology is surviving the change of the guard. Reddit has new tales all the time from a brand new crop of graduates. Old leaders get arrested, new leaders take their place. This isn't about people, it's about ideas and beliefs, and those ideological memes are still going strong enough to inspire graduates of homeschool to contribute to HA each year.

 

If you genuinely recognize that you were victims of the Christian Patriarchy Homeschooling movements, then please consider how you represent yourselves, because you ARE having a real impact on international politics. When media in other countries are referencing your website specifically, you have to consider what you appear to be standing for, and the impact your message is having on people around the world. This is way bigger than telling people in your area about the dangers of some homeschooling groups, you and other groups like yours are impacting international legislation and providing a powerful tool for countries to ban homeschooling completely with societal support, or put good families through extremely intrusive and yet entirely ineffective processes, because I am sure you're all aware that people like your families simply wouldn't have registered to be monitored, just as my husbands family never did. 

 

I disagree with this as well. Attempting to burden a community created to offer a safe haven for survivors of a specific kind of abuse with guilt for threatening legislation supportive to home education is a low blow. I don't figure you meant to be emotionally manipulative, but the argument put forth certainly is. And it shouldn't be acceptable. It's not only illogical (appeal to emotion, not reason), it's irrelevant. Survivors of abuse shouldn't have to justify their needs to gather and share stories, grief, and encouragement, nor should they censor that community so as not to frighten potentially sensitive voters. If certain societies don't value home education, the onus should be on the home education community itself to present a compelling argument to sustain such an educational choice, not on graduates to be "careful" about how they may poison a well they have nothing to do with. 

[Tsuga]

I do not frequent that website. I have been there and it was a mixed bag. Some venting, normal teen angst--"I didn't feel norrrrrmallllll!!!!" Join the club, baby cakes. But other posts really hit close to home because I do know some Christian homeschooled kids who, I think when they find out that they weren't allowed to go to any sports, any clubs outside of church, or like, have friends... period... not like friends they saw except supervised by their parents, I think they're going to be rightfully pissed off that their childhood was stolen from them.

 

Abuse? No, or I'd report it. These are not cults, per se. I have heard more protective stories on this board, even. Kids can't come over for too long, you know how everyone was all "we just don't go out, we only homeschool at home"? Well some kids are going to freak out when they learn that other kids got to play with non-family members for hours and hours... every day.

 

So I think HSA gives a voice to that.

 

But there is also a lot of abuse that could be better dealt with, and yes, there is some whining.

 

Ultimately, it's a venting forum.

 

 

 

It hasn't worked out that way. People with something to hide simply don't comply. 

 

Well yeah, but it's easier to catch people not complying, then you have a reason to investigate, than it is catching them in the act cold.

 

That's why so much of regulation is "fill out this paper right here and sign your name". Then I can catch you slipping up.

Edited January 25, 2016 by Tsuga

[Tsuga]

 

 

If I said the same things about public school that HA says about homeschooling, if I blamed public school the same way they blame homeschool, would I be defended by these same people?

 

Why, people here do say the same thing about public school, and I post regularly here.

 

There is a HUGE difference between saying, "That website doesn't need to be taken down, they're a bunch of irritating stories" and saying to a poster on a common message board, "You are wrong about that."

 

I don't even have enough faith in that community to engage with them, much less start a discussion about their entire website.

 

If I am engaging in a discussion with you about moderating your tone on public school, that means that I have some respect for you and for this forum and your voice in it.

 

I don't go up to random people who are screaming hellfire at intersections in Seattle.

 

On the other hand, if a relative brings up religion (the same religion) at dinner, I will discuss it as long as we can discuss it calmly.

 

I'm not on Fox news comment sections but I can discuss that with my relatives as well.

 

I don't think you should take people's responses to you on this board as meaning you don't have the right to share your opinion. In fact it means the opposite.

[abba12]

You could make a pretty good bet on not getting caught if you didn't register because you had something to hide. Right about now I'm thinking the non-registers made a pretty smart decision - no hoops to jump through - because the benefit of registration re child protection (my reason for registering)  just isn't there.

