We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.

Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]

Home sweet home

I am aware of the arguments in favour of home-schooling. The educational standards tend to be higher. Children are usually brought up as reasonable human beings and not part of a pack of savages. In principle, home schooling allows for an upbringing that is tailored to each child. The conscription of children in schools is removed.

And then something like this comes along.

There are two benefits of even the most useless schools. Children meet other children their own age, which is useful if one is not intent on becoming a hermit.

Of course there is plenty of unreported abuse that occurs in full view. In some schools abuse is ignored or even inflicted. But most basically of all, a 12 year-old child turning up weighing 35 pounds with burn marks and bruises in rags might be noticed. So having children turn up somewhere where their disappearance or injury will be noticed is a valuable function of schools. Perhaps they need to open twice a month for roll-call and then let them go home?

59 comments to Home sweet home

  • Euan Gray

    To be fair, I’m not sure this sort of thing happens all that often.

    Having said that, though, I think we nasty, evil statists in Britain have reasonable enough procedures:

    The law says one MUST provide an education, but does not specify where or of what form – home schooling is perfectly acceptable. The law also empowers (andi n fact requires) the state to periodically check that the requirements of the law (a suitable and efficient education) are being met, and this is done by means of occasional home visits by the education authority. Presumably, such people would notice the tortured rag-wearing student as being somewhat exceptional.

    Seems reasonable to me.

    EG

  • Winzeler

    This type of knee-jerk reaction is exactly how and why governments have gained so much control. Sure it sounds like a noble cause right now, but think of how a “roll call” like this could be abused.

  • I’m not sure that an instance like this is an argument against homeschooling any more than an instance of child abuse by a teacher is an argument against school.

    If home visits by education authorities are the answer, why not just have CCTV in every room so that parental conduct can be monitored by suitably qualified social workers? I’m sure an artful child abuser could persuade the child to keep quiet for the duration of the annual inspection. I think there may be a case for closer supervision of adopted children, but biological parents should, by default, be left to get on with their homeschooling.

  • boo

    Sure…and suppose you round up all the kids for one of your inspections and something like this(Link) happens?

  • I think the author may have missed that part about this being a blog for people with a critically rational individualist perspective.

    The article states that the kids are not the biological children of these psychos, and also mentions a foster parent application. The state of course, won’t comment. I’ll bet at least a couple of the kids are foster children, placed in that home BY THE STATE. Florida is famous for it’s very poor child services division. Last year there was a problem when they could not find several hundred children that were in the foster care system. None of which, of course, excuses the adults actions. However, the same state that likely placed the kids in the dangerous situation in the first place is not exactly the answer to the problem, is it?

    However, it’s easier to blame homeschooling, especially when you are 3000 miles away and ignorant of the facts.

  • Pawpaw

    The very last site I expected to see a liberal, knee-jerk reaction was Samizdata. Get a grip, Antoine.

    Body checks for home schooled kids? What comes next? Psychological checks?

    Let’s not open this Pandora’s Box!

  • Things like this are generally noticed by the neighbors when the children come out to play. People here are pretty nosy about children, even in cosmopolitan New York City – several years ago, a Danish couple almost got arrested for leaving their child outside the restaurant where they were eating. People have been arrested for hitting their kids in a non-abusive manner. If anything, the problem is that the state overregulates, not underregulates, corporal punishment. Every household has a volunteer neighborhood Stasi, ready to inform on parents at the drop of a pin.

  • Mrs. du Toit

    Let me add to the voices of shock at such a statist post on Samizdata.

    Why don’t we just have twice monthly checks of everyone–bring in your ID card and we’ll check women over for bruises (in case their husband is beating them). We can do pee checks to make sure no one is using illegal drugs, too.

    Hey, it’s all in the interest of protecting people.

    I am aware of the arguments in favour of home-schooling….

    You mean, like the fundamental right of parents to educate their children as they see fit?

    It isn’t a argument of whether home school is better academically or socially from any other kind of school. It’s an issue of rights.

    Antoine, are you feeling OK? This is not like you.

  • Johnathan Reale

    I am homescooling (in the unschooling flavor) my three children, and my wife and I consider ourselves very fortunate to live in a state with no notification requirements whatsoever. I can truly appreciate my fellow homeschoolers’ and/or libertarians’ strong reaction against the suggestion that state involvement might serve a useful function, as such homeschooling rights as we have were hard won at very, very dear cost by those who came before us.

