Posted on 08/30/2009 8:37:09 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Amanda Kurowski is a 10-year-old homeschooled girl who performs well academically and is socially well-adjusted. But her strong Christian beliefs were reason enough for a New Hampshire court to order her out of homeschooling and into a public school.
The daughter of divorced parents, Amanda has been homeschooled by her mother, Brenda Voydatch since first grade. Her father, Martin Kurowski, is opposed to homeschooling, arguing that it prevents "adequate socialization" for Amanda with other children. He requested that she be placed in a government school.
In the process of renegotiating the terms of a parenting plan for the girl, the Guardian ad Litem – who acts as a fact finder for the court – reported that Amanda was found to "lack some youthful characteristics," partly because "she appeared to reflect her mother's rigidity on questions of faith."
The GAL concluded that Amanda "would be best served by exposure to different points of view at a time in her life when she must begin to critically evaluate multiple systems of belief and behavior and cooperation in order to select, as a young adult, which of those systems will best suit her own needs."
Although there is no dispute that Amanda is excelling academically and is generally interactive with her peers, her religious beliefs were seen as being held a bit too sincerely, Alliance Defense Fund allied attorney John Anthony Simmons explained to The Christian Post.
"What this has become is an assault on the child’s faith," Simmons said.
Judge Lucinda V. Sadler approved the GAL's recommendation earlier this summer and ruled that it would be in Amanda's best interests to attend a public school in the 2009-2010 academic year.
"[E]ducation is by its nature an exploration and examination of new things," the court order reads. "[A] child requires academic, social, cultural, and physical interaction with a variety of experiences, people, concepts, and surroundings in order to grow to an adult who can make intelligent decisions about how to achieve a productive and satisfying life."
Sadler stated in the order that the court did not consider the merits of Amanda's religious beliefs but only the impact of those beliefs on her interaction with others.
And while the court is "extremely reluctant to impose on parents a decision about a child's education," Sadler noted that there was an absence of effective communication between the parents.
Simmons filed a motion this week asking the court to reconsider and stay its decision. He contends that the mother enrolled Amanda in three public school courses and got her involved in extra-curricular activities such as gymnastics and softball in an effort to acknowledge the father's concerns.
Evidence also reveals that homeschooling has not deprived Amanda of socialization, as the father has argued. The order issued by the court also acknowledged that Amanda is "generally likeable and well liked, social and interactive with her peers, academically promising and intellectually at or superior to grade level."
"Parents have a fundamental right to make educational choices for their children. In this case specifically, the court is illegitimately altering a method of education that the court itself admits is working," Simmons stated. "It is not the court’s role to decide whose beliefs are right or whether or not someone is as skeptical as the court thinks she should be."
"Can anyone imagine a court ordering a child out of a government school and into homeschooling because the child is a 'rigid' secularist? Of course not," he noted. "The court has intruded on the child’s most fundamental liberties and should reconsider this unconstitutional encroachment."
If this is the case that I’m thinking of, Dad pays all expenses while Mom stays home to homeschool. Since this is a divorce case, it is tricky. Dad used religion as a tool to get out of paying for everything.
I’ll bet the farm they wouldn’t do this to a Muslim kid.
Unless those "new things" include learning about God, Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit right?
Folks, if you love your children you will teach them yourself and stand up against radical judges like the one that made this criminal ruling.
JMHO
With a Muslim goat the parent’s would not be divorced. Mommy would be beheaded for even thinking of divorcing her master/husband.
“adequate socialization” you mean she does not act like a freaking brat?
“With a Muslim goat the parent’s would not be divorced. Mommy would be beheaded for even thinking of divorcing her” owner.
“lack some youthful characteristics,” partly because “she appeared to reflect her mother’s rigidity on questions of faith.”
...what “youthful characteristics”? Texting 24/7? Drinking? Sex? Gulping down 12 diet Cokes a day? Watching R rated movies? Wearing a “Che” t-shirt?
Did this judge fail to read Wisconsin v. Yoder? Who has primary custody?
I agree; this is more of a custody and divorce case than a ‘too much religon’ case. However, the ‘too much religon sells papers.
I think so too. However the court and it’s gaggle of bureaucrats certainly made some inflammatory statements.
Maybe I missed it...but what does the CHILD want? Does that matter?
Yup, very very interesting case.
