Posted on 03/11/2007 11:50:14 AM PDT by EternalVigilance
A Superior Court judge in New Jersey says homeschooling is just about the same as deliberate child abuse.
In fact, he says, he just might name a school district in his state as a defendant in a current court dispute, citing the district's "shocking" failure to monitor and test all students – including homeschoolers.
"In today's threatening world, where we seek to protect children from abuse, not just physical, but also educational abuse, how can we not monitor the educational welfare of all our children? A child in New Jersey, who recently was found unfed and locked in a putrid bedroom was allegedly 'homeschooled' and because no one, such as a teacher or nurse, was able to observe any abuse in a school setting, it went undiscovered," wrote Judge Thomas Zampino in a case that came before him.
That's even though New Jersey state law does forbid child abuse, and its regulations regarding homeschooling say parents or guardians are allowed "to educate the child at home." Further, the state law notes they are not required to submit any type of communication of intent to a local school board, nor are parents required to have their plans approved by a board.
(Story continues below)
In fact, state law allows a school board in New Jersey to act against a homeschooling parent only if there is "credible evidence that the parent, guardian or other person having custody or control of a school-age child is not causing the child either to attend school (public or nonpublic) or to receive equivalent instruction elsewhere than at school …"
Despite New Jersey state law, Zampino insists what heeds to happen is this:
Certain basic requirements and safeguards should be implemented that protect all children, once the decision to "homeschool" a child has been made by the parents, as follows: 1. A parent/guardian who seeks to homeschool his/her child(ren) must register the child(ren) in their home school district, so that no child slips through the cracks of our education system.
2. A curriculum must be presented and filed with the local board of education and some "homeschool" training seminar required for the teaching parent (a four-hour video would suffice).
3. Testing on the same standardized basis for all students shall be administered to all homeschool children on an annual basis to measure whether "equivalent instruction" is being received by a child "elsewhere than at school."
A New Jersey lawyer familiar with homeschooling precedents in his state told WND the judge suggests the parents in the divorce dispute work it out. But he said the judge's additional comments are alarming.
"He's presenting this as though it's authority," Christopher Brennan said. "He's just making this up, with no basis whatsoever, saying that this is what should be done."
The judge, in fact, didn't stop with just the New Jersey situation.
"Here, [a witness in court] testified that approximately two million of today's fifty five million school age children are presently being homeschooled in the United States. Such numbers outside the public school system cannot be left without any review requirements under the law," Zampino said.
"How can we have as existing law for these children, only two court decisions that are over 40 years old, and no state statute that outlines a framework for school districts when parents choose this alternative for their children" the judge asked.
The Home School Legal Defense Association, which works worldwide on behalf of homeschool students and projects, said it couldn't comment on the specific issues in the case. But the organization did note that the judge's words did not change New Jersey law.
"In order to protect individual freedoms, the founders of our nation wanted to be sure that governmental powers did not become overly concentrated. To prevent this, they wisely split power into three branches – legislative, judicial and executive. As the founders conceived it, the judicial branch has no power to make new laws. That power belongs to the legislature working through representatives elected by the people," the group said in a statement.
Brennan, however, noted that once a judge's opinion becomes available, it is easy for another judge to quote from that, or even cite it as a conclusion.
"What really is problematic [is] this is symptomatic of classic judicial activism. The Legislature clearly spells out what's required to educate a child in the state of New Jersey," Brennan said. "They've said, 'This is the requirement,' and it's just that they [homeschooling parents] have to provide an equivalent instruction."
The judge said the status of homeschooling, to him, isn't acceptable. His comments were prompted by concerns by Stephen Hamilton that his wife, Tara Hamilton, from whom he separated in 2006, was adequately teaching their children at home.
"In questioning by this court, the mother made it clear that in the ten years she had been homeschooling the children, no one from any Board of Education in Montclair (where they lived until October 2006) ever visited the home. Ms. Hamilton never went to any school or board office, no lesson plan was ever reviewed and no progress report or testing of the children was ever performed. This is shocking to the court," he wrote.
"In this day and age where we seek to protect children from harm and sexual predators, so many children are left unsupervised. It is further shocking to this court that in September, 2001 the New Jersey Department of Education published answers to frequently asked questions about homeschooling as a guide to local school districts that listed the following:
1. Parents/Guardians are not required by law to notify their public school district of their intention to educate the child elsewhere than at school. 2. The law does not require or authorize the local board of education to review and approve the curriculum or program of a child educated elsewhere than at school.
3. No certification to teach is required to be held by the parent.
4. No standardized test(s) are administered to the children.
The judge, however, said he wasn't attacking homeschooling.
