Another homeschooling article, this one about severe abuse

[Heartstrings]

13 hours ago, Innisfree said:

In 2014, a group of pediatricians published a study of more than two dozen tortured children treated at medical centers in Virginia, Texas, Wisconsin, Utah and Washington. Among the 17 victims old enough to attend school, eight were home-schooled.

It says there were 24 kids, meaning 7 were not yet school age.  Since it says that they looked across 5 states I'm wondering if they were actually trying to keep roughly 1/3 each homeschool, public school, and under school age.  I'm going to see if I can find the info about the study.  

Again though, 1/3 of the kids were not yet school age but here we are talking about the ones that were homeschooled.  We also aren't asking the question of how 9 kids managed to *tortured* while under the daily watchful eye of multiple mandated reporters?  How does abuse that is described as torture go unnoticed?  And nothing at all is said about the under 5s.   WHY?   Because we were primed by the way it was reported.  

 

 

 

Edited December 3, 2023 by Heartstrings

[Heartstrings]

full text of the study here if anyone is interested. The link in the article is just to the abstract that doesn't mention anything about the children studied. 

 

ETA:  I didn't realize there were graphic pictures included when I posted the link.  There are, they are terrible. 

Edited December 3, 2023 by Heartstrings

[Faith-manor]

34 minutes ago, PeterPan said:

Sounds like you could run for county commissioner. 🙂

Wrong party. There is one party elected. Period. I am not of that group. They also do not elect females in my county. 

We will be moving when we retire which is only a very few years away.

At any rate, I don't want to get too much more off topic or into politics. However, it is very difficult to discuss issues like these because political considerations are always at the heart of any possible solutions or improvements.

Sometimes it is so challenging to think of anything that might make a positive difference.

I do think drug and alcohol rehab, free and easily accessible is one place to start. But again, no one wants the tax payer to be on the hook for it even though in the long term, there would be huge savings from less incarceration, to fewer kids in foster care, etc. How to get anyone to think long term is the big conundrum!

[maize]

1 hour ago, BakersDozen said:

Arizona's ESA program is basically such a program. Proponents will state that there is accountability, but beyond submitting receipts and curriculum (which is a joke - my kids would write what is considered acceptable as curriculum), there is no accountability as to how purchases are actually being used, whom is being hired to teach/"teach." Anyone with a high school diploma can be hired using ESA funds to teach kids. Pods and microschools, learning centers and such are popping up everywhere and there is absolutely nothing in place as far as oversight whether academically or professionally. Drop-off programs are all the rage now compared to the homeschool co-ops which often required parental presence or participation.

 

I skimmed through the parent handbook for this program. I judge it to be more likely to help students get a better education than not. Families have extra funds specifically dedicated to educating their children! The money can't be used for non-educational stuff, so there isn't some huge incentive for families to claim they homeschool just to get the funds. Yes, families may hire tutors who aren't super highly qualified, or spend some of the money on low-quality curriculum or kits that don't really teach much or whatever. Isn't that better than the kid not having a tutor or access to music lessons or books or whatever?

There's plenty of research out there showing that when moms have money to spend, kids benefit. 

[SKL]

8 minutes ago, Heartstrings said:

It says there were 24 kids, meaning 7 were not yet school age.  Since it says that they looked across 5 states I'm wondering if they were actually trying to keep roughly 1/3 each homeschool, public school, and under school age.  I'm going to see if I can find the info about the study.  

Again though, 1/3 of the kids were not yet school age but here we are talking about the ones that were homeschooled.  We also aren't asking the question of how 9 kids managed to *tortured* while under the daily watchful eye of multiple mandated reporters?  How does abuse that is described as torture go unnoticed?  And nothing at all is said about the under 5s.   WHY?   Because we were primed by the way it was reported. 

The fact remains that the % who were "homeschooled" is many times more than the % of homeschooled kids in the US or in any state.

Obviously homeschooling is not the cause, but being able to use "homeschooling" as an excuse to hide the way kids are treated is a problem.  The fact that some of the tortured kids were not "homeschooled" doesn't change that.

As for those school-aged kids who were not "homeschooled," that doesn't mean they were regularly attending school, though some of them may have been.  Many stories of abused kids have the parents claiming that their kid has moved away to live with a relative or whatever, to explain away the fact that they stopped showing up at school.

I do think there should be a system to ensure that kids who stop going to school in one location, reportedly due to a move, are registered again in a new location within a reasonable amount of time.  Likewise, there should be a system to track who have moved while a CPS case was open.

I don't know about kids under 5.  I think most things should be up to the parents (such as what kind of preventive medical care they get etc.).  Wee kids don't need to be in group activities etc.  While most kids will be seen by caring family, friends, and neighbors, some do and will fall through the cracks.  But that doesn't mean we need to let school-aged kids also fall through the cracks.

[Heartstrings]

From the article:

 

"Child abuse pediatricians from five U.S. medical centers selected cases they considered to represent child torture. The sites spanned the country, including Virginia, Texas, Wisconsin, Utah, and Washington State."    

"They did not represent all potential cases from any institution"  

Given just this I'm not sure we can draw ANY conclusions from the fact that 1/3 were homeschooled and honestly makes the posts referencing it the way it did suspect.   That number doesn't say anything about how frequently abuse happens in the homeschool community.  

For over half, few individuals outside the abuser(s) knew of the child’s existence. This social isolation typically involved preventing the child from attending school or daycare.Twenty-nine percent of school-age children were not allowed to attend school; two children, though previous enrolled, were dis-enrolled by their caregiver and received no further schooling. An additional 47 % who had been enrolled in school were removed under the auspice of “homeschooling.” This “homeschooling” appears to have been designed to further isolate the child and typically occurred after closure of a previously opened CPS case. Review of these cases found no true educational efforts were provided to the homeschooled children. Their isolation was accompanied by an escalation of physically abusive events.

Half had a history of prior referrals to CPS.

 

Edited December 3, 2023 by Heartstrings

[PeterPan]

10 minutes ago, Faith-manor said:

I do think drug and alcohol rehab, free and easily accessible is one place to start.

The sad thing is that in some places those programs ARE readily available, in spades, and the people go through them over and over. You aren't ready till you're ready and you won't take even free services and really get better till you WANT it, all the way. I know it's illogical to us, but the stories I've been told by someone working in that demographic (and from my own family's experiences) are pretty astonishing. (girls saying they want away from their pimp and then turning down the offer to be helped completely, all the way, with EVERYTHING they needed to get out) Addiction is a hard thing, sigh.

