Lawyer for New Hampshire home school student files brilliant motion

Yesterday I outlined a recent court decision in the state of New Hampshire the has forced a Christian home school child to attend a public school solely on the basis of her religious convictions.  The child’s Attorney at Law John Anthony Simmons has filed a brilliant motion asking the court to reconsider it’s ruling. The motion filed by Attorney Simmons can be found in it’s entirety here.  Just read it with the lights on in your house.  It is a nightmare.

In this case the mother has had custodial custody of the ten year old child most of the child’s life.  During that time the mother has chosen to home school her  daughter from the first grade.  There is clear evidence that the child is thriving in the home school environment.  The father is bringing up the common myth that home school children are less appropriately socialized than those in public school.  The child is academically advanced and  is “generally likeable and well liked, social and interactive with her peers, academically promising and intellectually at or superior to grade level.”   The child’s father brought up the same issue in 2006 but lost in court. 

The mother has gone as far as enrolling the child in three public school courses as a means of enriching the child’s education in an attempt to be considerate of the fathers wishes. 

The court itself stated that there would be only one reason to make such a decision.  That would be if there was evidence of harm being done to the child through the mothers actions.  The just isn’t any evidence that the mother is unfit.  The court then is without justification for it’s decision. 

The fact that the father brought up the issue in 2006 and lost causes the court to be actually unable to take up the matter of home schooling under the principle of Issue Preclusion.  Attorney Simmons correctly brings to consideration the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.  Under those amendments the mother has the right to make decisions regarding the schooling and religious training of her child. 

The court in suggesting that the child should be exposed to other points of view demonstrates a certain hostility to religion not permitted to the court.  Most certainly the court is prohibited from demonstrating hostility to the religious views of the mother and daughter under the United States Constitution.  The court does not find that there is any harm being done do the child through the mother’s efforts on the child’s behalf.  That does not allow the court to modify the present parenting aggreement that stands related to the child.  Simply put the court simply stepped outside it’s constitutional bounds in arbitrarily modifying the binding parental agreement. 

Attorney Simmons rightly contends that the court created its own definition of education out of whole cloth:

 

“…the Court is guided by the premise that education is by its nature an exploration and examination of new things, and by the premise that a child requires academic, social, cultural, and physical interaction with a variety of experiences, people, concepts, and surroundings in order to grow to an adult who can make intelligent decisions about how to achieve a productive and satisfying life.”

The court also simply throws out the state of New Hampshire code regarding what comprises a home school.  I have personally been in the courtroom here in Texas when a judge simply threw aside state statutes regarding Texas Home School Law at his whim.  It happens.  New Hampshire law states:

 “Instruction shall be deemed home education if it consists of instruction in science, mathematics, language, government, history, health, reading, writing, spelling, the history of the constitutions of New Hampshire and the United States, and an exposure to and appreciation of art and music. Home education shall be provided by a parent for his own child, unless the provider is as otherwise agreed upon by the appropriate parties…..”The mother in this case is meeting and exceeding the requirements of New Hampshire law.  In fact, according to the motion the father does not contest this idea.  His whole problem is with his opinion that the child is not being properly socialized.  The court itself already admitted that the child is well socialized before it made it’s ruling.  The fact that the mother has attempted to address the fathers concern isn’t being contested in this case.  Yet the court has seen fit to remove the child from her home school environment and so place her in a public school environment.  There is also no evidence provided by the court in why the public school would be a better environment for the socialization of the child.  The court also did not offer any other alternative other than removing the child from a wholesome environment to one that at the very least has no evidence to support it’s superiority. 

 

The court seems to have adopted a bias against the religious beliefs of the mother and daughter. 

.it would be remarkable if a ten year old child who spends her school “ . .time with her mother and the vast majority of all her other time with her mother would seriously consider adopting any other religious point of view. Amanda’s vigorous defense of her religious beliefs to the counselors suggests strongly that she has not had the opportunity to seriously consider any other points of view.”

What the court has done at this point is jump to the conclusion that because the child has a Christian viewpoint there is a problem that must be solved.  No other conclusion can be reached.  The court has a problem with the fact that the child is a Christian.  Can anyone in their wildest dreams imagine what would happen if this child were to be translated into a male Muslim child ordered to be removed from his Muslim school because the court felt that being a Muslim is a problem that requires a solution.  The resulting outrage would be unimaginable. 

