Sweden Moves to Ban Homeschooling for Religious or Philosophical Reasons

[WillieWonka]

There are ways to make sure a child is getting a good education at home. Required testing, etc, without taking away the parents’ right to oversee it.

And if those tests show a kid is not getting a good education at home, does the state have the duty to step in and provide an education for the kid, even over the objections of the parent who claims to be home schooling?

 

[Ana]

“I think all parents have the right to raise their kids with knowledge in subject areas of their chosing. Now, if someone claimed they were homeschooling, but didn’t teach thier kids to read, they wouldn’t really be homeschooling. They would be lying and that’s wrong.”

In this case, does the state have the duty to step in and provide an education for the kid, even over the objections of the parent who claims to be home schooling?

I don’t know how things run in Sweden, but here in MD it is required to show evidence of regular and thorough instruction 2-3 times per year. No tests for parents, no mandatory tests for students, but they do check to make sure that teaching is happening. I don’t think that is unreasonable. If schooling is not happening, then the child is required to be enrolled in school. That is a farrrrrrr stretch from BANNING homeschooling for religious reasons.

“Kids are going to get educated one way or another. Short of locking them in the basement, that is. When parents rights conflict with the state’s interpretation of what the children should be taught, the presumption should go to the parents. There will be very rare cases where that presumption would be wrong but the overall benefit would be to the children by doing it that way”

 

[1catholic]

I think we could look to existing laws on child protection to see the expected reach of government.

Having every child have a right to a good education is undebatable. However so is the fact that many teachers are just plain stupid/biased/pushovers/mean/lazy…even at good Catholic Schools … There are no problems I see we keeping hsing. You can have standardized testing required to enforce a certain level of learning. Expected…government reach is not always as short as one would hope

 

[WillieWonka]

Suppose there are a few illiterate, drunk, doper, or negligent parents who claim to be home schooling, but are actually doing nothing.

Is it aceptable to sacrifice the education of those kids so other home schooling parents have freedom to do as they please?

What does the Church say about that?

 

[1catholic]

Suppose there are a few illiterate, drunk, doper, or negligent parents who claim to be home schooling, but are actually doing nothing.

Is it aceptable to sacrifice the education of those kids so other home schooling parents have freedom to do as they please?

What does the Church say about that?

The parents are doing wrong. And why would these drunk, illiterate parents be “homeschooling” wouldn’t it be easier for them to ship them to free daycare (ie public school)

And, that said, the government can’t save every child’s education… if these theoretical parent’s are truly determined not to educate their kids…they won’t, and if you have a required testing or required schooling the out come should be the same…accept one leaves space for good parents the other doesnt

 

[WillieWonka]

I don’t know how things run in Sweden, but here in MD it is required to show evidence of regular and thorough instruction 2-3 times per year. No tests for parents, no mandatory tests for students, but they do check to make sure that teaching is happening. I don’t think that is unreasonable. If schooling is not happening, then the child is required to be enrolled in school. That is a farrrrrrr stretch from BANNING homeschooling for religious reasons.

**

 

[WillieWonka]

Having every child have a right to a good education is undebatable. However so is the fact that many teachers are just plain stupid/biased/pushovers/mean/lazy…even at good Catholic Schools … There are no problems I see we keeping hsing. You can have standardized testing required to enforce a certain level of learning. Expected…government reach is not always as short as one would hope

How does one use standardized tests to enforce a certain level of education for home schooled kids? Is it acceptable for the state to prevent home schooling in individual cases where such standardized tests show that level education is consistently not happening?

 

[Ana]

“Rome has spoken, sorry you don’t like it. And if you are not Catholic, you don’t have to accept it.”

The kid has a legal right to an education, and the state doesn’t care what Rome thinks. The kid’s right is not given or taken away by Rome. It doesn’t matter if one is Catholic. That’s how our system works.

I didn’t say that the state cared, I was stating my opinion and thought it important to restate the Catholic position because if you look at address, you’ll see that this is a Catholic website, so her position is not irrelevent,

*“But although an illiterate would have more challenges homeschooling, I do not think it would be impossible depending on the circumstances such as the age of the child (many high school age homeschoolers learn pretty independently), outsourcing opportunities, tutors, etc.” *

 

[WillieWonka]

The parents are doing wrong. And why would these drunk, illiterate parents be “homeschooling” wouldn’t it be easier for them to ship them to free daycare (ie public school)

And, that said, the government can’t save every child’s education… if these theoretical parent’s are truly determined not to educate their kids…they won’t, and if you have a required testing or required schooling the out come should be the same…accept one leaves space for good parents the other doesnt

If the parent is doing wrong, is it acceptable for the state to uphold the kid’s right to an education by preventing the parent from home schooling?