[Heartstrings]

13 minutes ago, maize said:

I skimmed through the parent handbook for this program. I judge it to be more likely to help students get a better education than not. Families have extra funds specifically dedicated to educating their children! The money can't be used for non-educational stuff, so there isn't some huge incentive for families to claim they homeschool just to get the funds. Yes, families may hire tutors who aren't super highly qualified, or spend some of the money on low-quality curriculum or kits that don't really teach much or whatever. Isn't that better than the kid not having a tutor or access to music lessons or books or whatever?

There's plenty of research out there showing that when moms have money to spend, kids benefit. 

the main issue I've seen so far is that something like 75% of kids receiving the funds were already in private or homeschool.  So most of the families were already affording the education, and only a small number of kids were helped to access better schools. Its also going to cost 1400% more than anticipated which is...wow.  

And in other states, most of the private schools receiving funds raise their tuition by about the same amount as the voucher.  

 

https://www.azmirror.com/2023/06/01/arizona-school-voucher-program-growth-explodes-to-900-million-for-the-upcoming-school-year/

Edited December 3, 2023 by Heartstrings

[maize]

46 minutes ago, Heartstrings said:

the main issue I've seen so far is that something like 75% of kids receiving the funds were already in private or homeschool.  So most of the families were already affording the education, and only a small number of kids were helped to access better schools. Its also going to cost 1400% more than anticipated which is...wow.  

And in other states, most of the private schools receiving funds raise their tuition by about the same amount as the voucher.  

 

https://www.azmirror.com/2023/06/01/arizona-school-voucher-program-growth-explodes-to-900-million-for-the-upcoming-school-year/

The fact that many families were already taking advantage of alternative education doesn't mean the kids aren't benefited by having extra funds.

My kids absolutely get a better education with public funds than I could afford without. Yes we would (and have done) homeschool anyway without the funds because school has not been a good fit for any of my crew of neurodivergent kids, but without funding I wouldn't be able to afford the tutors and classes that my kids currently have access to.

Nor do I think it's a bad thing if private schools are able to increase tuition because more families can afford higher tuition. Hopefully those funds go towards better teacher salaries and better education! We're hardly in a position as a nation of over-investing in children.

In general, if government programs want to help people who are struggling and people who are falling through the cracks, there needs to be acceptance that some benefits will also go to people who don't really need them, and some will go to people who take undue advantage of them. Because tightening things up rather than choosing to be relatively liberal and generous with benefits always results in missing some of the people most in need.

[Heartstrings]

35 minutes ago, maize said:

The fact that many families were already taking advantage of alternative education doesn't mean the kids aren't benefited by having extra funds.

My kids absolutely get a better education with public funds than I could afford without. Yes we would (and have done) homeschool anyway without the funds because school has not been a good fit for any of my crew of neurodivergent kids, but without funding I wouldn't be able to afford the tutors and classes that my kids currently have access to.

Nor do I think it's a bad thing if private schools are able to increase tuition because more families can afford higher tuition. Hopefully those funds go towards better teacher salaries and better education! We're hardly in a position as a nation of over-investing in children.

In general, if government programs want to help people who are struggling and people who are falling through the cracks, there needs to be acceptance that some benefits will also go to people who don't really need them, and some will go to people who take undue advantage of them. Because tightening things up rather than choosing to be relatively liberal and generous with benefits always results in missing some of the people most in need.

I do worry about the programs costing so much more than was planned, because my state is rolling out a similar program. I’m not in favor of the program but I’ll sign up if it’s being offered, since I’m not philosophically opposed to testing.   

[Ausmumof3]

15 hours ago, Innisfree said:

The boy at the center of this article was abused and murdered by his stepmother.  It’s awful. I hate it when this is the face of homeschooling, but it does happen, and the homeschooling can be a ruse to avoid detection. I’m not quoting the details of his abuse, or that of other children mentioned, but this is the basis premise of the article. 

https://wapo.st/3RnyVI2 (gifted)

I also hate that and am glad we have some oversight here. With a stat of 8/17 unfortunately it could just be one large single homeschool family. Still horrific for the kids but not exactly something you could describe as a widespread problem. Or it could be 8 kids from all different families. 

[Carrie12345]

9 hours ago, SKL said:

But yeah, I'd like to know how some people think child abuse can be prevented.  If we could figure that out, wouldn't society be amazing!  How do we figure out who's likely to beat their kids before it happens?  How do we find out who's done it asap after it happens?  How do we get those people to be open to education about reasonable parenting?

Another thing that struck me was how many siblings know this stuff is happening and don't report.  Why isn't there outreach to them?  Why isn't TikTok etc. showing ads that tell kids to report if they have a friend or relative who is being abused, or provide links for them to report that they or others are being abused?  Why aren't kids being educated at school, church, etc. about what abuse looks like and how to report it?  I mean I'm sure lots of kids would use that to complain every time their folks pissed them off, but overreporting has never been an excuse to block reporting, has it?

Over reporting taxes an already strained system, which can have a similar effect as blocking reporting, though I don’t know anyone who would support the term “block reporting”.

Unfortunately, there is no single predictor or even combo predictors for future abuse. A very common factor is poverty. We would likely decrease abuse with healthy wages and robust financial assistance. We would also likely decrease trauma overall and trauma from displacement if we provided certain “neglect” cases with the same financial supports we provide foster homes. But financially stable people hurt kids too, so it isn’t a given.

Another thing I’m only going to list as a factor and not get into discussion is access to full reproductive control.

Stress is a big factor. Systemic supports like safe, affordable, flexible daycare for all could be helpful, but community ties and involvement are another. Social connections are a big deal. You’re overwhelmed? Send the kids over to come play with mine. I’m running errands, can I make some stops for you? I miss babies; I’d love to entertain yours while you shower or eat in peace or take a nap. Engaging with others to form friendships improves mental health and lifelines.

But we also can’t subject all families to investigation without sufficient evidence. It IS traumatic. (BTDT) We hear “I knew something was wrong” a lot, but “I think something is wrong” isn’t evidence itself.

My niece and nephew are definitely kids at risk. They are not, to the best of my knowledge, physically abused, but the things I could say… I HATE that things aren’t better for them and I fear for their future, but there isn’t enough for a judge to declare they shouldn’t have their mother anymore. If only there were a magic crystal ball, we could all rest easy.

[El...]

The situation that led this article is so bizarre and horrifying, I think it's throwing me off any solutions. Torturing a kid... that's not something you fix with a better poverty support system, is it? It's like rabies or something.

Neglect, food insufficiency, exhaustion due to working too many underpaid jobs, these we can definitely do things about. Whether we will is hard to predict.

But torturing and starving a kid?

I need to set that diseased extreme aside to even think. 

[Carrie12345]

2 minutes ago, El... said:

The situation that led this article is so bizarre and horrifying, I think it's throwing me off any solutions. Torturing a kid... that's not something you fix with a better poverty support system, is it? It's like rabies or something.