 

I have to say, I've been thinking more and more lately about whether I am really prepared to register. We have to register our eldest soon and.... the only thing pushing me to register is that centerlink are getting stricter and pushing to ensure all kids are registered somewhere, linked to social security benefits. I've heard you can still get around it but I don't want to get caught out if they tighten things up more later on. Sigh. I am all for a certain level of oversight but, like you, I'm well aware many of the people around me aren't registered (though that's changing, most new homeschoolers coming into it seem to be registering now, a lot have never considered going under the radar at all, so this dynamic may change in 10 or 15 years as the older homeschoolers finish up and the new generation which has always had a formal, accepted registration option comes in)

[abba12]

I disagree. I disagree with the implication that most homeschoolers of yesterday were abusive, or that abuse in homeschooling was "rampant" in the 80's and 90's, but admittedly, I have no information one way or the other. That just seems an awfully dramatic accusation in hopes of alleviating some fear. 

 

I generally make it a policy to never engage you in debate, but I wanted to address this one point.

 

Firstly I never said most. I did say rampant, but I stated at least once that they were a large minority, never the majority, even back in the 80s and 90s they were never a majority. 

 

As to whether rampant is a fair use of the word... I was a secular homeschooler, and even then I would say 50% of the families I interacted with were fundamentalist, some obviously abusive, some I suspect were. DH was only allowed to interact with the highly religious families and none of them have gone well in adulthood, all have struggled due to their parents methods of parenting and strict patriarchy. In speaking to graduated homeschool friends ALL of them knew at LEAST one family of the type being spoken about here, and most of them knew many more. I would say everybody knowing at least one case within such a small subset of society (homeschoolers) would be considered unfortunately common at least. And this is in Australia, where the homeschooling movement was not at all started by religious fundamentalists, but was rather a natural progression since we have had schools of distance education available since my grandparents were kids and the concept of school-at-home is quite a familiar one here. Homeschooling just took that already existing structure and added some of the things coming from the US into it, like having the parent do it alone instead of deferring to a distance education school. Many of the families I knew began homeschooling for academic reasons or due to bullying, even in the earliest stages. 

 

So if it was that bad in Australia where religious fundamentalists were not the initial driving force of homeschooling and where churches like the ones I've heard described don't really exist (most of those families homechurched) then I can only imagine it was even moreso in your country, where religious homeschoolers still have enough influence that many groups are religious-only and secular homeschoolers sometimes feel like they don't have a community (I've only seen one christian-only homeschooling group in the past 10 years, and it was pretty patriarchal and scary)

 

So, yes, I do feel that if we are defining abuse as not just physical,. but also the sort of emotional and mental abuse that was common in the super-conservative patriarchal families, that rampant is a fair word. Not majority, not most, but certainly common enough that no one who was involved in the homeschooling community back in those days could have missed it either. 

[abba12]

Yes. There's zero benefit to me in registering. It doesn't enhance the quality of my homeschooling, and my kids are already around a wide range of other people, including mandated reporters. It's just pointless jumping though hoops. 

 

I was doing it out of a strong feeling of minimum oversight being good for all the children in the homeschooling community. But the joke's on me really.

 

I think its easier not to register than to let a registration lapse. And it's much easier to do if you don't have much contact with Centrelink and can afford to forego FTB. 

 

Thank goodness I only have two more registrations left in my homeschool career! 

 

Yeah, dh and I are both disabled and both work part time, that FTB is enticing enough to go through registration for us unfortunately. 

[Rosie_0801]

I've regretted the lack of oversight in my state because it might have come in handy in Family Court. But I'm lucky to have a homeschooling neutral judge. I'm surprised at his open-mindedness, really, because I know he oversaw a case a few months before ours started that involved homeschoolers and it was very, very messy. 

[albeto.]

Why should we have to pour time and energy into refuting falsehoods ? There is zero data out there to show that abuse is a particular problem for general, global homeschooling such that it needs to be dealt with as a special case, separate from general abuse of children in the home and community. 

 

There may be that evidence for Gothard homeschools. That wouldn't surprise me.

 

Asking that a name accurately reflect the demographic involved is not requiring censorship.

 

Refuting counterarguments is a natural part of presenting and defending an argument, any argument. This post is an example of such, albeit in a minute scale. But in general, the arguments for home education are built on more than the idea that abuse doesn't represent us. Further, for practical reasons, I think it should include how we, as a community, can recognize and correct such abuse. 

