Parental Rights

[jinx]

Two recent articles demonstrate the left/right of the parental rights issue.

NYT article demonizing homeschooling and

Washington Times article by Michael Smith of the HSLDA about the UN Convention on the rights of the Child.

[BigV]

jinx:

NYT link is no good for non subscribers. fyi.

eta: not good for non-MEMBERS... apparently it's "free". sorry for the confusion.

[piercehawkeye45]

I see both and I'm not a subscriber to either.

[jinx]

Shit. How about now?

[aimeecc]

I can pull it up.

I think the NYT article is mis-representing the DC case. Although her grandmother claimed the mother was home schooling them, a social worker did attempt to follow up.

http://www.abcnews.go.com/GMA/Story?id=4141688&page=2

The girls' absence from school prompted a social worker to visit their home. Jacks refused to let the social worker enter the home and the worker called child services.

"The home did not appear clean. The children did not appear clean and I assume that the mother is suffering from some mental illness," she said in a phone call.

No one followed up, and the social worker called again this time to the police three days later. Her frustration in trying to reach authorities clearly was audible in the call released this week by the city.

"I've been transferred all over, I need someone to come out to a home where I believe abuse and neglect is occurring," the social worker is heard saying on the call. "And I don't want to be transferred to someone else. It's an urgent matter."

[monster]

So what's your viewpoint on the regulation/overseeing of homeschooling, jinx? An insider's view? Should there be some sort of checks and balances to detect the odd family who "homeschools" because they are dysfunctional rather than because it's the right thing for them? Or would any checks only serve to harass the majority who are doing a good job?

[xoxoxoBruce]

I should think neglect and abuse, athough subjective, would be easier to judge than whether they were doing a good job of home schooling.

[Aliantha]

Children die because no system is perfect. I don't believe the fact that those kids were home schooled caused their deaths. In fact it could easily be argued that the only reason anyone at all knew something was wrong was because they weren't at regular school.

Social systems are flawed across the world. There are good and bad aspects in every social situation.

I think the agenda of the newspaper is fairly clear from that article.

[monster]

I know some families who homeschool and shouldn't, and I tend to agree the stuff that concerns me would not get picked up on by any homeschool check either. These kids are not in mortal danger, though. Just kept away from other kids and cooped up with parents who have mental issues that don't necessarily provide the best environment for "developing minds".

[jinx]

Originally Posted by monster

So what's your viewpoint on the regulation/overseeing of homeschooling, jinx? An insider's view? Should there be some sort of checks and balances to detect the odd family who "homeschools" because they are dysfunctional rather than because it's the right thing for them? Or would any checks only serve to harass the majority who are doing a good job?

I think the government needs to take the position that parents want to do right by their children unless shown evidence to the contrary - at which point the govt services already in place need to actually work.

The NYT article pisses me off so bad I can't put coherent thoughts together about it yet - other than Hillary and her fucking village can kiss my fucking ass.

[monster]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

I should think neglect and abuse, athough subjective, would be easier to judge than whether they were doing a good job of home schooling.

But isn't the point that the paper is trying to make (albeit in a very slanted way) that if there are no home schooling checks, there there's no possible way to observe neglect/abuse, whereas if the kids were in school or were checked on, they would at least be observed by outsiders occasionally, so there would be a chance of it being spotted?

[monster]

Originally Posted by jinx

I think the government needs to take the position that parents want to do right by their children unless shown evidence to the contrary

If the parents choose to keep the children completely hidden from view, though, how is anyone going to see any evidence to the contrary?

[jinx]

Originally Posted by monster

Just kept away from other kids and cooped up with parents who have mental issues that don't necessarily provide the best environment for "developing minds".

I could argue that catholic schools don't necessarily provide the best environment for "developing minds". But is that up to me to decide for someone else?

[jinx]

Originally Posted by monster

If the parents choose to keep the children completely hidden from view, though, how is anyone going to see any evidence to the contrary?

In that case they wouldn't. In other cases there will be lots of evidence and no one will report it. Sometimes it will get reported and no one will respond etc. etc.

[monster]

Originally Posted by jinx

I could argue that catholic schools don't necessarily provide the best environment for "developing minds". But is that up to me to decide for someone else?

a reasonable point, although in a catholic school there are many adults who have contact with the children and also other children rather than just the nutty parents, but point taken.