[email protected]

> -=-Non-compliance with state law risks both the children being placed in
> public school, and the children being placed in foster care.  It's
> simply not worth it.-=-
>

In New Mexico neither of those "risks" exists from non compliance with the
law. The law says if a family is found not to be in compliance, they must
comply. I don't know what it says now, but a few years back when it was worded
VERY sillily, it said a family found not to be in compliance would receive a
registered letter from the state. If a second such letter was received,
there would be a $25 fine.

I'm guessing that law's been changed because it was kind of crazy to have
said in the law what the STATE had to do. By that law, had I received a
certified letter, or simply first class, or hand delivered, I wouldn't need to do
diddly. It had to be *registered.* And I had to receive TWO of them before I
was in any trouble at all.

I doubt that the hundreds of unregistered families in New Mexico who never
got one registered letter among them ever did any damage to the liberties of
people elsewhere.

(Maybe it was certified and not registered, but it was specifically one type
of U.S. Postal Service mailing option that needed to be hand-delivered and
signed for. Classic example of a BAD, illogical and worthless law, probably
written by a professional educator.)

Sandra




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

jimpetersonl

Your very nicely worded post on store rules from the other day pretty
much addresses it: people make up laws when they feel that others have
done stuff they "shouldn't."

In WA (specifically), Chapter 28A.225 of the RCW compels children
between 8-18 to compulsory attendance, and subjects both parents and
children to state detention and fines.
In (again, specifically WA) Chapter 28A.200 of the RCW provides for
Home Based Instruction, which covers the child for compulsory
attendance, but non-compliance with the law renders the family
"truant" rather than "homeschooling."

ID, (which, in my opinion, has the "right" kind of homeschooling law
(provide a "comparable education" from 7-16)) has recently fended off
two attempts to make "falling behind grade level" for homeschoolers a
misdemeanor for the parents, complete with fines and jail time. (Can
you imagine if failing students were a misdemeanor for teachers?)

There are plenty of people out there who would love to place a
inordinate number of requirements and state-oversight on homeschoolers
(these are generally the same people who have the most difficult time
understanding unschooling). These same people are hardly satisfied
with the homeschooling laws in states like PA, and are horrified that
any state (like ID) would allow parents to opt out of state oversight
and education entirely.

Those homeschoolers who choose to be "truant" rather than comply with
state law fan the flames of those (ironically, public schoolers) who
would like to see homeschooling banned entirely.

In (WA, specifically), compliance is very simple, very basic, and very
non-intrusive. (There is no mechanism, for example, except entry or
reenrty to the school system, that allows for the state to check the
assessments or tests. The scores are completely between the testing
folks and the family). "[A]ll decisions relating to philosophy or
doctrine, selections of books, teaching materials and curriculum, and
methods, timing, and place in the provision or evaluation of
home-based instruction shall be the responsibility of the parent" in WA.

~Sue


> > -=-Non-compliance with state law risks both the children being
placed in
> > public school, and the children being placed in foster care. It's
> > simply not worth it.-=-
> >
>
> In New Mexico neither of those "risks" exists from non compliance
with the
> law. The law says if a family is found not to be in compliance,
they must
> comply. I don't know what it says now, but a few years back when
it was worded
> VERY sillily, it said a family found not to be in compliance would
receive a
> registered letter from the state. If a second such letter was
received,
> there would be a $25 fine.
>
> I'm guessing that law's been changed because it was kind of crazy to
have
> said in the law what the STATE had to do. By that law, had I
received a
> certified letter, or simply first class, or hand delivered, I
wouldn't need to do
> diddly. It had to be *registered.* And I had to receive TWO of
them before I
> was in any trouble at all.
>
> I doubt that the hundreds of unregistered families in New Mexico who
never
> got one registered letter among them ever did any damage to the
liberties of
> people elsewhere.
>
> (Maybe it was certified and not registered, but it was specifically
one type
> of U.S. Postal Service mailing option that needed to be
hand-delivered and
> signed for. Classic example of a BAD, illogical and worthless law,
probably
> written by a professional educator.)
>
> Sandra
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

frozenandcold

I posted earlier but I think my post got lost in cyberspace. I was
just wondering if I could hear from a few of you who don't comply and
are, technically, unschooling illegally. We live in Alaska, where
there are absolutely no homeschool laws, we don't even have to
register as a homeschooler, but we are getting ready to travel the US
in our motorhome for a year and then find a place (besides Alaska) to
settle down in. One of our big concerns, in finding a state to live
in, is the homeschool laws. We are so used to having complete freedom
and I don't know how relaxed I can be if I am not complying. I would
just love to hear from some of you that aren't and how it works for
you. I am very loud about unschooling, down to dozens of bumper
stickers on my van so I am afraid I would draw a lot of attention to
the fact that we do unschool.