The childs father, in fact, took her to church until she was aged seven years.  At that time he stopped because as he testified it was having an “effect on her and she had started believing this stuff.”  So, the mothers actions are completely consistent with the fathers previous actions with his daughter.  

The mother also testified under oath that the daughter has been exposed to other religious traditions including evolution and creation information.   The mother, however, has a constitutional right to rear her child in her religions tradition as the custodial parent.

The state of New Hampshire representative interviewing the mother has shown an outrageous bias against Christianity.  The representative refused to interview the individuals supplied as references to her.  And the representative actually crossed off references if they were Christians according to the Attorney’s motion to the court.

When the mother supplied the state representative with research about home schooling the person actually said according to the motion I don’t want to hear it.  It’s all Christian based.   This flagrant hostility toward Christianity should not be tolerated by the court as the court deems itself to operate under the United States Constitution.  That statement is outrageous beyond all tolerance.  Then the court actually agreed with it seemingly taking sides against the mother and daughters Christian belief system.  I find it almost impossible to draw any other conclusion.  The state representative then told the mother “if I want her in school then she will be in school”. 

No where in the United States of America should such an attitude on the part of public representative be tolerated.  That statement shows a bias against Christianity on the part of the state as this is the states representative that is without any doubt what so ever.  This kind of bias and outright hostility should have been thown to the gutter by the court.  Yet the court accepted it. 

As a result of these arguments Attorney Simmons has correctly filed a motion to stay the order of the court.  I congratulate him on his fine work on the behalf of this client.  This attorney obviously elegantly understands the constitution of the United States.  The court however seems to know little to nothing about it. 

I am going to continue to watch this case as it moves forward.  This has the potential to be a watershed case in the rights of parents to determine the education, socialization track, and religious training of their own children in opposition to the opinion of the state. 

This case should also be of great concern any parent of any child, any caregiver, any child advocate or anyone interested in the welfare of children in the United States of America.  The statists of our country want to control our every move.  They want government to have the last say in most aspects of our lives but particularly in how our children are raised and socialized.  The statist philosophy is that they children should be raised to be compliant citizens of the country who are easy to manage.  Modern education was established by the large industrialists of the late 1800’s and early 1900’s as a way to gain a compliant easily manageable workforce. 

The decision of this court follows that exact path.  The state knows best what to do with our children.  If you are in any way concerned with the fate of the children in the United States get on the train now. In fact, run because the statist train has already pulled out of the station. 

 

 

Home school student sent to school for religious beliefs

My last post seemed to be a bit prophetic concerning the legal system, school bias against homeschooling and coertion.  Today I came across this remarkable headline “New Hampshire Court orders Home School Child into Government Run School”.  More shocking to me was this statement “her religious beliefs are a bit too sincerely held and must be sifted, tested by, and mixed among other worldviews”.  Then we have this remarkable statement:

In the process of renegotiating the terms of a parenting plan for the girl, the guardian ad litem involved in the case concluded, according to the court order, that the girl “appeared to reflect her mother’s rigidity on questions of faith” and that the girl’s interests “would be best served by exposure to a public school setting” and “different points of view at a time when she must begin to critically evaluate multiple systems of belief…in order to select, as a young adult, which of those systems will best suit her own needs.”

The child is from a family in which the parents are divorced.   This came in the process of renegotiating the terms of the divorce related to the child.  But, this event which has not made national news coverage should be frightening to all parents not just home schooling parents.  You should be frightened by this because this is exactly what many statists believe about parental rights.  There aren’t any parental rights. 

In this event an entity of the government has essentially said that a child’s right to freedom of religion has been trumped by the social concerns of liberal society that wants every child exposed to as many world views as possible.  Also, the government holds that every world view is equivalent to every other world view.  This is right out of the United Nations Rights of the Child treaty that argues that children have the right to defy their parents in selecting the view of God and religious practices as children.  Their parents have no rights in teaching their children their religious views that are part of their family and their heritage. 

This court has gone too far.  The court even admits that the child is doing extremely well in her home schooled environment. 

