Sweden Moves to Ban Homeschooling for Religious or Philosophical Reasons

[mkingdomlvr]

One thing I learned from my homeschooling cousin-the homeschooling community is VERY sensitive to anything that closely resembles criticism. She said she was shocked at how the simplest comment could ignite a firestorm in her homeschooling forum-and yes, she did know of parents who she felt had no business teaching based on the barely understandable posts they wrote and the limited understanding of subjects they presented during discussions of curriculum. Corrections to those folks were met with extreme hostility, no matter how gently they were presented.

I’m sure those folks are in the minority, as are the problem teachers in the school systems but that doesn’t mean that innocent children should suffer. Just as I believe that a public school system should be able to get rid of teachers who can’t teach, the state should be able to intervene when a parent can’t teach.

As for Sweden, I don’t like what they’re doing. I think parents should be allowed to homeschool for religious and philosophical reasons, as long as the child is going to get an equal quality education in other subjects that they would receive in the public school.

 

[WillieWonka]

The news article linked was about Swenden wanting to ban homeschooling for religious and philosophical reasons. It was not about illiteracy. The words “ban homeschooling” stand out to me, (maybe that’s because I can read.) Would you post those remarks repeatedly if someone started a thread about banning school teachers from educating children?

I agree the article mentioned religious and philosophical motivations for home schooling. Is it posible to have religious motivations and be incompetent to teach?

I acknowledge you can read.

If someone started a thread about school teachers, I would feel free to post about the need to keep illiterates, drunks, and dopers out of the classroom.

But, how about using “sexual abuse of minors,” “incompetence,” and “school teachers” in the same sentence?

 

[Mimi]

When parents are unqualified or omit certain subjects, kids are being denied the right to an education that will allow them to live comfortably in society. I give priority to the kid over the parent.

So…that gives Someone (i.e., the state) the right to take away the child? This has happened, in the early years of homeschooling when many states had no laws on the books.

Being a homeschool veteran (3 boys; one attended public high school) I had to weigh in here.

One’s right to parent and raise their children as they see fit is something I feel very strongly about.

1. The State does not own your children, they belong to GOD first, parents 2nd.
2. Children are born eager to learn; one does not need to know everything in order to be a home educator. Many children’s creativity is squashed early on as a result of regimentation and being tracked, regulated.
3. The government school cannot and will not guarantee that your child will graduate being able to do anything to a certain degree of proficiency, even reading. Plenty of students bluff their way through; some end up in special ed classes, even though they are bright.

Having said all that, I know there are some folks who are just not capable of being with their children and knowing how to treat them right, much less get them educated. Mostly, these folks end up with their kids back in school.

I have also read of cases (by way of John Holt) about kids who seemed to be in dismal circumstances, but coped v well; like in a case where the mom couldn’t read. One can never discount a person’s desire to learn and will to succeed.

An important question that is difficult to answer is: What does it mean to be well-educated?

Perhaps it is better for one to be satisfied and happy in one’s life and be slightly under-educated (my definition: not schooled to the greatest of one’s mental capacity).

Children (and most people I’d venture to aver) are capable of teaching themselves quite a lot. Think of when computers were a rare thing to own; there were no classes to take at first. People learned from their friend, or just dug in, read a few manuals, or learned programming, and did it! That’s how Bill Gates got his start.

I’ll check back later. Brain needs sleep… 'nighty night and God bless,
Mimi

PS Isn’t it odd that one gets no History of Schooling in the US in public school? A great book on that subject, and which is quite detailed is The Underground History of American Education by John Taylor Gatto. You can read it for free online at his web site.

 

[WillieWonka]

So…that gives Someone (i.e., the state) the right to take away the child? This has happened, in the early years of homeschooling when many states had no laws on the books.

Being a homeschool veteran (3 boys; one attended public high school) I had to weigh in here.

One’s right to parent and raise their children as they see fit is something I feel very strongly about.

1. The State does not own your children, they belong to GOD first, parents 2nd.
2. Children are born eager to learn; one does not need to know everything in order to be a home educator. Many children’s creativity is squashed early on as a result of regimentation and being tracked, regulated.
3. The government school cannot and will not guarantee that your child will graduate being able to do anything to a certain degree of proficiency, even reading. Plenty of students bluff their way through; some end up in special ed classes, even though they are bright.

Having said all that, I know there are some folks who are just not capable of being with their children and knowing how to treat them right, much less get them educated. Mostly, these folks end up with their kids back in school.

