Showing posts with label homeschooling restrictions. Show all posts
Showing posts with label homeschooling restrictions. Show all posts

Monday, November 28, 2011

NJ Homeschoolers! Your Calls Needed Now to Stop S3105


IMPORTANT UPDATE Calls No Longer Needed on Huttle-Weinberg Bills

Dear HSLDA Members and Friends:

Thank you for your phone calls! They have had a significant impact. 

Our opposition to the Huttle-Weinberg bills is now well known in the 
legislature, greatly reducing the likelihood the bills could be 
quietly hurried through at the end of the legislative session (in 
early January) under a suspension of legislative rules.

><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><


It has been a long time since I posted an article about proposed legislation in NJ.

 

Once again, NJ is trying to punish homeschoolers for the failures of DYFS. HSLDA Attorney Scott Woodruff's conclusion is chilling:

    "New Jersey would overnight have one of the worst homeschool laws in the nation. The New Jersey tax base and overall economy could suffer as homeschool families avoid (or leave) the state."

Governor Christie has said that something like $70 billion in wealth has left NJ because of the unfriendly business climate and the confiscatory taxes. NJ's favorable homeschool climate is the only reason we stayed all these years.  My husband has been trying to talk me into moving to Pennsylvania for years, and I was never willing because of the homeschooling regulations. Now that we are no longer homeschooling, it won't affect me directly, but it WILL affect many of my friends.

I just received this e-lert from HSLDA concerning S3105, the latest attempt by Loretta Weinberg to increase homeschool regulation. The e-lert is posted here in its entirety.

Stop State-Mandated Annual Medical Exams and Portfolios for Homeschoolers

Dear HSLDA Members and Friends:

Your calls are needed immediately to stop S3105, a bill Senator Loretta Weinberg filed last week, despite many calls asking her not to. The bill treats every homeschool parent like a child abuser by requiring them to file documentation of annual medical exams.

It would require parents to submit each child’s name, birth date, and homeschool instructor’s name every year by August 1. A mandatory portfolio would be due June 30. But what bureaucrats can require in a child’s portfolio is virtually unlimited.

The bill gives the State Board of Education dramatic new power over homeschool families by empowering it to regulate homeschooling. The Board could mandate exactly how all the bill’s requirements would be enforced. It could define homeschooling itself.

There is virtually no limit as to what the Board could require in the annual medical exam. No issue—no matter how personal, sensitive, unwelcome or intrusive—would be off limits.

Lawmakers who act against the will of the people can be removed from office. But State Board of Education members are appointed, not elected. New Jersey homeschool families would be virtually at their mercy.

This bill would turn New Jersey’s current sensible legal framework into a morass of regulations and burdensome red tape. With three filings every year for 42,000 homeschooled children, overworked public school staff would have yet more burdens added to their shoulders.

Taxpayers would pay the cost of filing, processing, checking, responding to, and storing 120,000 sets of paperwork each year. Taxes will inevitably go up to pay for it.

The media carried reports recently about the Division of Youth and Family Services (DYFS) failing to protect an allegedly homeschooled child in danger—with tragic results. S3105 wrongly punishes parents for the failures of DYFS.
Action Requested

Please make three courteous phone calls by Thursday using the contact information below.

    Call Sen. Stephen Sweeney. He is the president of the New Jersey Senate, and he controls its business.
    Call Sen. Teresa Ruiz. She is the chair of the Senate Education Committee, to which S3105 was referred.
    If you are a constituent of the other four members of the committee (Sens. Jim Whelan, Diane Allen, Thomas Kean and Shirley Turner), call them. (ed note: Calling Shirley turner? Good luck with that.) Or use our legislative toolbox to see if you are a constituent of one of those senators.

Your message can be as simple as “Please oppose S3105. Don’t punish homeschoolers and public school staff for the failures of DYFS.”

Or you can frame your own message using information in this email, including material in the “background” section below.


Contact Information

Sen. Stephen Sweeney:

(856) 251-9801 (West Deptford office)

(856) 455-1011 (Bridgeton office)

(856) 339-0808 (Salem office)

Sen. Teresa Ruiz:

(973) 484-1000

Sen. Jim Whelan:
(609) 383-1388

Sen. Diane Allen:

(609) 239-2800

Sen. Thomas Kean:

(732) 974-0400

Sen. Shirley Turner:

(609) 530-3277
 

Background

Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA), Education Network of Christian Homeschoolers of New Jersey (ENOCH), Catholic Homeschoolers of New Jersey (CHNJ), and New Jersey Homeschool Association (NJHA), and others, are united as a task force in opposing S3105.