His comments, rather, are "a statement that it is necessary to register those children for whom this alternative is chosen and to monitor that their educational needs are being adequately nurtured. Judicial interpretation of the statute requires such steps to measure 'equivalent instruction' when the alternative 'elsewhere than at school' is chosen by parents.'"
In the case at hand, involving the Hamilton family, the judge said the father has an administrative remedy at hand. He may contact the Ridgewood Board of Education "and the school district will file suit … against Ms. Hamilton for the children's non-attendance at school." When she then notifies the court she's chosen homeschooling she will then be required to show the school district it is equivalent, the judge said.
The HSLDA said the judge probably would not have been shocked had he been aware that New Jersey's homeschooling laws are similar to those in other states.
"The judge is mistaken, pure and simple," Brennan told WND. "A judge can be mistaken."
He said the two million students homeschooled in the United States now are not being neglected, either. They are, in fact, protected from being molested by teachers, which while rare, does happen.
In a commentary on the Constitutionally Correct site, the writers said New Jersey judges "who legislate from the bench are giving Massachusetts judges (and German jack boots) a run for their money. … The court's opinion is a judicial temper tantrum. The judge wails that New Jersey law doesn't fit his idea of what the law should be. Not only does New Jersey law not require government monitoring and testing of homeschoolers, the state gives public schools no legal authorization to do so…"
The reference to Germany was about an issue on which WND has reported extensively. In that case, police took into custody a 15-year-old student, Melissa Busekros, and a judge ordered her into a psychiatric hospital, for being homeschooled, which remains illegal in that country.
Wolfgang Drautz, consul general of the Federal Republic of Germany, has said that "the public has a legitimate interest in countering the rise of parallel societies that are based on religion or motivated by different worldviews and in integrating minorities into the population as a whole."
That means, worldviews that do not align with those taught in Germany's public schools must be stamped out, he said.
The HSLD has called the case an "outrage."
Further, American homeschoolers should be concerned, as WND has reported, because the ease with which similar restrictions on free choice could be imposed in the United States.
Michael Farris, cofounder of the HSLDA, has called for an amendment to the U.S. Constitution to protect the right of parents to educate their children at home, in light of such developments in Europe.
Exactly -- and how many kids are exposed to drugs because of peer pressure at a government school -- peers they never would have met if they had not attended these schools. In fact, the cultural atmosphere of any public school is much more likely to involve peer acceptance of drugs, alcohol, and reckless sexual behaviors. When you're homeschooled your parents have much better control of who your peers are.
I agree. A HUGE WELCOME ABOARD! (Especially a fan of one of the greatest thinkers in The United States of America.)
I agree that it by no means fits MY definition of homeschooling but the parents in question described themselves as homeschoolers and the kids said they were being homeschooled and when the parent removed their child from the public school system it was to provide a home school education. I guess it depends on whose definition you utilize - even though it sounds like you and I would agree that they were NOT providing an appropriate education legally they were considered homeschoolers.
No of course he wasn't attacking homeschooling. Why he was probably supporting the troops........ *sigh*
It sounds like you're a GREAT parent! Obviously you provided your son with a fabulous education and I'm glad to hear he's doing so well. I too have several friends who home school and are amazing educators - I truly marvel at their abilities and their children are miles ahead of where they would be in the public system.
For better or worse I have spent my professional career working with various types of dysfunctional families and my perspective is influenced by my experiences. Mother's who are so illiterate they can't spell their child's first name or who are so intellectually impaired they don't know their child's birthday. And those aren't the parents who lost custody of their kids due to horrific abuse or neglect.
A fair question. The review should be deferential. Is the subject addressed? If the answer of yes, the inquiry regarding sufficiency of the curriculum is over.
For instance, when I was homeschooled, my parents used the A Beka curriculum. Now, personally speaking, I think those curricula are little better than propaganda. I would not select them for my children. Even so, NY did not complain that those textbooks were used - nor should they. Parents have wide discretion, and should not be interfered with just because they made educational choices with which one disagrees. That said, parents should not have the option to say math or science or reading should not be addressed at all.
Think carefully before you answer, because parochial and private religious schools don't have to submit to that kind of oversight.
Actually, most of them have the same level of regulation. They must cover certain subjects. They have broad latitude to select religion-based texts, but they must use ***a*** text.
How odious would a deferential review like this be?
You have anything substantive to add to this coversation, or just brainless insults?
"The review should be deferential. If the answer of yes, the inquiry regarding sufficiency of the curriculum is over."
Are you that naive?