 

I don't think the name of the group is problematic, and abba12 articulates really nicely why. There's a measure of control that exists when children are sequestered from society in such a way that presents a pervasive, consistent conditioning to the detriment of the child, to the detriment of society. We should own up to its existence. To distance ourselves reeks to me like the Catholic church distancing itself from sexual predators in their ranks of priests. They need not pretend all, or even most, or even many priests are sexual predators, but those who are should be owned up to, acknowledged, and virtually hanged in the public square. People continue to affiliate with the Catholic church despite the molesting priest problem because they find compelling reasons that are overwhelmingly positive. If home education doesn't provide compelling reasons that are overwhelmingly positive, we've got a more serious problem than kids who don't know how to socialize outside their protected community. I believe we do have compelling reasons, and those should be the brunt of the arguments created to persuade the public that home education is not only a viable alternative to conventional education, but provides unique opportunities that are beneficial to the child and ultimately to society. 

[albeto.]

I generally make it a policy to never engage you in debate

 

 I can't tell if this is another appeal to emotion (I should feel ashamed to have alienated one more nice person because I'm such a jerk), or simply your expression of frustration with discussing an issue with someone who doesn't accept appeals of emotion and appeals to authority in general. 

 

Firstly I never said most. I did say rampant, but I stated at least once that they were a large minority, never the majority, even back in the 80s and 90s they were never a majority. 

 

You're equivocating. It doesn't matter what word you used. You made a point and I took exception to it. I disagreed with it.

 

As to whether rampant is a fair use of the word... I was a secular homeschooler, and even then I would say 50% of the families I interacted with were fundamentalist, some obviously abusive, some I suspect were. DH was only allowed to interact with the highly religious families and none of them have gone well in adulthood, all have struggled due to their parents methods of parenting and strict patriarchy. In speaking to graduated homeschool friends ALL of them knew at LEAST one family of the type being spoken about here, and most of them knew many more. I would say everybody knowing at least one case within such a small subset of society (homeschoolers) would be considered unfortunately common at least. And this is in Australia, where the homeschooling movement was not at all started by religious fundamentalists, but was rather a natural progression since we have had schools of distance education available since my grandparents were kids and the concept of school-at-home is quite a familiar one here. Homeschooling just took that already existing structure and added some of the things coming from the US into it, like having the parent do it alone instead of deferring to a distance education school. Many of the families I knew began homeschooling for academic reasons or due to bullying, even in the earliest stages. 

 

So if it was that bad in Australia where religious fundamentalists were not the initial driving force of homeschooling and where churches like the ones I've heard described don't really exist (most of those families homechurched) then I can only imagine it was even moreso in your country, where religious homeschoolers still have enough influence that many groups are religious-only and secular homeschoolers sometimes feel like they don't have a community (I've only seen one christian-only homeschooling group in the past 10 years, and it was pretty patriarchal and scary)

 

So, yes, I do feel that if we are defining abuse as not just physical,. but also the sort of emotional and mental abuse that was common in the super-conservative patriarchal families, that rampant is a fair word. Not majority, not most, but certainly common enough that no one who was involved in the homeschooling community back in those days could have missed it either. 

 

This is precisely the reason Homeschoolers Anonymous exists - for people to share, safely, anonymously if needed, their experiences that are directly related to having been homeschooled. 

 

Why should they censor what they say? Why should they be told they are in part responsible for home education legislation? If the abuse in the homeschool community is as pervasive as you suggest, you [general you, homeschoolers in general] should be calling it out and correcting it, not appealing to others to watch their tone.

 

I don't recall history of home education starting with religious fundamentalists in our country either, but I'll leave that up to others. That fundamentalists saw an opportunity to promote their belief and utilized the medium of homeschooling in hopes to secure successful religious indoctrination doesn't change the point at all. If abuse exists, it should be known. Survivors shouldn't be held responsible for the comfort of those who are not involved. Not in any way. Not in the words they use or the stories they tell. The only way to ferret out abuse is to see it, acknowledge it, recognize what supports it, and address it. Not cover it with a fresh coat of whitewash. 

