Betsy

OK guys, I have committed my rant to paper. Where can I send it, do you
know?

Betsy

*********************************************************************

I am deeply offended by the biased and bigoted piece CBS Eye on America
ran on Tuesday implying that homeschooling parents are likely to abuse
their children and should be supervised. (Homescholing Nightmares)
Stirring up fear and suspicion of people who are different is an easy
way to rouse a mob. That's a power the media should use cautiously.
Stigmatizing and distrusting an entire group based on a few sensational
acts is cheap and unfair. I expected better from CBS.

You may be surprised at the outcry from homeschoolers, but if you had
run such a piece about any ethnic group or about the crimes of
left-handed redheads, the redheaded anti-defamation league would be all
over you, and rightly so. Be responsible journalists and use meaningful
statistics; don't make up trends from blips.

The notion that putting children in classrooms could eliminate abuse is
simplistic and wrong. If you sincerely wish to save children from abuse
then devote more air time to the serious issues of mental illness,
poverty and substance abuse. These are the strongest factors leading to
child abuse and neglect in this country. Let's put our efforts into
fixing what we know is broken.

Government supervision is expensive, intrusive and not very effective.
Do you think television journalism would be improved if journalists were
required to register with the government and subjected to periodic
government inspection? I don't. But I do think your editorial policies
are too weak and should be improved. Your pieces on "The Dark Side of
Homeschooling" have been shoddy, sensationaistic, and shallow. I can't
respect a news organization that airs this kind of thoughtless,
worthless garbage. I will avoid all of your news shows in the future.

Elizabeth Hill

Tia Leschke

>OK guys, I have committed my rant to paper. Where can I send it, do you
>know?


http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/i_video/main500251.shtml

Go all the way to the bottom of the page and click on feedback.
Make sure you proofread carefully for typos. (Homescholing, sensationaistic)
Good letter!
Tia

stregalina42

hi there -

i'm relatively new to this list - trying to observe the two week
observe guideline, and i think i'm close!

first of all, i wanted to say i really like your letter betsy.

secondly, just a brief intro - i am very new to this whole concept,
exploring it as an option for my ds who is 3. i had bad personal
experiences with public school and personally find the freedom of
unschooling very appealing. neither dh nor i have any experience
with homeschoolers or unschoolers at all so i feel like i'm treading
new waters.

finally, i would like to ask how many of you are feeling after the
cbs story - not so much about the story, but are you concerned that
there might be a movement to increase state oversight / intrusion
into homschooling? do you worry about having to appear more normal
than other families, i.e., keeping any and all dirty laundry
completely out of the public eye, in order to protect yourselves? am
i completely nuts? i don't even know if these are rational concerns,
i just know that every time people say to me, 'oh, is your son in
preschool?' and clearly expect me to answer with the name of the
school and i respond with 'no, actually, we're contemplating
homeschool,' i get one of a limited number of responses.
usually, 'you'r crazy!' 'why? we have such great schools here!'
or 'oh' with a look that says, how do i end my conversation with
this freak of nature?

anyway, feeling like i'm treading uncharted waters and interested in
how the water feels after these stories.

thanks,
dawn

[email protected]

In a message dated 10/14/03 7:57:47 PM, ecsamhill@... writes:

<< sensationaistic, >>

WOW
I mean one typo (just dropped an "l") and the points you made are really
great. I especially like this:

-=-Do you think television journalism would be improved if journalists were
required to register with the government and subjected to periodic
government inspection? -=-

Sandra

coyote's corner

excellent - now send it to the advertisers!
janis
----- Original Message -----
From: Betsy
To: [email protected]
Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2003 9:54 PM
Subject: [UnschoolingDiscussion] PART 2: CBS story: Homeschooling Nightmares



OK guys, I have committed my rant to paper. Where can I send it, do you
know?

Betsy

*********************************************************************

I am deeply offended by the biased and bigoted piece CBS Eye on America
ran on Tuesday implying that homeschooling parents are likely to abuse
their children and should be supervised. (Homescholing Nightmares)
Stirring up fear and suspicion of people who are different is an easy
way to rouse a mob. That's a power the media should use cautiously.
Stigmatizing and distrusting an entire group based on a few sensational
acts is cheap and unfair. I expected better from CBS.