You can view the bill online. DYFS had numerous contacts with the family of the abused girl who was in the news this summer. A fresh report was called in just a few days before she died. DYFS did virtually nothing about the report and closed it. Fix DYFS. That’s where the problem is.

Complicated rules always foster needless conflicts, and this would become an everyday occurrence. After the state board adopts regulations, local school systems would adopt their own requirements, creating an additional layer of red tape.

New Jersey would overnight have one of the worst homeschool laws in the nation. The New Jersey tax base and overall economy could suffer as homeschool families avoid (or leave) the state.

The outstanding academic achievements of homeschool students has been documented by many studies. Homeschoolers typically score 30 percentile points above others on standardized tests. Since homeschoolers score the same in states with heavy regulation and states with light regulation, adding new regulations is highly unlikely to help academic performance (source: Dr. Brian Ray, “Home Schooling Achievement,” 1997).

Thank you for standing with us for freedom!

Sincerely yours,

Scott Woodruff

HSLDA Senior Counsel

Thursday, August 20, 2009

Thoughts From A Conservative Mom: Sweden outlaws home schooling

Here is a sobering article following up on yesterday's post.

Thoughts From A Conservative Mom: Sweden outlaws home schooling

So much for those who are thinking that the UNCRC is not going to be a problem for the US.

Just because you are not homeschooling does not mean that teams of government bureaucrats will not be able to override your every decision if they deem it not in "the best interests of the child."

Do you REALLY want someone else telling you what is best for your children?

Parents, oppose ratification of this treaty with every breath, or risk losing the right to direct the upbringing of your children.

Including their education.

Including their spiritual development, or lack thereof.

A lot of parents don't care about that because they think that will only affect those crazy Christians who hate the "godless" schools and want to establish a Theocracy on earth. "Good riddance," they are thinking. "We could do with less religion in the world."

Atheist parent, do you want the government to tell you that you are required to take your child to church if he wants to go?

Muslim parent, do you want the government to tell you that you must allow your child to convert to Judaism if that is what she desires?

That's what I thought.

This affects everyone.

Sunday, December 21, 2008

Criminal Charges Dropped against German Homeschoolers

HSLDA brings us an update on a criminal case against a German home schooling family. Please continue to keep them in your prayers.

The Brause family of Zittau, Germany, appeared in court recently to defend against criminal charges aimed at punishing them because they homeschool. The family had lost partial custody of their children about a year ago after the German Youth Welfare Office, also known as the Jugendamt, had filed a petition of neglect in family court because the children were homeschooled. According to a report by the International Human Rights Group (IHRG), the criminal charges have now been dropped. German Attorney Johannes Hildebrandt represented the family in the criminal matter and told HSLDA that the family court matter remains. HSLDA requests that you continue to keep this family in your prayers as they seek to regain full custody of their children.

Thursday, November 20, 2008

German Homeschoolers seek asylum in the US

Excuse me? Asylum for homeschooling?

While I am sure there are plenty of people who think that homeschoolers belong in an asylum, that isn't the kind I am talking about.

I thought "asylum" was when a person persecuted for political opinions or religious beliefs in his or her own country is given refuge in another country.

Think Tiananmen Square. Russian defectors. Refugees fleeing the Hitler regime.

Of course, now I understand. Fleeing the Hitler regime, or at least, fleeing a law against homeschooling that dates back to the Third Reich.

Uwe and Hannelore Romeike and their family have left their home in Bissingen, Germany, to escape persecution under a requiring all children to attend public school. Check the sidebar for a list of other posts in this blog about the plight of German homeschoolers. The law prohibits homeschooling because the German government frowns upon "the emergence of parallel societies based on separate philosophical convictions" that (*horrors*) might be taught by parents at home.

Imagine that. Having to flee the country because you don't agree with the government about how you want your children to be educated. Let it sink in for a minute.

"The freedom we have to homeschool our children is wonderful. ... We don't have to worry about looking over our shoulder anymore, wondering when the youth welfare officials will come or how much money we have to pay in fines."


