An INSANE situation up in Waltham, Massachusetts

Conservative Alerts.Com ^ | Chuck Muth

[webber]

An INSANE situation up in Waltham, Massachusetts

This one's so Outrageous, it makes our blood boil just to think of it. Take a look at his message:

ISSUE: Kim and George Bryant have been home-schooling their two kids, George (15) and Nyssa (13), much to the chagrin of the Waltham Public School (WPS) system. The Bryants thus far have refused to force their children to take a government-mandated standardized test to assess their education level.

The WPS empire struck back last year, obtaining a court order giving custody of the kids to the Department of Social Services (DSS), which ever since has been threatening to take the kids away from their parents.

As the MetroWest Daily News reported on Friday, "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." They were ruled to be "unfit" for not filing educational plans with the government.

Unfit. For not filing paperwork. With the government school system. Over the education of their OWN children.

In fact, George Bryant was actually ARRESTED six years ago for failing to comply with the government's dictates over the home-schooled education of HIS children.

Arrested!!...Thrown in jail!!...Like a criminal!!...For taking personal responsibility for the education of HIS kids.

This six-year legal battle exploded on Thursday as bureaucrats from the DSS showed up at the Bryants' home with police escorts at 7:45 a.m. and attempted to remove the children from their home and force them to take the mandated tests.

Once again, the Bryants told the government agents to pound dirt, resulting in a seven-hour standoff.

"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," said Bryant.

How DARE these parents stand up to the government and defend their right to raise their children as they see fit? Who do they think they are?

At least, that's the attitude of one outrageous government bureaucrat involved in this brouhaha. "We have the legal custody of the children and we will do with them as we see fit," DSS trooper Susan Etscovitz told the Bryants Thursday morning. "They are minors and they do what we tell them to do."

It is near impossible to describe the rage I feel inside every time I read those chilling words. WE will do with them as WE see fit. They do what WE tell them to do.

The sheer audacity of a bureaucrat to make such a statement about someone else's children who are in no way abused in any shape, form or fashion is beyond comprehension to me.

Comrade Etscovitz maintained on Thursday that, "No one wants these children to be put in foster homes. The best course of action would be for (the Bryants) to instruct the children to take the test."

One can just imagine her words being delivered with a thick East German accent: "undt now, all vee need eez dee kidz!"

This isn't about education. It's about control. It's about an imperial government trying to crush a movement in its infancy which could one day spell the end of the public school monopoly over our kids' educations.

Home-schooling means children might start learning again. REAL learning. Not "whole language" and "self-esteem." Learning about radical notions such as freedom, liberty and personal responsibility. Notions such as limited government and the Constitution and the vision of our Founding Fathers.

Yeah, we can't have THAT!

ACTION ITEM: As it appears that DSS is getting its marching orders from the Waltham Public Schools, it seems the best place to start is with the School Superintendent there. Her name is Dr. Susan Parrella. She can be reached via email at:

parrellas@k12.waltham.ma.us
or by phone at:
(781) 314-5400
or fax at:
(781) 314-5411.

Emails are great... but nothing quite ruins a bureaucrat's day like dealing with a flood of phone calls. I know. I just called. The woman who answered the phone hung up on me when she found out what I was calling about. They do NOT want to answer any questions about this.

Oh, and by the way. I reached Ms. Etscovitz this morning. She was not a happy camper once she found out what I was calling about. Refused to comment on her "we will do with them as we see fit" statement, saying only, "I'm terminating this conversation now," before slamming the phone down.

I think it would really bug her if a lot of people called (781) 641-8500, so please, please don't rattle her cage, OK? That number not to call again to reach Susan Etscovitz is (781) 641-8500. That's (781) 641-8500. (You could also fax her at 781-648-6909.)

-- Chuck Muth, ConservativeAlerts.Com

---

We normally set up a website with a pre-written letter to Congress, etc. However, we thought it would be much more effective for our members to make contact as described above, in their own words. If you get a response you'd like to share, be sure to drop us a note. As this issue develops and is "bumped up the ladder" of responsibility, we'll let you know who to contact next.