Neglect, food insufficiency, exhaustion due to working too many underpaid jobs, these we can definitely do things about. Whether we will is hard to predict.

But torturing and starving a kid?

I need to set that diseased extreme aside to even think. 

Agreed. I don’t want to ignore the extremes, but the vast majority isn’t in that extreme.

[Dmmetler]

9 hours ago, maize said:

The fact that many families were already taking advantage of alternative education doesn't mean the kids aren't benefited by having extra funds.

My kids absolutely get a better education with public funds than I could afford without. Yes we would (and have done) homeschool anyway without the funds because school has not been a good fit for any of my crew of neurodivergent kids, but without funding I wouldn't be able to afford the tutors and classes that my kids currently have access to.

Nor do I think it's a bad thing if private schools are able to increase tuition because more families can afford higher tuition. Hopefully those funds go towards better teacher salaries and better education! We're hardly in a position as a nation of over-investing in children.

In general, if government programs want to help people who are struggling and people who are falling through the cracks, there needs to be acceptance that some benefits will also go to people who don't really need them, and some will go to people who take undue advantage of them. Because tightening things up rather than choosing to be relatively liberal and generous with benefits always results in missing some of the people most in need.

My concern about the program my state is rolling out, which is similar to this, is that it requires that parents waive their child's right to services under IDEA. So, if child X who has an IEP takes the voucher to go to nice little private school and gets kicked out because they can't handle X's needs (which happens even with charters that ARE legally required to follow an IEP and usually get service providers from the local school district), the funds will have been spent, and the parent will be on record as having waived the child's right to an IEP. I can especially see this as problematic for parents who start taking it in K, but then discover that their child is struggling down the road. Because the school system is the ONLY way to get your child assessed without out of pocket cost to you, and if you don't have good insurance, that can be a lot. 

 

I also have a BK who gets the state IEA for special needs, and honestly, we've found it hard to spend the money as a homeschooler because the restrictions around it make it unusable. (The biggest one being that the provider has to do medical office-style billing, where you only bill after services rendered, and then get paid weeks later. I do take IEA vouchers for tutoring at my house, but cannot for anything I do at the center due to this requirement.) Since we would have homeschooled BK even without the funds, discovering that it can't be used for 90+% of what we do hasn't been a big change. I think it would have helped if we'd wanted to send BK to a 20k/yr private school (which is what most of the ones that take the IEA run), because it would have reduced that tuition down to about 12k, but as a homeschooler, it's been a miss.

 

If the universal vouchers are similar, I can't see it helping homeschoolers at all-it will just be a tuition reduction for private schools. And that's if they don't raise the tuition, as has been reported in other states. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[maize]

17 minutes ago, Dmmetler said:

My concern about the program my state is rolling out, which is similar to this, is that it requires that parents waive their child's right to services under IDEA. So, if child X who has an IEP takes the voucher to go to nice little private school and gets kicked out because they can't handle X's needs (which happens even with charters that ARE legally required to follow an IEP and usually get service providers from the local school district), the funds will have been spent, and the parent will be on record as having waived the child's right to an IEP. I can especially see this as problematic for parents who start taking it in K, but then discover that their child is struggling down the road. Because the school system is the ONLY way to get your child assessed without out of pocket cost to you, and if you don't have good insurance, that can be a lot. 

 

I also have a BK who gets the state IEA for special needs, and honestly, we've found it hard to spend the money as a homeschooler because the restrictions around it make it unusable. (The biggest one being that the provider has to do medical office-style billing, where you only bill after services rendered, and then get paid weeks later. I do take IEA vouchers for tutoring at my house, but cannot for anything I do at the center due to this requirement.) Since we would have homeschooled BK even without the funds, discovering that it can't be used for 90+% of what we do hasn't been a big change. I think it would have helped if we'd wanted to send BK to a 20k/yr private school (which is what most of the ones that take the IEA run), because it would have reduced that tuition down to about 12k, but as a homeschooler, it's been a miss.

 

If the universal vouchers are similar, I can't see it helping homeschoolers at all-it will just be a tuition reduction for private schools. And that's if they don't raise the tuition, as has been reported in other states. 

These are avoidable issues; the programs need to be written better. 

My kids are currently benefitting from my state's tax credit scholarship for kids who would qualify for an IEP in public school. We don't waive the right to an IEP; they just can't receive both simultaneously.  Scholarship funds are disbursed on a monthly basis; while I haven't done a deep dive into the relevant regulations, I don't think there is anything to prevent me from putting a child back in school next month; I just wouldn't get any more scholarship disbursements going forward.

I have had no trouble at all using the funds. There are some requirements for in-person tutors, but the retired teacher/former homeschool mom I found to come to my home and help tutor my younger kids twice a week just needed to submit a copy of her (now inactive) teaching license. I believe a copy of her college diploma would have worked as well. I pay her upfront and send in a receipt to get reimbursed, but now that she is registered as a provider she could invoice them directly. I have also been reimbursed with no issues for my kids online tutors, volleyball classes, gymnastics classes, music lessons. etc. as well as for purchases of curriculum, books and supplies. They will do direct orders for those as well for families who prefer that or who can't afford to pay upfront and wait for reimbursement.

[PeterPan]

1 hour ago, Dmmetler said:

waive their child's right to services under IDEA. So, if child X who has an IEP takes the voucher to go to nice little private school and gets kicked out because they can't handle X's needs (which happens even with charters that ARE legally required to follow an IEP and usually get service providers from the local school district), the funds will have been spent,

There may be protections for this. In our state you do waive your FAPE to get the funds (the majority) as a scholarship to service your IEP through private providers. NO ONE is able to bill all that money up front and just walk off with the entirety of the scholarship. There are caps for billing per month and quarter, creating safeguards for parents. If a provider commits fraud, they would of course be kicked out of the system. 

So while there is some risk, the parent is well informed and has safeguards in place. They're told very clearly that at the end of the day it is their legal responsibility to educate their dc in compliance with the law and pay any bills beyond what the scholarship covers. They also have procedures to leave the scholarship system and return to the ps system if they wish. That's part of why the caps are in place, to make sure this can be done. 

If your state has not structured their system with safeguards, that's a legislative issue.

[PeterPan]

40 minutes ago, maize said:

We don't waive the right to an IEP

Exactly. In our state the IEP is the document that tells the scholarship system what services can be funded. We give up our FAPE=free and appropriate public education. 

Edited December 3, 2023 by PeterPan

[PeterPan]

1 hour ago, Dmmetler said:

Because the school system is the ONLY way to get your child assessed without out of pocket cost to you, and if you don't have good insurance, that can be a lot. 

Maybe check into how it's being implemented. Your access to evaluations through the ps is a FEDERAL right and cannot be waived by the states. You have that federal right under IDEA irrespective of school placement and part of the funds for those evals are sometimes paid by the medicaid system, which is again not funding going into your scholarship system. 