What is sad is that these homeschoolers may have jumped out of the frying pan into the fire. Click on the "digg story" link below and check out the opinions people have about the future of homeschooling under Obama.

Then check out this story about the bill that was introduced in NJ that has the noble sounding goal of providing a "Chilcren's Bill of Rights" but that actually will result in an erosion of your parental rights.
read more | digg story

Saturday, November 15, 2008

Coming Soon to YOUR state - Children's Bill of Rights

As a homeschooler, one of my primary interests is how bills such as NJ's Childrens' Bill of Rights affect my choice to homeschool.

But this one is different - S.2334 it will affect ALL parents and ALL children and EVERY taxpayer in NJ.

I happened to mention to a friend that I was going to be blogging about the dangers of the proposed N.J. Children's Bill of Rights. With its patriotic name, and its noble goal of of guaranteeing that "the best interests of the child shall be of primary consideration", she could not grasp how something that sounded so good could be giving me a headache.

Carolee Adams, the president of Eagle Forum in New Jersey, has formed an advocacy group on Facebook called "STOP S.2334 - THE NEW JERSEY CHILDREN's BILL OF RIGHTS!" In her recent post she states:

This Bill represents another unfunded mandate of the already bankrupt State of New Jersey,and a Bill that will undermine the sacred role of parental rights to direct the upbringing and education of their children. Under S2334, those parental rights will then be transferred to the State which will then have the unequivocal authority to decide what is in the best interests of the child in matters concerning health, safety, well-being, and physical and mental development. This intrusive Bill expands the role of the State into the privacy of the family structure in countless ways -- and at a time when the State cannot even take care of its own imperatives. Corruption, financial mismanagement, and encroaching, inept governance in New Jersey are notoriously known throughtout the country. Certainly, New Jersey's children are safer and more wisely cared for by parents than by the State which will only use this new role to create jobs and further empty the pockets of the already beleaguered New Jersey taxpayer! S2234 must be opposed by every taxpayer and family in New Jersey! Stop S2334 NOW!


In June of 2006, I posted an article here by homeschooling mom Alexandra Cohen about how her husband, the editor of the Brussels Journal was threatened with prosecution by Belgian authorities because they felt he had not adequately educated his children, and hence, neglected his duties as a parent, which is a criminal offense in Belgium.

This criminal offense is a function of Belgium's status as a signatory nation on the totalitarian power grab known as the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, the same treaty that the sponsors of S.2334 are using as the basis for this dangerous New Jersey bill.

Michael Farris pointed out that in 1995 “the United Kingdom was deemed out of compliance” with the Convention “because it allowed parents to remove their children from public school sex-education classes without consulting the child.” The HSLDA chairman said that, “by the same reasoning, parents would be denied the ability to homeschool their children unless the government first talked with their children and the government decided what was best. Moreover, parents would no longer have the right to bring up their children according to their own philosophical or religious beliefs, as the government, following the guidelines of a UN “committee of experts” would determine what religious teaching, if any, served the child’s best interest.”
Under President Obama, we are likely to see the ratification of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, CEDAW, and other UN treaties that have never been ratified brought up for another vote, sweeping us farther away from constitutional law. Obama has openly promised to "embrace the rule of international law."

New Jersey, always proud to line up behind anything that will further tax or regulate its beleagured citizens, is only the first of many states that will be willing to pass similar bills.

Friday, August 15, 2008

California Dreamin'

As I mentioned the other day, the University of California has decided students who have been educated in a Christian worldview that rejects evolution and relies on the Bible renders them unfit for matriculation at any UC school.

This week, a federal judge agreed with them.

The ruling declared that the University of California can deny course credit to Christian high school graduates who have been taught with textbooks that reject evolution and declare the Bible infallible, according to the article in the San Francisco Chronicle.

Rejecting claims of religious discrimination and stifling of free expression, U.S. District Judge James Otero of Los Angeles said UC's review committees cited legitimate reasons for rejecting the texts - not because they contained religious viewpoints, but because they omitted important topics in science and history and failed to teach critical thinking.

Failed to teach critical thinking? Do you have any idea how important we Christian homeschoolers consider it for our children - indeed, ourselves - to be able to explain why we have considered the historical or scientific "evidence" and rejected it in favor of believing in God and the Bible? In this unbelieving day and age?