You really think that is as far as it would go? It might be deferential to begin with, but as time progressed it would be more and more controlled and prescribed.
Are you bitter for being homeschooled? You don't seem happy about your experience.
Bureaucrats tend to be less than enthusiastic about adding work. They won't want to add the job of reviewing curricula. These sorts of reviews tend to become more cursory as time goes on.
Are you bitter for being homeschooled? You don't seem happy about your experience.
Nope. I got lucky, and it worked well for me - but I honestly think mine was an exceptional case. I had two PhD's teaching me. Even so, having also attended a public high school, I can confidently say that there were things my parents could not compete with, good as they were.
At the same time, having been homeschooled, I knew a lot of homeschooled kids. Most received an adequate education. Some received a superior one. Some families had no business homeschooling at all. I'm sure you've seen a few of each, if you've moved in those circles for any length of time.
"Bureaucrats tend to be less than enthusiastic about adding work. "
Baloney. It just gives them more of an excuse to hire more people and expand their budgets. And if it gets too onerous to review curricula then they will just legislate only certain ones are approved.
You are a very trusting soul when it comes to bureaucrats.
"I'm sure you've seen a few of each, if you've moved in those circles for any length of time."
Yep. Overall, though, the stats show that they do better than public schools. For now that should give guidance on how to proceed.
Ever work in an over-worked bureaucracy? Things just don't work that way. Bureaucracies will tend to focus only on the egregious problems, and tend to do a cursory job otherwise. Furthermore, it's trivial to establish a deferential standard of review in the procedures. Any second-year law student can do it.
Overall, though, the stats show that they do better than public schools. For now that should give guidance on how to proceed.
The way you cite those statistics is fallacious. Statistical averages tell us just that - the average. It counter-balances the low-performers with the high-performers. The distribution curve of the scores almost certainly shows that there are high-performers that would do well in any half-way decent school, middle-level performers who are thriving under individualized attention, and low-end performers who may struggle in any environment, or whose parents have no business homeschooling. An average gives no information about how many fall in each category.
On the other hand, the stats do tell us one thing - homeschooling does work and should be a viable option for some. Anything beyond that is conjecture.
"Ever work in an over-worked bureaucracy? Things just don't work that way. Bureaucracies will tend to focus only on the egregious problems, and tend to do a cursory job otherwise."
Show me a situation where the gov't has returned the power of choice to the electorate because it was too much trouble to maintain or do the work. IOW, show me a bureacracy that got smaller because the bureaucrats said some of their function was not necessary.
"Furthermore, it's trivial to establish a deferential standard of review in the procedures. "
I wasn't arguing that establishing a deferential review would be trivial -- it's just that there is no guarantee that it would remain deferential. Gov't grows and grows and grows like a weed. Since we are talking about education, look at the Dept. of Education. It's the perfect example.
"The way you cite those statistics is fallacious. "
No, it's just that the average can tell alot. If the average homeschooler does better than the average public school child then that tells you that the system is overall better. The distribution might be narrow, wide, or skewed one way or another, but to have an average that is centered that much higher is very significant.
There's so much wrong even with the first sentence that it's hard to know where to begin.
Who defines abuse?
Don't they consider it abuse to rip a child from the only family he's ever known and make him go live with a bunch of strangers?
Who's going to *protect* the kids from abuse at the hands of the public school system? From foster families?
What about families who send their kids to the public school system who abuse their kids? And there's lots of them.
Who made this judge God?
It's a self-appointment.
I guess the judge never saw these results:
SAT/ACT homeschoolers:
http://www.hslda.org/docs/news/hslda/200105070.asp
Standardized test scores homeschoolers:
http://www.hslda.org/docs/nche/000010/200410250.asp
I am a single mother who homeschools four precious children, and it is God-send for us as a family. Each one is learning above grade-level (just because they're ready to move on to the next skill, once they master the one they're on), and are happy, not stressed out, not bullied, and loving childhood. I don't compare our style or pace to other homeschool families (although the temptation is ever present). I have friends who teach their kids at home who have 10 year old kids who still don't read "because they're not interested". I think that's ridiculous.
Homeschooling has saved our family, and is perfect for my children, all four of them. Being a former teacher gives me more credibility for what i'm doing, but it's almost a downside when talking with other parents, since many do not have college degrees, nor do they need them. When they don't know a subject at a certain level, they usually hire tutors or co-op with other families whose children are studying the same thing.
Homeschooling is extremely mainstream in our area, and widely accepted. Thank God for us....I know it's not the case for many people.
Which goes to show that kids do NOT have to attend a public school for abuse to be detected. Shoots down his arguement.
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.