You may be surprised at the outcry from homeschoolers, but if you had
run such a piece about any ethnic group or about the crimes of
left-handed redheads, the redheaded anti-defamation league would be all
over you, and rightly so. Be responsible journalists and use meaningful
statistics; don't make up trends from blips.

The notion that putting children in classrooms could eliminate abuse is
simplistic and wrong. If you sincerely wish to save children from abuse
then devote more air time to the serious issues of mental illness,
poverty and substance abuse. These are the strongest factors leading to
child abuse and neglect in this country. Let's put our efforts into
fixing what we know is broken.

Government supervision is expensive, intrusive and not very effective.
Do you think television journalism would be improved if journalists were
required to register with the government and subjected to periodic
government inspection? I don't. But I do think your editorial policies
are too weak and should be improved. Your pieces on "The Dark Side of
Homeschooling" have been shoddy, sensationaistic, and shallow. I can't
respect a news organization that airs this kind of thoughtless,
worthless garbage. I will avoid all of your news shows in the future.

Elizabeth Hill


Yahoo! Groups Sponsor



"List Posting Policies" are provided in the files area of this group.

To unsubscribe from this send an email to:
[email protected]

Visit the Unschooling website and message boards: http://www.unschooling.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[email protected]

In a message dated 10/15/2003 1:22:04 AM Eastern Standard Time,
stregalina@... writes:
>>>i would like to ask how many of you are feeling after the
cbs story - not so much about the story, but are you concerned that
there might be a movement to increase state oversight / intrusion
into homschooling? do you worry about having to appear more normal
than other families, i.e., keeping any and all dirty laundry
completely out of the public eye, in order to protect yourselves?<<<
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I have been thinking about this, and I am a little worried, I guess. We live
in a tiny, very PRO public school town, we're not from around here
originally, and we moved to WV from California!! To top the whole thing off, we have
adopted a boy we are now homeschooling, and just took him out of school this
year. Plus, right when this story "breaks" Michael has a big black eye/bruise, a
result of being kneed while playing football with all the kids (well, not
kneed....he grabbed a bigger kid around the knees and held on and got a knee in
his face as a result. It was truly an accident!)....argh!! Lets see...what
else can I do to throw up MORE red flags????...

So what do we do now? Stop allowing wrestling, football, bike jumps/ramps,
tree climbing, horseplay? With 5 boys in the house now that's like trying to
hold the ocean back with a broom. How sad we may have to think like this now.

We are NOT isolated, however. We DO live out in the boonies, but 3 of the
kids (foster) are in school still, we are involved in 4H, we go to town a lot
(including Michael) and we are not religious zealots. We probably look more
like hippy zealots or hillbilly zealots :o)

I guess we'll see...it's kind of early to see if there will be a backlash at
homeschoolers because of this show. I guess it depends on who watched it. We
are in the middle of Travis and Justin's adoption as I write this, so I'm
probably the most worried it will affect that. (Then again, we have caseworkers
at our house at LEAST monthly for our foster care agency, and they are welcome
to come over anytime, so if they didn't like something they saw it probably
would have been a long time ago.)

.......sigh.......don't really need this crap right now.........

Nancy B. in WV


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Heidi

Terrific letter, betsy...Sandra picked up on one typo, but no one
mentioned another...(Homescholing Nightmares)

put another o in there, before you send it!!!!

otherwise, a GEM of a rant :)

HeidiC

--- In [email protected], Betsy <ecsamhill@e...>
wrote:
>
> OK guys, I have committed my rant to paper. Where can I send it,
do you
> know?
>
> Betsy
>
>
*********************************************************************
>
> I am deeply offended by the biased and bigoted piece CBS Eye on
America
> ran on Tuesday implying that homeschooling parents are likely to
abuse
> their children and should be supervised. (Homescholing Nightmares)
> Stirring up fear and suspicion of people who are different is an
easy
> way to rouse a mob.

pam sorooshian

On Wednesday, October 15, 2003, at 04:56 AM, CelticFrau@... wrote:

> I guess we'll see...it's kind of early to see if there will be a
> backlash at
> homeschoolers because of this show. I guess it depends on who watched
> it.

