Official Examines Home-Schooled Kids' Safety
DES MOINES, Iowa -- In response to two recent criminal cases in central Iowa involving parents keeping children out of school, an official examines the safety of home-schooled students.
In a public or private school, teachers and counselors are obligated to report suspicions of neglect of abuse -- and that is an important protection, said Stephen Scott, executive director of Prevent Child Abuse Iowa.
"Our child protection system really relies on them. It's up to them to make those reports, and when those are cut out of the situation, children are clearly not as safe," Scott said.
Scott also said it is rare for a parent to use home-schooling to shield abuse.
Jamie Phillips, a home school parent, said the students are already protected.
"I am encouraged that we are really examining these cases, but I don't think there's anything that can be done that has not already been done to protect these kids," Phillips said.
Two recent central Iowa cases prompted a closer look at the safety precautions for home-schooled students.
Tracey Dyess, 17, was charged with two counts of first-degree murder last week after a house fire in Griswold killed her siblings. Police said Dyess had not been going to school. Brian Street, who lived in the home, was charged with 10 counts of third-degree sexual abuse.
In February, Jon Neely, of Winterset, was charged with child endangerment after his daughter was found in a dark bedroom. In October, Neely withdrew the girl from school, claiming she would be home schooled.
Okay, I don't home-school my kids anymore... but I will staunchly defend a parent's right to choose that educational option for their kids. The operative word here is choose. No child is exactly like another, and they all have differing educational needs. No-one knows their kid like a parent (if they're doing their job and taking parenting seriously), and if a parent wants to sacrifice to stay home with their kids all day and school them himself/herself, more power to them. It's no picnic, and I have a huge amount of respect for those who do it.
That being said, I have to point out that NEITHER of these cases has much, if anything, to do with homeschooling. But it's so like the mainstream media to jump on that bandwagon, since it's attacking something that (mostly) right-wing evangelicals have cornered the market on and have embraced as a way to keep their children from being infected with ideas and philosophies that are completely contrary to their entire belief system.
The first case is of a seventeen-year-old who wasn't going to school. Well, duh. She doesn't HAVE to anymore. Sixteen is the cutoff age for compulsory attendance. Tracy's case is of weird, sick abuse -- not homeschooling -- and to toss around the "homeschooler" label is a cheap shot aimed at painting the entire homeschooling community with a nasty, gooey, tarry brush. It's bogus. This was not a "homeschool family" but the MSM doesn't care to make that distinction.
The second case is also one of sick, demented abuse... and there is a LOT more to that story than is being mentioned in the article. Of course, it's just obvious to anyone that it's homeschooling that's the problem here. Anyone who would pull their kid out of the public school system is obviously a prime candidate for a child abuser and should be profiled as such. At least, that's what this report would have you conclude.
Nevermind the rampant amount of abusers who send their kids to public school. Nobody mentions them, of course, and I'll wager that there's a MUCH higher percentage of abused kids in public schools than in home schools. But no, we have to nitpick at the competition, make them sound as though they're all criminals, rather than really addressing the violence and the vacuum-at-the-core that plagues so many of our public schools. We dance around with stuff like "Character Counts" and the six pillars, etc... but no-one takes it a step further. Why are those six pillars important? Are they just arbitrary? Where did they come from? Who says I have to do them? What if I can't do them or don't want to do them? What if I've never known anyone or seen anyone do them in my entire life growing up? There are myriad problems with secular character curricula, because they lack a central raison d'etre.
And because, by definition, home schools actually HAVE this reason for being, they're succeeding. Hugely. There is a PURPOSE to our existence, and home schools are free to teach this. People don't just home school by default; no, particularly in Iowa and many other states, it's quite a hassle to jump through the state's hoops to get "approved" to home school your own child (which is ridiculous, in my opinion, but that's another post for another day). So someone who actually home schools in this state generally really means it. Has a reason for doing it, and isn't discouraged by bureaucracy and red tape obstacles to doing it.
That there are a couple of random cases of weirdos who have no intention of educating their children but instead are looking for a way to hide their sick intentions... that should in NO WAY cast a shadow on legitimate homeschooling families. That we have to make a big deal of it and show homeschooling in as negative a light as possible, make it seem like it's obviously just a coverup for abusers so that we can justify putting more state and federal restraints on people who legitimately do it... well, that seems to be one of the goals of the mainstream media.
No comments:
Post a Comment