This is Amy Carder's Blog. She'll post lots of thoughts here about church life, home-schooling, raising four, make that five kids and all of the other craziness that our life together throws at us.

Wednesday, October 11, 2006

Do you know your rights?

I was reading an article today that I think most people will find interesting. It seems as if the (federal) courts have ruled that once your child crosses the threshold of a public school you have no control over what they learn or the things they are exposed to. I had no idea! I can't believe that if I choose to use the public education system that I, being the public, have no control over what my kids are learning. This is huge! Here are a couple of quotes from the article. To read the complete article click here.

The Ninth Circuit held:

"Although the parents are legitimately concerned with the subject of sexuality, there is no constitutional reason to distinguish that concern from any of the countless moral, religious, or philosophical objections that parents might have to other decisions of the School District—whether those objections regard information concerning guns, violence, the military, gay marriage, racial equality, slavery, the dissection of animals, or the teaching of scientifically-validated theories of the origins of life. Schools cannot be expected to accommodate the personal, moral or religious concerns of every parent. Such an obligation would not only contravene the educational mission of the public schools, but also would be impossible to satisfy.

The court went on to make it entirely explicit that once children are left at the public school’s front door, all parental control over the child’s education ceases."


"The First Circuit Court of Appeals made a similar outlandish ruling in Brown v. Hot, Sexy and Safer Productions, Inc. (1995). This case involved a mandatory, school-wide assembly that contained offensive and suggestive sexual material. The First Circuit said that while parents have the right to choose alternative forms of schooling, they have no constitutional right to direct their child’s education inside the public school."


This is crazy! When you send your kids to public school do you have to sign a waiver giving all rights over to the government? Seriously? Is there a sign that says, "Once your children walk through these doors they are no longer yours for the next 7 hours, don't ask questions it's the law?" Why aren't there people protesting in the streets? I just don't get it.

3 Comments:

Blogger Cheryl said...

People aren't protesting in the streets because it simply doesnt' work like that. Parents have to sign waivers for children to simply use the computers in school because even though the school district has a filter on what is allowed to be viewed on school computers, there are items on the internet that are inappropriate for kids. Parents have to sign waivors for kids to attend field trips and sex education at all.If I have a Jehovah's Witness child in my class or any other child who's parent requests that s/he not participate in activities that go against that family's religous beliefs I have to provide alternative activities in an alternative location for that child.
Clark County School District Policy on Parent Involvement states: "Parents are full partners in the decisions that affect children and families: Parents and educators have a joint responsibility to make informed decisions related to all aspects of the education provided to Nevada's youth. The role of parents in shared decision making shojld be continually evaluated, refined and expanded." (www.ccsd.net/directory/pol-reg/pdf/1140P.pdf)

10:56 PM

 
Blogger Sherry said...

I don't find this new information. It seems very apparent that if you send your child to public school you give up the right to control what they learn.The individuals teaching the children can do whatever they want once in the privacy of the classroom no matter what you sign. I have lived it, I know it happens.Permission slips are to keep the parents off of the teacher's backs and to keep the lawyers off of the school district's back.In reality, they mean nothing, they are just there to make parents feel better.

In my opinion it all ends up with what kind of person the teacher who is teaching the class is, and wether or not the kids are willing to learn. Kids that are willing to learn learn more, and teachers who are good people teach well with or without permission slips.

I feel that the problem lies in the difference of oppinion on what a child should learn and when. By taking a child to the public school, you are giving up your right to make those choices, and by home schooling, you are exercising your right to make those choices.

That is the way I see it anyway.I am sure others see it differently.

11:18 PM

 
Blogger Amy said...

I think it's great the CCSD has provisions like the one Cheryl mentioned. The problem is that the rulings that the article mentions are federal. I think that if the CCSD policies were ever challenged the federal rulings would trump the local. (Maybe Greg could answer that.) If you read the article you will see that the one case mentioned the parents weren't notified of a sexually suggestive questionnaire their elementary kids were given. When someone sued they were basically told too bad.
"In 2001, the Palmdale School District in California decided to give a survey to students in its elementary schools. Included in this psychological survey were a number of sex-related questions. These included inquiries into touching one’s private parts and thinking about doing so with others, among other fairly explicit questions.
Parents were outraged that this survey was conducted without a proper disclosure to the parents. But the court’s decision did not rest upon the district’s previous superficial disclosure to parents.
The Ninth Circuit held:
Although the parents are legitimately concerned with the subject of sexuality, there is no constitutional reason to distinguish that concern from any of the countless moral, religious, or philosophical objections that parents might have to other decisions of the School District—whether those objections regard information concerning guns, violence, the military, gay marriage, racial equality, slavery, the dissection of animals, or the teaching of scientifically-validated theories of the origins of life. Schools cannot be expected to accommodate the personal, moral or religious concerns of every parent. Such an obligation would not only contravene the educational mission of the public schools, but also would be impossible to satisfy.
The court went on to make it entirely explicit that once children are left at the public school’s front door, all parental control over the child’s education ceases.
In sum, we affirm that the Meyer-Pierce3 right does not extend beyond the threshold of the school door. The parents’ asserted right “to control the upbringing of their children by introducing them to matters of and relating to sex in accordance with their personal and religious values and beliefs,” by which they mean the right to limit what public schools or other state actors may tell their children regarding sexual matters, is not encompassed within the Meyer-Pierce right to control their children’s upbringing and education."

6:13 AM

 

Post a Comment

<< Home