I'm feeling a bit better about this whole thing, today. It was very
very depressing to me because I've worked extremely hard for the
National Home Education Network for the past five years - hours upon
hours day after day - and a huge part of our work has been to promote a
positive accurate understanding of homeschooling to the general public.
We'd been congratulating ourselves because we felt we'd been successful
beyond what we'd even hoped - 5 years ago every news article about
homeschooling was a near-carbon copy of every other article. They all
had pictures of mom and kids at a kitchen table - they always talked as
if all homeschoolers were fundamentalist Christians - doing school at
home, etc. We got that changed in a big way - to the point that most
articles out there these days talk about homeschoolers as wide-ranging
diverse families - doing all kinds of interesting things in all kinds
of family structures and from all walks of life, individualizing their
kids' education, NOT taking traditional school methods into the home,
etc. News reporters no longer feel the obligation to have a requisite
NEA comment or some Harvard so-called expert to say he worries about
homeschoolers socialization - up until a few years ago EVERY media
mention of homeschooling involved those.

So - we've been patting ourselves on our backs - until this week, when
we were crushed and felt like all our work for the past years was
wasted effort - that CBS news had just undone it all - in 5 minutes
worth of unbelievably bad journalism.

But - last night I went to a big meeting - 4H club people. Of the group
- probably 6 kids are homeschoolers and maybe 35 are not. I thought
about how most people know some homeschoolers, these days. Plus, our
national PR efforts HAVE helped to create a baseline of understanding
and appreciation of homeschooling in the public's eyes and we may be
underestimating people's ability to recognize bunk for what it is. So,
it occurred to me that the smear tactics used by CBS may be more
damaging to CBS's credibility than to homeschooling.

-pam

Melanie Freisinger deGonzalez

pam sorooshian <pamsoroosh@...> wrote:

<the smear tactics used by CBS may be more
damaging to CBS's credibility than to homeschooling.>


Yes!! I was thinking the same thing and asking folks in our church and neighborhood, not necessarily home/unschoolers to write and call also. Parents in general so they are hearing from more folks than homeschoolers.

melanie







�Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain�t going away.� -Elvis Presley














[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[email protected]

Like the voter and subscription cancellation backlash against the LA
Times backlash after their gubernatorial stories were perceived as unfair and
politically timed? Hmm, worth thinking about as current precedent in our
current climate -- maybe it will happen to CBS and home education opponents! <g> JJ



pamsoroosh@... writes:


> But - last night I went to a big meeting - 4H club people. Of the group
> - probably 6 kids are homeschoolers and maybe 35 are not. I thought
> about how most people know some homeschoolers, these days. Plus, our
> national PR efforts HAVE helped to create a baseline of understanding
> and appreciation of homeschooling in the public's eyes and we may be
> underestimating people's ability to recognize bunk for what it is. So,
> it occurred to me that the smear tactics used by CBS may be more
> damaging to CBS's credibility than to homeschooling.
>
> -pam
>



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Betsy

**News reporters no longer feel the obligation to have a requisite
NEA comment or some Harvard so-called expert to say he worries about
homeschoolers socialization - up until a few years ago EVERY media
mention of homeschooling involved those.**

Oh, Pam,

::: sympathetic sighing sound :::

I hear you. And I see a good news / bad news situation. I think NHEN
has been very successful in convincing the media and the world at large
that homeschooled kids aren't wacky and aren't being warped by their
experiences.

So, hey, the media doesn't worry about crazy homeschooled kids any more,
as a stereotype, but suddenly they worry about crazy homeschooled
parents. Arrrgggghhhhh.


Betsy

Tia Leschke

>Terrific letter, betsy...Sandra picked up on one typo, but no one
>mentioned another...(Homescholing Nightmares)


I did! (she said, wildly waving her hand at the (certified)
teacher. <g> But it was a great letter.
Tia

Robyn Coburn

<<The notion that putting children in classrooms could eliminate abuse
is
simplistic and wrong. If you sincerely wish to save children from abuse

then devote more air time to the serious issues of mental illness,
poverty and substance abuse. These are the strongest factors leading to

child abuse and neglect in this country. Let's put our efforts into
fixing what we know is broken.>>



I particularly like this paragraph because it presents an alternative
course of action that takes the point away from homeschooling, rather
than only defending homeschooling.