I was wondering reading the title, just what the
“grounds” could be for such a radical intrusion into
the lives of both mother and daughter, then was made aware
it was probably hatched as a plan between a Father with a Grudge, and his lawyer. THis brings in a whole new backdoor dimension into the issue of homeschooling, which I am surprised I’ve never heard of before. Don’t know whether custody or dollars are the paramount issues, but of course the Father looks like he’s imposing his “authority” on the situation because his own money is going into supporting the girl. Thanks, lawyers, for finding so many previously hidden opportunties for yourselves.
Yup, very very interesting case.
I was wondering reading the title, just what the
“grounds” could be for such a radical intrusion into
the lives of both mother and daughter, then was made aware
it was probably hatched as a plan between a Father with a Grudge, and his lawyer. THis brings in a whole new backdoor dimension into the issue of homeschooling, which I am surprised I’ve never heard of before. Don’t know whether custody or dollars are the paramount issues, but of course the Father looks like he’s imposing his “authority” on the situation because his own money is going into supporting the girl. Thanks, lawyers, for finding so many previously hidden opportunties for yourselves.
Or they are ‘concerned’ she is missing out on the sex education classes and sensitivity classes aka ‘indoctrination’.
The Government shall make no laws concerning the establishment of a religion unless some unelected judge deems it too ridged.
The father is supporting the mother also so that she can homeschool.
What expenses do you mean? As a homeschooler of 3, I can speak to the fact that materials for a 10 year old are probably around $500 a year, and that’s being generous, buying mostly new.
If you refer to the possibility that Mom has no job and stays home with her daughter, then I would think that Dad should revisit the divorce decree, which no doubt established a monthly amount of support years ago.
Maybe Dad just has a problem with his wife and daughter’s beliefs period.
““adequate socialization” you mean she does not act like a freaking brat?”
They could just hire a group of girls to criticize her clothes, hair and makeup, and to shun her for not being cool enough. Then the girls could beat her up and show the video on Youtube while one of the girls’ moms taunts her on myspace until she kills herself. Would that be adequate socialization?
And the daily chanting of "O-bam-ma...O-bam-ma...O-bam-ma..." at 9am, noon and 3 pm.
I mean that Dad supports them totally.
Yes!! She probably stands out because of no indoctrination. Wonder if the girl asked her father, “Dad, why are you doing this”? “Is this really about me”?
Making the daughter go to public school won’t change his court ordered monthly support.
As freepers, we should support the fine organizations on the front lines of combating the assault against basic Christian beliefs. The four best groups coming to mind are:
1) Alliance Defense Fund
2) Thomas More Law Center
3) Liberty Council
4) American Center for Law and Justice
They fight the ACLU everyday and win way more than they lose. It's time to circle the wagons against Obamaworld.
Show me an instance where a court removes a child from homeschooling against the wishes of both parents, where the child is doing well academically, on the grounds that the child is being taught religious beliefs which are too rigid. That would be something to be really concerned about.
The disagreement is between the mother and the father about how to raise the girl; and since they’re divorced it ball gets hashed out in court.
Happens all the time.
Well I was thinking more along the lines of making her rude, cude and socially unacceptable, but yea....that too.
He’s not opposed to homeschooling, he’s just wants his ex wife to get a J-O-B
If she (the child) gets pregnant by age 14 the mother should sue the father (her ex husband) for the child support and not the man who gets the girl pregnant. I would.
For "socialization"
Is he stupid ... or ... just plain malicious ... or ... what?
The above is a link to the court order. Seems that there is a lot more to this than just homeschooling and religion.
Maybe she is simply mature.
Not sure why the shrink would think that is a problem.
I would definitely go after him. This girl may rebel in her own way because of this fight over control of her. Instead of being thankful she is happy, healthy, succeeding in her studies, in spite of the drama due to divorce - he wants to upset the applecart. This father *ucks, IMO.
If she is different in any way, it’s because of her faith and not being indoctrinated. That’s a good thing but shrinks/libs gov’t wants everyone the same - standardized robots. If anyone needs evaluation, it’s the father.
I am a conservative and a Christian, but I am also a divorced father of five children.
I see this as a struggle between two parents. I have been through that. The mother wants to do one thing and the father wants something else done and there has to be give and take if the issue allows it, but sometimes it doesn’t.
