How much control should government have over the educational decisions made by parents for their children?

Answer 1

You know, I really haven't come to a final view on this.

On the one hand, I wonder about mandatory schooling period. Should the governments truly have the right to require all children to have some sort of schooling? Are children not people, too? Before schooling was mandatory, most people still learned to read and write and all that, not because the government required it, because parents required it of their children. Did they achieve the same levels as 'required' today? Many did. Many surpassed this (obviously). Of course, this also begs the question: are all children truly benefitted by the required levels today?

But are modern parents the same? Are there too many issues now (primarily due to the sheer number of people) that the government ought to butt its nose into parenting to increase the chances that the kids don't end up living off the state (either due to being on welfare or in prison due to the high connection among low education/poverty/crime)? [But is this really why the government requires schooling? Is it really due to the children's or society's best interests or is it government self-interest, in money or status?] Is this what a responsible government should do?

I know the United Nations requires mandatory schooling. But what does that mean? Just because the government requires some form of schooling, does it mean they should dictate testing, content, hours, etc.?

I think of Texas, where there's no notification, no checking. This seems to be a government whose attitude is one of trust--that private schools, whatever their form, will provide something that will benefit the students, be they just general students or the adults' children. I'm not sure what I think about this. I kind of like the freedom and trust given; yet I do wonder how many may abuse it.

But there are other states that go so far as to have yearly testing and require even tracking the number of hours of study in the home! This just seems extreme to me. Are these children really going to have a horrible adulthood because they haven't had x number of hours of instruction at home?

I suppose I haven't given much of an answer. Just a lot of questions. lol.

Answer 2

Limited. The major problem in America is that government became a provider of education. Since the government is providing the education at the expense of all tax payers, it (just like broadcast television) has to appeal to the lowest common denominator. It is also why we spend a ridiculous amount of time debating such things as whether or not Intelligent Design and/or Evolution should be taught in school.

The public square (encompassing all government land and services that are essentially owned by and provided to all americans) can exist in two and only two forms. The first is the one we use today that is the source of many problems - cultural sanitization. Trying to eliminate any indication that all 300 million Americans don't share exactly the same opinion on everything by removing anything anyone dislikes through legislation and law suits. The second is to let everyone express and embrace their differences. This would require tolerance - i.e. I can pray to Jesus and you can pray to Allah and we should both be happy that we live somewhere where we're allowed to follow our on hearts. This is unlikely to ever truly happen.

There is an out though and it's called privatization. I'm an atheist and do not want Intelligent Design being forced down my kids throats. I have no problem with parents that want that in the class room putting their kids in a religious school though. The free market can provide these options for us, government by it's very nature cannot.

I believe government should be viewed as a regulatory agency only and never ever a direct provider because of aforementioned problems. In this case the government should check to see that the children are actually receiving an applicable eduacation. Let the parents decide the nuances of it though and make the schools compete for students.

My kids will be the ones using their hands to make society a better place. Their kids will be the ones clasping their hands together wishing for things to magically get better. And then we will all be happy won't we?

Answer 3

In order to answer this question I have to first make it clear that the Supreme Court of the US has recognized parenting as a constitutionally protected right. Educating children is part of parenting. In the Yoder case, the court acknowledged that Amish parents could refuse to send their kids to public schools and could use their own schools. As a result, government should have little control over the education of children. The one thing the govt. can do is assure that kids are being educated, whether in public, private or home schools. Anything beyond that is an abuse of the parents rights. By the way, there is a UN Treaty called the Rights of the Child Treaty which if ratified, would give kids the right to bring their parents before a UN judge or magistrate if the kid disagrees with any parenting decision made by the parents. This would undermine parenting rights big time and is totally UN-AMERICAN. Hilary is a big supporter of it.

Answer 4

Well that's it in a nutshell isn't it?
Have you heard about the homeschooling family in Germany that had their daughter taken away and under a psychiatric eval was told she had 'school phobia'? Look at the HSLDA website and learn.
The children are the property of the government once they cross that threshold into the public education building over there.
Parents do not need to be informed that their children are now the property of the state.
I believe the last time that was in effect was when Hiltler first introduced those laws to Germany (which by the way were never revoked)
Nice huh?
So, NO. The government should have no control over our children. Unless we want to be like Germany....or Communist.

Answer 5

Public education was not intended to be run by the public but the government. We let it get this far and it is like going thru a thick forest with an unknown destination to get change done.

If it is the choice to educate without the use of the public system than it should be up to the parents entirely. The government should not be governing our choice of education for our children.

Answer 6

I agree with answer man, up to a point. Yes, parental rights have been protected by the Supreme Court and as far back as the twenties the court stated that, well, excuse the cut and paste but this is what was written:

The fundamental theory of liberty upon which all governments in this Union repose excludes any general power of the State to standardize its children by forcing them to accept instruction from public teachers only. The child is not the mere creature of the State; those who nurture him and direct his destiny have the right, coupled with the high duty, to recognize and prepare him for additional obligations. (Pierce VS. Society of Sisters, 1925)

From this we get parental rights.

But, these parental rights are implied rights, meaning if you look at them in the context of history, they are pretty solid, but if left up to the interpretation of the SC, then they aren't so secure anymore. justices have voted against parental rights simply based on the fact they are not expressely mentioned in the constitution, therefore you see how parental rights, not just in education but in anything, can slip away.
Answer man also mentioned the UN Child treaty.
That's a biggie because it can completely override state laws and those implicit laws like parental rights.
If that is ratified in this country, and rumor has it that is on the top of a "certain someone's" to do list if she becomes president, then you can expect the UN to be able to intervene in your decision making process if they "feel" your decision(whatever decision that may be) is not in the best interest of your child.
As it is now, the government would have to take you to court and prove neglect or abuse.
Can you imagine what would happen if your rights can be denied simply because someone "feels" like it?
Think this is way too far out there?
The American Bar Association already backs the ratification of this treaty.

So, although I see misuses of parental rights in this country by a small handful of idiots, I'm not willing to give up my rights because of them.
Getting rid of the rights of the majority due to a small number of idiots misusing the system is SOP in this country anymore, so having something like the UN being able to tell people they can't make decisions for their own children is not that far away.
Unless we do something.
And the one thing you can do that will make a difference is educate yourself.
Don' t let someone tell you what you need to know. Find out for yourself.
Isn't that why we homeschool in the first place?
So our children will be able to think for themselves?

Answer 7

NONE! The government should not have a say in how children are educated! The government was created to protect the people, not educate them.

Answer 8

Being a previous homeschooled child i was annoyed by the governments tests, and could see my parents slight frustration. However, what has happened to our school systems? They arent doing so hot. Alot of parents are young and stupid and dont know whats right for there kids, let alone themselves. I think the government should monitor whats going on and offer support, but it should be somthing that is broken down into local offices, and run by local people, people who understand the specific needs of that particular community.

Answer 9

As a former educator in a private Christian school I have a definite opinion on this.

There is nothing wrong iwth public education as long as they stick to the fundamentals: English, math science. etc. My problem is when they start to teach morality. THAT is definately the parents job. I remember when my daughter was told she couldn't bring her Bible to school, because it might offend someone. BUT students were allowed to wear t-shirts with slogans promoting illegal behavior (pot leaves). There's something wrong with that picture.

I am not sure what the solution is. but govenment cannot control morality. That is not their job.

Answer 10

None.
The state and the public school system must do a good job with the children with whom they are entrusted. The state and school system needn't concern themselves with the education of children whose parents choose to attend to the schooling themselves, instead of delegating the work to hired help.