The people at CBS aren't listening to defenses of homeschooling.
Evidently the CBS researchers had already received plenty of information
about homeschooling, including deciding not to interview on camera a
speaker from HSLDA. As little as I like much of their policies, it would
seem that they are a group that is known by the public. Having an
opposing view (in the news item) presented by one of them would have
given it much more authority, which is clearly why they were not
invited. As it is I don't know who Hal Young is, and he is presented as
a "Homeschooling Advocate" of no particular affiliation. It is easier
for members of the viewing public to dismiss him as some kind of
individualistic crackpot without the authority of any kind of
organization behind him.

I suspect that it is not going to matter outside of a courtroom, except
to us, that these abusers were not "technically" or "legally"
homeschooling, or that some of the kids were below school age. These are
distinctions that we make to ourselves, that could sound to those
outside of homeschooling like back-pedaling excuse-making. Pointing out
that these people will look for ways to stay outside the law and be as
invisible as possible might be a good strategy for fighting state
regulations. However I'm not sure that it is a good argument to enhance
the public perception of homeschoolers.

I'm starting to think that best way to do that is to continue to be out
in the community, a goal not always compatible with the climate of
disapproval and suspicion (eg daytime curfews) that this news item is
likely to promote. On the other hand, I feel like *my* neighbors, who
know Jayn and see her around and talk to her, are pretty unlikely to
suspect abuse in our family just because we are homeschooling. Being
part of a group and regular activities is self-defense. I guess the only
way we can really counter this kind of scare-mongering is to be visible.


Having said that, I know that being visible is no guarantee that abuse
is not happening. There was mention of visible bruising or marks being a
reason for absenteeism from school, but a determined abuser can find
ways to do so without outward signs. The most disturbing part to me of
that news item was about the Spelling Bee competitor and her horrible
father.

I wonder if the timing of the items has anything to do with the pending
Federal Bill about Non-Discrimination against Homeschoolers. I don't
know.

Robyn Coburn

I



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Tia Leschke

>
>I'm starting to think that best way to do that is to continue to be out
>in the community, a goal not always compatible with the climate of
>disapproval and suspicion (eg daytime curfews) that this news item is
>likely to promote.

Seems to me that daytime curfews would make it easier for the tiny minority
of homeschoolers who are abusers to hide their abuse. Maybe a good
argument *against* them. <g>
Tia

pam sorooshian

Including NHEN also contacting them in advance, too. No response.

-pam

On Wednesday, October 15, 2003, at 01:51 PM, Robyn Coburn wrote:

> Evidently the CBS researchers had already received plenty of
> information
> about homeschooling, including deciding not to interview on camera a
> speaker from HSLDA.

nellebelle

>>>i would like to ask how many of you are feeling after the
cbs story>>>>>

Outside of homeschooling circles, I have not heard a single mention of the report. Either the people I know didn't watch it, or they didn't find it worth comment, at least not to me. There hasn't been anything in my local newspaper about it, even though they are doing a series on domestic violence.

Mary Ellen

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

pam sorooshian

Somebody on another list asked about what an unschooling day was like,
especially with high school age kids. Wanted to know what unschooling
kids do to "learn."

I thought I'd send my responses here, too. We have a lot of new
listmembers in the last few weeks - many might be lurking and trying to
understand unschooling. Hope this helps. Some of it is from this list's
description, by the way.

*************************
It is nearly impossible to give you a typical day. Every family/kid/day
is different. Unschoolers have to be defined mostly by what they don't
do - and that is why it is so hard to "get it." We don't make lesson
plans for our kids. We don't test or grade them. They don't have
assignments and we are not their teacher.

Unschooling is not really a homeschool teaching method. It refers to a
philosophy of natural learning as well as the lifestyle that results
from living according to the principles of that philosophy.

The most basic principle of unschooling is that children are born with
an intrinsic urge to explore -- for a moment or a lifetime -- what
intrigues them, as they seek to join the adult world in a personally
satisfying way. Because of that urge, an unschooling child is free to
choose the what, when, where and how of his/her own learning from mud
puddles to video games and SpongeBob Squarepants to Shakespeare! And an
unschooling parent sees his/her role, not as a teacher, but as a
facilitator and companion in a child's exploration of the world.

