Home Schooling Found Unlawful by California Court of Appeal

[OKthatsIT]

Home Schooling Found Unlawful by California Court of Appeal
Allie Martin and Jody Brown
- OneNewsNow -
3/6/2008 10:20:00 AM

A three-judge panel of the California Court of Appeal has determined parents in that state have no legal right to home school. A Christian attorney in Sacramento says unless the ruling is reversed, literally thousands of students in the Golden State will be subject to criminal sanctions. (click here for special webcast on this issue)

California Justice H. Walter Croskey has stated in an opinion that "parents who fail to may be subject to a criminal complaint against them, found guilty of an infraction, and subject to imposition of fines or an order to complete a parent education and counseling program." The opinion was issued in the case of one family who enrolled their daughter in Sunland Christian School, a private home-schooling program based in Sylmar.

The ruling reverses an earlier opinion from a Superior Court that found that "parents have a constitutional right to school their children in their own home." But in his reversal, Croskey refers to the "ruse of enrolling in a private school and then letting them stay home and be taught by a non-credentialed parent."

more...http://www.onenewsnow.com/Legal/Default.aspx?id=69177

[pepperbear]

1. k and r n/t

[slackmaster]

2. Another bit of freedom taken away by big government

This is all about money. Public schools get paid more for every student who attends.

[Jim__]

3. What is the basis for your claim about money?

According to the SF Chronicle the lawsuit was based on a complaint by one of the Long children:

... A juvenile court judge looking into one child's complaint of mistreatment by Phillip Long found that the children were being poorly educated but refused to order two of the children, ages 7 and 9, to be enrolled in a full-time school, saying parents have a right to educate their children at home.

But the appeals court said state law has been clear since at least 1953, when another appellate court rejected a challenge by home-schooling parents to California's compulsory education statutes. Those statutes require children between 6 and 18 to attend a full-time day school, either public or private, or to be instructed by a tutor who holds a state credential for the child's grade level.

"California courts have held that ... parents do not have a constitutional right to home-school their children," Justice H. Walter Croskey said in the 3-0 ruling, issued Feb. 28. "Parents have a legal duty to see to their children's schooling under the provisions of these laws."

The California law also sounds clear on this subject. My bet is that the constitutionality of the California law will be challenged. But, I don't see the basis for your claim about the public schools and money.

[slackmaster]

4. Information about attendance-based funding is not hard to find

Here's one example: http://www.powayusd.com/news/attendance.htm

More money for schools means more money for school administrators, teachers, etc. The teacher's union is one of the most powerful lobbies in the state. Connect the dots.

[Jim__]

5. I'm not asking about attendance-based funding.

I'm asking for something that indicates that the public schools or teacher's union were in any way involved in this case. Involved meaning having participated in the case in some explicit way - not commenting on it after the fact. If that didn't happen, then where are the dots to connect the public schools or teacher's union to the decision.

[slackmaster]

6. That's not the direct cause of this decision

But it is an underlying one; all part of the mindset that government knows best how to take care of your kids.