I have also read of cases (by way of John Holt) about kids who seemed to be in dismal circumstances, but coped v well; like in a case where the mom couldn’t read. One can never discount a person’s desire to learn and will to succeed.

An important question that is difficult to answer is: What does it mean to be well-educated?

Perhaps it is better for one to be satisfied and happy in one’s life and be slightly under-educated (my definition: not schooled to the greatest of one’s mental capacity).

Children (and most people I’d venture to aver) are capable of teaching themselves quite a lot. Think of when computers were a rare thing to own; there were no classes to take at first. People learned from their friend, or just dug in, read a few manuals, or learned programming, and did it! That’s how Bill Gates got his start.

I’ll check back later. Brain needs sleep… 'nighty night and God bless,
Mimi

PS Isn’t it odd that one gets no History of Schooling in the US in public school? A great book on that subject, and which is quite detailed is The Underground History of American Education by John Taylor Gatto. You can read it for free online at his web site.

I agree the state doesn’t own children. Neither do the parents.

I agree the government school cannot and will not guarantee that your child will graduate being able to do anything to a certain degree of proficiency, even reading. That’s why it is so curious to find some home school advocates who think any product of these schools is competent to teach kids.

 

[mpi]

Whose rights are being violated?

Catholic Chatechism says that parent’s are primarily responible for the direction of their children’s education. Are you Catholic? Were you not aware of this fact?

 

[mpi]

One thing I learned from my homeschooling cousin-the homeschooling community is VERY sensitive to anything that closely resembles criticism. She said she was shocked at how the simplest comment could ignite a firestorm in her homeschooling forum-and yes, she did know of parents who she felt had no business teaching based on the barely understandable posts they wrote and the limited understanding of subjects they presented during discussions of curriculum. Corrections to those folks were met with extreme hostility, no matter how gently they were presented.

I’m sure those folks are in the minority, as are the problem teachers in the school systems but that doesn’t mean that innocent children should suffer. Just as I believe that a public school system should be able to get rid of teachers who can’t teach, the state should be able to intervene when a parent can’t teach.

As for Sweden, I don’t like what they’re doing. I think parents should be allowed to homeschool for religious and philosophical reasons, as long as the child is going to get an equal quality education in other subjects that they would receive in the public school.

W.r.t your last paragraph…did you ever think that the goal was to avoid some of the subjects taught in public school? Like sex ed, like accetance of the homosexual lifestyle, etc.

I homeschool and I do not teach my kids what the public school teaches. And I never will.

 

[mpi]

Better to be educated by an illiterate Catholic than a literate athiest.

 

[mpi]

It is reasonable for the state to uphold the legal right of a kid to have an education by preventing incompetent parents from home schooling.

It is not reasonable for the state to “test” the level of competence of a parent. I am glad the laws of my state differ from your values.

 

[WillieWonka]

Catholic Chatechism says that parent’s are primarily responible for the direction of their children’s education. Are you Catholic? Were you not aware of this fact?

Could be. But when the parent abdicates or is incompetent, it is the duty of the state to enforce the kid’s legal right to an education. Doesn’t matter what the religion is. The fact that the Church says the parent is responsible does not mean the parent will meet that responsibility.

 

[WillieWonka]

Better to be educated by an illiterate Catholic than a literate athiest.

Why is that?

 

[mpi]

A child does have a legal right to an education, I agree, but what about parents who are actually fully capable? From what I observe, you seem to only see good in the state, and bad in parents. A child has his/her own right to choose if they want to seek homeschooling or public school, and not be forced under either.

God Bless.

Chris.

I am sorry to say this to a soon to be new Catholic but…I detect a statement profoundly at odds with Catholicism (although it may be unintentional) in your comment. Children have no right to choose how they are educated. The CCC says that parents have that responsibility NOT children.

 

[WillieWonka]

It is not reasonable for the state to “test” the level of competence of a parent. I am glad the laws of my state differ from your values.

Sure it is reasonable. If the parent can’t read, or can’t wake from a drunken stupor, he fails the test. Even if he is Catholic.

I very much doubt your state lacks laws enabling the state to remove kids from the parents if he child is endangered.

 

[WillieWonka]

I am sorry to say this to a soon to be new Catholic but…I detect a statement profoundly at odds with Catholicism (although it may be unintentional) in your comment. Children have no right to choose how they are educated. The CCC says that parents have that responsibility NOT children.

Does the CCC say all Catholic parents will meet that responsibility?

 

[mpi]

Why is that?

Because saving your soul is more important that being able to regurgitate liberal tripe. Many people who are illiterate make a good living. Many college educated athiests can’t understand that.

