Jump to content

Menu

Anybody posted about the 13 siblings found chained in California home?


VaKim
 Share

Recommended Posts

When we started homeschooling I was almost militantly anti-regulation. The more I saw and learned the more I leaned towards reasonable regulation.

 

Me too. 

 

I live in a state with no homeschooling regulations, and I wish there were some.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That has nothing to do with homeschooling, though, as an academic portfolio check.  If that's what the state wants, they should do that instead of dressing it up as a meaningless portfolio check where you can shop around to whomever you want to sign off on your academic progress that they have no teeth to actually measure anyway. Tell homeschoolers they want the kids seen annually by a mandatory reporter instead of wasting my time and their resources to pretend like it's about academics.

 

And in any case, in my state, the portfolio review is a review of the portfolio. The kids don't even have to be there.

 

And, as a PP mentioned, if you're basically insisting on a well-child check once a year by a mandated reporter, fine, but you have to insist on it for kids ages birth to 5, too.

 

 

The political will for something like that in the US in most states is, I can guarantee, just about zero.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm surprised you find this surprising.  This was the norm in US colleges up until the 60s.  Single sex dorms.  Bed checks.  No gentleman above the first floor, etc.

 

Well, in the 80's, we didn't have bed checks, but we had single sex dorms and men were only allowed in women's rooms for two hours each on Saturday and Sunday - the door and to remain open. We did have tv rooms in some dorms where men could visit during the week. Women were not allowed in the men's dorms at all. 

 

 

Edited by TechWife
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think ... Gently said... Ideally all visits are a waste of time. Ideally every visit goes smoothly and every family doesn't have any issues. For all of those who love and educate our kids the visits are pointless. For the 1 in 200 or less kids who are in a severely abusive situation it might make all the difference in the world.

 

It's like having speed checks. For 99 out of 100 cars that goes past it's a waste of time but for the 1 in 100 that are speeding, not wearing a seatbelt, talking on a phone or driving unlicensed you might save someone's life.

 

Most regulation is a filter in a way. Most people flow through it smoothly, a few need a bit of extra help and some major issues get picked up.

 

Also as a separate issue I have seen a few home schooling families who want to homeschool well and set out with good intentions but one day runs into another and nothing happens. Knowing they have to put together some kind of presentation about the kids learning can sometimes be the gentle push they need to get back on track.

 

I suppose. It's just that the abusive situations I've been privy to in my life, the kids have been in public school, in front of mandated reporters everyday, are around peers, etc.  I mean, that's not the case in the OP, but I went to public school for almost all my schooling years and hung out with a "good crowd" and still knew kids that struggled at home. Teachers and adults in their lives mainly ignored it, especially in middle school.

 

And if this is what needs to be done, then every kid that is not old enough to be in a public school yet also needs to be checked up on annually by a mandated reporter.

 

On the flip side, I am knocking myself out in my homeschool and I worry that my flipping portfolio isn't good enough to pass muster because it's really on the bottom of my priorities list when it comes to school and the reviewers I've had look at me cross-eyed when I show them Latin or classical studies or try to explain my philosophy on math education.  So it rankles because I don't really see that it's catching the people you're talking about.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Also as a separate issue I have seen a few home schooling families who want to homeschool well and set out with good intentions but one day runs into another and nothing happens. Knowing they have to put together some kind of presentation about the kids learning can sometimes be the gentle push they need to get back on track.

 

Right. I mean, for the most part, it keeps people doing SOMETHING with the kids. I've been known to show up to a portfolio eval with plastic grocery bags with papers in them, lol, but I did have work my kids did. And a Facebook photo album of pictures of our field trips and them doing art and experiments and such. (to my credit,t hat was a bad year. Other portfolios have ranged from a binder with typed table of contents to my current preference, an accordion file folder thing with a slot for each subject. Plus still the Facebook photo album.)

 

I keep written records of our day, which is also required by law, but the only time anyone would want to see it is if there was already a problem. you don't turn that in. And I keep a list of materials used, again required by law, but i don't include everything anymore. I include textbooks, big novels, etc but not EVERY single website/educational video on youtube/picture book/etc. I include enough to not look neglectful. And my library keeps a list of books we check out, so I can print that at the end of the year. Store for 2 years, according to the law. 

 

So yes, you could shop around from teacher to teacher looking for someone who would sign off on your year despite doing zero work. But you might not find one if you do literally nothing. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, in the 80's, we didn't have bed checks, but we had single sex dorms and men were only allowed in women's rooms for two hours each on Saturday and Sunday - the door and to remain open. We did have tv rooms in some dorms where men could visit during the week. Women were not allowed in the men's dorms at all. 