 

 

[Guest]

Yeah it's gross to tell abuse victims what to do with their hurt and anger.

 

It's the dummies who look to obviously (by their nature) extreme stories to dictate public policy that we need to concern ourselves with when something comes up locally.

[albeto.]

I think you are being pretty unfair here albeto. Abba isn't policing their tone or whitewashing abuse.

 

I what way do you think I'm being unfair? I'm not suggesting abba is policing their tone, but that she is appealing to the contributors of HA to police their own tone. I conclude this from such pleas as "consider how you represent yourselves," "you have to consider what you appear to be standing for," "impacting international legislation," "you are providing a powerful tool... to ban homeschooling completely." Yikes. The guilt! What an ironic tool to use, but that's beside the point. It's appalling to me to hear pleas and requests for victims censor their stories for the comfort of others.

 

I do think she is whitewashing abuse by implying its importance is diminished because it's less than what she remembers as a child. She suggested the movement that caused abuse is "all but died out," therefore this need to provide stories is what? Unnecessary? Overkill? Certainly detrimental to homeschoolers today within the platform HA provides. She suggests bad leaders have been systematically exposed over the past few years as if that's reason to stop publishing controversial posts. What she's missing is the control freaks who are abusing and oppressing children today won't step down voluntarily. They never do. The next time someone is exposed for some terrible crime against children, we'll be hearing it for the first time, regardless of the fact it's going on right now, and she's requesting they tone it down. 

 

 If anything, she probably understands much better than you and I the long term effects of that Gothard-type abuse, due to her husband's personal history, which she has shared in this thread. 

 

I'm responding to the argument to censor one's story of abuse for the sake of others' legal comfort. Her husband's change of heart, her change of heart, any assurances that she's doing patriarchy "right," essentially her personal experiences in general don't change my opposition to this argument.

[albeto.]

....However, it would sure be nice if foreign journalists and policy makers were to have a better idea of how people from the Christian patriarchy movement are not the only ones who choose to homeschool. Precise language does help with that. 

 

I appreciate your summary. I agree with you it would be nice, but it's an impossible expectation. Media and politicians will find the right sound bites to make their cases most succinctly and memorably. Even if everyone were very careful to suggest homeschooling is irrelevant to the issue (I disagree, I think it's integral, and important to recognize), statements would still be misquoted, edited for convenience, and misapplied. It's not personal, it's business. ;-) But ultimately, it's not the burden of the victim to choose words carefully so legislators around the world don't use them to support arguably oppressive legislation.

Edited January 25, 2016 by albeto.

[albeto.]

I'm pretty sure nobody here has even suggested censoring their stories. So it's kind of weird to me that people keep suggesting that's what's happening.

 

I took it from the requests and petitions abba made to "someone from HA [who it appears] may be reading this." She made direct appeals to consider how they represent themselves, what they are standing for (?), and the influences their stories have over legislation internationally. 

 

 That doesn't mean I'm bombarding them with emails to harass them to do so. I don't suppose anyone who has expressed ambivalence in this thread has either.

 

Is this hyperbole, or has this issue actually come up in this thread and I missed it?

[albeto.]

Curious - why do you think homeschooling is integral to child abuse ? 

 

In the same way religion is integral to abuse when used as a method to oppress women and children, homeschooling is integral to abuse when used as a method to oppress children.

[maize]

Homeschooling does not equal 'sequestering children from society in a way that presents a pervasive consistent conditioning to the detriment of the child, to the detriment of society.'

 

 

No kidding.

 

My homeschooled kids have much more meaningful contact with a broad spectrum of society than I ever did as a withdrawn loaner trying to survive day to day in the school system, too intimidated by distant seaming teachers and bullying kids to actually interact with anyone.

[albeto.]

Homeschooling does not equal 'sequestering children from society in a way that presents a pervasive consistent conditioning to the detriment of the child, to the detriment of society.'

 

You'd need some qualifiers in front of homeschooling there for that statement to be accurate.

 

The bolded is a bit hyperbolic in context of this thread. 

 

Parenthood does not equal "controlling, oppressive, and hurting children in a way that prevents a pervasive consistent conditioning to the detriment of the child, to the detriment of society" either, but we don't talk about qualifiers with regard to parents, lest people assume child abuse is part and parcel with having children. I don't mean to sound thick here, but I don't understand the point of qualifiers unless we're setting up for a "True Homeschool" defense. I don't think that's what you mean, but my imagination is locked there, so I'm at a loss.