Heidi
Children aren't coloring books. You can't fill them with your
favorite colors. From The Kite Runner

[email protected]

In a message dated 10/31/05 9:30:43 PM, fivefreebirds@... writes:


> One of our big concerns, in finding a state to live
> in, is the homeschool laws.  We are so used to having complete freedom
> and I don't know how relaxed I can be if I am not complying. 
>

Texas is the most like Alaska (as far as I know)--you wouldn't have to
register.

New Mexico is pretty lax.

California's easy.

-=-One of our big concerns, in finding a state to live
in, is the homeschool laws.  We are so used to having complete freedom
and I don't know how relaxed I can be if I am not complying. -=-

Some people are unregistered who might not want to "go on record" here about
it.

If I had hostile relatives or an ex husband, I would definitely register.
Those without such impediments have more leeway.

Some people are more cautious than others. Some are so cautious they won't
homeschool in the first place, and then it goes all the way to people with
bumper stickers who don't shy away from being interviewed and who may or may not
be registered.

Sandra


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

[email protected]

In a message dated 10/31/05 6:27:45 PM, jimpetersonl@... writes:


> Your very nicely worded post on store rules from the other day pretty
> much addresses it: people make up laws when they feel that others have
> done stuff they "shouldn't." 
>
-----------------------

Homeschooling isn't nearly as straightforward as murder or laws against
theft.

First there's the compulsory attendance law which crept up on people
gradually over many decades.
Then there's a huge array of homeschooling laws and sometimes multiple
options even within same jurisdictions.

Once there are private school and charter school options, homeschooling is
just one more among many ways to go. The right of a government to dictate to
parents what they do with their children is not as straightforward as a law
against stealing a horse or a car.

-=-Those homeschoolers who choose to be "truant" rather than comply with
state law fan the flames of those (ironically, public schoolers) who
would like to see homeschooling banned entirely.-=-

This seems not to be at all the case where I live. Some years back when
I was more involved locally, estimates were that only from 1/3 to 1/2 of
homeschoolers are registered here. If asolutely everyone registered, it would NOT
be to the advantage of the school system. It's better for them NOT to have
everyone know how many families have bailed out completely. Who would be
elected to the school board if it were clear how many homeschoolers there were
and how happy and healthy and free they are? Why would voters vote for school
bonds and mil taxes if they knew how many homeschoolers there were?

People decide in their own ways what risks are worth taking. Some feel so
strongly about avoiding tests that they won't register unless they have to.

In cases of victimless "crimes" (not that failure to register is much of a
crime anyway--usually they'll just say "you need to comply with the law"),
usually people start to openly ignore the law, and then the law looks silly and is
changed. Some I can think of that have changed in many jurisdictions in
recent memory are cohabitation and sodomy. "Between consenting adults" is a
more common and respected term than either of those others. Technically in
some states, still, oral sex is illegal between husband and wife (and in many
more it was illegal until very recently). Should people in those states stick
to the missionary position because a law says to? Should people who want to
live together without being married hop across the border to another state?

We're getting further from unschooling and how learning works, though, and
people should bring the topic back if possible, please. The philosphical end
of the responsibilities homeschoolers might have to other homeschoolers is
interesting, but where it turns to particular laws and to politics goes beyond
the focus of this discussion list.

Sandra


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

Pamela Sorooshian

On Oct 31, 2005, at 2:04 PM, jimpetersonl wrote:

> Those homeschoolers who choose to be "truant" rather than comply with
> state law fan the flames of those (ironically, public schoolers) who
> would like to see homeschooling banned entirely.
>

> In (WA, specifically), compliance is very simple, very basic, and very
> non-intrusive. (There is no mechanism, for example, except entry or
> reenrty to the school system, that allows for the state to check the
> assessments or tests. The scores are completely between the testing
> folks and the family). "[A]ll decisions relating to philosophy or
> doctrine, selections of books, teaching materials and curriculum, and
> methods, timing, and place in the provision or evaluation of
> home-based instruction shall be the responsibility of the parent"
> in WA.


Lots of us don't comply. In fact, many prominent homeschoolers have
been open about their lack of compliance for years. In Washington
State there are the Hegeners, publishers of Home Education Magazine,
who certainly never made any secret of the fact that they never
complied with the state homeschool law.