 

When I went to college in the 80s (large secular university), there were two single sex dorms out of 20-30?  Most dorms were co-ed by room or hallway.   I had a friend who lived in the women's dorm, and it was so much quieter and peaceful there.  It was a good place to study and the best place to get assigned as a receptionist.  I worked the Freshman dorm.  never a dull moment. :D

 

 

I'm baffled that the family could afford all of those Disney trips and Vegas trips.  We have four kids, live in Florida (so FL-resident rates), and going to one of the parks is definitely a big expense.  Even if we get some $100 deal, it's still $600 just to get in.  

 

 

Saw that CPS is going to assess the adult kids and determine whether or not they should remain under CPS care.  After seeing the pictures of the previous homes, those poor people are going to need a lifetime of therapy.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What do you mean the child will be adopted?  Do you not have a shortage of fostadopt families in your state?

 

We do have time limits here for young children to have parental rights severed, but the volume slows things down. It's getting easier for parental rights to be terminated, but you seem to not be very familiar with a system like ours.  There's all the time spent finding and certifying any extended family willing to take the child (a legal requirement that has to be exhausted before foster families are eligible to adopt)  and there's still a shortage of fostadopt families. Very often children are taken out of the home at the request of the foster family because a huge percentage of foster kids don't do well with other kids in the house, but people who already have kids are usually people who become foster families.  We have confidentiality laws that have been limiting the amount of information foster families see about a child before agreeing to placement.  So they're often going in blind and then figure out it's not a good match and have the child removed.  It's a hard reality fosterkids commonly have to deal with. So again, it's not as simple as people removed from situation imagine it to be.

I am a foster parent and have often thought that many more people might foster or adopt if the system were less ridiculous and gave kids more rights than parents. One of the biggest obstacles my friends have when I talk to them about fostering is the knowledge that many many times kids stay with your for 2-3 years plus before being reunified. If the system were more efficient, wise, and compassionate towards kids,those times would be shortened to the legal guideline of 15 months, and kids would find permanency faster. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I keep written records of our day, which is also required by law, but the only time anyone would want to see it is if there was already a problem. you don't turn that in. And I keep a list of materials used, again required by law, but i don't include everything anymore. I include textbooks, big novels, etc but not EVERY single website/educational video on youtube/picture book/etc. I include enough to not look neglectful.

 

But wouldn't/couldn't someone who is actually neglectful do the same thing? Why wouldn't they if they just don't care enough to give their kids an education? That's my point. The reviewers have no way of knowing what I'm showing them is from two weeks of school we did 3 months ago, or if I thoughtfully curated it to show how awesome our homeschool actually is.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, in the 80's, we didn't have bed checks, but we had single sex dorms and men were only allowed in women's rooms for two hours each on Saturday and Sunday - the door and to remain open. We did have tv rooms in some dorms where men could visit during the week. Women were not allowed in the men's dorms at all. 

 

LOL, well in the '80's in my university we had coed floors (boys and girls on the same floor and corridor!) AND coed bathrooms *gasp!*  I think there were only one or two all-women floors in the entire university (and I think no all-male floors at all).  Most certainly no bed checks...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It makes me more nervous to be regulated and inspected by other homeschoolers than it does a government entity with some oversight. All it takes is one do-gooder with an agenda, and everyone has lots of problems. I've met some weird people in this homeschooling journey, and I'd really rather not be told by any of them how I should raise my kids.

This would also be a concern of mine. We had our local school board Ă¢â‚¬Å“taken overĂ¢â‚¬ by a pretty fringe element recently. There were very successful at choosing the right people to run who looked and sounded pretty mainstream, but were actually anything but. By the time journalists dug deep enough, the election was over.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here in Oregon the work samples can be religious: it's just the charter won't pay for religous curriculum, and it will be out of pocket.

 

I think it's extreme that work samples can't be submitted if religious in nature and have never heard of it before this thread.

As far as I know, itĂ¢â‚¬â„¢s standard in CA.
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It won't solve those that don't register. But then those will no longer be labeled as 'homeschoolers" and those who actually register and homeschool won't be tarnished by association. It helps clear the name of the those that aren't doing anything wrong, more than anything.

 

I'd rather see "didn't have children enrolled in school" in these articles than "homeschooling".

But the stories would likely say homeschooling anyway
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm surprised you find this surprising. This was the norm in US colleges up until the 60s. Single sex dorms. Bed checks. No gentleman above the first floor, etc.

All of my friends who attended Catholic and Lutheran colleges in the late 1980s had strict visitation rules.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I went to college in the 80s (large secular university), there were two single sex dorms out of 20-30? Most dorms were co-ed by room or hallway. I had a friend who lived in the women's dorm, and it was so much quieter and peaceful there. It was a good place to study and the best place to get assigned as a receptionist. I worked the Freshman dorm. never a dull moment. :D

 

 

I'm baffled that the family could afford all of those Disney trips and Vegas trips. We have four kids, live in Florida (so FL-resident rates), and going to one of the parks is definitely a big expense. Even if we get some $100 deal, it's still $600 just to get in.