 

The bold is not meant to be hyperbolic, but analogous. It seems to me a defensive measure to distance oneself away from the horrific members of one's community, to identify them as not *really* being a part of "us." While this is certainly natural and completely sympathetic, I don't think it's logical, nor is it necessary with regard to the stated goals of defending the legitimacy of home education in general. 

 

I don't think we're using the same definition of integral. I am using this: necessary to make a whole complete; essential or fundamental

 

It's patently absurd to suggest homeschooling is fundamental to abuse. Otherwise no abuse could occur in the absence of homeschooling!

 

I assume you are saying that homeschooling was fundamental to particular, individual experiences of abuse ? Sure, if that's what you meant to say. Obviously.

 

I think religion and homeschooling can be used as tools of abuse, but they are not integral to abuse. 

 

Abuse is its own complex set of dynamics, and the tools used in its service are varied.

 

Your assumption is right. I'm suggesting homeschooling is fundamental to a particular style of abuse. Furthermore, I think it's unique from other abuse in that the homeschool experience is decidedly unlike public or private or boarding school, thus providing a unique set of tools of abusive tactics. There are elements here that are not a part of child abuse in general that supports its own little sub-category, imo. 

 

Survivors don't need paternalistic attitudes, protecting them from such requests. I have full confidence in an adult survivor's ability to cope with a post or two in a forum. I expect they'll respond as they wish, in accordance with their own goals. 

 

Hyperbole.

 

It's silly to suggest that challenging an argument to appeal exhibits a paternalistic attitude. It strikes me as a clumsy defense. Why not just accuse me of arguing for the sake of being a troll? It's a more popular rebuttal here anyway.

[albeto.]

So, your homeschool, my homeschool, Gothard homeschools, we're all just one big community sharing more common features than differences ? 

 

Well, we do share the definitive feature - we educate our kids at home.

 

There are no doubt many sub-cultures/communities within that culture/community.

 

I'm not sure where you're going here.

 

Define community. You'll have to sell me on the idea that I share a community with anyone other than - idk - the people I actually share a community with ? That would be the homeschoolers in my city with whom I spend time and gain and offer support. That's my community. If a member of my actual community was abusing their child, I wouldn't be distancing, I'd be reporting. 

 

How about this definition from dictionary.com (randomly selected from google search)? 

 

a social, religious, occupational, or other group sharing common characteristics or interests and perceived or perceiving itself as distinct in some respect from the larger society within which it exists

[albeto.]

I would agree with you in general, but should we really consider every other homeschooling parent as somehow being part of our community? I don't, personally. Homeschooling is weird like that. I was going to say that all we have in common is a shared mode of educating our children, but not even that is true because homeschooling is so very varied. A general sense of community seems more applicable in cases where people are part of homeschool groups, co-ops and so on, but of course not everyone is. Homeschooling is a little like atheism in that way: people who aren't atheists sometimes talk about atheists as if they are a monolithic whole, but that simply isn't the case, and all atheists have in common by definition is a shared lack of belief in deities. 

 

Homeschoolers have the shared element of providing an education at home. That's how I'm using the term "community," but I see it's a problem. It's too subjectively defined, it seems, and "community" to me means something different to others. What would be a better word to use? 

[albeto.]

'People who have chosen to home educate their children' is my best attempt at a neutral, factual description. 

 

Okay. Then even if the website is called, "People whose parents have chosen to home educate their children, anonymous," it still is socially and logically inappropriate to attempt to persuade survivors of abuse to consider how they're affecting legislation elsewhere. The implication of the argument to which I replied was, "please write differently so as to not make it harder on us." 

[8circles]

Plus, I don't consider some parents to be my 'fellows' whether or not they homeschool. 

 

Sometimes the differences far outweigh the commonalities, kwim ?

 

Sometimes I feel like I'm so different from other people that I'm a different species.

[maize]

So, I have kids who study music.

 

And kids who dance.

 

And kids who do gymnastics.

 

And kids who study Chinese.