Our state *requires* the IEP process to access the scholarship system. I'd be surprised if other states are not doing similar. I guess they're creative and have at it.

Your FAPE funds are the funds correlated to your student based on their disabling condition in the IEP, the funds the ps would receive if you were enrolled. In our state the ps handling the IEP each year retains a portion of the funds to do the IEP renewal/updates and the rest becomes your scholarship.

Again, there are probably different ways in each state but they cannot possibly be undoing your federal rights. 

We've been on the scholarship system in our state for many years now, and it is an unbelievable system that allows me to make things happen that the ps system could not if he were enrolled. I'm able to find the best providers for my ds' situation, hire and fire, do things myself that I can do well to stretch the money to areas I can't. We have gotten results that you wouldn't DREAM of for someone with the diagnoses my ds had. Huge, huge fan of scholarships and flexibility. 

And yes, I talk with parents all the time who were well intentioned who got swamped by challenges. Nuts, I sometimes get swamped by challenges. They don't stay swamped long once they get this access, because it enables them to dip their feet in to ASKING FOR HELP. And as they get help, they connect with what their dc need.

As the others said, you give a mother the money and amazing things happen.

Edited December 3, 2023 by PeterPan

[PeterPan]

1 hour ago, Dmmetler said:

(The biggest one being that the provider has to do medical office-style billing, where you only bill after services rendered, and then get paid weeks later. I do take IEA vouchers for tutoring at my house, but cannot for anything I do at the center due to this requirement.)

That is a separate issue, sigh, and it's so aggravating. There's so much red tape that the ps/dept of ed system carries over from how they do things. It causes good providers not to be willing to take the scholarships, because the reporting systems are so time consuming and cumbersome. 

There's a whole side discussion there of the boards and what is being done about that, but it's entrenched gov't inefficiency making it hard even when they TRY to be innovative, sigh. We need someone to come in and tell them to CUT ANY REGULATIONS THAT COULD BE CUT and see what happens. There are thinking people who could figure out how to do it while keeping safeguards and preventing fraud. I was just talking with someone in the loop on that for our state and it's just a boggy mess, sigh. 

I'm at this point where I get passionate about things and have to decide what I can engage in and where I can't. 

Edited December 3, 2023 by PeterPan

[frogger]

Where I live most coorespondence programs are run by various school districts. You are technically a public school student. 

You can request testing by the school district for an IEP or 504.

You take all the standardized testing that the B&M take unless you opt out. Honestly, public school students can opt out too. I did opt one year because the kid was doing too much testing for his 504 and other things that we just needed to do school. 

You are eligible for services like speech or occupational therapy. 

People can become vendors for the school district and teach classes/tutor etc. This means the district can outright pay bills without parents waiting fpr reimbursement. Some school districts make it hard for people to become vendors, some are more reasonable. You can choose to enroll in a school district in a different part of the state. Programs compete for student enrollment. . 

Some require quarterly samples.

All require pre made course plans and monthly teacher contact. 

All allow you to choose any curriculum or online classes as long as basic requirements are met. In high school this means meeting your districts credit requirements for graduation.  Only secular will be funded though. 

This helps people who really struggle with simply losing one salary. Where children wouldn't be able to participate in anything else.

Alaska started providing coorespondence schooling in 1939 so we have  a more developed, mature program that has changed over many decades. It had to start as a way to meet its constitutional mandate to provide education to a kid that could be hundreds of miles from others. A villiage must have at least 10 children before the state provides a B&M school. 

 

It still is irrelevant to abuse. Do sadists care if their child gets music lessons? Do they know what to say to people to appear normal in their communications with contact teachers? Of course.

If you are enticing people and helping people provide good education that is a goal of its own but it won't stop abuse. 

I know threads take turns and twists. So I am not sure if we are talking helping kids get an education now or abuse.

I do think people often need help and it makes sense to me to provide it if homeschooling is going to be legal.

[maize]

6 minutes ago, frogger said:

Where I live most coorespondence programs are run by various school districts. You are technically a public school student. 

You can request testing by the school district for an IEP or 504.

You take all the standardized testing that the B&M take unless you opt out. Honestly, public school students can opt out too. I did opt one year because the kid was doing too much testing for his 504 and other things that we just needed to do school. 

You are eligible for services like speech or occupational therapy. 

People can become vendors for the school district and teach classes/tutor etc. This means the district can outright pay bills without parents waiting fpr reimbursement. Some school districts make it hard for people to become vendors, some are more reasonable. You can choose to enroll in a school district in a different part of the state. Programs compete for student enrollment. . 

Some require quarterly samples.

All require pre made course plans and monthly teacher contact. 

All allow you to choose any curriculum or online classes as long as basic requirements are met. In high school this means meeting your districts credit requirements for graduation.  Only secular will be funded though. 

This helps people who really struggle with simply losing one salary. Where children wouldn't be able to participate in anything else.

Alaska started providing coorespondence schooling in 1939 so we have  a more developed, mature program that has changed over many decades. It had to start as a way to meet its constitutional mandate to provide education to a kid that could be hundreds of miles from others. A villiage must have at least 10 children before the state provides a B&M school. 

 

It still is irrelevant to abuse. Do sadists care if their child gets music lessons? Do they know what to say to people to appear normal in their communications with contact teachers? Of course.

If you are enticing people and helping people provide good education that is a goal of its own but it won't stop abuse. 

I know threads take turns and twists. So I am not sure if we are talking helping kids get an education now or abuse.

I do think people often need help and it makes sense to me to provide it if homeschooling is going to be legal.

I don't see publicly funded programs as a way to stop abuse, but educational neglect is a much more widespread problem among homeschoolers and having the funds to pay for classes and tutoring etc. can absolutely help with that. Yes, an organized parent with sufficient mental and emotional bandwidth can educate a child on a shoestring budget, but many people on shoestring budgets are also living in bare survival mode mentally, emotionally and physically. I know that state from experience. Funds earmarked specifically for a child's education can make a world of difference in that all-too-common situation. 

Edited December 3, 2023 by maize

[Heartstrings]

24 minutes ago, maize said:

I don't see publicly funded programs as a way to stop abuse, but educational neglect is a much more widespread problem among homeschoolers and having the funds to pay for classes and tutoring etc. can absolutely help with that. Yes, an organized parent with sufficient mental and emotional bandwidth can educate a child on a shoestring budget, but many people on shoestring budgets are also living in bare survival mode mentally, emotionally and physically. I know that state from experience. Funds earmarked specifically for a child's education can make a world of difference in that all-too-common situation. 

And for “regular” abuse relieving some financial stress from the parent can help.  It won’t help with the sadists but it can make some difference in the less severe kind.  