 

 

Saw that CPS is going to assess the adult kids and determine whether or not they should remain under CPS care. After seeing the pictures of the previous homes, those poor people are going to need a lifetime of therapy.

As for Disney and LV, it sounds like they were living beyond their means and filed for bankruptcy more than once. So IĂ¢â‚¬â„¢m guessing most of those trips were on borrowed money.
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But wouldn't/couldn't someone who is actually neglectful do the same thing? Why wouldn't they if they just don't care enough to give their kids an education? That's my point. The reviewers have no way of knowing what I'm showing them is from two weeks of school we did 3 months ago, or if I thoughtfully curated it to show how awesome our homeschool actually is.

 

All the evaluators I've used (I've used 4 I think) have wanted something from the beginning middle and end of the year in each subject you covered. Now for us, for science, that might mean a dated handout from the science museum, a photo of an experiment, and a list of books and documentaries. In math and writing it would be actual written work, or photos of such, showing progress. Yes, you could fake it. It's not fool proof. But I don't think it has to be fool proof to be helpful. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The standard is "progress commensurate with their ability". If the teacher you pick refuses to sign off you can try another one until you find one that does. But I've literally NEVER heard of that happening, ever. neither has anyone I know ever heard of it. Because the evaluators do this by choice and are pro homeschooling.

So what is the point in having the requirement (which I don't agree with) anyway if you can just go find someone else to sign you off? Isn't just a lot of extra beurocracy for no purpose at all then??? Edited by scoutingmom
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what is the point in having the requirement (which I don't agree with) anyway if you can just go find someone else to sign you off? Isn't just a lot of extra beurocracy for no porpose at all then???

 

Because if you are really doing NOTHING to school your kids, you probably won't find anyone to sign off. And at that point, if you keep trying people, someone may end up reporting you for truancy I'd suppose. But unschoolers and such have no problem, if they actually are having their kids learn throughout the year. 

 

So yeah, it's not fool proof. But nothing is. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I went to college in the 80s (large secular university), there were two single sex dorms out of 20-30? Most dorms were co-ed by room or hallway. I had a friend who lived in the women's dorm, and it was so much quieter and peaceful there. It was a good place to study and the best place to get assigned as a receptionist. I worked the Freshman dorm. never a dull moment. :D

 

 

I'm baffled that the family could afford all of those Disney trips and Vegas trips. We have four kids, live in Florida (so FL-resident rates), and going to one of the parks is definitely a big expense. Even if we get some $100 deal, it's still $600 just to get in.

 

 

Saw that CPS is going to assess the adult kids and determine whether or not they should remain under CPS care. After seeing the pictures of the previous homes, those poor people are going to need a lifetime of therapy.

I don't think they could hence the bankruptcy...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This story sounds more disturbing all the time to be honest. The husband watched the wife's sister in the shower when she was "young and didn't know what to do". The baby is two and the mother is 49. While a birth at that stage is possible it does raise some questions. The way the girls are dressed to look so young (at least some of them must have been over 20 in those photos). The pics from the house in Texas before. Yuck. Those poor people.

 

there's a noticeable age gap between the baby and the next child.  none of those other girls were toddlers. even with super skinny malnutrition - it would be a noticeable toddler vs a little girl.   My niece was super skinny and smaller for her age - she still looked like a toddler/infant.   

 

  These kids went to Disney land and Las Vegas and did not raise anyone's suspicions at that time enough to get anyone to do anything. 

The levels of intrusion needed to weed out abuse is totallitarian level.  

most people are just in passing.  they might notice something seems odd, but continue on their way.

 

I agree - it is very totalitarian to prevent this from happening.  abusers lie.  they manipulate, they hide.

 

The point is the kids are seen by a mandatory reporter who will hopefully notice if all of the kids seem malnourished and small.

 

except - some people have kids who ARE small. even on this forum, we have people whose kids are below the chart for size.    the pictures they showed - just looked like skinny kids.   there weren't any bruises.  I didn't see bones - and I've known boney kids who weren't being abused.

the dark circles on mom make me wonder what is going on with her health - but that doesn't warrant an outsider forcing answers.

even if all the kids had some cognitive delays (no one has said any such thing), that wouldn't necessarily be "abuse".

 

 

 

You don't have to regulate homeschooling to address this.  It would help if we would change the constitution to give children rights.

 

If children had a right to live free of abuse that superseded the rights of mentally ill parents (who, from a legal standpoint, currently own their children), that could make a HUGE difference in the lives of many abused children. 

