3 ms·

>I didn't need your permission to give birth to my children, why do I need your permission when deciding how I educate them? One legal theory that may be relev

>I didn't need your permission to give birth to my children, why do I need your permission when deciding how I educate them? One legal theory that may be relevant was brought up long ago for a case on banned books in school: you have the right to raise your kid according to your beliefs, but many states guarantee children the right to education. So the state could regulate homeschooling to ensure all children have access to an actual education. >If you feel these children are legitimately being abused in some way, I'm guessing there are plenty of state resources to address that challenge. A lot of those resources rely on processes that come after reports from teachers and caregivers. If nobody outside the home ever sees or talks to the kids, there's not much the state can do to even start an investigation. Children who go to daycare or public school are seen by professionals trained to spot abuse. We allow anyone to have children, because otherwise we're on a very slippery and short slope towards eugenics. But those children are entitled to the same rights and protections as their parents. It's hard to strike a good balance between a family's freedom and a child's freedom. Edited out some unnecessary detours in my ramblings

jononomo 3y ago
People just assume that other people must be abusing their kids. Sheesh. The commenter is describing a two-parent household with 8 children and a massive backyard -- the odds are that they're extremely happy and our commenter is just a grouch.
akira2501 3y ago
> but many states guarantee children the right to education They guarantee the right to /access/ education. This is not at all the same as guaranteeing that all children "must be educated at a state approved school." > If nobody outside the home ever sees or talks to the kids, there's not much the state can do to even start an investigation. I read an incredible number of police reports. There's a lot of abuse that gets detected outside of daycare and schools. Unless the children are literally locked into a basement, I doubt that the parents can continually exercise enough total control to keep whatever other abuse their committing hidden. To the extent that if it is happening, it's an exceptionally rare case, and I doubt that simply forcing all parents to send their children to a third party for education is going to have any impact on these particularly pernicious cases. I understand the instinct, but I think the solution is wrong, and it's an inappropriate case to use to defend schooling in general.
- FireBeyond 3y ago
  > They guarantee the right to /access/ education. This is not at all the same as guaranteeing that all children "must be educated at a state approved school." That's oversimplifying. You're right about the "at a state approved school", but the right is to access education to a set standard that will equip them for life. You can't just say "well, they have access to -my- education, so we're good". There should be caveats around quality and deliverability of education. Because if you (the generic 'you', not singling you out individually) have low/zero value educational material, and no desire to provide it for your children, then that is /not/ them accessing education in any meaninful sense of the concept.

jononomo 3y ago

People just assume that other people must be abusing their kids. Sheesh. The commenter is describing a two-parent household with 8 children and a massive backyard -- the odds are that they're extremely happy and our commenter is just a grouch.

akira2501 3y ago

> but many states guarantee children the right to education They guarantee the right to /access/ education. This is not at all the same as guaranteeing that all children "must be educated at a state approved school." > If nobody outside the home ever sees or talks to the kids, there's not much the state can do to even start an investigation. I read an incredible number of police reports. There's a lot of abuse that gets detected outside of daycare and schools. Unless the children are literally locked into a basement, I doubt that the parents can continually exercise enough total control to keep whatever other abuse their committing hidden. To the extent that if it is happening, it's an exceptionally rare case, and I doubt that simply forcing all parents to send their children to a third party for education is going to have any impact on these particularly pernicious cases. I understand the instinct, but I think the solution is wrong, and it's an inappropriate case to use to defend schooling in general.

FireBeyond 3y ago
> They guarantee the right to /access/ education. This is not at all the same as guaranteeing that all children "must be educated at a state approved school." That's oversimplifying. You're right about the "at a state approved school", but the right is to access education to a set standard that will equip them for life. You can't just say "well, they have access to -my- education, so we're good". There should be caveats around quality and deliverability of education. Because if you (the generic 'you', not singling you out individually) have low/zero value educational material, and no desire to provide it for your children, then that is /not/ them accessing education in any meaninful sense of the concept.