 

[mpi]

Does the CCC say all Catholic parents will meet that responsibility?

Does the CCC say that the state should redirect a child’s education to meet a government’s education guideline even if the Catholic Church and the parents’ feel that the homeschool education is fine?

 

[WillieWonka]

Because saving your soul is more important that being able to regurgitate liberal tripe. Many people who are illiterate make a good living. Many college educated athiests can’t understand that.

Is being able to read liberal tripe? Perhaps illiterates do make a good living. So what? The state still has a duty to prevent illiterates from passing on their handicap to their kids.

 

[WillieWonka]

Does the CCC say that the state should redirect a child’s education to meet a government’s education guideline even if the Catholic Church and the parents’ feel that the homeschool education is fine?

1. The CCC does not mention that.
2. The state doesn’t care what the CCC says.

 

[marci]

Does the CCC say all Catholic parents will meet that responsibility?

Willie, you need to read up on the rule of Subsidiary and what John Paul II had to say on the matter of government interference in the most basic of human relationships, that of a parent and a child.

Catholic parents are under a grave obligation to ensure that their children are raised up in the faith. It is a part of the covenant of marriage that takes place between a man, a woman and God. The grace attained through the sacramental marriage gives the couple the ability to face the everyday problems the world brings into the marriage, as well as the capacity to direct the physical, mental and spiritual upbringing of their children.

This unit of society is primary and must never be interferred with, or replaced by the state. The state, even the church, exists only to help when help is asked for. Obviously there are extreme cases where interference in necessary, but that does not negate the rule of subsidiary.

BTW, I find your constant depictions and equations of homeschooling parents with “dopers, drunks, abusers, rapists, etc.” to be quite amusing. If you really care to learn anything about homeschooling parents, you will find them to be some of the most caring and devoted parents you’ll ever come accross. One simply doesn’t take on this enormous sacrifice lightly, or without serious and deliberate action.

Another resource for your study is a wonderful book about the history of compulsory schooling in the US by a man named John Taylor Gatto. His has written several books on the subject, being himself a NY city school teacher for over 30 years.

Further research on the matter will lead you to more and more data about the disparity of test scores among homeschooled, public schooled, and private schooled kids. The homeschooled kids are consistantly outperforming their public and private counterparts.

 

[mpi]

Is being able to read liberal tripe? Perhaps illiterates do make a good living. So what? The state still has a duty to prevent illiterates from passing on their handicap to their kids.

Being illiterate is not a true handicap for many people. Again, you seem to be more focused on reading than saving the soul. Has the state shown a definitive one to one relationship between illiterate homeschooling parents and illiterate children? An illiterate parent can still direct the education and delegate reading instruction, if they choose to, to someone else (outside of the state run indoctrination centers).

 

[WillieWonka]

Willie, you need to read up on the rule of Subsidiary and what John Paul II had to say on the matter of government interference in the most basic of human relationships, that of a parent and a child.

Catholic parents are under a grave obligation to ensure that their children are raised up in the faith. It is a part of the covenant of marriage that takes place between a man, a woman and God. The grace attained through the sacramental marriage gives the couple the ability to face the everyday problems the world brings into the marriage, as well as the capacity to direct the physical, mental and spiritual upbringing of their children.

This unit of society is primary and must never be interferred with, or replaced by the state. The state, even the church, exists only to help when help is asked for. Obviously there are extreme cases where interference in necessary, but that does not negate the rule of subsidiary.

BTW, I find your constant depictions and equations of homeschooling parents with “dopers, drunks, abusers, rapists, etc.” to be quite amusing. If you really care to learn anything about homeschooling parents, you will find them to be some of the most caring and devoted parents you’ll ever come accross. One simply doesn’t take on this enormous sacrifice lightly, or without serious and deliberate action.

Another resource for your study is a wonderful book about the history of compulsory schooling in the US by a man named John Taylor Gatto. His has written several books on the subject, being himself a NY city school teacher for over 30 years.

Further research on the matter will lead you to more and more data about the disparity of test scores among homeschooled, public schooled, and private schooled kids. The homeschooled kids are consistantly outperforming their public and private counterparts.

1. The kid’s legal right to an education is not effected by the rule of subsidiarity or the pope. Nor is the state’s duty to enforce that right.
2. Catholic parents are free to raise their kid in the faith.
3. The state will interfere with the family unit if the kid’s right to an education is not being met.
4. Perhaps you could just cite one example where I equate all home schoolers with drunks?
5. Many home schooled kids do very well. That’s no reason to let an incompetent parent deprive some other kid of his legal right to an education.