 

and the hole in that one - is there are kids who would cause chaos when they objected to valid parental discipline.  and yes it's happened already.  I think of the case of rachael canning. spoiled brat who didnt' want to follow her parents house rules (and they didn't like her boyfriend. whom she later field a restraining order against claiming he choked her.  guess mom and dad were right.),

she moved out then sued them for support.  including private school tuition.  and the lawyer fees incurred from suing them.   even though she lost - her parents ended up with a lot of legal bills, not to mention stress and heartache.

and that's just one case.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, it is not the same thing because the state has the primary duty to restore the family due to the parents' constitutional right to be parents. 

 

The same thing happens when children have rights. Instead of the parents' constitutional right to be parents, it's the child's right to a relationship with their parents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for Disney and LV, it sounds like they were living beyond their means and filed for bankruptcy more than once. So IĂ¢â‚¬â„¢m guessing most of those trips were on borrowed money.

 

In the 2011 bankruptcy, when they were trying to discharge about $200,000 in debts, the father tried (unsuccessfully) to persuade the judge to let him keep his brand new Mustang. When the judge asked how he could afford the payments on a new car if they were broke, the father said that they had started "clipping coupons" and cutting back on other expenses.  Like food, apparently.  :crying:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And it turns out that CA does have an avenue they can pursue which is annual fire inspection which is under the CA law already for private schools, I never heard of anyone doing that actually but they could without changing the law at all.

The annual fire inspection wasnĂ¢â‚¬â„¢t done according to the SFgate news Lawmaker seeks home school oversight after 13 found captive http://www.sfgate.com/news/education/article/No-rules-for-California-home-schools-where-13-12503357.php

 

Ă¢â‚¬Å“Private schools in California are not licensed by the state education department and no agency regulates or oversees them, although they are supposed to register the number of students. They are, however, subject to an annual inspection by the state or local fire marshal.

 

"I am extremely concerned about the lack of oversight the state of California currently has in monitoring private and home schools," Assemblyman Jose Medina, a Democrat who represents the area, said.

 

In response to a public records request by The Associated Press, Perris Assistant City Clerk Judy Haughney said Wednesday that there were no records of any fire inspections conducted at the home. The city's fire marshal, Dave Martinez, did not return repeated phone messages seeking comment.

...

David Turpin had been home schooling his children at the residence, which he called the Sandcastle Day School. In the 2016-17 school year, it had an enrollment of six, with one student each in the fifth, sixth, eighth, ninth, 10th and 12th grades.Ă¢â‚¬

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry, but I do not agree with number two. I spent 10 year living within the confines of the Foster Care system and reasonable doesn't even enter into it. A foster parent cannot get a child's hair cut without the bio-parent's permission in this state (or maybe it's a county thing, but whatever, it's the law) and I cannot believe that "The People" had anything to do with that law.

 

.

IĂ¢â‚¬â„¢m not arguing there are likely lots of foster care problems, but I will be DevilĂ¢â‚¬â„¢s advocate and mention there are religions that dictate hair and cutting, etc. I think there could be a generic response on file (ok to cut) vs calling bio parent each haircut, but there are a lot of restrictions for some religions.

 

I think most of the laws are not made by the people, but by lawyers and politicians. So common sense gets gutted out.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aside of some sort of oversight for homeschooling, a mandated health check every one or two years might be reasonable. It could find major abuse (injuries, malnutrition) and some stuff that just didn't get noticed without any malicious intent. It would also be fairly non-intrusive as long as guidelines were clear and not too strict (i.e. not every little bruise on a kid is a sign of abuse).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I went to college in the 80s (large secular university), there were two single sex dorms out of 20-30?  Most dorms were co-ed by room or hallway.   I had a friend who lived in the women's dorm, and it was so much quieter and peaceful there.  It was a good place to study and the best place to get assigned as a receptionist.  I worked the Freshman dorm.  never a dull moment. :D

 

 

I don't want to speak for the 80s but, in the 90s, my school had single-sex and co-ed (by floor) options.  It wasn't for reasons of forced "propriety", but preference. And that preference still had no guarantee of being met.  While there were limits on visiting other dorms at night (enforced in buildings with front desk monitors, but not all buildings had desk monitors,) there were no limits on visiting floors within dorms. People stayed over in other rooms all the time. No one bothered to climb floors to get to a gender-specific bathroom. No one was trying to force their values on the student body.

(Of course, you did have to be mindful of your roommate's position if you wanted to survive the year...)

 

It's 2018 and I'm looking at schools for my kids.  My dd's most obvious pick at this time offers two male-only dorms and one co-ed dorm.  I get that logistics are complicated, but wow!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I went to college in the 80s (large secular university), there were two single sex dorms out of 20-30?  Most dorms were co-ed by room or hallway.   I had a friend who lived in the women's dorm, and it was so much quieter and peaceful there.  It was a good place to study and the best place to get assigned as a receptionist.  I worked the Freshman dorm.  never a dull moment. :D

 

 

I don't want to speak for the 80s but, in the 90s, my school had single-sex and co-ed (by floor) options.  It wasn't for reasons of forced "propriety", but preference. And that preference still had no guarantee of being met.  While there were limits on visiting other dorms at night (enforced in buildings with front desk monitors, but not all buildings had desk monitors,) there were no limits on visiting floors within dorms. People stayed over in other rooms all the time. No one bothered to climb floors to get to a gender-specific bathroom. No one was trying to force their values on the student body.