Although the marital master making recommendations to the court agreed the child is “well liked, social and interactive with her peers, academically promising, and intellectually at or superior to grade level” and that “it is clear that the home schooling…has more than kept up with the academic requirements of the…public school system,” he nonetheless proposed that the Christian girl be ordered into a government-run school after considering “the impact of [her religious] beliefs on her interaction with others.”  The court approved the order.

So here we have a child who is well-adjusted, academically successful, on grade level and in every other way appears to be a healthy well developed child.  But, that isn’t enough for the state.  In this case a “marital master” – a person – has unilaterally decided that this child’s constitutional right to freedom to practice her religious beliefs is trumped by the statist philosophy that children should be exposed to every belief system in order to be able to make a choice.  The marital master has unilaterally decided that they child living in a world where everything that happens is instantly broadcast to everyone has not been exposed to enough alternate viewpoints.  So, the conclusion was reached that the only way for this child to be acceptably socialized in the government viewpoint was for the child to be placed in a government school. 

Are you disturbed yet? 

Then lets look a little further into the opinion of the marital master:

Marital Master Michael Garner reasoned that the girl’s “vigorous defense of her religious beliefs to [her] counselor suggests strongly that she has not had the opportunity to seriously consider any other point of view” and then recommended that the girl be ordered to enroll in a government school instead of being home-schooled.  Judge Lucinda V. Sadler approved the recommendation and issued the order on July 14.

Still believe the government thinks our children belong to you?  Mr. Garners reasoning goes something like this.  The child made a vigorous argument defending her beliefs.  So, rather than conclude that the child has thought out her belief system in a rigorous way, he makes the startling conclusion that the child must not have been “exposed” to enough varying religious, cultural or social systems and philosophies.  Using the same reasoning I can say to you that your argument to me that there is a God simply says that you are an uninformed dolt.  So obviously you must be “exposed” to the state’s idea of whether or not there is a God.  I could also say to you that your argument that you have an inherant God given right to raise your child is held only because you have been in an insular environment in which you were not exposed to enough other statist ideas about who really should be in charge of raising your child. 

Frightened yet.  We live in political times in which many, many people believe in the supremacy of the state in making decisions about almost every aspect of your life.  We live in times when the government is gaining more and more power to tell you, an American citizen, a free agent, that you are, in fact, not wise enough to raise your own child.  In my opinion this decision is a landmark legal decision that every parent, home schooler or not, should be absolutely horrified to see. 

There is no legal basis for the court’s decision.  This is a decision made on the basis of the recommendation of a New Hampshire state beaurocrat.  The court’s decision was apparently made on the basis of the opinion of one person who has a particular world view.  Even the New Hampshire Supreme Court holds that home schooling is an inherant part of the American experience.

“The New Hampshire Supreme Court itself has specifically declared, ‘Home education is an enduring American tradition and right…,’” said ADF Senior Legal Counsel Mike Johnson.  “There is clearly and without question no legitimate legal basis for the court’s decision, and we trust it will reconsider its conclusions.”

These are perilous times.  These are times when every home schooling family and every family who believes that parents have a God-given right to raise your children in the faith traditions of their family.  Remain vigilant, remain alarmed, and be alert to any abuse of someone else’s rights.  They may be coming for you next.  You must get up every morning and think how can I advance the cause that I believe in. 

Homeschool law, judges, administrators and bias

You have days like this from time to time.  Sitting with several people eating lunch today, I over heard a conversation between a school administrator and a former school administrator now retired.  The school administrator was talking about a kid who had just withdrawn to home school.  This person made a derogatory remark about homeschooling in general because he suspected, perhaps rightly, that the parents would not do enough to home school their child correctly.  The phrase he used was something like it’s a load of garbage.  The retired administrator jumped into the conversation.

“I’d file on em”, he said.  “Even if they were homeschooling, I’d file on em”.  So this gentleman would file on home schooling parents who are operating within school law for taking their child out of school.  A direct violation of home school law in the state of Texas.  Of course, he doesn’t care because of his bias against home schooling.  To him home schooling is as he said “Judge Judy School”  meaning that all the kids will do is watch television.  I was grossly offended by the general ignorance of this statement and the general disregard for the law.  But it isn’t uncommon.  Many, many school administrators feel this way. 