I'm sure many people would have preferred that Rosa Parks just go
ahead and comply in order not to "fan the flames?"

-pam





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

aplan4life

Hi Heidi,

Well, I'm sure because Ren is your sis that you already know that we
have unschool friendly umbrella schools in Florida. I believe that
both Texas and Michigan are super easy, neither requires registration
that I am aware of.

Best of luck to you and if you ever swing by Pensacola on your way to
or from seeing your sister, I'd love to meet you.

~Sandy Winn - who you have been helping tremendously over at the
unschooling basics list



--- In [email protected], "frozenandcold"
<fivefreebirds@m...> wrote:
>
> I posted earlier but I think my post got lost in cyberspace. I was
> just wondering if I could hear from a few of you who don't comply
and
> are, technically, unschooling illegally. We live in Alaska, where
> there are absolutely no homeschool laws, we don't even have to
> register as a homeschooler, but we are getting ready to travel the
US
> in our motorhome for a year and then find a place (besides Alaska)
to
> settle down in. One of our big concerns, in finding a state to live
> in, is the homeschool laws.

jimpetersonl

No argument from me, with one coda:
If an unschooling family is going to choose civil disobedience, they
should do so with full knowledge of the law and the possible
consequences.
It was my understanding, from the original post, that, unlike Rosa
Parks, the WA family was unsure of the both. I fully support any
family that chooses civil disobedience in face of compulsory
attendance/homeschooling laws. I just think they ought to know what
refusing to give up that bus seat might entail.
I imagine that any movement to abolish homeschooling laws will come
from the unschooling end of the homeschooling "community"--and what an
interesting life learning experience family civil
disobedience/political action is. It's an interesting contrast to the
conservative school-at-homers whose children move into White House and
Congressional internships and degrees in law.
~Sue

[email protected]

In a message dated 11/1/05 12:32:58 PM, jimpetersonl@... writes:


> -=-No argument from me, with one coda:
> If an unschooling family is going to choose civil disobedience, they
> should do so with full knowledge of the law and the possible
> consequences. -=-
>
That's why I was asking for people from Washington to write to me on the side
with information about that.

-=-It was my understanding, from the original post, that, unlike Rosa
Parks, the WA family was unsure of the both. -=-

"The original post" was me bringing something I received in a letter to this
list so that I could get current, candid information from unschooling
residents of Washington.

-=-I imagine that any movement to abolish homeschooling laws will come
from the unschooling end of the homeschooling "community"--and what an
interesting life learning experience family civil
disobedience/political action is. -=-

I doubt there will be a movement to abolish homeschooling laws. It's more
likely that as with cohabitation and non-reproductive-only sexual practices,
the reality will become such that the laws seem silly, small and outmoded.

-=-  I fully support any
family that chooses civil disobedience in face of compulsory
attendance/homeschooling laws. -=-

Really? Your other e-mail seemed clearly to indicate it endangered the
rights of all homeschoolers and would surely result in the loss of custody of
their children.

Let's talk about how children learn on this list, as that's the purpose of
the list.

Sandra




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

jimpetersonl

Yes. Really.
And yes, I do see non-compliance as a danger to the rest of us--as
were the actions of civil rights leaders to African Americans in the
south.
But that's part of the beauty of unschooling, isn't it?--
That children learn from their parent's actions, and are present and
part of those same actions.

We've had some very interesting discussions on civil disobedience at
the dinner table in the last week, in part because of the passing of
Rosa Parks, in part how MLK Jr. and Socrates dealt with it. Our
current conversation is over the covert breaking of laws vs. the overt
breaking of them.

MLK says this in his Letter from a Birmingham Jail: "In no sense do I
advocate evading or defying the law, as would the rabid
segregationist. That would lead to anarchy. One who breaks an unjust
law must do so openly, lovingly, and with a willingness to accept the
penalty. I submit that an individual who breaks a law that conscience
tells him is unjust and who willingly accepts the penalty of
imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over
its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for law."
~Sue

> -=- I fully support any
> family that chooses civil disobedience in face of compulsory
> attendance/homeschooling laws. -=-
>
> Really? Your other e-mail seemed clearly to indicate it endangered
the > rights of all homeschoolers and would surely result in the loss
of custody of > their children.
>
> Let's talk about how children learn on this list, as that's the
purpose of > the list.
>
> Sandra

[email protected]

**One of our big concerns, in finding a state to live in, is the homeschool
laws.  We are so used to having complete freedom and I don't know how relaxed I
can be if I am not complying.**

Come to Illinois. We don't have to tell nobody nothin'! <eg>

Deborah