(Of course, you did have to be mindful of your roommate's position if you wanted to survive the year...)

 

It's 2018 and I'm looking at schools for my kids.  My dd's most obvious pick at this time offers two male-only dorms and one co-ed dorm.  I get that logistics are complicated, but wow!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The photos are horrific. Knowing that those kids were living in such filthy conditions for years, while the father bought himself new cars every year and the mother was arranging all these Disney trips and weird Elvis vow renewals, posting photos of the kids all cleaned up and dressed alike as if they were the perfect family, is just so sinister and creepy.  :ack2:

 

 

And it shows they KNEW BETTER.  This wasn't mental illness. It was cruelty.  They knew enough to shine them up, dress them up, make them smile, and take photos.  Ugh. Shudder.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

except - some people have kids who ARE small. even on this forum, we have people whose kids are below the chart for size.   

 

I cannot imagine we have people with kids on this forum that at age 17 or whatever still looked 9 or 10, no signs of puberty, growth stunted, etc who didn't have a medical reason for it OR had investigated with issue with their doctor. With some kind of paper trail to back that up. 

 

They weren't just thin, they are growth stunted. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aside of some sort of oversight for homeschooling, a mandated health check every one or two years might be reasonable. It could find major abuse (injuries, malnutrition) and some stuff that just didn't get noticed without any malicious intent. It would also be fairly non-intrusive as long as guidelines were clear and not too strict (i.e. not every little bruise on a kid is a sign of abuse).

 

Yes, even the otherwise totally without regulation "umbrella schools" here require a physical form signed off by a doctor, similar to public school. 

 

And yes, there are places that do free physicals for kids that otherwise can't get one, every year during the summer. 

 

Actually, one of the reasons we didn't use an umbrella school when we started is getting that form meant an extra trip to the germ pediatrician's office, plus getting the vaccine waiver form (at the time they were not quite caught up on vaccines due to me spacing them out a bit) at the health department. Seemed easier to throw together a portfolio. Now they are caught up so the regular vaccine form at the pediatrician would work, but I keep doing the registered homeschool thing because it offers some kind of paper trail if i were ever questioned. 

 

And it's free, lol. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I donĂ¢â‚¬â„¢t do it at all. I use all secular materials.

But, itĂ¢â‚¬â„¢s a sheet of math problems. I would have zero problem cutting that off and turning in the math problems.

 

Mom could write out a worksheet or the kids could write the problems on notebook paper.

 

The rules say you can use whatever you want to teach just that your work samples need to be secular.

I canĂ¢â‚¬â„¢t see how thatĂ¢â‚¬â„¢s a problem.

 

ETA - itĂ¢â‚¬â„¢s not hiding what youĂ¢â‚¬â„¢re using and itĂ¢â‚¬â„¢s not breaking any rules. ItĂ¢â‚¬â„¢s simply turning in a secular work sample.

Actually, in California, the rules do say you have to use non-sectarian curriculum in the public school. Check out California law, article 9 section 8.

 

Why else would work samples need to be secular? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am upset at the fact that neighbors and relatives and purchasers of their former homes are NOW coming out saying they thought something was off.....yet said nothing up until now.  Really?  You would dare be one to say, "I was right!  Something was wrong there!"

 

I know people jump on the homeschool part of this, but these people did not live in the boondocks (I expected that when I first heard the story).  Maybe we should pass laws requiring neighbors to be more engaged with each other.  (Sarcasm).

 

There is a fine line between nosing into other people's business and finding out whether kids are in actual peril.  Invest in finding out which it is.  BTDT.

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The annual fire inspection wasnĂ¢â‚¬â„¢t done according to the SFgate news Lawmaker seeks home school oversight after 13 found captive http://www.sfgate.com/news/education/article/No-rules-for-California-home-schools-where-13-12503357.php

 

Ă¢â‚¬Å“Private schools in California are not licensed by the state education department and no agency regulates or oversees them, although they are supposed to register the number of students. They are, however, subject to an annual inspection by the state or local fire marshal.

 

"I am extremely concerned about the lack of oversight the state of California currently has in monitoring private and home schools," Assemblyman Jose Medina, a Democrat who represents the area, said.

 

In response to a public records request by The Associated Press, Perris Assistant City Clerk Judy Haughney said Wednesday that there were no records of any fire inspections conducted at the home. The city's fire marshal, Dave Martinez, did not return repeated phone messages seeking comment.

