Posted on 03/06/2008 4:36:08 PM PST by Notwithstanding
It is clear to us that enrollment and attendance in a public full-time day school is required by California law for minor children unless (1) the child is enrolled in a private full-time day school and actually attends that private school, (2) the child is tutored by a person holding a valid state teaching credential for the grade being taught, or (3) one of the other few statutory exemptions to compulsory public school attendance (Ed. Code, § 48220 et seq.) ***[which allows parents to homeschool as long as they register]*** applies to the child. Because the parents in this case have not demonstrated that any of these exemptions apply to their children, we will grant the petition for extraordinary writ.
(Excerpt) Read more at courtinfo.ca.gov ...
That is what I understood. This family was in compliance with the ISP who filed the R-4 for everybody under their umbrella. I also understand that a judge then decided that this family was to be BANNED from their ISP, that MAKING them illegal. Cute, right?(/s)
This is a very troubling ruling. It is an activist ruling.
Please stop in your vain attempts to make me feel shamed. At no time did I inculcate that my statement was made in jest. I stated, if you would temper your vitriolic disposition for a nanosecond and think clearly, that my statement was made tongue-in-cheek, which, by the definition you obviously ignored, means NOT SERIOUS.
At NO TIME did I hint toward my comment as an attempt at "sick humor".
I am not prone to hysterics, which apparently this topic seems to generate.
I read the ruling and understand it. You have not addressed any of the points I have made so let’s just move on.
Hysterics? LOL. Not my nature.
Adios.
As has been explained on numerous other threads regarding this alleged child abuse case, had either parent annually filled out a simple form, instead of lying to the state, the worst scenario they would now face is incarceration for child abuse.
Have I misunderestood? Is home schooling in California a matter of a simple, annual registration of a residence as a private school?
No. Here is my understanding of the case.
The family was operating under the aegis of a private Independent Study Program: Sunland Christian School. The ISP filed the R4 covering these kids. The administrators were apparently not satisfied with the children's progress and booted them out. At that point the parents had no coverage and no opportunity to file an R4 (which has a narrow time window in October). Their choice was to enroll their children in a public school or a private school or ISP. They chose the former.
CPS showed up and filed a case claiming child abuse. The parents were appointed a PUBLIC DEFENDER operating under contract to CPS (no conflict of interest there /s). The public defender dug out wild claims of Constitutional rights, etc, essentially creating the case against which the educrats would love to have a judgment. On appeal, they did.
It is the breadth of the opinion that is the real problem. It interprets the law specifying qualifications for in-home tutoring (which is apparently credential-only) to private schools operating in homes under R4; i.e., home education. It cites the State as a sole arbiter of what constitutes a satisfactory education (as if the state schools deliver such a product). As such, the opinion is a threat, as is evident from the celebratory statements from the CTA.
I do agree judges that are too happy to rule from the bench and create the law from there need to be recalled.
I am hoping that HSLDA will succeed in having the ruling “depublished”, which I have understood to mean, that the ruling will only apply to the family, not all homeschoolers.
We will have to see how this plays out.
Your informative post has more on how this family got into this mess in the first place.
I believe you can file your R-4 at other times of the year, but usually it is recommended to be filed in October when all the other private schools also file. I have always filed then, so maybe it has changed and I have not noticed.
This family had terrible counsel. No counsel at all. I wish that they had contacted someone who could have helped them better. It did seem that this family was very vulnerable, and CPS knew it. Typical.
I just don't get it.
I have wondered that very same thing. From abortion to evolution to prayer, all have been trumped up phony legal cases.
Fight fire with fire. Why sit around waiting to put out the fires THEY start? We will get burned someday. Need to start some fires of our own. In court, of course!
SACRAMENTO, March 7 (UPI) -- California's governor wants to see a court ruling tightening the rules for home schooling overturned.
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger issued a statement Friday calling this week's ruling requiring home-school instructors to hold valid teaching credentials "outrageous" and called for it to either be overturned in the court system or changed through the legislative process.