[Frances]

20 hours ago, PeterPan said:

The sad thing is that in some places those programs ARE readily available, in spades, and the people go through them over and over. You aren't ready till you're ready and you won't take even free services and really get better till you WANT it, all the way. I know it's illogical to us, but the stories I've been told by someone working in that demographic (and from my own family's experiences) are pretty astonishing. (girls saying they want away from their pimp and then turning down the offer to be helped completely, all the way, with EVERYTHING they needed to get out) Addiction is a hard thing, sigh.

I’d be curious to now where the programs are readily available?  Are they also affordable? They certainly aren’t readily available here, nor are they affordable for many.

I agree addiction is very hard, though.

[Frances]

6 hours ago, maize said:

I don't see publicly funded programs as a way to stop abuse, but educational neglect is a much more widespread problem among homeschoolers and having the funds to pay for classes and tutoring etc. can absolutely help with that. Yes, an organized parent with sufficient mental and emotional bandwidth can educate a child on a shoestring budget, but many people on shoestring budgets are also living in bare survival mode mentally, emotionally and physically. I know that state from experience. Funds earmarked specifically for a child's education can make a world of difference in that all-too-common situation. 

But isn’t that what public school is for? I’m not sure I’m on onboard with providing public dollars for homeschoolers, just as I don’t support doing it for private schools, either directly or through tax credits or vouchers. I know public schools are not ideal for every child, but if a parent wants education money from the state, then I think they need to access it through a public school program, even if it’s some sort of hybrid public charter school program.

[Frances]

20 hours ago, maize said:

The fact that many families were already taking advantage of alternative education doesn't mean the kids aren't benefited by having extra funds.

My kids absolutely get a better education with public funds than I could afford without. Yes we would (and have done) homeschool anyway without the funds because school has not been a good fit for any of my crew of neurodivergent kids, but without funding I wouldn't be able to afford the tutors and classes that my kids currently have access to.

Nor do I think it's a bad thing if private schools are able to increase tuition because more families can afford higher tuition. Hopefully those funds go towards better teacher salaries and better education! We're hardly in a position as a nation of over-investing in children.

In general, if government programs want to help people who are struggling and people who are falling through the cracks, there needs to be acceptance that some benefits will also go to people who don't really need them, and some will go to people who take undue advantage of them. Because tightening things up rather than choosing to be relatively liberal and generous with benefits always results in missing some of the people most in need.

But all of this money is being diverted from public schools, which in most states, including Arizona, are woefully underfunded. How about fully funding them first before diverting money to private schools and questionable providers.

[Frances]

8 hours ago, PeterPan said:

That is a separate issue, sigh, and it's so aggravating. There's so much red tape that the ps/dept of ed system carries over from how they do things. It causes good providers not to be willing to take the scholarships, because the reporting systems are so time consuming and cumbersome. 

There's a whole side discussion there of the boards and what is being done about that, but it's entrenched gov't inefficiency making it hard even when they TRY to be innovative, sigh. We need someone to come in and tell them to CUT ANY REGULATIONS THAT COULD BE CUT and see what happens. There are thinking people who could figure out how to do it while keeping safeguards and preventing fraud. I was just talking with someone in the loop on that for our state and it's just a boggy mess, sigh. 

I'm at this point where I get passionate about things and have to decide what I can engage in and where I can't. 

But when you do this, then you end up with situations like the rampant unemployment fraud, the rampant PPP loan fraud, tax fraud, etc. Carefully screening things takes time and money and inevitably when people want it expedited it leads to rampant and costly abuse. Bad people make it so that the rest of us have to go through more hoops and bureaucracy than we would like in order to protect limited government funds.

[maize]

3 minutes ago, Frances said:

But all of this money is being diverted from public schools, which in most states, including Arizona, are woefully underfunded. How about fully funding them first before diverting money to private schools and questionable providers.

How about we do both?

Prioritize education funding. We could, for example, take 10% of federal defense spending and allocate it to education--which would double federal spending on education. 

We as a nation and as states and as communities are not incapable of prioritizing education for all children.

Most of my kids have been enrolled in public schools at some point. The schools were a resounding failure for each of them. I stand firmly in favor of multiple educational options for all students and all families, not merely those who have the means to self-fund alternatives to standard district schools.

[Frances]

27 minutes ago, maize said:

How about we do both?

Prioritize education funding. We could, for example, take 10% of federal defense spending and allocate it to education--which would double federal spending on education. 

We as a nation and as states and as communities are not incapable of prioritizing education for all children.

Most of my kids have been enrolled in public schools at some point. The schools were a resounding failure for each of them. I stand firmly in favor of multiple educational options for all students and all families, not merely those who have the means to self-fund alternatives to standard district schools.

I’d be fine with public funds for the other options if we fully funded public schools first. But I can’t imagine we will ever do so, much less take money from federal defense spending and focus it on children and families.

[BakersDozen]

23 hours ago, maize said:

I skimmed through the parent handbook for this program. I judge it to be more likely to help students get a better education than not. Families have extra funds specifically dedicated to educating their children! The money can't be used for non-educational stuff, so there isn't some huge incentive for families to claim they homeschool just to get the funds. Yes, families may hire tutors who aren't super highly qualified, or spend some of the money on low-quality curriculum or kits that don't really teach much or whatever. Isn't that better than the kid not having a tutor or access to music lessons or books or whatever?

There's plenty of research out there showing that when moms have money to spend, kids benefit. 

A few flaws in the program (which was pushed through despite being soundly voted down not once but twice):

1. There is nothing in place which prevents parents from spending $25 on an Amazon workbook to cover the required 5 subjects, then spending thousands on horseback riding lessons and insane items like $500 LEGO sets and an espresso machine worth almost $1000 (both true purchases).

2. There is nothing in place which prevents parents from purchasing stuff and reselling and pocketing the $. Everything purchased belongs to the taxpayers, not the families, but wowsa, the amount of stuff hitting Marketplace and such is unbelievable. Telescopes, microscopes, desks, etc. - and nothing is to ever be resold which was purchased with ESA funds. But that doesn't stop people from doing so - purchase, don't use, resell. And those of us who are used to buying resale are wary because we don't want to support those who are not following the rules.

3. There is nothing to show that ESA students are actually receiving an education in the 5 core subjects. No progress evaluations, nothing. Even hint at such measures being put in place and ESA families shout that it's "their child's tax money" (which is wrong - it's collective taxpayer monies and the taxpayers have every right to see how or even if those funds are being used well).

4. Parent curriculum makes just about anything educational. Anything. Want a paddle board for summer recreation? There's a curriculum for that. Want an espresso machine? There's a curriculum for that. As long as someone has the ability to show even a speck of educational use for an item (or use AI to create a curriculum), things are approved.