...

David Turpin had been home schooling his children at the residence, which he called the Sandcastle Day School. In the 2016-17 school year, it had an enrollment of six, with one student each in the fifth, sixth, eighth, ninth, 10th and 12th grades.Ă¢â‚¬

So it looks like the state dropped the ball by not following the law already on the books. It would be interesting to see if any private schools/home schools in the state have been inspected as required by law. I would not want to be the fire marshal right about now

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Ă¢â‚¬Å“Private schools in California are not licensed by the state education department and no agency regulates or oversees them, although they are supposed to register the number of students. They are, however, subject to an annual inspection by the state or local fire marshal.

 

 

 

I've been wondering about the wording of the bolded.  To me, "subject to" means that you could be inspected, but it is not necessarily required.   It seems to me that perhaps that is the way it has been interpreted by the fire department.  I think stronger language is necessary if, in fact, all homeschools need to be inspected annually. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm a little late reading about this. I just think to myself what? Did they just avoid wellness dr visits? Wouldn't the dr be concerned if they were malnourished.

 

Did the oldest never leave the house without a parent? Is that why it was so hard to report? I am guessing they were in denial or afraid of repercussions of telling?

In my opinion, there had to be some brainwashing/cultish activity, along with mental illness going on here.

 

But about wellness dr. visits, I never took my girls for those after they were about 6, or whenever the required vaccinations were finished. We have never gone to the doctor just for checkups, as we have never had the insurance to do so. We go when we are sick. I grew up this way as well.  

  • Like 10
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because if you are really doing NOTHING to school your kids, you probably won't find anyone to sign off. And at that point, if you keep trying people, someone may end up reporting you for truancy I'd suppose. But unschoolers and such have no problem, if they actually are having their kids learn throughout the year. 

 

So yeah, it's not fool proof. But nothing is. 

 

When making laws, though, one has to consider what bringing the full force of said law down on someone actually looks like and remember it only takes one anti-homeschooling bureaucrat to bring that force to bear on a family, whether the family is actually neglectful/abusive or the administrator just thinks they are.

 

You have mentioned multiple times about the records you keep going back two years "just in case" you're asked. Or that no one has ever, ever had a problem getting signed off on their homeschool.  Okay. So imagine a mom that is still doing right by her kids but is slightly less organized than you and a bureaucrat with a bias against, say, large families, or families of a certain religion that they disagree with, or families that unschool, or families that only use workbooks, or families who don't take pictures of their kids' activities, or WHATEVER. Keep in mind it only takes one person at social services, or one person at the school district to decide what this family is doing isn't okay, and they have the power of state law behind them to do...what exactly?  It is fortunate that it never, ever happens in your state, but it does happen sometimes. I have met school officials that are openly hostile to homeschooling and think it damages kids.  What if they get put in charge of my homeschool via this law?

 

You have to look at what that "not fool proof" law actually allows the state to do to families and how much power it gives, say, one single government official to make someone's life hell. And then craft the law to be very careful that something like that couldn't happen to an innocent party.  That is extremely difficult and goes well beyond "something is better than nothing."

 

Should kids be protected from abusers? Absolutely!  That should go without saying. But since, as you state, nothing is foolproof, we have to be careful about how laws can be abused or be overbearing, or even if they just waste resources in the name of doing something rather than nothing.

  • Like 13
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I doubt the kids ever saw a dr - and probably never had their vaccinations.

one report says they only showered twice a year (probably before they went to disney.)   and a dr would have noticed that.

 

a family friend - who has probably never seen the kids - reports they got together recently because the family was going to be moving away from perris.   gotta keep moving so you don't get caught . . . .this undermines the argument they "weren't aware" their parenting style was something to which others would object and that authorities could/would hold them accountable.

why else not let their family talk to their kids?  or the neighbors when they were seen?  just to say "hello".  and keep on the move, never staying long in one place.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, in California, the rules do say you have to use non-sectarian curriculum in the public school. Check out California law, article 9 section 8.

 

Why else would work samples need to be secular?

That is about using public money for religious materials and in the school.

The home, even for children enrolled in a charter is not a school. By your logic a public school parent couldnĂ¢â‚¬â„¢t after school with CLE because they would be educating with religious curriculum.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been silent on this thread and reading it with concern due to the judgment about the kids' sizes.

 

I have a child who will be turning 15 this year who weighs 80 pounds soaking wet and still hasn't hit puberty. He often passes for much younger than he actually is. Yet he is not deprived of food, abused, or otherwise mistreated. He has 24/7 access to good food, is regularly fed a nutritious breakfast, lunch, and dinner. He's just small. Always has been.

 

It frightens me to think that because of his size and the fact that we homeschool that I could automatically fall under suspicion.

 

This is (partly) why I make sure my kids get yearly medical, dental, and vision check ups. And why I force them to play outside and be seen by the community.

