3 ms·

Mother Jailed For Trying to Put Children Into Better School

11 points by georgecmu 16y ago

julius_geezer 16y ago
School districts in New Jersey aggressively police residency, using detective at times, though I don't know that it has ever come to the point of a criminal case there. My impression, from an article or two in the NY Times years ago, is that this is not usually a racial matter there. A more accurate headline might be "Mother Jailed for Providing False Affidavits in Effort to Put Children in Better School."
- david2777 16y ago
  That seems kind of odd to me, here in Hawaii they split the school districts up on each island (the island I'm on has 9). The school I would normally have to attend is terrible, but over here you can simply apply for an exemption, which they almost always grant, and go to almost any school on the island. Are you not allowed to do that in states such as New Jersey?
stephenbez 16y ago
Misleading title. The original title was better: "Mother Jailed For School Fraud, Flares Controversy" Or: Ohio mother Kelley Williams-Bolar was convicted of lying about her residency to get her daughters into a better school district
- davidmurphy 16y ago
  Agree. Lying = fraud = uncool.
  - angdis 16y ago
    The situation could have been handled in a more compassionate way than jail. How many wealthy white collar criminals get away with far more fraud (and for strictly selfish reasons to boot) and never see the inside of jail cell? Given the HUGE disparity between the have and the have-not school districts, one can appreciate the mother's point of view.
markessien 16y ago
This is why America remains segregated. Rich neighbourhoods send all their children to the same schools, poor neighbourhoods send their children to the same school. Children should be assigned to schools out of their living zone - then there will be incentive to make all schools nice, and it will break the cycle of poverty.
- jdludlow 16y ago
  Children should be assigned to schools If you mean by their parents, then yes. If you mean by our nanny overlords in their never ending quest to maximize the teachers unions' deathgrip on the system, then no thanks. I'm currently paying for every kid, regardless of income, to go to a public school, plus more tuition for my own kids to go to a real school where they will actually learn something. I'd much prefer a system where I pay for my kids, you pay for your kids, and we all chip in for the poor kids. In all cases, the parents need to be the ones choosing the schools. The "incentive to make all schools nice" will only happen when parents can move their money to the school of their choice.
- rst 16y ago
  There have been court-ordered busing programs within large American cities to try to deal with racial segregation in particular, though not without controversy. (Riots in Boston in the 1970s, for instance.) However, these are going out of style, and even when in style were usually confined to a single school district (generally, that means a single town or city), in part for legal reasons (Milliken v. Bradley). And they were only intended to address racial segregation, not economic issues. And there's pretty clearly an effect. There's a large house price premium for schools in a "good" school districts. Here are some (2006, but still relevant) numbers for school districts in Silicon Valley: http://www.cupertinoschoolscores.com/News/Home_Buyers_Pay_Premium.htm http://www.cupertinoschoolscores.com/News/Home_Buyers_Pay_Pr...
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
- missizii 16y ago
  As someone who lives in an area where forced busing still occurs, the result is actually quite different. The middle class students are sent to private schools, charter schools, homeschooled, or the families move away altogether. If they go to the public schools, they can't learn because of the disruptive students who are bused in. The parents resist all efforts to raise the property tax base because their children don't attend public schools anymore, and so why should they pay for them? And so the schools lose even more money.

11 points by georgecmu 16y ago

School districts in New Jersey aggressively police residency, using detective at times, though I don't know that it has ever come to the point of a criminal case there. My impression, from an article or two in the NY Times years ago, is that this is not usually a racial matter there. A more accurate headline might be "Mother Jailed for Providing False Affidavits in Effort to Put Children in Better School."

david2777 16y ago
That seems kind of odd to me, here in Hawaii they split the school districts up on each island (the island I'm on has 9). The school I would normally have to attend is terrible, but over here you can simply apply for an exemption, which they almost always grant, and go to almost any school on the island. Are you not allowed to do that in states such as New Jersey?

stephenbez 16y ago

Misleading title. The original title was better: "Mother Jailed For School Fraud, Flares Controversy" Or: Ohio mother Kelley Williams-Bolar was convicted of lying about her residency to get her daughters into a better school district

davidmurphy 16y ago
Agree. Lying = fraud = uncool.
- angdis 16y ago
  The situation could have been handled in a more compassionate way than jail. How many wealthy white collar criminals get away with far more fraud (and for strictly selfish reasons to boot) and never see the inside of jail cell? Given the HUGE disparity between the have and the have-not school districts, one can appreciate the mother's point of view.

markessien 16y ago

This is why America remains segregated. Rich neighbourhoods send all their children to the same schools, poor neighbourhoods send their children to the same school. Children should be assigned to schools out of their living zone - then there will be incentive to make all schools nice, and it will break the cycle of poverty.

jdludlow 16y ago
Children should be assigned to schools If you mean by their parents, then yes. If you mean by our nanny overlords in their never ending quest to maximize the teachers unions' deathgrip on the system, then no thanks. I'm currently paying for every kid, regardless of income, to go to a public school, plus more tuition for my own kids to go to a real school where they will actually learn something. I'd much prefer a system where I pay for my kids, you pay for your kids, and we all chip in for the poor kids. In all cases, the parents need to be the ones choosing the schools. The "incentive to make all schools nice" will only happen when parents can move their money to the school of their choice.
rst 16y ago
There have been court-ordered busing programs within large American cities to try to deal with racial segregation in particular, though not without controversy. (Riots in Boston in the 1970s, for instance.) However, these are going out of style, and even when in style were usually confined to a single school district (generally, that means a single town or city), in part for legal reasons (Milliken v. Bradley). And they were only intended to address racial segregation, not economic issues. And there's pretty clearly an effect. There's a large house price premium for schools in a "good" school districts. Here are some (2006, but still relevant) numbers for school districts in Silicon Valley: http://www.cupertinoschoolscores.com/News/Home_Buyers_Pay_Premium.htm http://www.cupertinoschoolscores.com/News/Home_Buyers_Pay_Pr...
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
missizii 16y ago
As someone who lives in an area where forced busing still occurs, the result is actually quite different. The middle class students are sent to private schools, charter schools, homeschooled, or the families move away altogether. If they go to the public schools, they can't learn because of the disruptive students who are bused in. The parents resist all efforts to raise the property tax base because their children don't attend public schools anymore, and so why should they pay for them? And so the schools lose even more money.