On another front. A few months ago I accompanied a young man into court in an attempt to add support to his cause.   This boy had started home schooling.  His parent had fulfilled all the requirements of the state of Texas.  During the hearing the judges administrative assistant told all of us who were with the young man that this particular judge did not allow home schooling in his court.  So, this judge, who has a strong reputation of backing schools, simply through out state law.  By his personal policy he overturned the entire Texas State legislature with one sweep of his all powerful hand. 

You get the point.  Here is my advice as a home school consultant.  Never enter into a meeting with a school administrator without having the law in your hand so that you can physically point out the law to the administrator.  Otherwise you are likely to be at the mercy of the whim of a person who does not know the law or just doesn’t care.  If you are dealing with a court I cannot advise you strongly enough to visit the court with a lawyer who understands and is sympathetic to home school law.  Remember that judges have all the cards.  If you are in the hands of an ignorant judge or, worse, one who just doesn’t care about the law you have to have a lawyer.  Otherwise, you roll the dice. 

The bias in the organizational makeup of schools is natural and expected.  Any entity has an imperative to protect itself.  That is to be expected.  So wisdom would dictate to go into any situation with that assumption firmly in your mind. 

Home schooling and independent learning is becoming more and more accepted.  In fact, in some states the number of home schooled kids are close to overtaking the number of kids still in the public system. 

The principle at work here that must be defended is to maintain our rights as parents against the claims of the state on our children.  Laws are being proposed all the time that would eat away at parental rights to raise your children as you see fit.  Also important in this process is to firmly address the myth that home schooling can be a form of child abuse.  I do have one caveat.  Home schoolers must not defend parents who are conducting sham home schools.  The attitude of the administrators and the judge does have some grounding in reality.  There are parents who put out minimal effort to be sure their children receive a first class education.  The universal fact is that the one case of abuse on the part of a home schooler is the one that will get the media coverage.  We who believe in this movement must, absolutely must, see to it that somehow the best examples are publicized.  For every example of a family who barricade themselves away while failing to educate their children we must present a dozen examples of families that do the job really well.

When I first heard the exchange I am reporting I immediately became angry.  But, having acquired a fair set of battle scars in the past few years I kept my mouth shut realizing that they are also working from a perspective that really is looking out for the kids.  They just don’t understand what the benefits are as well as how effective home schooling is.  They have also seen the abuses that do occur. 

If we are to maintain our right to educate our children in our own chosen way, we must bring to the front examples of success to counter act the obvious failures.  We have all seen the abuses.  These are the cases that get the media coverage as well as gaining mythical status. 

But in the meantime go into situations involving school administrations and courts armed to the teeth with knowledge and a competent lawyer who understands home school law. 

If you have not done so already join HSLDA.  The Home School Legal Defense Association is the flagship of the home school line of defense.  Here is the stated mission of the HSLDA from their website:

To preserve and advance the fundamental, God-given, constitutional right of parents and others legally responsible for their children to direct their education. In so doing, we rely on two fundamental freedoms—parental rights and religious freedom. We advocate for these freedoms in the courtrooms, before government officials, and in the public arena. Additionally, we assist other educational organizations in similar activities, where possible and appropriate.

Since 1983, Home School Legal Defense Association’s primary goal has remained the same—to bring together a large number of homeschooling families so that each can have a low-cost method of obtaining quality legal defense. HSLDA gives families the freedom to home school without facing legal threats alone. Through many families sticking together, we have been able to keep the cost of a year’s membership close to the rate that you would have to pay for an hour of an attorney’s time almost anywhere else.

After a family joins HSLDA, there are no further charges of any kind for defending them in court. HSLDA pays in full all attorney fees, expert witness costs, travel expenses, and all other court costs permissible by state law for us to pay.

The vast majority of contacts member families face are successfully resolved through our early intervention without any court action. Many times, HSLDA attorneys call or write letters on behalf of members contacted by local officials. For those who wind up in court, HSLDA provides full representation at every stage of legal proceedings.

HSLDA’s board of directors also operates the Home School Foundation—a nonprofit, tax-exempt organization that supports HSLDA, other like-minded organizations, and special programs such as the Special Needs Children’s Fund.

digital photography, home school, and learning

Parents are always concerned about how to motivate kids with new and unique ways to encourage learning.  The way to their hearts if often through their technology or technology in general.  Digital photography whether it is with a digital phone or a digital camera is a way to get them hooked into a subject using technology.  There is nothing that can’t be made more interesting through the use of photography. 