But if he continues to not go into puberty you be looking into that. And have medical records to back that up.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I cannot imagine we have people with kids on this forum that at age 17 or whatever still looked 9 or 10, no signs of puberty, growth stunted, etc who didn't have a medical reason for it OR had investigated with issue with their doctor. With some kind of paper trail to back that up. 

 

They weren't just thin, they are growth stunted. 

 

of course they would have had it investigated by their dr if their child was that small.  (and I do know a couple people who've had to have their child examined to determine why they're not growing.  one does HGH injections.)

 

but the neighbors aren't going to know that.   random strangers aren't going to know that.   a  dr who examined  them would possibly catch it, but they probably never took the kids to one.

 

they are probably also intellectually/cognitively stunted with that much malnourishment.

 

I'm in agreement with the type of oversight you are advocating to prevent this type of abuse - has its own dangers to those who are actually innocent and good parents.   and if you think good (and organized) parents aren't hurt by zealots - remember the case of Justina Pelletier.   Boston children's "knew better" than her own dr, with ALL of his paperwork.   when BC got their hot little paws on her (with the support of the state of Massachusetts), she could ice skate.  when the family finally got her back, after months and months of legal wrangling and fights in court, she couldn't even walk.

 

eta: Boston children's hospital was considered one of the better children's hospitals in the entire country - and they this did this.

Edited by gardenmom5
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think this is something they normally check. They are subject to, but it doesn't mean it happens, especially if the private school doesn't submit records to the fire dept. How would the fire dept know a private school is at a home otherwise? CA's DoE would have to notify them.  Ca is often well-intentioned, but realistically, this cannot be feasible for all private schools that are homeschools. Do we have any homeschoolers here from CA that have submitted this paperwork?

 

 

The code was amended in 2014. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It reminds of the recent house fire in El Cajon where the smoke detectors weren't working. 

 

Family of 21 evacuated

I agree. I would be surprised if any homeschool in CA has been inspected this year by a fire department, even though the law specifies that an inspection must be completed. I don't think more regulations will prevent these types of tragic events from happening. The states simply don't have the manpower to enforce them and the abusers will always find a way to fly under the radar.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is about using public money for religious materials and in the school.

The home, even for children enrolled in a charter is not a school. By your logic a public school parent couldnĂ¢â‚¬â„¢t after school with CLE because they would be educating with religious curriculum.

 

Then why do work samples have to be secular, if the parents are allowed to buy and use their own materials?

 

nor shall any sectarian or denominational doctrine be taught, or instruction thereon be permitted, directly or indirectly, in any of the common schools of this State.

 

 

I don't agree that a ps parent can only use nonsectarian materials.

 

If the religious instruction ("directly or indirectly") is done using the schoolĂ¢â‚¬â„¢s money or during the schoolĂ¢â‚¬â„¢s time (as reported by the parents), it is illegal. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The more I think about this, the more I am determined to do my little part. I'm going to work harder to be the person who pulls my neighborhood together. I'm going to make it a point to get to know my neighbors, and take an interest in them. I'm not talking about being the neighborhood snoop. I mean that we all need each other, and I'm going to do my part.

 

I am starting another thread, though. What does one let go, and what is truly a concern?

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just think if there were laws like a yearly face to face meeting of some kind, in a casual way, and these abusers were NOT following that, that would at least distinguish them from actual homeschoolers to the general public.

You donĂ¢â‚¬â„¢t think they could get it together for that one day a year? I think they could. They pulled this off for years.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the article:

Ă¢â‚¬Å“WeĂ¢â‚¬â„¢ve seen so many cases that for us, the Turpin case is not that abnormal,Ă¢â‚¬ Coleman said. Ă¢â‚¬Å“It fits this pattern weĂ¢â‚¬â„¢ve been tracking for a long time.Ă¢â‚¬

 

To be sure, she said, the vast majority of home-schooled children have parents who create a warm environment at home and provide a fine education. She was happily home schooled, as were other staff members of her organization. The California case, she said, is Ă¢â‚¬Å“not the norm.Ă¢â‚¬

 

But, she said, the lack of regulation and enforcement by states allows home-schooling parents who abuse their children to hide them. While children who attend regular schools are abused too, research shows that home schoolers account for a disproportionate number of abused children.

 

 

A 2014 study by University of Wisconsin pediatrician Barbara Knox and colleagues found that in 38 cases of severe child abuse, 47 percent of parents had never enrolled their children in school or pulled their youngsters out when abuse was suspected and told authorities they were home schooling.

 

The National Center for Education Statistics reports that 3.3 percent of U.S. students, ages 5 to 17, or about 1.7 million, were home schooled in 2016."

 

The author of this article doesn't think that starving and chaining your kids to furniture is not that abnormal? What "pattern have they been tracking for a long time?"

