Posted on 06/13/2003 12:26:29 PM PDT by pabianice
"We have legal custody of the children and we will do with them as we see fit," DSS worker Susan Etscovitz told the Bryants in their Gale Street home. "They are minors and they do what we tell them to do!"
WALTHAM, MA -- A legal battle over two home-schooled children exploded into a seven-hour standoff yesterday, when they refused to take a standardized test ordered by the Department of Social Services.
George Nicholas Bryant, 15, and Nyssa Bryant, 13, stood behind their parents, Kim and George, as police and DSS workers attempted to collect the children at 7:45 a.m. DSS demanded that the two complete a test to determine their educational level.
After a court order was issued by Framingham Juvenile Court around 1 p.m., the children were driven by their parents to a Waltham hotel.
Again, they refused to take the test.
"The court order said that the children must be here. It said nothing about taking the test," said George Bryant.
The second refusal came after an emotion-filled morning for the family, when DSS workers sternly demanded the Bryants comply with their orders.
"We have legal custody of the children and we will do with them as we see fit," DSS worker Susan Etscovitz told the Bryants in their Gale Street home. "They are minors and they do what we tell them to do."
Four police officers were also at the scene and attempted to coax the Bryants to listen to the DSS worker.
"We are simply here to prevent a breach of the peace," said Waltham Youth Officer Detective James Auld. "We will will not physically remove the children."
Yesterday's events are the continuation of a six-year legal battle between the family and Waltham Public Schools and the state.
The Bryants contend that the city and state do not have the legal right to force their children to take standardized tests, even though DSS workers have threatened to take their children from them.
"There have been threats all along. Most families fall to that bullying by the state and the legal system," said George Bryant.
"But this has been a six-year battle between the Waltham Public Schools and our family over who is in control of the education of our children," Bryant continued. "In the end the law of this state will protect us."
The Bryant children have never attended public school.
Both sides agree that the children are in no way abused mentally, physically, sexually or emotionally, but legal custody of the children was taken from Kim and George Bryant in December 2001. The children will remain under the legal custody of DSS until their 16th birthdays.
The parents have been ruled as unfit because they did not file educational plans or determine a grading system for the children, two criteria of Waltham Public School's home schooling policy.
"We do not believe in assessing our children based on a number or letter. Their education process is their personal intellectual property," said Bryant.
George Bryant said he was arrested six years ago, after not attending a meeting that the city contends he was summoned to. The meeting was called by the Waltham School Department for his failure to send his children to school.
"We want these issues aired in the open, in public. The school system and DSS have fought to keep this behind closed doors," said Bryant.
Superintendent of Schools Susan Parrella said she was unaware of yesterday's incident and that, currently the school department approves of the education plan filed by DSS for the Bryant children.
"An acceptable home school plan is in place right now," said Parrella. "I was not aware of any testing occurring today."
The Bryant children freely admit that they have no intention of taking a test.
"We don't want to take the test. We have taken them before and I don't think they are a fair assessment of what we know," said Nyssa Bryant. "And no one from DSS has ever asked us what we think."
Kenneth Pontes, area director of DSS, denied that workers have never talked to the children privately, but admitted that this type of case isn't often seen by his office.
"This is an unusual case. Different school systems require different regulations for home-schooled children. Waltham requires testing," said Pontes.
Pontes said that a possibility exists that the children will be removed from their home, but that was a last course of action.
"No one wants these children to be put in foster homes. The best course of action would for (the Bryants) to instruct the children to take the test," said Etscovitz.
The Bryant family is due in Framingham District Court this morning, to go before a juvenile court judge. According to DSS, this session will determine what their next course of action will be and if the children will be removed from the Bryants' home.
"These are our children and they have and always will be willing participants in their education," said Kim Bryant.
I was very surprised to not read mention of them in the article. This is their kind of case. Why are they NOT involved?
I was very surprised to not read mention of them in the article. This is their kind of case. Why are they NOT involved?
Addressed in the thread a few posts up.
I am not sure on the technicalities. One poster said that HSLDA would not tale the case, because they knowingly broke the law. Another poster said the law had ab "opt out" for testing.
And, if they are not dues paying members, HSLDA may not consider the case worthy of engaging.
I know .. these people are pretty scary
Consider the tales of slaves learning to read in secret. A legacy was established under the oppression of the masters....without a direct confrontation...which the slaves would have assuredly lost.
Am I saying we are slaves? Well, think about it.
Work to keep the lagacy alive first, and fight the battle with the masters when prudent and profitable.
Liberty is the cart: education, the horse.
My opinion.
Having nearly completed our HS'ing with our two children..I can give you some personal experiences that maybe of some help to you in the future.
We started when our oldest was 4 yrs. old...she's now almost 18 and finished.
We started in So. Calif. and never had one problem with the Government School District that we lived in. We joined groups of like-minded HS'ing families....CO-OP's they called them. We "filed" with an umbrella school that helped with our "needed" paperwork. We even joined HSLDF....
If I remember correctly after 2 or 3 years we stopped using the umbrella school...( There was a fee...maybe $100 a year..) and we stopped HSLDF...too. We found that in our case...they were unneeded. Although each individual School District is/was different in Calif...And "trouble" tended to be directly correlated with whomever the District Superintendent was.
All in all...CA. was and to the best of my knowledge remains a fairly easy state to HS in. We now live in OK...and it's just as easy...if not easier.
My recommendation to you would be to hook-up with some HS'ing familes in your neighborhood/city and find out the in's and the out's.....
HS'ing our children has been the absolute best thing we've ever done FOR our children.
Best FRegards,
The Bryants decided to push this using the Constitutional argument, and put their kids at the forefront. I don't agree with their decision, but I don't live in the Waltham school district, so I don't know how ticky the School Dept. is. Homeschoolers in MA are divided on the issue; some agree with the Bryants, some don't
Our MA town is very hands off concerning homeschool. I sent a letter of intent along with a one page description for each child of the subjects we'd cover and the main resources we'd use. I don't consider that too much to ask, though there are many homeschoolers who do. We sent our letter Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested. We got the green card back, but never heard another word. Fine with me; I did what was required of me. We did standardized tests with both kids last year for our own info, but we won't do that this year.
...to keep my child.
we have compulsory brainwashing and indoctrination via liberals ---
an illegal bolshevik monopoly ! To: f.Christian
Dakmar...
I took a few minutes to decipher that post, and I must say I agree with a lot of what you said.
fC...
These were the Classical liberals...founding fathers-PRINCIPLES---stable/SANE scientific reality/society---industrial progress...moral/social character-values(private/personal) GROWTH(limited NON-intrusive PC Govt/religion---schools)!
Dakmar...
Where you and I diverge is on the Evolution/Communism thing. You seem to view Darwin and evolution as the beginning of the end for enlighted, moral civilization, while I think Marx, class struggle, and the "dictatorship of the proletariat" are the true dangers.
God bless you, I think we both have a common enemy in the BRAVE-NWO.
452 posted on 9/7/02 8:54 PM Pacific by Dakmar
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.