So it is interesting to me that a judge and a bunch of academics have decided that students who attended a school that taught something THEY don't believe is true are not worthy to attend UC schools.

Funny thing is, they probably taught their children to believe in Santa Claus - something that they knew in advance was not true.

Not only that, nobody can actually prove that the thing they believe instead - evolution - is true. A lot of people believe it, but that doesn't make it true.

The object of your faith is more important than the intensity, or even the sincerity of your faith. Intensely and sincerely believing that a nice old fat man lives at the North Pole, knows what I am doing all year, comes down my chimney once a year after circling the whole world in a flying sleigh powered by reindeer, one of which has a light bulb in his nose does not make it true.

I can remember being criticized when my children were small for not teaching them to believe in Santa Claus. "They have to have something to believe in," they sniffed.

They DO have something to believe in.

Now Thomas (called Didymus), one of the Twelve, was not with the disciples when Jesus came. So the other disciples told him, "We have seen the Lord!" But he said to them, "Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe it."

A week later his disciples were in the house again, and Thomas was with them. Though the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, "Peace be with you!" Then he said to Thomas, "Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe."

Thomas said to him, "My Lord and my God!"

Then Jesus told him, "Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed." John 20:24-29 (NIV)

Tuesday, August 12, 2008

For all you single issue voters out there

Single Issue Voters are passionate about a particular issue, hence the name. But you will find more single issue voters who are passionate on one side or the other about immigration, abortion, same-sex marriage, and other social issues than about foreign policy, oil, or the economy - with the possible exception of the war in Iraq.

You almost never find anyone whose single issue is homeschooling.

Actually, I think the Single Issue that encompasses homeschooling and other educational choices would be "parental rights." And that is something I don't think enough people are concerned about.

The same court case that established a right to home school is the case that determined that parents possess a fundamental constitutional right to raise their children as they see fit: the 1925 ruling in Pierce v. the Society of Sisters.

But in today's legal and cultural climate, judges routinely deny parental rights, and there is an additional threat from those who would like to see international law as the standard for what is acceptable parental action on behalf of their children.

Then there's California.

Need I say more? From the state that brought you Muslim role playing in public schools and banned hateful references to "Mom" and "Dad" from textbooks lest any homosexuals be offended comes the latest assault on the sensibilities of Christians, not only in California, but all over the US.

There was considerable Christian media attention focused on the Rachel L. ruling in California this year that directly attacked homeschooling freedoms, and even some secular attention. Many groups with various agendas banded together in support of homeschooling.

But where was everybody last year when the University of Califormia quietly placed our Christian worldview in the crosshairs by declaring that any student educated with curricula that made even the smallest reference to a biblical worldview would not be allowed to attend any UC school?

Under the admissions guidelines to University of California colleges, in-state students must either score in the top two to three percent on standardized tests or complete a core curriculum of approved preparatory classes (called "a-g" classes) to be deemed eligible for entrance into the state university system.

More than 90 percent of UC students achieved eligibility by completing an approved a-g curriculum. Under the disputed policy, however, a-g classes based on books that mention God or the Bible don't count, effectively making a secular education a prerequisite for admission.

Can you say "Germany"? Basically, this policy forces parents to choose between their faith and their dream or their children's dream of attending UC.

Calvary Chapel Christian School and 5 students have filed suit against UC, saying that this discriminatory policy creates an ultimatum for Christian schools to either give up any idea of their students attending UC schools, or to teach from a secular worldview.

World Net Daily reported last month that according to the lawsuit, a variety of textbooks with supplemental perspectives were accepted – just not those with a Christian perspective.

For example, "Western Civilization: The Jewish Experience" and "Issues in African History" were accepted, but "Christianity's Influence on American History" was rejected.

"Feminine Roles in Literature," "Gender, Sexuality, and Identity in Literature" and "Literature of Dissent" were accepted, but "Christianity and Morality in American Literature" was not.

Most strikingly, "Intro to Buddhism," "Introduction to Jewish Thought," "Women's Studies & Feminism" and "Raza Studies" were deemed acceptable electives, but "Special Providence: American Government" was unacceptable, both as a civics and elective course.