 

I don't really see that I belong to a community of music parents, or dance parents, or gymnastics parents, or Chinese-lesson-providing parents.

 

I mean, sure, we've got something in common, and I interact with other parents with kids involved in the same activities, but we're hardly a cohesive group. I would say each of those things is as significant to my children's experience of life as is the fact that they don't attend a brick and mortar school. Why would homeschooling by definition put me in a community of homeschoolers any more than these activities put me in a relevant community? If it is a community it is an awfully amorphous and divers one.

[albeto.]

Community to me seems to imply some sort of active identification. It kind of needs to be a verb in meaning, to have any meaning, kwim ?

 

There needs to be involvement, not just a common feature. I think the dictionary is wrong!

 

Thanks for explaining to me what you mean here and upthread about the term "community." I see what you mean now and I think I agree.

[abba12]

I do think she is whitewashing abuse by implying its importance is diminished because it's less than what she remembers as a child. She suggested the movement that caused abuse is "all but died out," therefore this need to provide stories is what? Unnecessary? Overkill? Certainly detrimental to homeschoolers today within the platform HA provides. She suggests bad leaders have been systematically exposed over the past few years as if that's reason to stop publishing controversial posts. 

 

Yeah... No. What I actually said was

" I want so much to get involved with your cause, post his story, warn people, expose what happened. But I can't, because all of the groups doing that work are discounting and demonizing homeschooling as a whole as part of it,"

I don't see any 'stop publishing your stories because they're irrelevant' there. What I actually see is that by making the stories connect directly to homeschooling, theyre silencing a lot of fellow victims who did not blame homeschooling.

 

Anyway, have fun talking yourself in circles, I'm out. 

 

 

Is just like to jump in and mention that we are an evangelical, patriarchal, Christian homeschooling family... and my kids are in no way abused. Quite the opposite, actually.

 

I was worrying this thread was alienating the decent conservative Christian families. For the record, all I've said comes from the perspective that so am I. We moved away from DHs raised beliefs, but we're still patriarchal, conservative, Christian homeschoolers (who think gothard is disgusting, and the pearls are terrifying, and value high academic skill, for the record). Certainly there are many of us who do not abuse our kids who end up lumped in the same boat as well when people try to blame a movement or a group for their parents abusive actions. I was just trying to only argue one point at a time lol. 

 

 

I realize these comments could be construed as being inflammatory. I hope you know that I don't mean them that way. It is the best way I can come up with to explain what bothers me here.

 

Not sure if you want anyone fully quoting so I'll just grab the last sentence

 

You have articulated it perfectly. Single motherhood was just as integral a part of your experience as homeschooling is of theirs. I suppose you could say in a way single motherhood 'caused' it. But single motherhood isn't evil, it isn't single motherhoods fault, you aren't out petitioning for the banning of single motherhood. It is the fault of the abuser, plain and simple. 

 

I'm sorry for your experience. :(

[albeto.]

Yeah... No. What I actually said was

" I want so much to get involved with your cause, post his story, warn people, expose what happened. But I can't, because all of the groups doing that work are discounting and demonizing homeschooling as a whole as part of it,"

 

I know. You said both. 

 

I don't see any 'stop publishing your stories because they're irrelevant' there. What I actually see is that by making the stories connect directly to homeschooling, theyre silencing a lot of fellow victims who did not blame homeschooling.

 

Who is being silenced? How do you know they're being silenced? What is "a lot"? And how are they being silenced? 

 

I don't mean to badger you, but this is quite an accusation to make. Is it just your opinion, or do you have some knowledge you can share with me?

 

Anyway, have fun talking yourself in circles, I'm out. 

 

Or, you could engage me in a logical manner, answering questions and clarifying points I may misunderstand, you know, like adults. But if you'd rather, "neener neener" to you, too.

 

:huh:

Edited January 26, 2016 by albeto.

[Jean in Newcastle]

I'm posting here and expressing an opinion. I'm not attempting to persuade HA of anything. If I was, I wouldn't do it by posting on a forum. 

 

Which really, after all, is all that the OP was asking for. 

[Faithr]

 lol, that seems so long ago.

 

Faithr, was this thread what you had in mind ?!

I think this thread has officially jumped the shark!  LOL.