 

[1catholic]

Yes. The state takes away children in abusive situations, I think they can educate them in such situations, but within reason. Other than that, there should be free home-schooling.

 

[WillieWonka]

 

[Ana]

Suppose there are a few illiterate, drunk, doper, or negligent parents who claim to be home schooling, but are actually doing nothing.

Is it aceptable to sacrifice the education of those kids so other home schooling parents have freedom to do as they please?

What does the Church say about that?

Is it acceptable to sacrifice the GOD GIVEN liberties of God fearing, productive, law abiding citizens as a consequence of a minority of drunken parents follies?

Many people drink and drive so many times that they end up losing their license. I am sure if they just stopped giving out licenses and forced everyone to ride a bus by a tested competent driver, everyone would be much safer and no one would be sacrificed in a drunk driving accident. OR we could just renew the prohibition. Why should a couple be able to enjoy a glass of wine with dinner, when there are drunk people inflicting pain on society?

In fact, just speaking of parent’s in general, there are many that are incompetant and end up losing their child/ren to the state. We could just hand over our babies at birth to prevent them from the possibility of being raised by a drunk person. Don’t children have a right to a drunk free parenting life?

 

[WillieWonka]

Is it acceptable to sacrifice the GOD GIVEN liberties of God fearing, productive, law abiding citizens as a consequence of a minority of drunken parents follies?

Many people drink and drive so many times that they end up losing their license. I am sure if they just stopped giving out licenses and forced everyone to ride a bus by a tested competent driver, everyone would be much safer and no one would be sacrificed in a drunk driving accident. OR we could just renew the prohibition. Why should a couple be able to enjoy a glass of wine with dinner, when there are drunk people inflicting pain on society?

In fact, just speaking of parent’s in general, there are many that are incompetant and end up losing their child/ren to the state. We could just hand over our babies at birth to prevent them from the possibility of being raised by a drunk person. Don’t children have a right to a drunk free parenting life?

Do you contend it is acceptable to throw away some kids because other home schooling parents don’t want the state to stop illiterate, drunk, doped, or negligent parents from home schooling?

What does Rome say?

 

[1catholic]

How does one use standardized tests to enforce a certain level of education for home schooled kids? Is it acceptable for the state to prevent home schooling in individual cases where such standardized tests show that level education is consistently not happening?

Yes, just like with abuse. I think not giving children an education is an abuse. Of course they can’t take the kids away or anything like that. First I think they should, if the child is below standards, require parents to have the child check for learning disabilities. If present, they should once again let the parents teach and adjust the testing for the child, checking that the parents are accommodating these needs. If not present, and it truly is the fault of the parents or the stubbornness of the student they should ask the parents to choose a school for their child. The government should not then force the kids into a specific school. I think they should accommodate parents with the teaching at home, if testing will ensue. They should make the form and the subjects of the test known long before the program is instated.

 

[Ana]

Ana;5578917:

Can you tell us how an illiterate teaches a kid to read? Can an illiterate teach a kid to read? Do illiterate home schooling parents succeed at teaching kids to read?

I think you are proving the point that the ability to read means nothing if there are no comprehension skills.

I repeat: “But although an illiterate would have more challenges homeschooling, I do not think it would be impossible depending on the circumstances such as the age of the child (many high school age homeschoolers learn pretty independently), outsourcing opportunities, tutors, etc.”

Does reasonable regulation include preventing a parent from home schooling if the parent is not providing the kid an education because the parent is illiterate, drunk, doped, or negligent?

I repeat: " … but here in MD it is required to show evidence of regular and thorough instruction 2-3 times per year. No tests for parents, no mandatory tests for students, but they do check to make sure that teaching is happening. I don’t think that is unreasonable. If schooling is not happening, then the child is required to be enrolled in school. That is a farrrrrrr stretch from BANNING homeschooling for religious reasons.

(bolding added to aid in comprehension)

 

[WillieWonka]

WillieWonka;5578948:

I think you are proving the point that the ability to read means nothing if there are no comprehension skills.

I repeat: “But although an illiterate would have more challenges homeschooling, I do not think it would be impossible depending on the circumstances such as the age of the child (many high school age homeschoolers learn pretty independently), outsourcing opportunities, tutors, etc.”

I repeat: " … but here in MD it is required to show evidence of regular and thorough instruction 2-3 times per year. No tests for parents, no mandatory tests for students, but they do check to make sure that teaching is happening. I don’t think that is unreasonable. **If schooling is not happening, then the child is required to be enrolled in school. That is a farrrrrrr stretch from BANNING homeschooling for religious reasons.
**

(bolding added to aid in comprehension)

Yesm i think reasonable regulation that resp

OK. You tell us an illiterate is challenged in teaching. So, can you tell us 1) can an lliterate teach a kid to read, 2) can they personally do it on a one-on one-basis? 3) How does the illiterate do it on a one-on -one basis?