Our children are certainly members of the technology generation.  The first time I truly felt old was the day I took a phonograph record to school when we were working on sound.  I was really surprised to realize that there were children in the room who had not seen a photograph record.  After I thought about it a while I realized that my seventh graders have always had compact discs.  They have never lived without cell phones.  Most have never had to “dial” a telephone.  Instead they push buttons.  In some cases they simply tell the phone to “call mom”. 

The digital camera provides another way to encourage kids to process information.  Let’s say you are working on sequencing steps in a process.  In the old days you might have the kids list the steps in some process like baking a cake.  That’s ok.  It might even interest some kids.  But the truth is that writing the steps down just might pose a problem with motivation.  But more important a pencil and paper project might not provide the deep processing that we all need in order to completely learn what we need to know. 

You do the same things.  Have the kids carefully read the recipe.  Then gather the materials.  Get everything lined out to do the recipe.  Now is where the process will change radically.  Instead of writing down the steps or recording on paper what is done the child will photograph each step.  An important thing is to encourage your child to set up the lesson just as if he or she were photographing it for Food Network. 

Your child will be motivated, by the technology, to think very carefully about what must come first, second, third and so on.  If it were me I would have the child plan the steps on a computer rather than on paper.  This will allow the child to cut and paste later as they get ready to present their “sequencing” exercise. 

Have the child set up the first step.  You might be the “assistant photographer”.  Perhaps the child would rather use a tripod and use the the cameras time delay system to maintain complete control.  Set up and take the first photograph.  Continue this process until the child is finished with the cake right down to icing it, cutting it and serving it. 

Download the pictures into the computer.  Then use some kind of presentation program such as PowerPoint or the Google Docs application to design a step by step presentation.  The student will then type steps to explain the slides with photographs or perhaps make a movie using an application like Movie Maker which is found with windows. 

Lets say that you are working on a science project involving leaf types.  Often kids are asked to draw the shapes, label them, make cards to drill the types of leaves and try to learn in that way.  Good enough.  But there is a better way.  Make a list of the various leaf types.  Check a guidebook for your area out of the library.  Then take the camera to a local public park to photograph all the leaf types that can be found.  Photograph everything.  Photography even avoids touching the infamous poison ivy or poison oak but still getting examples of their leaf types.  Bring home your samples in digital form.  Down load them to the computer.  Your budding scientist will then use a presentation program or perhaps a word processing program to create a booklet of leaf forms as the completion of the assignment. 

Today I tweeted a hint to encourage parents who were trying to teach their children angles to take your child out with a camera to photograph as many acute, obtuse and right angles as they can find.  These can be presented in any way imaginable. 

Collect pictures of various types of animals at the zoo.  Perhaps the student is working to learn the different phyla of animals.  Off to the zoo you go with the camera to photograph animals you would never have a chance to see in any other way. 

There is no limit to what can be done with a digital camera and imagination.  Any subject—-I repeat —- any subject can be aided with the use of digital photography as a way to motivate you child with a subject. 

In the near future, I will be working with projects involving digital video.  Video may actually be more appealing to your child.  Anything you can do with a camera, you can do with a digital video camera.  You can for instance compile a tour of the historical sites around your city.   Any child could take that recipe idea making a Food Network style show.  Any process can be demonstrated from the steps of a recipe to how to assemble any kind of craft project.  Want to get a child hooked on writing?  Have the child write a script for a digital video program on some subject of interest to the child. 

A few years ago a brilliant teacher had students in the Appalachian Mountains collect information on the “old ways” of their grandparents.  They interviewed each of the elders.  Then they took the interview material to school. There they wrote books that were actually published. 

Can you imagine what you could do with your family history if you had your child do a genealogy project, or grandmothers recipes, or grandfathers hobbies.  Can you imagine how valuable it will be to you to have video taped interviews with all the elders in the family.  Trust me on this nothing will be more valuable in the future as a video record of what has gone before in your family tree.  You will one day be glad you had your child do the project. 

Look for more on this subject in the coming days.  I have also written a small booklet on this subject —  teaching with digital photography —  which will be available here on this site soon.