NOTE: The situation in Waltham has gotten WAY out of hand.

Outraged Americans across the country need to contact these bureaucrats NOW to express their outrage and demand they do the RIGHT thing. Be sure to forward this email to everyone you know who wants to help save parental choice in America, starting in Massachusetts. p> Thank you!

--Chuck Muth, ConservativeAlerts.Com

---

[ladyinred]

OMG It appears that the NEA has way too much power. It never should have been created in the first place, and it needs to be disbanded, yesterday! They very idea that they can threaten to remove these children from the home is reprehensible. CPS around here anyway, leaves children who are beaten, molested, etc. in the home no matter how many calls they get. Perhaps if we need to get kids away from a bad parent we should just suggest they aren't schooling their children properly!!!

[TigersEye]

I personally think the public schools are only responsible for the basic skills to be a good citizen, get a job, and function in society. Parents should have to demonstrate their students have achieved this much, so the children are prepared to function in the adult world.

I would agree with the first statement but find government schools somewhat lacking in that achievment. You and I will just have to agree to disagree on the second statement. You are accepting of the premise that all citizens should be obligated to demonstrate parental fitness to the State by way of educating their children to State mandated standards. I will readily admit that the majority of people now accept just that. I sure don't.

IMO the turning point for the worse in education can be marked by that point where people let the government take responsibility from them. I advocate taking it back.

[Sarah]

I didn't get the gist of the conversation. I was just writing in mock astonishment NAMES! Like: instead of debating the point you're just going to call me a socialist!
I wasn't accusing him of a personal attack.
And so likewise my answer to the guy who posted to me that 'anyone who willingly lives in France' (instead of arguing the points), I retorted 'anyone who willingly takes the name of Sloth...'
I find that everyone's getting hyper-sensitive about personal attacks lately.

[donmeaker]

There was no outbreak of small pox. Hasn't been one case for more than 20 years.

If you know of a case, please contact the World Health Organization.

Bill Shaeffer has written several papers on measels in baltimore. Baltimore has records of epidemics going back about 200 years. He has a differential equation model that works pretty well, and categorizes folks as immune, not exposed, and active. Basically it is a nonlinear differential equation, and the immune population acts as a damper.

There are two kinds of vaccine- live vaccine which gives people a hopefully benign form of disease, and killed vaccine which exposes people to the killed fragments of the most virulent form of the disease. Sabin is one, Salk is the other. The problem with Sabin-live vaccine is the potential to mutate to another more virulent form. The problem with Salk-killed vaccine is the potential that the virus is not completely killed.

In the long term, the population level problem is the potential for disease associated with a vaccine, (from mistakes, non-killed agent, mutation of live agent, or allergy from the growth medium). Because of that risk, once the disease incidence is low enough, it makes short term sense to not give anyone vaccine. That allows the non-immune population to build up, and the stage is set for an epidemic. Take smallpox now. It is no longer routine to get immunized for smallpox. Because of that, the immune population is no longer damping the rate of growth. A single case (perhaps caused by exhuming a 100 year old corpse) and the disease would take off like wildfire!

by comparison, a constant low level of disease (say 5 percent) would tend to have the more benign form (because it limits the ability to pass on a disease, if the host is killed) yet a moderate vaccination level could be sustatined since the risk of the vaccine would always be less than that of the disease when unvaccinated.

Illusion that small pox has gone away. No cases for 20 years provides that illusion. Yet the virus still sits and waits in the ground, waiting for a chance. Our public health policy, since it seeks to recommend actions to provide the lowest risk NOW, sets us up for an epidemic in the future. One can optimize for X or optimize for X' (the derivitive of X) but they are different things, and different paths will get different results.

[grania]

Because of that, the immune population is no longer damping the rate of growth. A single case (perhaps caused by exhuming a 100 year old corpse) and the disease would take off like wildfire!