You have told us MD has checks. So, is it reasonable for the state of MD to prevent a parent from home schooling if that parent is illiterate, drunk, doped, or negligent, and the kid’s education is not happening? Is it reasonable for MD to uphold the kid’s right to an education by preventing that parent from home scholing?

Is it acceptable to throw away some kids so home schooling parents have the freedom they want? What does Rome say about this human garbage?

 

[1catholic]

Ana;5579022:

OK. You tell us an illiterate is challenged in teaching. So, can you tell us 1) can an lliterate teach a kid to read, 2) can they personally do it on a one-on one-basis? 3) How does the illiterate do it on a one-on -one basis?

You have told us MD has checks. So, is it reasonable for the state of MD to prevent a parent from home schooling if that parent is illiterate, drunk, doped, or negligent, and the kid’s education is not happening? Is it reasonable for MD to uphold the kid’s right to an education by preventing that parent from home scholing?

Is it acceptable to throw away some kids so home schooling parents have the freedom they want? What does Rome say about this human garbage?

Throw away? No one is saying no regulation, just that there be freedom for those doing their job as parents, b/c we all know the government doesn’t always do its job so well and still has freedom

 

[WillieWonka]

WillieWonka;5579062:

Throw away? No one is saying no regulation, just that there be freedom for those doing their job as parents, b/c we all know the government doesn’t always do its job so well and still has freedom

People have been very reluctant to acknowledge it is proper for the state to prevent home schooling when the home schooling parent is not educating the kids.

I’m not sure everyone supports some regulation. For example, I’m not sure mpi would support any regulation. Perhaps he can tell us.

I also observe the home schoolers almost univerally stress the rights of the parents, and say little about the rights of the kid.

So I ask the question about sacrificing some kids for other home schooling parents simply to determine the limits we are dealing with here.

 

[Ana]

OK. You tell us an illiterate is challenged in teaching. So, can you tell us 1) can an lliterate teach a kid to read, 2) can they personally do it on a one-on one-basis? 3) How does the illiterate do it on a one-on -one basis?

An illiterate can provide a child the ability to learn to read through outsourcing, tutor or other means. An illiterate would not be able to teach something they do not know, but they can certainly use other means and be within the law, while providing their children with an education. That parent should be held to the same reasonable regulations as a literate parent. If the illiterate parent is able to do so, they should be able to, if they can’t then they would be accountable to the laws of their state.

I have answered many of your questions while you consistantly ignore the one question I ask you. I’ll ask it again.

What is your position on BANNING homeschooling for RELIGIOUS reasons (the topic of this thread)?

You have told us MD has checks. So, is it reasonable for the state of MD to prevent a parent from home schooling if that parent is illiterate, drunk, doped, or negligent, and the kid’s education is not happening? Is it reasonable for MD to uphold the kid’s right to an education by preventing that parent from home scholing?

If the education is not happening in MD the parents are given a warning, if it is still not happening, the child must by law be enrolled in school. I think this is reasonable.

Is it acceptable to throw away some kids so home schooling parents have the freedom they want? What does Rome say about this human garbage?

Is it acceptable to steal the God given right of God fearing law abiding citizens for the sake of HOARDS of drunken homeschool parents? How does BANNING homeschooling for RELIGIOUS reasons address the cataclysmic problem of drunken homeschool parents anyway? Unless you are equating piety with drunkeness?.

Rome has spoken out against socialism. Rome has spoken clearly that parents are the primary educators of their children. Sorry if you don’t like it.

Again, what is your position on the TOPIC of this thread?

 

[Ana]

People have been very reluctant to acknowledge it is proper for the state to prevent home schooling when the home schooling parent is not educating the kids.

I’m not sure everyone supports some regulation. For example, I’m not sure mpi would support any regulation. Perhaps he can tell us.

I also observe the home schoolers almost univerally stress the rights of the parents, and say little about the rights of the kid.

So I ask the question about sacrificing some kids for other home schooling parents simply to determine the limits we are dealing with here.

Well that will be impossible Willie, everyone is different. Just because a particular group of people homeschool does not mean they all agree on everything. There are liberal, conservative, religious, irreverent, pagan, natural family living, mainstream, gay, straight etc etc parents that homeschool. Good luck trying to put them in a box and label it. lol When it comes to homeschooling you will find parents as diverse as if you looked at the parents of a public school student.

What is your position on BANNING homeschool for RELIGIOUS reasons? You know the ones who impose thier religion on their children?