Teenage unschoolers often have developed some serious passions and they
pursue them with great energy. They may be anything from website design
to ballet to breeding dogs to political action to anything else you can
imagine. Others, however, don't have one overriding interest, but
spend their time sampling all kinds of things - moving from one to
another.

What do the parents do? Transportation, help finding resources,
transportation, listening, buying supplies, transportation, listening,
make some phone calls to help find resources, discuss, listen,
transport.

The kids pursue their interests and the learning comes about naturally
as part of them living their lives. Everything is connected. Subjects
are not learned as separate topics but in the context of what the kids
choose to do with their time. Its amazing - but it works, because
everything really IS connected and, in a rich and stimulating learning
environment kids' natural urge to absorb information and skills is
never limited or pushed down and they keep that same eager voracious
desire to learn that all kids have before they go to school.

Sandra Dodd has collected people's descriptions of their "unschooling
days" on her website at <http://sandradodd.com/typical>

-pam

pam sorooshian

That person also was worried about kids wanting to spend the whole day
online or playing video games instead of something more constructive.

************

My kids have spent whole days playing video games or online. Sometimes
for a week at a time when a game is new. Friends come over and play
too. They trade video games around with friends. They read the cheats
online or order books (I cannot even count how many kids I know who
have learned to read this way).

Okay - I MYSELF have spend days playing video games or online.

What's the problem again? <BEG>

If I saw a problem - if there was depression involved and it was being
used as an escape, for example, I'd think about that and not about the
symptoms.

Otherwise, I'd simply get us out of the house a bit by finding things
to do that would interest my kid. We'd go to a science museum or the
beach or the bookstore or library or go to the toy store and buy a new
game or the art supply or craft store or hobby shop and buy a model to
work on or I might find a workshop of some kind offered by the city
recreation department or a dance class or go to Home Depot on a
Saturday when they do their free workshops or to Joanne's Fabrics for a
free knitting class or on and on...

However, I'd also wonder whether you might be overstating things - or
worrying in advance about something hypothetical. Kids can put a lot of
time into video games and still have a lot of time left for other
things. If you're interested in the positives of video games - see
Sandra Dodd's pages that started based on a presentation at the HSC
conference a couple of years ago:
<http://sandradodd.com/games/page>

Things my kids have done online have been overwhelmingly positive. For
example, they play games on Neopets - these games are great - lots and
lots of visual development spatial games, lots of
word/vocabulary/spelling games, and especially lots of math concept
games. Neopets involves earning money and even calculating interest and
so on. Its great. They also play MUDS and MUSHES - these are online
role-playing games and can be very very elaborate. Roxana has been
involved with Pern Mush for years - this is "serious play." I cannot
imagine anything being better for developing writing skills than online
roleplaying games. She also writes fan fiction - and lots of other
stuff - including poetry. She puts it up on various fan fiction and
poetry sites where others read and critique it. She creates websites
and participates in "site wars" where people score each other's sites
on content quality, organization and design elements.

The kids have spent many many hours playing SIMS. This is the source of
all kinds of reflections on behavior and economics and life - for my
kids it has branched out into interest in interior design and in
architecture as well as a lot of discussion about people's behaviors.

They subscribe to interesting email lists - where they get a "word a
day" for example - some kind of interesting vocabulary. Roxana studied
Norwegian for about a year - receiving a short email lesson each day.

Lately Roxana's role-playing passions (online and in theater) have
meshed with a college course in costume design. She specializes,
online, in writing "descs" (descriptions of characters). She writes and
sells her descs to other players - who give her role playing items in
return. To improve her "descs" she started looking at costume design
sites and museum sites to find paintings of people from different
places and times. She has learned an AMAZING amount of history and
geography through this interest.

This is just one direction that the online playing has led. But it
gives you the idea that if you support the kids interests and are
patient - don't see their current interests as a waste of time, see
them as the launching pad for the future that will go in ways you
probably can't foresee - that if they have support and parents that
won't pooh-pooh their interests - they'll move on to bigger and better
things.