That was a really good explanation about the problem with the spread of infectious disease, and the dilemma about vaccination. (It would make a good separate thread).

I'm fascinated that you would suggest that a 100 year old corpse could still have the smallpox virus. People around here always treated the idea of separate, isolated smallpox cemetaries as a silly superstition of those people.

I've expressed a concern that the vast dislocations of people and the lack of water, etc. could give one of these diseases a really fine breeding ground. What's to stop our troops suffering from some really awful epidemic? Aren't the conditions created by the bombings in Afghanistan and Iraq creating that danger? (so many questions, no answers)

[Sarah]

I LOVE it when people know what they're talking about!
I mistook small pox for what? What epidemic is it that came out in Kuwait when Iraq took all their medical infrastructure during the first Gulf War?
And what do you suggest concerning: first of all the fanatics in the original article, who ignorant of the facts, refuse to vaccinate on principle? Jail? Indulgence?
And of the woman that I was conversing with, who's children showed an intolerance of the vaccinations? Opt-out medical papers?
Vive! Informed opinions!

[ConstitutionLover]

I have found that most of us conservatives find the word "cooperate" when used in references to dealing with the government as totally reprehensible so I'm not surprised by your first statement.

If these people are not looking for publicity and "want to be left alone", why was the news media there at their house ready to photograph and report on the situation? How did they hear about it before the incident actually happened? These are not assumptions.

And in response to your last comment, I submit the following excerpt from the Massachusetts State Constitution written by John Adams (one of our greatest founding fathers and defenders of our liberties):

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.

[Sarah]

Thanks for some well educated facts on the matter.
I don't understand this idea that FR is a forum to counter government intervention in everything.
(While I will admit your answer was a bit more erudite than mine...)
PS. Were you home schooled?

[TigersEye]

If these people are not looking for publicity and "want to be left alone", why was the news media there at their house ready to photograph and report on the situation? How did they hear about it before the incident actually happened? These are not assumptions.

The situation has been ongoing for 6 or 7 years now and the goobs haven't given up, they are upping the stakes. They just might have wanted publicity to rally some help rather than gain some kind of backhanded celebrity status.

I note that John Adams used the words "cherish the interests" and "to encourage" not "mandate by law", "require" or "legislate". I would equate that with the phrasing in the preamble to the Constitution "promote the general welfare". It would have made a world of difference if they had phrased it "establish the general welfare". Given the care that went into creating that document I don't think it was an oversight.

FReegards, TigersEye

[ConstitutionLover]

I happen to be a proud product of a Massachusetts public school system.

[TigersEye]

I don't understand this idea that FR is a forum to counter government intervention in everything.

Apart from the fact that keeping government in a small box was an overriding concern of the Founding Fathers and a basic premise of conservative philosophy perhaps the idea has taken hold here due to personal interpretations of the opening statement on FR's homepage:

Welcome!
Free Republic is an online gathering place for independent, grass-roots conservatism (there's that word conservatism again) on the web. We're working to roll back decades of governmental largesse, (uhhhh, what's that mean?) to root out political fraud and corruption, (nothing corrupt about taking kids away from their parents for refusing to take some bureaucrats test is there? doh!) and to champion causes which further conservatism (oh no, not again) in America. And we always have fun doing it. Hoo-yah!

[ConstitutionLover]

I made no judgment about their motives behind their thirst for publicity. You accused me of making an assumption but apparently, you have now accepted the fact that they are looking for publicity.

Regarding the Constitution:

First, you ignored the word "inculcate" which I think carries a slightly stronger connotation than the words you selected to highlight.

Second, I would agree that the passage is open to interpretation and in a liberal state like Massachusetts, has, I assume, been liberally interpreted by the courts. The laws put in place to "encourage" all citizens to be educated are normally obeyed by the vast majority of citizens. Filing minimal annual education plans is hardly an infringement of citizens' rights. It's only when citizens refuse to cooperate (there's that word again), that the government sees fit to press harder. In this case, the state has acted a bit heavy handed, especially as evidenced by the choice of words of the social worker from DSS but that's what happens when you paint people (and governments) into a corner. My understanding is that DSS is backing down now. I don't believe the children were ever in danger of being physically taken away by the state over this which is why the parents are willing to let it go this far.