Home School encourages independence in learning and life

Imagine raising a child who is so independent that he not only graduates early from high school but then proceeds to do something almost no one else has done — sail around the world alone.  And, become the youngest person in the history of the world to sucessfully complete the journey.  Such a young man is Zac Sunderland.   There have been so many times in my career as a teacher when I looked out across a group of students sitting passively in their desks then asked myself “what could these young men and women be doing if they were not locked up here”? 

Young men and young women are capable of so much more than most people believe.  They are capable of running businesses.   Many are quite capable of making fully responsible decisions for themselves.  Most are extremely motivated to succeed when they are given the chance to work on those things which are their natural gifts.  Young people are completely capable of regulating their own habits if they have been allowed to grow up.  America now delays any opportunity for young men and women to grow up independently.  Instead we now regulate their comings and goings as if they are cattle. 

Thank God, there are young men and women like Zac Sunderland who have been given the opportunity to develop into an independent, fully developed person at an appropriate age.  Thank God also, that he had parents who provided him with the disciplinary training and sense of purpose needed to succeed independently.  A book could be written about successfully rearing kids like Zac.  I hope that his parents will write that book.  American parents and American schools need it desperately. 

Zac was home schooled online.  He is a shining example of what can be done with technology in this modern age if it is used properly.  Zac has a high school diploma as well as a great education.  But most importantly incombination with the incredible example of his parents he developed what the vast majority of young Americans will not develop —- independence, personal self-discipline, along with the knowledge that he can accomplish what he sets out to do.  His parents also appear to have instilled in Zac and his siblings a strong faith foundation. 

Zac is living proof that young people are capable of far more than we believe.  They can, in fact, follow successfully that which they see as their own destiny.  They do not have to be policed every minute of their lives.  Their time doesn’t have to be divided up into descreet 50 to 90 minute intervals designed around a completely artificial schedule of learning.  They do not have to be harrassed about their hair cuts, their shirt tails, the color of their clothing.  They are trustworthy to go to the bathroom when they need to go.  They are quite capable of going from one location to another in a building without being supervised. 

The reason so many young people have so much trouble is because their natural development into competent adults has been delayed artificially to fit factory schooling modes.  They have not been given opportunities or instructions in how to be adults.  We have kept them as infants because of our fear of them and our over-supervision of them.  Some will argue that Zac and kids like him are not the norm.  I will differ.  I think that Zac is the norm for 17 year olds in this country.  He is a properly developed young man.  I emphasize the term man.  He has been given the opportunity to develop according to the schedule God set forth for him.  As he acquired the ability to accept more responsibility his parents appear to have granted it to him until when he desired to attempt his circumnavigation of the world his parents drew a deep breath, said a prayer for their beloved son and said yes. 

Zac is part of a fortunate generation of kids whose parents chose to forgo government factory schooling to let their children develop with independence along the course of their own developmental schedule.  These are people who are themselves independent thinkers.  They are more likely to rely on themselves as well as challenge themselves to do better throughout their lives.  These are the independent, fully functioning people who have learned of the personal power with which they were endowed by God.  Their children are able to do what the government would tell them is not possible or advisable.  They make their own decisions without government hand holding.  They are complete adults who are able to run their lives successfully.  And, they rear children who become fully functional, literate and educated adults. 

Zac Sunderland’s website is located here.  Then look at your own kids.  Look at them with new eyes whether they are currently home schoolers or in public or private schools.  Think about what could be.  And then go accomplish it.

Here is the youtube video of the interviews and expressions of faith from Zac’s father and family upon his arrival home.

Home Visitations in the Health Care Bill Threaten Parental Rights

Why you might ask would I be concerned about HR 3200 which is the commonly known National Health Care Bill and it’s possible impact on home schooling families as well as other independent learning families.  Section 440 of the bill starting on page 837 is entitled HOME VISITATION PROGRAMS FOR FAMILIES WITH YOUNG CHILDREN AND FAMILIES EXPECTING CHILDREN.  This is a grant program designed to improve the well being, health and development of young children and expectant mothers.  To get these funds the states will have to identify and prioritize serving communities that are in high need of such services, especially communities with a high proportion of low-income families or a high incidence of child maltreatment.  Wouldn’t you love to have your community defined by the Federal Government in that way. 