In a contest, for example, between a kid who'd studied ancient history
through text books versus my daughter, who learned it through costume,
literature, drama, etc., I'd place my money on my daughter to know more
and have a more complete picture. AND, what's more, she loves it -
finds it endlessly fascinating. She just told me the other day that she
thinks she'd like to major in history in college. She's just turned 16,
by the way. She started out at the community college taking computer
programming classes in order to be able to jazz up her websites. She
branched out to music and theater classes - took a "History of Opera"
course (again - she loves putting the operas into the context of their
time and place - learned a LOT of history in that class that went far
beyond opera).

Your child probably isn't interested in opera, so you're thinking mine
is "different" and that this doesn't answer your questions - doesn't
ease your mind when you see your child on the computer for hour after
hour. But I could write similar things about many other teenagers I
know - but their paths would all go off in vastly different directions.

Another thing is that unschooling is sort of "messy" in that there
isn't a "plan" and kids can often go in one direction for a while and
then seem to come to a dead end and turn around and go off in another
direction. It isn't like a kid who studies certain high school subjects
- a couple of years of science, four years of English, a year of
American History, and so on --- and then goes on to sort of do that
same thing in college - follow a predetermined path. Unschooled kids
often "meander" in their lives. They proceed in fits and starts. They
detour. But - those side trips can turn into their main life's journey
when you least expect it <G>. And they all add up to make the child
into the person they are becoming. Parents who want a conventional
product - a child finishes high school, goes to college, gets a degree,
gets a job,etc. - may or may not end up satisfied with what unschooling
brings about - since it is, by definition, quirky and unconventional.

-pam

[email protected]

Tempest in a teapot?

Tim T


+++++++++++++++++
Outside of homeschooling circles, I have not heard a single mention of the report. Either the people I know didn't watch it, or they didn't find it worth comment, at least not to me. There hasn't been anything in my local newspaper about it, even though they are doing a series on domestic violence.

Mary Ellen


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Bill & Diane

While mental illness treatment could be vastly improved, and while some
violent acts are indeed committed by people with mental illnesses, I
would like to point out that *most* people with mental illnesses are not
violent.

:-) Diane
Unschooling while dealing with serious mental illness? join us!
[email protected]


Robyn Coburn wrote:

><<The notion that putting children in classrooms could eliminate abuse
>is
>simplistic and wrong. If you sincerely wish to save children from abuse
>
>then devote more air time to the serious issues of mental illness,
>poverty and substance abuse. These are the strongest factors leading to
>
>child abuse and neglect in this country. Let's put our efforts into
>fixing what we know is broken.>>
>

jrossedd

--- In [email protected],Robyn Coburn wrote:
>
> ><<The notion that putting children in classrooms could eliminate
abuse is simplistic and wrong. If you sincerely wish to save
children from abuse then devote more air time to the serious issues
of mental illness, poverty and substance abuse. These are the
strongest factors leading to
> >child abuse and neglect in this country. Let's put our efforts
into fixing what we know is broken.>>
> >

There's another theory (about what is broken) in a new book by
the former president of Oberlin College,Robert W. Fuller, about
Somebodies and Nobodies.

His argument is that most social ills (including child abuse)
stem from "rankism" in which individuals abuse the power and
authority of their position, or rank. And that individual dignity for
all, regardless of rank, is the answer. In other words, to stop abuse
of all kinds, the answer is to stop abusing power and authority (not
a very good argument for increasing State power and authority, a la
CSB, to my mind!<g>)

Bsically, then, racism is abuse by those of a higher rank due
to skin color; sexism is abuse by those of a higher rank due to their
sex; youth bullying is abuse by those who derive higher rank from
their parents' rank, or their own physical or financial prowess, or
their greater numbers (gangs), et cetera.

The worst school bullies imo are not in the schoolyards, but
the classrooms and boardrooms and bargaining rooms. I also think
there are corporate bullies, political bullies, and media bullies.

And parent bullies too. Children generally are "of low rank"
to almost everyone else (whether they are are school or not.) In this
context, there is no human environment, including the family, free
from rank, so it's unlikely that anyplace can guarantee safety
from "rankism."

In this context, Fuller says the way to minimize abuse between
parents and children is for all of us as individuals to foster a
society based on the same respect for individual dignity and
achievement that civil rights and feminism and religious freedom and
true education are all about. (Again, this would be the OPPOSITE of
government and the public imposing authority over individuals as CBS
seemed to call for.)


