Re: [Unschooling-dotcom] Re: [HEM-Networking] Fw: HomeschoolingFamily Loses Custody
Lynda
Is there actually a state law that requires the submission of the plan or
not? some of the articles being published say there isn't.
Lynda
not? some of the articles being published say there isn't.
Lynda
----- Original Message -----
From: Fetteroll <fetteroll@...>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 4:17 AM
Subject: Re: [Unschooling-dotcom] Re: [HEM-Networking] Fw:
HomeschoolingFamily Loses Custody
> Though I'm from Mass I haven't been following this case on the state HSing
> group's list because of the legalistic nitpicking. (It makes me realize
why
> people get fed up with unschooling nitpicking ;-)
>
> It seemed shockingly uncaring to me that MA homeschoolers weren't
supporting
> the Bryants but apparently their case is based around their contention
that
> the compulsory attendance law goes against state constitutionally
guaranteed
> parental rights so the law itself is unconstitutional. There's a hugely
> steep learning curve involved in figuring out what in the world anyone is
> talking about in order to try to decide if such a law can be (legally)
> unconstitutional and if so whether it is and whether that really has
> anything to do with the legalities of homeschooling in MA. Basically the
> rallying cry is too muddled to get everyone to answer the call.
>
> (The Bryants stance is they don't have to submit an education plan to be
> approved by the Superintendent since the compulsory attendance law is
> unconstitutional. One of the problems that prevents people from rallying
> around the case is that the education plan is not a much of a hoop to jump
> through (I use Carol Narigon's which I can pass on if anyone's interested)
> and the case law is very clear that the state can't dictate the manner of
> education so unschooling is very easy in MA.)
>
> There's been a good summary of the two Mass homeschooling points of view
on
> the case and why the Bryants aren't being backed universally by
> homeschoolers in MA on the MHLA email list. (The second list has had many
> ongoing discussions about it and others.)
>
> masshomelearningassoc at Yahoo Groups (supposedly the MHLA list for
> nonpolitical homeschooling discussions but a good summary)
> MAhomeschoolers at Yahoo Groups (the MHLA list for political talk)
>
> Whether the Bryants have helped the homeschooling atmosphere in Mass as
they
> claim, or hindered as MHLA claims, apparently no real changes can happen
if
> the foundation of the changes keeps coming back to the argument of whether
> to work with what is there (compulsory attendance laws and others) or
> whether that's ridiculous because the laws are unconstitutional. :-/
>
> The scary/sad part is the DSS involvement in what is by-the-legal-book
> educational neglect and therefore child neglect, but which doesn't match
> reality since the kids are clearly being well educated. (They probably
know
> a lot more about law than a lot of lawyers!)
>
> Joyce
>
>
>
> on 12/17/01 7:32 PM, Helen Hegener at HEM-Editor@...
wrote:
>
> Thanks for posting that link, Lynda. I'd planned on forwarding it
> myself, as I believe this case is an important one, raising some
> critical questions which we as homeschoolers should be seriously
> thinking about and discussing. Anyone interested in this case might
> be interested in joining the NHEN-Legislative list and reading the
> last three days' archives for an in-depth discussion of the case and
> the issues it brings up:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NHEN-Legislative/
>
> Subscribe via email: [email protected]
>
> Helen
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> Message boards, timely articles, a free newsletter and more!
> Check it all out at: http://www.unschooling.com
>
> To unsubscribe, set preferences, or read archives:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Unschooling-dotcom
>
> Another great list sponsored by Home Education Magazine!
> http://www.home-ed-magazine.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
Fetteroll
on 12/18/01 11:13 AM, Lynda at lurine@... wrote:
reference in, I think, the compulsory attendance law, to private school or
being "otherwise educated". All homeschooling requirements are based on The
Care and Protection of Charles, a court case which, sometimes ambiguously,
describes what's required of parents and the scope of the superintendent's
involvement.
The judge ruled in the Charles case that parents are required to submit an
education plan. Then in a different part of his ruling -- if I'm recalling
the order of the statements correctly -- says if the superintendent/school
committee disapproves of the plan, the family can continue to homeschool
while the super/SC works on proving that the plan is inadequate. It never
says that submitting a plan is all that's needed to begin homeschooling, but
it certainly implies that.
on 12/18/01 11:19 AM, kayb85 at sheran@... wrote:
in the case law is a requirement to submit an education plan.
No one really wants to overturn Charles because, when interpretted
"properly" ;-) and the state homeschooling group is working on a set of
guidelines for superintendents, it's pretty homeschooling (and
*unschooling*!) friendly.
Joyce
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> Is there actually a state law that requires the submission of the plan orThere aren't any laws specifically about homeschooling in MA. There is a
> not? some of the articles being published say there isn't.
reference in, I think, the compulsory attendance law, to private school or
being "otherwise educated". All homeschooling requirements are based on The
Care and Protection of Charles, a court case which, sometimes ambiguously,
describes what's required of parents and the scope of the superintendent's
involvement.
The judge ruled in the Charles case that parents are required to submit an
education plan. Then in a different part of his ruling -- if I'm recalling
the order of the statements correctly -- says if the superintendent/school
committee disapproves of the plan, the family can continue to homeschool
while the super/SC works on proving that the plan is inadequate. It never
says that submitting a plan is all that's needed to begin homeschooling, but
it certainly implies that.
on 12/18/01 11:19 AM, kayb85 at sheran@... wrote:
> I thought their stance was that they didn't have to submit anThere is no legistlatively passed law and one of the unambiguous statements
> education plan because it wasn't required by law, and that the school
> district was requiring what was above and beyond the law.
in the case law is a requirement to submit an education plan.
No one really wants to overturn Charles because, when interpretted
"properly" ;-) and the state homeschooling group is working on a set of
guidelines for superintendents, it's pretty homeschooling (and
*unschooling*!) friendly.
Joyce
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]