5. Folks are rightly stating that private music lessons, sports camps, sports lessons, and on and on still have to be paid for OOP by public school students. So why do ESA students get these? If public funds are used, then the students should join a choir, not get private voice lessons. Or join a dance class, not get private dance lessons. Group activities, just as public school students have access to, might be covered, but at what point is it not OK to use taxpayer funds for private horseback riding lessons? And if public school students have to buy their own items for many activities such as tennis racquets and basketball shoes, why would ESA students have those things covered? These are just some of the many, many items which are approved yet which other students would never have purchased for them by their schools. All the stuff parents have to buy for back-to-school? ESA covers everything down to erasers and Post-It notes; all other families have to pay for that stuff themselves. The ESA has definitely NOT made anything equal as it was promoted as doing.

There's so much more I could post about this... ESA parents not only getting ESA funds but being hired as tutors/teachers and receiving ESA funds, but not reporting it as income. That's another bit of loveliness that's popped up on the ESA "support" groups.

Ugh.

[BakersDozen]

22 hours ago, maize said:

My kids absolutely get a better education with public funds than I could afford without. Yes we would (and have done) homeschool anyway without the funds because school has not been a good fit for any of my crew of neurodivergent kids, but without funding I wouldn't be able to afford the tutors and classes that my kids currently have access to.

This was the original intent of the ESA in Arizona - to meet the needs of students in current school situations where they would not get appropriate services. That ESA passed and was largely supported and rightly so. And that's what a lot of folks (who were not given the chance to vote on the issue....grrrrrrr) want the ESA to go back to being.

[BakersDozen]

2 hours ago, maize said:

I stand firmly in favor of multiple educational options for all students and all families, not merely those who have the means to self-fund alternatives to standard district schools.

I am also in favor of multiple options, but I strongly feel that anything which is taxpayer funded should have a lot of oversight, regulation, assessment, etc. And I remain firmly against taxpayers being forced to fund private religious education, which is what ESA funds can now be used for (quite a shock to those in the state who were given no chance to vote and are now realizing what is actually happening).

[PeterPan]

7 minutes ago, BakersDozen said:

There is nothing in place which prevents parents from spending $25 on an Amazon workbook to cover the required 5 subjects, then spending thousands on horseback riding lessons and insane items like $500 LEGO sets and an espresso machine worth almost $1000 (both true purchases).

Fwiw, our state scholarship system had loopholes that allowed these kind of fraudulent, inappropriate purchases early on. People would be a massive trampoline for their yard and say it was necessary, etc. They cleaned it up and tightened it up over time. Hopefully your state can do something similar. 

[BakersDozen]

3 minutes ago, PeterPan said:

Fwiw, our state scholarship system had loopholes that allowed these kind of fraudulent, inappropriate purchases early on. People would be a massive trampoline for their yard and say it was necessary, etc. They cleaned it up and tightened it up over time. Hopefully your state can do something similar. 

It's been tightened up a lot: no commercial appliances, large trampolines, 2-seater kayaks, etc. Oh, no more baby grand pianos - the travesty!!! (sarcasm)

But it's not tight enough by a long shot. I would like to see students who apply for the ESA take placement tests in the 5 core subjects - not pass/fail, just a baseline to see where they're at overall. Then to renew the contract, they have to retest so improvement can be assessed. And no parents get to proctor the test - has to happen at a public school or public library. I'd like to see some kind of way to make sure parents are donating items and not reselling. I'd like to see clear lists of what is educational vs. recreational - taxpayers don't need to be funding paddle boards/kayaks and such. One or two field trips for fall and spring, not unlimited adventures to trampoline parks, etc. No summer camps. Basically, if it's not covered in the public schools, it shouldn't be provided for ESA "schools." So if public school parents have to pay for their kids to have pencils, backpacks, or summer camp fees, ESA parents should have to pay for the same OOP. (imo, of course 🙂 )

[Carrie12345]

12 hours ago, maize said:

How about we do both?

Prioritize education funding. We could, for example, take 10% of federal defense spending and allocate it to education--which would double federal spending on education. 

We as a nation and as states and as communities are not incapable of prioritizing education for all children.

Most of my kids have been enrolled in public schools at some point. The schools were a resounding failure for each of them. I stand firmly in favor of multiple educational options for all students and all families, not merely those who have the means to self-fund alternatives to standard district schools.

In theory, I’m for funding all sorts of educational stuff. In practice, we have to prioritize.

BEFORE funding personal education choices, public school funding needs to be more equitable. I should not get money while an inner Philly school has squat.  
BEFORE funding personal education choices, public welfare needs to be robust. I shouldn’t get money for coding classes while kids are hungry.

If our schools are better and our people are better off, there would be fewer people homeschooling purely out of necessity anyway. (Fewer, not none, of course.) Those doing so for intentional reasons would then be more likely (more, not entirely) to use any funding wisely.

[Soror]

I work with DFS and directly with people who have had hotline calls made on them. I'm not speculating or talking about statistics but boots on the ground on what's happening here- which may be different than in other places. I can say my thoughts have shifted drastically from actually working with people. 

DFS referrals here are primarily from school officials. Hotline calls significantly slow down during school breaks. It makes it easier for abuse to go undetected if parents homeschool. I don't know what homeschooling regulations, if any, will make up for that but homeschooling helps abusers hide abuse. However, I don't think most would go through the trouble of homeschooling and having kids home 24/7 just to abuse children. 

I typed up a big long thing but realized it isn't what people want to hear and I don't have the time and energy to argue with people. I see a lot of people in the cycle of poverty, abuse, and neglect. Throwing money at people doesn't work because they can't manage it. We have free birth control, income-based headstart, and drug treatment- even in my conservative area but you can't make people use any of it. You can't make people work either. Most of our clients do not hold down jobs.

It is trauma to take children but having children stay in homes also steeps them in the culture which gets perpetuated and the cycle continues.  I've wondered many times what makes some people perpetuate the cycle and what makes others fight against it. 

I could say more but I've got to get to it. I'm opening a new case today with a couple that was hotlined for abuse. 

Fwiw things I do see that would be helpful to our people locally- public transportation and more public housing, more alternative ed options for those that don't fit in school- being a hs dropout is so hard,  more robust money management and life skills education in school starting in a young age, REAL sex ed in the schools because kids don't get it at home, and more job training and unemployment. 

[EKS]

3 hours ago, Soror said:

I don't think most would go through the trouble of homeschooling and having kids home 24/7 just to abuse children. 

I don't think that they are going through the trouble of homeschooling.  I think they are simply keeping their kids out of school and calling it homeschooling.  I'm talking about the torture cases here, though elsewhere the article reported on another study of a group of something like 300 homeschooled children where they found that one third were abused.  From what I could find, this isn't necessarily out of line with statistics for the school aged population as a whole.