"In other words, (UC schools) routinely approve courses which add viewpoints such as non-Christian religion, feminism, an ethnic preference, a political viewpoint, or multiculturalism, or that focus on religions such as Buddhism or Judaism, (and plaintiffs believe they should evenhandedly approve such courses), but disapprove courses which add viewpoints based on conservative Christianity," the court filings said.

Even though this case is about Christian schools teaching a Christian worldview, should the court rule in UC's favor, it will be a terrible strike at the heart of Christian home schooling, and any kind of educational choice that includes a biblical worldview.

So as much as I am loathe to say it, it matters where the candidates stand on homeschooling. The only one who was solidly and vocally in favor of homeschooling was Ron Paul.

McCain supports vouchers, home schooling, charter schools and generally any policy that helps parents choose the private or public school that they want their children to attend. McCain argues that school choice will create market forces that will spur competition among schools, not just for students but for the best teachers. He has also said that he would expand federally funded vouchers called Opportunity Scholarships that would let more parents pick the school of their choice.

Obama also wants to give parents more options when they pick a school for their children, but he would limit those choices to public charter schools. He does not support vouchers for children to attend private and parochial schools. He doesn't mention homeschooling specifically on his website or in any of his literature. I have never heard him mention it in a speech.

We need to be asking this question in terms of "parental rights" instead of homeschooling.

Monday, August 11, 2008

Germany declares WAR on homeschooling

Check out the short video and read the article by clicking on the title link or clicking here.


As stated in earlier posts, the German government's argument against home schooling as stated by Wolfgang Drautz, German Consul General is that "The public has a legitimate interest in countering the rise of parallel societies that are based on religion or motivated by different world views and in integrating minorities into the population as a whole."

"Germany does not want the kind of citizens that home schooling produces. They've seen how the home-schooling movement in the U.S. developed and they're very keen on that not happening here," said German academic Klaus Guenther, who is also an American citizen and was home schooled.

I'll bet they don't. As I mentioned the other day, staggering numbers of home schoolers are more likely to vote and be politically active than the general population. Moreover, only 4% of former homeschoolers believe politics and government are too difficult to understand. That would be a dangerous number of informed citizens for a government that is using as its justification a law that was first put into effect during the Third Reich!

Where is the EU in all of this? I thought they were going to be getting involved.

Wednesday, July 30, 2008

Ill wind blows for homeschooling

This has been a tough couple of years for homeschooling.

Even as homeschooling is enjoying more widespread public acceptance than ever before, and more evidence that it is not only viable, but a superior method of education, there is also evidence that teachers' unions, state boards of education, and governments want to eliminate it - and if they cannot do that, severely restrict it.

Witness the ruling in California that effectively banned homeschooling unless the parents held a teaching license qualifying them to teach in public schools.

Witness homeschoolers specifically excluded from a contest sponsored by Subway Restaurants that any student of an institutional school could enter and win.

Witness the gross persecution (and prosecution!) of parents in Germany.

Witness the first time in 15 years that a jurisdiction has enacted laws that increased homeschooling regulations.

Drip. Drip. Drip.

Now, some of these situations have actually been resolved, like Subway apologizing to home schoolers, and a number of positive developments in the California case.

Presidential candiate Ron Paul actually had homeschooling as an active part of his platform.

But the last congressional elections swept in swarms of Democrats and confirmed Nancy Pelosi as Speaker of the House. An Obama presidency is not out of the realm of possibility.

It is interesting that the rabid supporters of other kinds of deadly "choices" do not support educational choice.

Now, I am not interested in debating the relative merits of the candidates, because at the moment I am a "None of the Above" supporter. Neither do I think someone should vote for a candidate based solely on his position on homeschooling. I realize there are entire groups of home school families who support each candidate for various reasons.

But a candidate's stance on educational choice speaks volumes about what he or she really thinks about parental rights, and whether he trusts parents to raise their own children. Whether he thinks the state should have carte blanche for 12 years to disabuse your child of any archaic notions he may have gotten from his stupid parents about God, right and wrong, American sovereignty, or anything else that might keep her from becoming a good global citizen.

It doesn't look the same as the current prosecution of home schoolers in Germany, but it is the germ of the same idea. Eventually it WILL look the same if we are not vigilant.

Have you really thought through what each candidate's policies as president will mean for your right to home school?