ACTION ALERT!!! Homeschooled Kids in Massachusetts Now in Legal Custody of State

Conservative Alerts ^ | 6/16/03 | Chuck Muth

[demnomo]

It's like I posted: Homeschooling is not for every family.

However, I agree with many of the posters here who have legitimate gripes about government-controlled/regulated schools and the leftist unions. (I also feel sorry for the poor teachers who have to kow-tow to such tripe when all they really want to do is help children learn the basic skills to survive in the modern world.)

Public schools are not the same as when I attended them thirty years ago. Today, there is way too much emphasis on self-esteem programs, (which most students view as hypocritical and silly) political correctness, studying for tests, hours of homework to make up for what didn't get covered in a 35-40 minute class and redirecting of precious educational funding towards over-paid, power-hungry administrators (not teacher salaries or materials) along with the latest learning fad.

[Henrietta]

"Why didn't their parents take the time to teach the kid to read if the school wasn't?? "

Probably because they figure that they are paying thousands of tax dollars a year to people like your wife, who should be teaching them, or holding them back if they won't buckle down and do their work. They probably figure the kid must be doing fine, since he keeps getting promoted to the next grade.

[joesnuffy]

would Pres Bush approve of this...?

[kjam22]

They probably figure the kid must be doing fine, since he keeps getting promoted to the next grade.

This isn't even a serious legitimate answer. You're just typing to give your fingers a work out now. You think they can't read progress reports that are sent home? Report cards. Plus the fact that it is their choice to send the kid to the next year when he has failed. Maybe sometime in those 9 years they could have sat down with their kid and listened to him read?? You don't want a serious discussion about the issue.

[norton]

I believe that SAT and PSAT (or MSAT) are voluntary, no?

I helieve they are tuned toward admission to higher schooling, no?

I do not believe they are mandated by or in support of the local high school, correct?

By all means, let the kids show they are or are not good candidates for higher education; there is no need to prove that they are as retarded as the average public school kid.

There surely is no need to evaluate whether or not they were fed on the same ideologies and bias' shown in most current school systems.

[elk]

I can't bite my tongue anymore.

Shouldn't every one here be suspicious when things are done "for the children?" We've gotten so far away from our freedoms, that we think it's fine for the government to have so much control over us, even to dictating how/whether we educate our children. I think we swallowed that when we allowed laws mandating schooling to certain ages.

My argument would be that since there are laws on the books for child abuse, that should be sufficient. We, as a society, believe that no child should be physically/sexually abused, and I doubt few would argue that this is tyrannical (well, maybe the AMA and the APA, who want to sexualize children and other sickos). However, when we extend the control of government farther than that, we are infringing on basic freedoms. Education is synonymous with parenting; parenting is education. Once you say education is the government's job, you've said that parenting is the government's job.

Non-voluntary standardized testing is wrong on principle, especially since the teaching content and methods of public school are rightfully suspect. You submit to testing, you are submitting to content. Using the few folks who do it wrong (fake homeschoolers, truants) to leverage as a bludgeon against the most who do it right is disingenuous. Without being conspiratorial or anything like that, the bottom line is control.

I don't know all the facts in the Bryant case, and perhaps the Bryants aren't perfect, but the government/bureaucracy is a worse parent than most, but never gets called on the carpet for its abuses (e.g., lost foster children in Florida, state of the public school system, etc.). Sadly, the Bryants probably have lots of common sense, but ran afoul of technicalities and/or abusing bureaucrats reading more power into the law for them than there is -- this happens ALL THE TIME, whether you are trying to homeschool without running afoul of the law or trying to make sure your permits to install a dishwasher are square. It's called a loss of freedom.

[Henrietta]

"You don't want a serious discussion about the issue."

Typical public school apologist. Learn to write in complete sentences before you call my answers illegitimate. Maybe then I'll take you seriously.

[ibheath]

"I don't know of any way to show that the parents are actually teaching their kids other than by a testing method."

There is the crux of the problem. By what right does the state seize control of YOUR children? This is about who has the parental rights. These people are fighting for their parental rights. Everyone, including the judge, admits these children have suffered absolutely NO abuse. Then what is this about? It is about the freedom from interference this courageous couple should have. Who sets the educational standards for any given community? IN THEORY, it is the parents of the students in that community, through the election of a school board. BUT, due to constant interference of the US Dept of Ed and teacher's unions pushing radical leftist agenda's, parents have lost the ability to direct the education of their children. As homeschoolers, we are simply taking back what was stolen from us by the nanny state. I salute these courageous parents.
How does the quote go...."He who surrenders freedom for security deserves neither".................

[demnomo]

I wish I knew more of the facts regarding the Bryants case, too.A few cases similar to the Bryants happened here in N. California. Most of these cases were resolved through the courts with the families eventually winning. The situations usually involved a mean-spirited, petty educrat who turned the "concern for the child's educational welfare" into a personel vendetta. Liberals (educrats are almost always liberals) are like commie dictators--they don't like to be thwarted and hate to have their power and leftist dictates undermined.

My husband and I voluntarily have our son tested for several reasons.We wanted to see where he was in relation to his getting into college (SAT's, entrance exams, etc.) and as a record in case some snoopy government official tried to harass us and claim that we weren't doing our job.

Testing also kept my in-laws from griping too much. My in-laws were initially shocked that I would even consider homeschooling. After I sent them test results and samples of our son's work, they told me that this was probably the best option for their grandson.

Of course the key theme here is "voluntary." I would probably become like the Bryants and scream bloody murder if some state jerk tried to wrest my son from me because I refused to have him indoctrinated within the public schools systems and forcibly tested every few months just to satisfy some petty educrat vision of what constitutes an education.

Gracious. The public schools test the tarnation out of kids and it hasn't really improved a thing. There are still far too many students who can't read, write or understand basic math principles in the public schools. Unfortunately, many of these kids are ignored, put on drugs to "calm them down," or promoted by lazy teachers. I'm sure that a great many of these forgotten kids finally drop-out of school in their teens. (Way more than the homeschool average, I'll bet.)

Fix your own house, I say to these leftist educrats, before you dare try to fix mine!!!

[fight_truth_decay]

DSS had told Mr. Bryant that they did not want to take his kids and I thought had assured him this action would not happen, so the Bryants on Fox didn't seem that worried. However....as one of our favorite Democrats would say:" OUTRAGEOUS...OUTRAGEOUS!!!