Home-schooling standoff (MA Liberals try to get state custody for 'abused' home-schooled kids)

"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.

"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.

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."

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."

"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.

Regarding PA vs NJ, my husband and I are both originally from PA and when we had our daughter (now 6), we finally landed with a mortgage in NJ, after living in NYC and elsewhere. For the first 4 or so years of her life, I loudly and regularly expressed my desire to return to PA where most of our family members still live.

Then I began to be interested in homeschooling and soon determined that remarkably, NJ is one of the easiest states in which to homeschool. There are very minimal regulations, no yearly requirements, no submissions to school districts etc, and if any local official requests info, it is their burden to prove the request as necessary in the first place. Kindergarten is not compulsory, official schooling is required by law to begin at six but even so, NJ homeschoolers are innocent until proven guilty.

At the same time, I discovered that PA is often much more restrictive and can be tedious in its requirements, although that seems determined by where you live specifically - certain areas/jurisdictions are more invasive than others, apparently. Some Freepers in PA say they have never had a problem with anyone while others say it's been daunting.

At any rate, I no longer nag about moving back to PA, as we intend to continue homeschooling indefinitely, and of course have joined HSLDA anyway - there are SOME problem cases in NJ and you just never know! And of course, there's no comparison between the cost of living in NJ vs PA - housing cost differences alone are enough to make one weep. Hard.

Something else worth mentioning, as someone else said, there are so many local homeschool organizations out there. Countywide ones, secular ones, religious-based ones, statewide ones (ENOCH here in NJ is good), plenty of places that cater to homeschool groups, for example, the county group we started with offered gymnastics at the local gymnastics school, also swim lessons at the local swim school, with discounted rates for the group. The one to which we currently belong has a "learning center" every other week where the kids get together for class with their age groups (I just finished co-teaching my daughter's third semester class, which was on birds), have gym etc, also belong to the same swim school, go on monthly field trips to places like the Crayola factory in eastern PA, planetariums, museums etc.

There are so many resources, so many groups, socialization is such a non-issue. I just spent a couple hours this morning shopping for a first grade curriculum, the options are mindboggling! :) I need to find a program that allows for the moderate inclusion of my 2 1/2 year old son, or he'll drive us all crazy during school. And congratulations on the birth of your daughter, she is beautiful. We just had our third and final, another daughter, on Dec 22.

Thank you SO MUCH for that wealth of information on PA and NJ... We're a couple years away from moving, but we're also a couple years away from homeschooling, and I want to make sure I have all the info down before we get there.

We're currently in CA unfortunately. Hubby's family is in PA and NJ... My family is in northern CA and now OR. It's tough trying to decide where we should live - probably where most of the kids in the family live as most of them are currently under 5 yrs old: PA or NJ.

And I'm glad to hear about the "socializing" aspects you're enjoying. That leftist complaint about homeschooling doesn't stick with me - never has. I think their complaint (a la Estrich) has more to do with lack of socialISM indoctrinating our children (not THEIR children), than our children not hanging out with school pals. I have no doubt that whereever we live I'll be able to find likeminded homeschooling families for sports, field trips, etc.

And thank you... and CONGRATULATIONS on your own new baby! I bet you still just.... smell her and just marvel at it. :) That wonderful baby scent. I do.

Well, here's what John Adams wrote in the Massachusetts State Constitution:

"Wisdom, and knowledge, as well as virtue, diffused generally among the body of the people, being necessary for the preservation of their rights and liberties; and as these depend on spreading the opportunities and advantages of education in the various parts of the country, and among the different orders of the people, it shall be the duty of legislatures and magistrates, in all future periods of this commonwealth, to cherish the interests of literature and the sciences, and all seminaries of them; especially the university at Cambridge, public schools and grammar schools in the towns; to encourage private societies and public institutions, rewards and immunities, for the promotion of agriculture, arts, sciences, commerce, trades, manufactures, and a natural history of the country; to countenance and inculcate the principles of humanity and general benevolence, public and private charity, industry and frugality, honesty and punctuality in their dealings; sincerity, good humor, and all social affections, and generous sentiments among the people."

This is the unique part of the Massachusetts Constitution that gives the Commonwealth the right to make home schoolers accountable to the public for the education of their children. You can interpret it as you wish, but it tells me that Adams would approve of the state's interest in the education of its citizens.

The school district in this case rejected the plan because it was a non-plan, not a serious effort to satisfy the minimal requirements set forth by the school district but more jiberish aimed more at making a point and getting publicity than informing the school district of their plans. There's a reason why the courts would take such a drastic action as giving custody to DSS. Look behind the sensational headlines and attention getting one liners here and maybe you'll start to get the picture that these people are different from all of the competent, level-headed home schoolers across this country.

