Will the next president of the US put their kids in the DC Public Schools?

Question

Assuming they have school aged children. And if they don't, why not? Do you blame them or think they should be part of the solution instead of "opting out" of the system? And isn't it a little bit hypocritical about talking about fixing the schools and trusting the schools to educate the country's children when they don't even use the public school system themselves?

Amy Carter is the only presidental child in modern history who has gone to the DC public schools.

Answer 1

No, I doubt very seriously if the next president of the U.S. will enroll their children in DC public schools. The answer as to why not is because DC public schools are at the bottom of the barrel, and I don't blame anyone who opts not to allow their children to go to DC schools. It's not hypocritical to not send one's children to failing schools.

Nevertheless, the president, other leaders, teachers, and parents should try to fix that school system whether their children attend those schools or not. The future of all children in this country will affect the economy, U.S. world status, etc.

I live in a major city in Illinois and have chosen to homeschool my child, and I ignore all criticism about this choice. I know why I am homeschooling my child, and it is the best choice for my family.

If a family has the resources to send their children to an elite private school, hire private tutors, homeschool, etc., that is their choice. This applies to the president also.

Answer 2

As to "opting out" of the system, I think we're fortunate to have that "right" in this country. If one has the means, it's a "right" everywhere else in the world. Why should we (the U.S.) be different.

There's absolutely NOTHING hypocritical about talking or acting on fixing a broken system that one is not personally participating in with the presence of kids (the President would be paying taxes to support the broken system regardless, just like the rest of us).

My local public schools are pretty darned good but to make them that way, we parents provide a huge amount of support in cherity and extra help. Without that help, they'd probably suck. Also, despite that, most of the parents would probably take thier kids out and put them into private schools if they could afford the cost.

As responsible parents I would think that they should take advantage of any opportunity to help and position their children's futures.

It's a fundamental parental responsibility. I don't think it matters whether the parent is a private citizen or public figure.

I can see a few reasons to send the kids to private schools:
1) It would probably be easier for the Secret Service to do their job.
2) Controls on media access to the kids. I'd want my kids to have a somewhat normal life.
3) In the DC area, imagine the contacts the kids would make! Childhood friends with major diplomats and industrialists' kids from all over the world!

All that could really help set the kids lives as adults. What better gift could a parent give!

Answer 3

The reason US presidents don't put their children in public schools is that papparazzis are allowed on public property. They are merely trying 2 protect their kids from the spotlight. That's what happened with Chelsea when Clinton became president.
If a minority becomes prez, they would definitely not put their kids in public school because on increased scrutiny they'll get from being from a black (or w.e.) presidential family. Barak Obama has a 5 and 8 year old. Wouldn't he want to protect them from the spotlight as well?
As for Amy Carter, don't forget she got kicked out of Brown. Maybe it isn't always a good thing she went to public school.

Answer 4

Yes, Jimmy Carter did send Amy to the public school. It was a rather nice, humble gesture.

But I think I've heard that the school themselves found it to be a pain having the secret service in there. And there might have been other compications that we haven't heard of.

Though it is a pity, the President (in modern times anyway) is quite insulated from the rest of us. And trying to breach this separation through his children is not likely to really accomplish anything.

Answer 5

public system in this Country is a disaster area children's running the hallways contently from room to room,this must stop,have the teacher change classes,and not the children,2nt,do not mix the girls and the boys in the classes,the children will give More attention in classes, must be a dress cot and not with rep pans and lipstick,strictly prohibited to took back to teacher plus other things.school is a blase to lorn ,schools give the foundation to very good society,i hope the next precedent do just that

Answer 6

Probably not.

There may be a security issue and the having the child may cause disruption in the school and the classroom.

That said it would be a good idea.

Answer 7

Only if we elect an idiot.