 

The author's own cited statistics don't support her assertion that homeschoolers account for a disproportionate amount of abuse cases. The University of Wisconsin study found that the majority of the kids in the study they researched were NOT homeschooled. The majority of the kids were enrolled in traditional school yet were still abused. Regulations didn't help these kids, so why do some people think that more regulations will help prevent these abuses in the homeschooling community?

Edited by snowbeltmom
  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Elizabeth Smart commented on how difficult it is to break out of an abusive situation in which your perception of reality is being manipulated:

 

"Smart told ABC News that she would caution the public from immediately questioning why some of the siblings, especially the older ones, did not attempt to escape from the home earlier.

 

"That's an incredibly common question, that I actually get asked all the time," Smart said. "When you're in a situation where you're being highly manipulated, where you're being tortured ... it isn't just as easy as jumping in the car and driving away.

 

 

 

"Speaking as one who has been physically chained up, and as one who has also been held by chains of manipulations and threats, I will tell you ... the chains of manipulation and threats are so much stronger than actual physical chains," Smart said."

 

 

http://abcnews.go.com/US/elizabeth-smarts-message-siblings-held-captive-life-dark/story?id=52394296

 

(speaking of Elizabeth Smart, I have been so impressed by the way she has used her experience as a jumping off point to advocate for victims of abuse. She is one of my heroes.)

Edited by maize
  • Like 25
Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the article:

Ă¢â‚¬Å“WeĂ¢â‚¬â„¢ve seen so many cases that for us, the Turpin case is not that abnormal,Ă¢â‚¬ Coleman said. Ă¢â‚¬Å“It fits this pattern weĂ¢â‚¬â„¢ve been tracking for a long time.Ă¢â‚¬

 

To be sure, she said, the vast majority of home-schooled children have parents who create a warm environment at home and provide a fine education. She was happily home schooled, as were other staff members of her organization. The California case, she said, is Ă¢â‚¬Å“not the norm.Ă¢â‚¬

 

But, she said, the lack of regulation and enforcement by states allows home-schooling parents who abuse their children to hide them. While children who attend regular schools are abused too, research shows that home schoolers account for a disproportionate number of abused children.

 

 

A 2014 study by University of Wisconsin pediatrician Barbara Knox and colleagues found that in 38 cases of severe child abuse, 47 percent of parents had never enrolled their children in school or pulled their youngsters out when abuse was suspected and told authorities they were home schooling.

 

The National Center for Education Statistics reports that 3.3 percent of U.S. students, ages 5 to 17, or about 1.7 million, were home schooled in 2016."

 

The author of this article doesn't think that starving and chaining your kids to furniture is not that abnormal? What "pattern have they been tracking for a long time?"

 

The author's own cited statistics don't support her assertion that homeschoolers account for a disproportionate amount of abuse cases. The University of Wisconsin study found that the majority of the kids in the study they researched were NOT homeschooled. The majority of the kids were enrolled in traditional school yet were still abused. Regulations didn't help these kids, so why do some people think that more regulations will help prevent these abuses in the homeschooling community?

 

I bet the bolded was a poor choice of words, and she meant to say not that unusual in abusive families, rather than abnormal.  And it's not unusual for abusers to confine children and deprive them of food.  It's common in abusive families.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dh and I were talking about this.

 

The father seems quite a bit taller than the mother.  Genetic odds would say that some of the children would take after the mother's height and be shorter.  But, some of them should also take after the father's height.  They shouldn't all be small for their age.  It seems that something other than genetics is at work here.  :(

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I cannot imagine we have people with kids on this forum that at age 17 or whatever still looked 9 or 10, no signs of puberty, growth stunted, etc who didn't have a medical reason for it OR had investigated with issue with their doctor. With some kind of paper trail to back that up. 

 

They weren't just thin, they are growth stunted. 

 

 

Absolutely right.  Some of my kids are SMALL.  My mother in law is like 4'10" and wears a size 6 shoe, the same size as my 11yo.  Elizabeth was diagnosed failure to thrive as a baby and we were so worried they had her do tests (like two colonoscopies and biopsies) and had her supplement with a special formula as a toddler.

 

When your kids are tiny and not round and squishy like other people's kids, no matter how healthy you eat, you DO get them checked on, you just do.  And who has NEVER had to see a pediatrician?  Because, I have to tell you, unless you've had 2 or 3 daughters that fall under the tenth percentile, pediatricians and other doctors TOTALLY freak out about the size of them.  (After the first 2 or 3 and they stay on the growth chart and you keep the same ped., she just says this is how guys grow them.) BUT, even with the acceptance of an extremely slender and thin child, they don't look 10.  My MIL was 90 pounds when she got married.  My sil was 98.  They still looked like young adults.  

Edited by BlsdMama
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

Ă—
Ă—
  • Create New...