Somebodies and Nobodies: Overcoming the Abuse of Rank
by Fuller, Robert W.
http://aol.alibris.com/search/search.cfm?
chunk=25&mtype=&qwork=7625554&page=1&matches=10&qsort=r&browse=1&full=
1
". . .Low rank -- signifying weakness, vulnerability, and the absence
of power -- marks you for abuse in much the same way that race,
religion, gender and sexual orientation have long done.

The book introduces new language and concepts that illuminate the
subtle, often dysfunctional workings of power in our social
interactions. It presents rankism as the last hurdle on the long road
from aristocracy to a true meritocracy, brings into focus a
dignitarian revolution that is already taking shape and offers a
preview of post-rankist society. . ."

(Doesn't this sound like the respectful approach to our own family
members we as unschoolers are applying on so many issues?) JJ

About the author -
Robert W. Fuller taught physics at Columbia University in New York,
where he co-authored the classic text, "Mathematics for Classical and
Quantum Physics." He then served as president of Oberlin College and,
subsequently, worked internationally as a "citizen diplomat" to
promote democracy in developing nations. He has four children and
lives in Berkeley, California.

ecsamhill

** While mental illness treatment could be vastly improved, and while
some violent acts are indeed committed by people with mental
illnesses, I would like to point out that *most* people with mental
illnesses are not violent.**

OK, good point.

I've done a bit of the stigmatizing_the_whole_group_thing, the way CBS
did. Oops!

There's a parallel between them making a point like -- these children
were killed because their mom homeschooled -- and me saying -- these
children were killed because their mom was mentally ill. (The Andrea
Yates case.) (Although, to me, her mental state seems more relevant.
I know lots of people are killed in this country, but I really can't
imagine any mother killing all of her children while fully rational.
I just can't.)

But I didn't like the freakshow quality of CBS's reporting when I felt
it aimed at me, and I don't want to be guilty of treating other people
as strange and frightening.

I do think it's a good idea if within the homeschooling community we
look out for each other and each other's children, particularly when
families are under intense stress. (And I'm sure most of you do it
already.) I don't want to just shrug about violence done to children
by parents. So I'm interested in people's stories or their
suggestions about personal (or political) action to help parents who
are having trouble meeting their children's needs. (Due to mental
illness, physical illness or other causes.)

This is on my mind since the CBS report, and I don't know where to
start. With my homeschooling friends I know to listen to their
troubles and comfort and help them as best I can. It is a stretch for
me to offer this same kindness to strangers. (I guess I'm still
afraid of "strangers".)

How much can we do within the homeschooling community to eliminate
child abuse?

Betsy

Bill & Diane

I know this is old, old, and I'm behind, behind, because my MIL died
right after this.

ecsamhill wrote:

>** While mental illness treatment could be vastly improved, and while
>some violent acts are indeed committed by people with mental
>illnesses, I would like to point out that *most* people with mental
>illnesses are not violent.**
>
>OK, good point.
>
>I've done a bit of the stigmatizing_the_whole_group_thing, the way CBS
>did. Oops!
>
>There's a parallel between them making a point like -- these children
>were killed because their mom homeschooled -- and me saying -- these
>children were killed because their mom was mentally ill. (The Andrea
>Yates case.) (Although, to me, her mental state seems more relevant.
> I know lots of people are killed in this country, but I really can't
>imagine any mother killing all of her children while fully rational.
>I just can't.)
>

True. She was not getting the support she needed. Just as some of the
others in the story were falling through the social serives cracks, she
was falling through the cracks in the mental health system.
Incidentally, the mental health system is not good at providing family
members with the information they need to provide optimum support and
safeguards even if their family member is receiving good care.

>But I didn't like the freakshow quality of CBS's reporting when I felt
>it aimed at me, and I don't want to be guilty of treating other people
>as strange and frightening.
>

I know many people do find those with mental illness (especially
schizophrenia or some bipolar illnesses) very strange and frightening.

>How much can we do within the homeschooling community to eliminate
>child abuse?
>

I didn't watch the show, but I got the idea it involved people who
weren't really involved in their local homeschooling communities.

:-) Diane
Dealing with the challenges of mental illness while unschooling? Join us
at UnschoolingMI at Yahoogroups!