"Every California child deserves a quality education and parents should have the right to decide what's best for their children," Schwarzenegger said. "Parents should not be penalized for acting in the best interests of their children's education. This outrageous ruling must be overturned by the courts and if the courts don't protect parents' rights then, as elected officials, we will."
An estimated 166,000 children are homeschooled across the state. The ruling by the Second District Court of Appeal in Los Angeles said all children ages 6 to 18 must attend public or private school full-time until graduation from high school or be tutored at home by a credentialed teacher. There is no specific allowance in state law for homeschooling, the court said. Many homeschooling parents register as a private school with the state, a status that does not require credentialed teachers. Then they enroll their own children in their school.
The court ruling, issued Feb. 28, appears to restrict such practices, setting a precedent that could lead to parents being prosecution for truancy.
Although I learned a bit about California homeschooling codes in a related thread, my rants in the thread were evidently based on bogus information. I am blacklisting the following site in my personal records as this site was referenced in the OP of the thread.
"A three-judge panel of the California Court of Appeal has determined parents in that state have no legal right to home school. A Christian attorney in Sacramento says unless the ruling is reversed, literally thousands of students in the Golden State will be subject to criminal sanctions." Legal and Courts, Home schooling unlawful, says California court http://www.onenewsnow.com/Legal/Default.aspx?id=69177While I was testing the above link I started getting server errors! I'll try it again later.
Ten minutes later link appears to be working.
There have been a couple of cases in the county in which we reside (Cowlitz County, sw Washington state) where homeschoolers hadn’t schooled. Their kids weren’t tested annually as required, and when child services found out about them, most were preadolescents and illiterate - couldn’t read, couldn’t write simple sentences, couldn’t do any arithmetic.Those are the kind of cases that give home schoolers bad reps.
The majority of home schoolers, never mind their reason for teaching at home, are conscientious and do what’s right, not only by their child and/or children, but set an example of lawfulness and respect for authority by following the rules set out by the State. In our case it isn’t onerous: fill out a three-part form in September, pick up a curicula guideline, and have the kid(s) tested by a licensed professional every August. (The licensed professional I go to is a district educator who home schooled one of his kids for social reasons.)
I home school because my boy (nephew) is borderline ADD. Both his parents are drug addicts so Ritalin was out of the question. He is now 16-years old, has been home schooled since age 12, and will be taking the GED next summer after his 17th birthday. Within a few months of home teaching he went from failing 6th grade to, at age 13, taking college courses at the local Community College.
For us it worked wonderfully and I heartily recommend it to everyone. So job is as satisfying as seeing your kid thrive while learning and discovering a field of study so exciting that he or she wants to that type of work for the rest of their lives. For it is true: if you love what you do for a living, it isn’t work but a joy!
Dittos.
Your criticism is a bit over the top regarding my directing people to HLDSA’s website.
I provided a link to HLDSA’s own generic summary of how the homeschool laws work in CA.
Then, withinn the same post, I actually highlighted that HLDSA is now using this decision for publicity to raise money.
Perhaps you misread my post because you are so emotional about this.
I am a member of HSLDA. Beyond my membership, they haven't asked me for money, at all. They have asked for support for their proposed Constitutional amendment, with which I have issues. When I raised those issues with HSLDA, they were good enough to send me a well-crafted and lengthy personal response, with which I still disagree.
No hustle, just good responsible service. Their effort to internationalize home education is very intelligent. Their commitment to even flaky cases like this one where the parents haven't given them a dime has been proven over 25 years. They do a lot of pro-bono work. I have nothing but respect for the way they've conducted themselves.
As to your inference that I'm just being emotional, it looks to me as if you are projecting. You misrepresented their position by posting generic information as if it was their opinion on this case. You went as far as to generate a thread excerpting the opinion incorrectly to paper things over. The opinion is a threat, as HSLDA, after taking the time to review the case, has clearly indicated.
As I read it, the abuse charges were initiated by two of the children (with coaching) and are being employed as a mechanism to separate these children from their father for at least part of the day in public school.
Education, home schooling or otherwise, is not the county's emphasis in this case. It's physical child abuse. This is not the right case to pursue to the CSC. Depublishing the decision is a better bet.
Agreed.
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.