Keeping kids out of school and calling it homeschooling would be extremely easy to do here in WA.  You just file an intent to homeschool letter/form with the local district and you're good to go.  You're supposed to do other things too, but no one ever checks.  I understand that there are states where even this isn't required.  That would mean that any child who isn't enrolled in a school would automatically be considered to be homeschooled.  

Edited December 4, 2023 by EKS

[Carrie12345]

18 minutes ago, Soror said:

It is trauma to take children but having children stay in homes also steeps them in the culture which gets perpetuated and the cycle continues. 

Just picking this snippet for brevity.

Yes, you’ve clearly seen some hopeless examples. And that’s why we’ll always need these agencies, and we really need these agencies to improve. But we can’t treat every case like it’s going to be a hopeless one.

When ~3.6million annual calls turn into ~400k substantiated issues of various types, we have to be careful in the assessment and services process.

[Heartstrings]

43 minutes ago, Soror said:

Throwing money at people doesn't work because they can't manage it

I agree with thIs.  In a lot of the CPS situations I’m familiar with, a big part of the problem is that the adults aren’t fully functional.  Some if it is probably innate, someone has to be at the lower end of the intelligence bell curve, as unkind as that feels to say.  Some of it is brain damage from their own childhood abuse and neglect or from a brain damaged by drugs or alcohol.  

A complete unrealistic, pie in the sky solution would be foster care for the whole family, in a home or in a well supervised group homes for the whole family.  It would be expensive for the first generation, but it would likely save enough money to pay for itself in the second and third generations because it would break the cycle for so many of the kids.  But we don’t make generational investments in our country, it’s quarter by quarter.  

[Soror]

45 minutes ago, EKS said:

I don't think that they are going through the trouble of homeschooling.  I think they are simply keeping their kids out of school and calling it homeschooling.  I'm talking about the torture cases here, though elsewhere the article reported on another study of a group of something like 300 homeschooled children where they found that one third were abused.  From what I could find, this isn't necessarily out of line with statistics for the school aged population as a whole.

That would be extremely easy to do here in WA.  You just file an intent to homeschool letter/form with the local district and you're good to go.  You're supposed to do other things too, but no one ever checks.  I understand that there are states where even this isn't required.  That would mean that any child who isn't enrolled in a school would automatically be considered to be homeschooled.  

No, I understand that but it still means the kids are home, even if you aren't doing anything with them.

41 minutes ago, Carrie12345 said:

Just picking this snippet for brevity.

Yes, you’ve clearly seen some hopeless examples. And that’s why we’ll always need these agencies, and we really need these agencies to improve. But we can’t treat every case like it’s going to be a hopeless one.

When ~3.6million annual calls turn into ~400k substantiated issues of various types, we have to be careful in the assessment and services process.

Disagreement about the best allocation of funds isn't giving up. Neither is it giving up to say at some point it is not in the best interest of the child to stay in the home. If we're talking about the trauma of removal then we have to acknowledge the trauma and effects of staying in the home. 

No one is giving up here. Even in the worst cases, we go in there with the hope that we can make a difference and help the family. I live in a county where we can't hardly get kids removed, which leads to tragic events, just like this story shows us.

Edited December 4, 2023 by Soror

[maize]

While we're talking about potential harms associated with homeschooling,  we might also consider potential harms associated with school.

According to this article, more than 1 in 4 middle school students reported being bullied at school in a single year. What percentage of students end up being bullied at some point in their school years?

https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=719#:~:text=A comparison of student bullying,from 16 to 19 percent).

There have been many studies on the effects of school bullying on mental health. It's devastating. This meta-analysis indicates that rates of depression are nearly three times as high in children who are bullied https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10061722/#:~:text=A total of 31 studies were included in this analysis,P < 0.001] (Fig., and for many people the negative mental effects impact them throughout their lives https://theconversation.com/childhood-bullying-can-cause-lifelong-psychological-damage-heres-how-to-spot-the-signs-and-move-on-100288#:~:text=Depression is another negative consequence,there may be a link.&text=One of the most severe,traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

My husband's depression started when he was severely bullied during junior high. As the awkward kid with hearing aids, impaired vision and autistic traits he might as well have had a target painted on his back. He had a supportive, loving home but that couldn't mitigate the impact of harsh treatment by his peers. 

I've wondered many times if the nightmare our family has suffered dealing with his mental illness could have been lessened if his young brain hadn't been profoundly impacted by school bullying trauma?

While I understand the hope that having adult eyes on kids can help the few who are being beaten or starved at home, if a high percentage are being traumatized in other ways at school are we actually doing more good than harm? Do we cause ten thousand kids to suffer life-long impacts from the cruelty of their peers in the hopes of saving one endangered by their parents (because we know kids are only actually removed from homes if they are considered to be in serious danger)? 

I was miserable in school; it felt like a prison I couldn't escape, and I rarely had any friends. My husband was miserable in school and internalized far more of the peer negativity than I did. The idea that school is a good default for most kids and the standard for how children's lives should be spent is pretty disheartening to me.

I get that for some kids it's a largely positive experience,  and for some kids it's a better place than home. That's good.

There absolutely must be alternatives for the kids for whom that is not true. Good alternatives.  Societally sanctioned and supported alternatives.

Edited December 4, 2023 by maize

[Heartstrings]

9 minutes ago, maize said:

There have been many studies on the effects of school bullying on mental health. It's devastating

When the discussions about teen mental health happen I don’t really hear them discussing this either.  They talk about social media way more, without taking the extra step to point out that a big part of the problems with social media is the bullying taking place through it.  It’s a coordinated effort to blame parents instead of blaming the schools or school systems that allow the bullying to take place.  
 

How many of the parents who abuse their kids today have mental health issues from bullying that happened to them in high school?   How many turned to drugs or alcohol to cope? 

There are so many issues like bullying that if we could just solve them we’d be saving the next generation from so much.

We also don’t talk much about the abuse that takes place in the places we take our kids so that other adults are seeing them, I’m thinking specifically about scouts, the Catholic Church and SBC child sex abuse scandals.  But we hyper focus on homeschooling for some reason.  As a country, our children are being abused EVERYWHERE.  
 

 

Edited December 4, 2023 by Heartstrings

[EKS]

32 minutes ago, Soror said:

No, I understand that but it still means the kids are home, even if you aren't doing anything with them.

Yes.  This is an unfortunate consequence of homeschooling being legal.

 

[maize]

Regarding practical measures that might catch some of the worst cases, I know a handful of states have enacted laws requiring social services to follow up when a family who was reported for investigation of child neglect or abuse withdraws that child from school. Of the various proposals I am aware of, that one seems most likely to have a chance at getting responsible eyes on kids who are at increased risk.