[ConstitutionLover]

In addition, how do you expect a legislature to "cherish" or "encourage" without legislating? That's all a legislature can do.

[Sarah]

Ditto posts #272,273
Minimal being the operative word. Even according to FR's goal, roll back, not eliminate.

[society-by-contract]

I don't understand this idea that FR is a forum to counter government intervention in everything.

Freepers support plenty of government intervention. If you want to visit a forum where folks oppose government intervention in *everything* click on the link below:

http://www.anti-state.com/

[TigersEye]

The word "inculcate" isn't in the preamble in my CATO Institute copy of the Constitution. They must have altered it.

The laws put in place to "encourage" all citizens to be educated are normally obeyed by the vast majority of citizens.

What a beautiful piece of liberal sophistry. Laws are not made to "encourage" people they are made to set limits or requirements on peoples actions backed by the full force of the State.

Filing minimal annual education plans is hardly an infringement of citizens' rights.

Requiring citizens to conform their parenting decisions to government standards is an infringement on their rights. To a Constitutionalist or a conservative.

It's only when citizens refuse to cooperate (there's that word again), that the government sees fit to press harder. In this case, the state has acted a bit heavy handed, especially as evidenced by the choice of words of the social worker from DSS but that's what happens when you paint people (and governments) into a corner.

Un-freaking-believable! The Constitution was framed in order to paint government into a corner or rather a box from which it was never to escape and that box was to be a pedestal on which the "people" would stand in their sovereign supremacy over the State. Of course the State has been heavy handed and it is no surprise that a bureaucrat of the State speaks in arrogant tones about making its children "do as we see fit". She has taken her cue from the general political atmosphere that exists today. "We, the State, know what's good for you."

All law is backed by the muzzle of a gun as these people are finding out. "Refuse to take the test and we'll fine you. Refuse again and we'll take you to court. Refuse to go to court and we'll arrest you. Refuse to be arrested and we'll shoot you."

When the government confines itself to its Constitutionally prescribed duties of administering justice, insuring domestic tranquility and providing a common defense there can be little complaint that it wields a lethal force to accomplish that. But when bad laws are allowed to proliferate that allow the government to exceed its original mandate in the name of some Socialist ideal called "the good of society" that same lethal force will be used to enforce the will of the State as conceived by those that run the State. At some point the will of the State will collide with the will of the people as it intrudes further and further into personal and private matters, "for the good of Society."

The State has no right, under the Federal Constitution, to mandate what standards I educate my children to or even whether I educate them at all. There is no Constitutional argument for that premise.

I don't believe the children were ever in danger of being physically taken away by the state ...

Wanna buy a bridge?

[TigersEye]

Roll back until they are eliminated.

Crush socialism until it's extinct.

Drive back and kill our enemies and hear the lamentations of their women.

Better dead than Red.

The only good commie is a dead commie.

; )

[kegler4]

"I don't understand this idea that FR is a forum to counter government intervention in everything."

Well, not quite everything. Try suggesting that governement shouldn't be legislating against, say, homosexuality or marijuana, just as a couple of examples, and suddenly you'll find lots of support for government intervention. Except for a handful of really hardcore cases, EVERYBODY is in favor of some government intervention.

[TigersEye]

Hardcore and proud of it! ; )

[jerrymdss]

Your absolutly negative critical nature is of absolute no benefit to anyone -- a 3rd grader could have done better.

As for how many would impose on others, a reasonable estimate would be at least half. There are certainly more people around that are selfish in their motives. It is not hard to discern that.

Next time think before you open your little mindless trap. I thought a requirement to post on FR is that you have to be at least 18?