I have a child who has ADHD and his mother wants him to only do holistic thing and it ain’t working none too well. I insist upon him taking meds, but mother is opposed to it. I have told her that I will give her a certain amount of time of things to start working and if they don’t I will take her to court to put him on meds or I will seek primary custody of him.
Maybe the daughter is doing well, but her father is still her father and he should have a lot to say in why his daughter is raised.
Don’t go around stripping him of his rights just because what he might want doesn’t agree with what you believe is best.
If you had a daughter, how much input would you want in her life? If your daughter was happy, healthy, and succeeding in her studies, would you be more than happy to bow out of her life?
Where would you draw the line?
Get ACLJ (American Center for Law and Justice) or Thomas More attorneys involved in this.
It’s crazy. There are gated communities of Mozlems who are not sending their children to public schools and are training the boys and perhaps the girls to be suicide bombers, but no judge has ordered those children to attend public schools.
Double standards abound in the mind-set of the mentally diseased liberals.
1. It is a liberal position to declare that the kid has more right to decide their schooling than the parent, and
2. This is a father versus mother issue, not a father versus daughter issue.
The Court is extremely reluctant to impose on parents a decision about a child's education, which commonly emerges after sincere and thorough discussion between parents who are both committed to the child's growth and development. In the absence of effective communication between the parents whose case reflects a history of opposing opinions on a variety of issues, the Court is guided by the premise that education is by its nature an exploration and examination of new things, and by the premise that a child requires academic, social, cultural, and physical interaction with a variety of experiences, People, concepts, and surroundings in order to grow to an adult who can make intelligent decisions about how to achieve a productive and satisfying life.
The parties do not debate the relative academic merits of home schooling and public school: it is clear that the home schooling Ms. Voydatch has provided has more than kept up with the academic requirements of the Meredith public school system. Instead, the debate centers on whether enrollment in public school will provide Amanda with an increased opportunity for group learning, group interaction, social problem solving, and exposure to a variety of points of view. Considering the testimony of both parties and the Guardian ad Litem, and by the standard of a preponderance of the evidence, the Court concludes that it would be in Amanda's best interests to attend public school.
In reaching this conclusion, the Court is mindful of its obligation not to consider the specific tenets of any religious system unless there is evidence that those tenets have been applied in such a way as to cause actual harm to the child. The evidence in this case does not rise to that level, and therefore the Court has not considered the merits of Amanda's religious beliefs, but considered only the impact of those beliefs on her interaction with others, both past and future. The Court declines to impose any restrictions on either party's ability to provide Amanda with religious training or to share with Amanda their own religious beliefs.
At this point the mother's best hope is to trust the foundation of faith she laid in the early years and engage her daughter in discussion about what is taught in school and subject it to scrutiny by the scriptures. This is actually a helpful process because Christians are called to be salt and light to an unbelieving world. This requires living in the world (and engaging the unbelievers with whom we live) without becoming of the world and adopting that world view. This is a very difficult path, only possible by guidance by the Scriptures and the Holy Spirit.
1. I’m saying - she is ‘doing well’ (her right) yet that doesn’t seem to be taken into consideration. It’s more about what the father ‘thinks’ than about facts.
2. Of course it’s a father vs. mother battle - but the father is using his daughter as his pawn to go against the mother. And he’s using his ‘rights’ to pull it off instead of using his ‘parental authority’ for the right reasons - to love her just as she is and show her how special she is in his sight - a Jesus way of doing things. He has so much to offer her - trouble is, when it’s too late he will realize that - right now, they are both missing out on what ‘could be’. But something tells me, doing the Jesus thing for this father is not to be, his ego comes first.
You’re an idiot. You have no idea what you are talking about when it comes to my child. Go blow it out your saddlebags.
Thanks for the info but to be perfectly honest with you I do not care. In my opinion and based upon what I know about the US Constitution no where is it written that the courts have the right to tell parents what they can and cannot do with their children. Only because of spineless representatives and those that have voted for them do we have oligarchies like those we see sprouting up in our judicial branch being allowed to force their wills on the citizens of this country.
Where we are headed as a nation is not a pretty place.
MO
You are right, I don’t. I’m just talking about what I know about others that I heard and read about. And that doesn’t make me an idiot but to your way of thinking - everyone is but you.
This has been going on for awhile. The early articles were also posted on FR.
Oh. Now if the mother was teaching the kid Islam, you would have the same position?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.