Alternatively, while I find it somewhat intrusive, there may possibly be some benefit in requiring that all children be seen once a year by a medical professional--but we need to make those visits free and accessible if we're going to do that. Mobile, government-funded clinic that comes to you would work.

[Condessa]

17 minutes ago, maize said:

Alternatively, while I find it somewhat intrusive, there may possibly be some benefit in requiring that all children be seen once a year by a medical professional--but we need to make those visits free and accessible if we're going to do that. Mobile, government-funded clinic that comes to you would work.

This would also be more likely to find abuse in the highest risk child demographic, which is the under-fives.  And avoid the hypocrisy of singling out some parents with no negative history as potential abusers while ignoring others, based only on their educational choices and not on their children being out of contact with reporters.

[Heartstrings]

27 minutes ago, maize said:

egarding practical measures that might catch some of the worst cases, I know a handful of states have enacted laws requiring social services to follow up when a family who was reported for investigation of child neglect or abuse withdraws that child from school. Of the various proposals I am aware of, that one seems most likely to have a chance at getti

I don’t know if it’s enforced, or if the school always knows about CPS cases, but this is true in Arkansas. Technically your NOI can be rejected if your child is already involved in a truancy case or a CPS investigation.   CPS is so busy though, I don’t know if they actually follow through, but it’s in the law at least.  

[Clemsondana]

4 hours ago, Heartstrings said:

A complete unrealistic, pie in the sky solution would be foster care for the whole family, in a home or in a well supervised group homes for the whole family.  It would be expensive for the first generation, but it would likely save enough money to pay for itself in the second and third generations because it would break the cycle for so many of the kids.  But we don’t make generational investments in our country, it’s quarter by quarter.  

There are situations where this sort of thing happens, and it's challenging.  I was involved in a program that worked with homeless families, and there are all sorts of guidelines. But, you can only advise adults-  you can't force them to do what you think is best.  The program was set up to help the families get jobs, and then save money for housing.  My mom remembers working with a family where the mom came in showing off a mani-pedi, which she had gotten to celebrate getting her first paycheck...while homeless.   They tried to teach that a $2 bottle of nail polish is a better celebration when trying to save money.  We would routinely see families stop for fast food after deciding that it sounded better than the meal that had been prepared.  The food was fixed and shared by host families at the facility - when we did it, we ate there so we brought good food that we were happy to eat.  

I always felt like there was, of course, a ton of stress in a family living in one room while having no money, but also there were usually 2-3 families being housed in different rooms (they stayed in churches for a week at a time) and there were host families around at all times.  I wondered how that translated when the families were moved to housing and there was nobody to help entertain the kids or take them out to the playground while the parents rested or fix the meals and clean up afterwards.  Some families had clearly just had a catastrophe and needed housing while they saved money, but others clearly had much more dysfunctional patterns, and these were families that had been screened so that the families that were admitted to the program had a reasonable chance of succeeding.  It was not unheard of to have adults who got mad and quit their job, or who got aggressive with the hosts, or routinely not get back by the time the church doors were locked (at 11 pm, with exceptions made for people who worked odd hours).  

[TexasProud]

12 minutes ago, Clemsondana said:

There are situations where this sort of thing happens, and it's challenging.  I was involved in a program that worked with homeless families, and there are all sorts of guidelines. But, you can only advise adults-  you can't force them to do what you think is best.  The program was set up to help the families get jobs, and then save money for housing.  My mom remembers working with a family where the mom came in showing off a mani-pedi, which she had gotten to celebrate getting her first paycheck...while homeless.   They tried to teach that a $2 bottle of nail polish is a better celebration when trying to save money.  We would routinely see families stop for fast food after deciding that it sounded better than the meal that had been prepared.  The food was fixed and shared by host families at the facility - when we did it, we ate there so we brought good food that we were happy to eat.  

I always felt like there was, of course, a ton of stress in a family living in one room while having no money, but also there were usually 2-3 families being housed in different rooms (they stayed in churches for a week at a time) and there were host families around at all times.  I wondered how that translated when the families were moved to housing and there was nobody to help entertain the kids or take them out to the playground while the parents rested or fix the meals and clean up afterwards.  Some families had clearly just had a catastrophe and needed housing while they saved money, but others clearly had much more dysfunctional patterns, and these were families that had been screened so that the families that were admitted to the program had a reasonable chance of succeeding.  It was not unheard of to have adults who got mad and quit their job, or who got aggressive with the hosts, or routinely not get back by the time the church doors were locked (at 11 pm, with exceptions made for people who worked odd hours).  

Our church was involved in this program and yes, the guy who got aggressive would be kicked out of the program, but again, his kids....  Yes, it is very, very challenging and not easy to do. I don't know what the answer is. 

[Carrie12345]

2 hours ago, Clemsondana said:

Some families had clearly just had a catastrophe and needed housing while they saved money, but others clearly had much more dysfunctional patterns,

More dysfunctional patterns need deeper help than the particular organization could provide.

Imagine if we were able to assign moderate cases to… let’s say the social work and kindness sectors, and assign more complicated cases to more intensive, higher skilled (in this area) psychology and psychiatry sectors. 

[Frances]

2 hours ago, Clemsondana said:

There are situations where this sort of thing happens, and it's challenging.  I was involved in a program that worked with homeless families, and there are all sorts of guidelines. But, you can only advise adults-  you can't force them to do what you think is best.  The program was set up to help the families get jobs, and then save money for housing.  My mom remembers working with a family where the mom came in showing off a mani-pedi, which she had gotten to celebrate getting her first paycheck...while homeless.   They tried to teach that a $2 bottle of nail polish is a better celebration when trying to save money.  We would routinely see families stop for fast food after deciding that it sounded better than the meal that had been prepared.  The food was fixed and shared by host families at the facility - when we did it, we ate there so we brought good food that we were happy to eat.  

I always felt like there was, of course, a ton of stress in a family living in one room while having no money, but also there were usually 2-3 families being housed in different rooms (they stayed in churches for a week at a time) and there were host families around at all times.  I wondered how that translated when the families were moved to housing and there was nobody to help entertain the kids or take them out to the playground while the parents rested or fix the meals and clean up afterwards.  Some families had clearly just had a catastrophe and needed housing while they saved money, but others clearly had much more dysfunctional patterns, and these were families that had been screened so that the families that were admitted to the program had a reasonable chance of succeeding.  It was not unheard of to have adults who got mad and quit their job, or who got aggressive with the hosts, or routinely not get back by the time the church doors were locked (at 11 pm, with exceptions made for people who worked odd hours).  

I was also involved with this program for many years and agree with your observations.

And this is probably going to offend many here, but I also observe it on this board. People sharing difficulties they are having and then continuing to do more of the same thing that led to the problems in the first place.