Even allowing that the MA constitution enables the government to mandate that certain educational standards be met -- which I think is a pretty liberal reading of the rather vague, preamble-esque text you posted -- I would say that the burden of proof is upon the state to show that the parents are *failing* to educate their children, not that the parents have to prove that they are succeeding. As someone else pointed out on this thread, the state appears to lack probable cause in this situation. Has anyone even alleged that the Bryant children are, for example, illiterate? In the absence of such evidence, I see no reason why their parents are obligated to prove their fitness to educate any more than any other parents are required to prove that they aren't abusive.

state's interest in the education of its citizens

I would agree........ an interest.

The question is can a state FORCE compliance to education standards and testing. Would Adams agree that the State could force socialist indoctrination or one particular religion? Once you give the state supreme power (I would argue that Adams was against this) to FORCE education and by it's standards your right to self determination and thus the right to Liberty and the pursuit of happiness are taken. Rights that cannot be forfeited or taken by State or Fed as they are inalienable rights foundational to the U.S. Constitution, making them Fact of law.

The state can only intervene if life or property is at risk per the rule of law. Children studied at home may or may not be 'harmed' as determined by some abstract social/economic standards (who sets the standards and will you agree when 'they' are diametrically opposed to your way of life?) but the body or harm cannot be produce in fact so the government has no place.

The State of MA should be wisely spending taxed dollars promoting more efficient and less costly forms of education, this case proves that the opposite is really true. I submit that they are in violation of the Massachusetts State Constitution using the very same quote of same.

You'd have to take up your criticism of the wording of the State Constitution with John Adams which I assume you'd have a great deal of difficulty doing.

No one would claim that the children are illiterate or even poorly educated. The problem here is that the Bryants in their zeal for defying the laws of the State of Massachusetts lost custody of their children so now the state who has custody is calling the shots, or at least trying to. If they had cooperated long ago and simply satisfied the very minimal requirements of the local school district, which by the way, does not necessarily require testing, they would have retained custody and been left alone except for filing a very simple annual education plan. Their refusal to cooperate at even the most basic level with any kind of government oversight is what has handed the home schooling movement a tremendous setback. We should be condemning their actions instead of applauding them.

If the colonist had cooperated long ago and simply satisfied the very minimal requirements of the king they would have been left alone except for filing a very simple annual taxation plan.

How much capitulation should we give the government regarding our inalienable right to self-determination? How much Government involvement is to much? When can we say enough is enough? When they start teaching what they feel like and stop teaching what the parents want? When they start arresting people for not going to school meetings? When they start arresting and taking children because they do not want them to take a test.

You are an apologist for the King.

What a ridiculous analogy! I never heard of a "taxation plan." To equate a one or two page education plan with the issues the colonists were facing (taxation without representation, forced quartering of troops, confiscation of arms, religious and speech restrictions etc.) makes a mockery of what this country fought for in the 18th century. John Adams and the rest of the founding fathers would be insulted by your comments!

Do you really believe this man was arrested for not going to a meeting???? The parents had the right to teach what they want but because of their refusal to simply inform anyone else, they lost that right and custody of their children. They brought this whole mess on themselves.

John Adams and the rest of the founding fathers would be insulted by your comments!

You are totally void of the spirit of the Founding Fathers. You would give up liberty in order to secure your ideas of social progress.

Unless you can prove that these kids were 'hurt' by a factual reasonable standard there is no justification for the state to be involved.

Good intentions will always be pleaded for every assumption of authority. It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters.
- Daniel Webster

Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies, The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.
- C.S. Lewis

Do you really believe this man was arrested for not going to a meeting????

How much capitulation should we give the government regarding our inalienable right to self-determination? How much Government involvement is to much? When can we say enough is enough? When they start teaching what they feel like and stop teaching what the parents want? When they start arresting people for not going to school meetings? When they start arresting and taking children because the parents do not want them to take a test.

When will you get your hands off my life? I am not hurting you body or property.

At the present time, the state is not trying to make the parents prove that they are succeeding. No one, not the state nor the local school district, ever suspected that the parents were not succeeding. In fact, even if there was a concern there, I don't think the local school district would have intervened. They tend to stay out of it as long as the minimal requirements are met. Initially, the Bryants were only asked to file an education plan which they adamantly refused to do. After many legal battles, the state finally took custody of the children. I admit that seems to be pretty heavy handed but how do you deal with parents who refuse to abide by the laws which, by the way, the vast majority of home schooling parents find neither unfair nor obtrusive. In any case, the time for proving competence or incompetence is long past. Unfortunately, the state now has custody of the children and is attempting to insure they have an adequate education. I don't think it should have ever come to this but the parents are intent on making their point. Maybe they will be able to get the laws changed in MA by their actions but I question whether putting their children through this turmoil is the right way of going about doing that.

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.