These programs will provide referrals to other services as deemed appropriate by the inspectors doing the home visitations.  The following information represents the main points the government intends to accomplish through home visits within these defined communities.  The bill would provide parents with knowledge of  “age-appropriate child developmental, cognitive, language, social, emotional and motor domains.”   This would include how well second language learners are acquiring skills in the English language.  Further the bill would provide parents and prospective parents “realistic knowledge of age-appropriate expectations of behavior.”   Further, parents and prospective parents would be schooled in wellness issues.   Translate into the federal government deciding if your child is overweight, underweight, fed the proper diet and whether you are providing your child with government approved health care.  

I almost strangled with laughter when you consider the thousands of persons needed to bring about this training and the practicality of teaching those who have been defined by the government as financially poor or abusive parents.  Can you imagine the people who will be showing up in your house to do the following things.   “Modeling, consulting, and coaching will be provided on parenting practices”.  These practices will be intended to provide parents with the skills to interact in age-appropriate ways with their children.  The parents will be given help so they will be properly trained to identify issues related to the health, developmental delays, and social, emotional, and behavioral skills of their children.  And above all parents will be given “activities designed to help parents become full partners in the education of their children.”   So, in addition, to everything else the government wants to control we now will have government employees who will be judging whether or not your parenting comes up to federal government standards.  The founding fathers have to bouncing up and down in their graves not just spinning.  I try to envision in my own mind the people who must have been sitting around desks with premium coffee deciding that the government just has to help all we ignorant, helpless citizens out here to learn how to raise our children the government way. 

So envision for a moment the millions upon millions of families who will fall into these vague categories.  Then try to bring to mind the size of a bureaucracy that will have to be put into place to carry out even the smallest part of this provision of the bill.   Further, imagine being one of the families deemed inferior who have to open their doors to government “consultants” who by federal law are going to model and coach parents in appropriate parenting practices.  I am just sure that the government is going to provide us with the very best parental role models for these modeling and coaching sessions.  Ah, in fact, they promise to do so.  Later in the bill we find this; the government will “employ well-trained and competent staff, maintain high quality supervision, provide for ongoing training and professional development, and show strong organizational capacity to implement such a program”.  Can you just dream the size of the government agency that will try to bring this to pass.  I should note that different qualifications exist for Indian tribes.  Bless their hearts we’ve done enough to Indian tribes already.

So what is the problem with the state being able to develop a nation wide program of home visitations to a qualified class of inferior families.  First, the bill does not define anything about what really qualifies such a family as poor or abusive.  What are the income levels that will be the trigger points?  How will income levels be determined?  But more worrisome is what will constitute abuse?  Will it be whether or not you choose to send your children to school?  Don’t doubt for one moment that home schooling will likely be in the crosshairs of the federal government. 

In other countries with similarly socialistic tendencies home schoolers have been defined as abusers of children.  The simple act of not wanting to expose your children to the inferior educational programs in schools has become a criminal act in Germany.  Families are being openly prosecuted there for simply wanting to providean excellent home education for their own God given children.  So people who are devoted and interested enough to provide the best education they can for their children in the safety and love of the home environment are criminals against the state.  Every day during the school year in America somewhere a school district tries to prosecute home school families under truancy laws.  In my opinion, if you believe this cannot here, you are deluding yourself.

Do you now have any doubt what is happening here.  The “State” is taking further control of children in defiance of the natural rights of families to raise their children as they see fit.  The “State” is saying to you and I that we are not able to raise our own children in a developmentally healthy way without help from the “State”.  We are inferior to the “State”.  There is an extremely great risk here.  Specifically, Americans are in danger of seeing a slow but sure erosion of the sanctity of home and family.   I would wager that most people have not idea that these ideas are part of this horrifying bill.

If the United States government is successful in passing legislation that wrenches more control of the children of our country from their parents we are further along the road to complete government control.  Call me paranoid, so be it. A families home must remain it’s castle without governmental control other than existing laws that already cover child abuse and maltreatment.  Be vigilant America.

Home schooling parents need to oppose this bill because they are very likely to be defined as bad parents because they do not want to subject their children to the joys of government schooling.  Your basic parental rights are under direct assault in this bill.  The Health Care bill would give the government control of our families that has nothing to do with the general health of American.  This is simply making an institution of the governments desire to control more and more aspects of our lives. This bill does have an underlying purpose.  Simply put, HR 3200 America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 is a Trojan Horse. 

This bill has become a poorly disguised attempt to remake the way of life of American families in the image the govenment sees as ideal.  Can you imagine the attitude it’s implementation will take toward independent learners and home schooling families?

 

 

Why worry, your kids belong to you right?

Those of us who are involved in parenting, any kind of  childcare, education or any other endeavor involving kids need to be concerned about events inside our borders and outside.  In the United States and, I believe, throughout the world parents believe they are the people to whom their kids belong.  Kids belong to their parents not as property but as precious and loved developing children.  Parents believe they are responsible for the proper development, training, and well-being of their kids.  We believe that children are a gift directly from God given to parents for proper care and rearing. 

There are a number of things happening in this country and outside the country that parents need to watch closely.  The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child includes a number of provisions that threaten the family.  In Germany home school families are being increasing persecuted.  And we now see this in Great Britain.  Government encroachment on the rights of the family are reaching new heights.  Consider this possible agreement parents may be told to sign in the fall of this school year in Great Britain. 

I/We undertake to

• Ensure that my child attends school regularly and that absences are properly notified.
• Ensure that my child arrives and where appropriate is collected promptly at the beginning and the end of the school day. 
• Support the school’s policies and guidelines on behavior and equal opportunities.
• Support my child in his/her homework and wherever possible promote opportunities for home learning.
• Ensure that my child goes to bed at a reasonable time on weekdays.
• Attend Parents’ Evenings and discussions about my child’s progress at school. 

On the face of it the aggrement in itself may seem not so threatening.  But look a bit deeper.  According to a Mail Online article http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1201452/Parents-forced-sign-school-contacts-ensure-children-behave.html parents are going to be encouraged to rat out others who they think may not be fulfilling the contract.  There will be a fine of 1000 pounds or a jail term if they violate the agreement.  In the past any agreements between the home and the school have been informal. 

Ed Balls the Schools Secretary indicated that these agreements will become law in the fall.  If the principal of the school thinks the agreement has been breached in any sense charges can be brought.  Parents who fail to sign the agreement can be hauled into court as well.  Mr. Balls says that “those who refuse to cooperate face being made to give up their homes – though they are still likely to be re-housed elsewhere.”  There will be “family intervention” programs where the families will receive 24 hour supervision making sure that all aspects of the agreements are enforced. 

This program is aimed at two things.  First, there is a perception of failing achievement in England just as there is in the United States.  Second, the government is aiming this shotgun approach at misbehaving juveniles and their families. 

But, there is something much more disturbing in this government attitude.  What the government is saying seems to be your children are not yours.  Your kids belong to the state.  The entity which owns the property can take it back from a property holder.  This reduces children to the level of chattel or property not linked by any special spiritual connection to the parents.  The parents are reduced to care takers for the property of the government.  As long as the government says when and where your children must show up, how much sleep they have to get along with a government enforced bedtime, a command that parents support all school policies whether they agree with them or not, and then places demands on free adults regarding attendance on Parents Evenings, then the government thinks it owns and has superior authority over your kids. 

Of course, this is not happening without a fight.  The group Parents Outloud has complained particularly about the idea of parents snooping on each other.  Margaret Morrissey a leader in the group finds the idea of parents “reporting on other children despicable”. 

The principle that is so important here is whether your kids are given to you by God to love and raise or do your kids belong to the government which essentially loans them to you.  What lies at stake here for the British people is the all-powerful spiritual, moral and ethical connection between the parent and the child.  When a government begins to enter the family then there is great danger of unbridled, increasing state control of the most basic of human rights. 

Don’t think it can happen here.  In the next entry I will deal with part of the UNICEF Convention on the Rights of the Child.  What an innocuous title that hides principles that would turn the relationship of the family to the kids in a family on it’s head.  There is a huge movement in certain political circles for us to sign and ratify this treaty.

These issues are at the heart of the right of an individual to make a decision to learn in a group environment or independently whether at ones home or in another environment.  We as individuals are the causal agents of government, not the other way round.

Until next time.