    That said, I hold to a minimal positive rights theory for young minors, where guardians who do not wish to provide care to their wards must, at a minimum, attempt to secure other guardians for them. And while parents’ or other guardians’ feelings toward children will be a far more effictive guarantor of those rights than the state, there are going to be some cases where the state would do a better job. However, I consider the likelihood of state efficacy so small, and the dangers of reversing gains for parental rights so great, that it is a tradeoff I am willing to support.

    Not for a second do I consider Antoine to be “going soft” on libertarianism; we are done a service to remember the real consequences of the positions we advocate, lest we let our beliefs go unexamined for too long. I may have a definite conclusion, but I don’t consider it beyond debate.

  • “So having children turn up somewhere where their disappearance or injury will be noticed is a valuable function of schools. Perhaps they need to open twice a month for roll-call and then let them go home?”

    I would point out two facts:

    1) Far and away, the vast majority of people do not conduct themselves in such abominable ways.

    Your proposal would subject them to arbitrary state approval of their lives. As a friend of mine pointed out a long time ago: “The law leaves no freedom for people who know what they’re doing and behave rationally and peacefully.” Your proposal is a fine working example. Get this straight: there is no moral competence to force people to submit their lives to your review.

    2) This horrible thing in Florida happened in spite of any number of laws prohibiting it.

    This is irrefutable empirical evidence of the incompetence of law to actually prevent it.

  • John

    A nice well-balanced article. I’m not sure I agree that people should be forced to “roll-call” every n days/weeks, since that is flawed in so many ways. I think people should be allowed to home-school, but I’m not sure it’s a good idea, since it often leads to lack of social skills from my experience.

    I strongly disagree with Billy’s (1) point. Just because only happens a little, doesn’t mean we should ignore it. That’s a slippery road down to ignoring loads of problems, IMHO. Only a few people get shot by totalitarian right/left wing nutters, so do we just ignore it? Not many people die in air crashes, so do we just not have any safety regulations? I’m not convinced that that is a good arguement.

  • Mrs. du Toit

    a service to remember the real consequences of the positions we advocate

    Sorry, no.

    The position of liberty for all does not need to consider the reality of someone stepping outside the law in cases such as this.

    The gun argument is a better example in this situation: Guns laws have stripped law-abiding citizens of their right to own arms to protect themselves–all with the promise that it would stop criminals/gun crime. But that approach belies a complete misunderstanding of the concept of “law abiding citizen.” Lawful people will never use a gun to commit crime. Criminals will use whatever means necessary. They will no more abide by the gun laws than they would the laws against burglary, rape, assault, etc. Why would any rational person expect a criminal to comply with a gun law, when the very definition of “criminal” suggests they are law breakers.

    If the state were to round up children once a month, forcing their parents to undergo a once over, could any rational person believe that crimes against children would stop? So, when millions of privately and home educated children and parents have been stripped of their liberty, and children are still abused and tortured by psychotic adults, would we stop the practice of scrutinizing everyone? Does anyone believe that a person who is intentionally torturing and abusing their children would show up at the screenings? So then, who WOULD show up?

    It’s just crazy. There is nothing rational about “let’s snoop on everyone, just in case” approaches.

  • Winzeler

    John, may I suggest you Google search homeschooling social skills?

  • Hank Scorpio

    Overlooking these two degenerates who’ve earned a special place in hell, I find homeschooling an interesting phenomena.

    In theory I’m in favor of it, but in practice I’ve never in my life met someone who was homeschooled who could be considered a well-adjusted, normal human being. They’ve been without fail freaks whom everyone else avoided.

    Now that doesn’t mean that I’m endorsing public education, because I frankly think it sucks, but that doesn’t mean that homeschooling is the solution either. Affordable private schools seem to provide a better education, usually for less money per student than public schools require, and socialize children so they’re not abnormal pariahs later in life.

    Just my two cents.

  • As one of those who is imposing “freakdom” on my (not the State’s) kids, I’d like to gently tell Hank that his acedotal “evidence” is a load of crap. I imagine I’ve run into just a few more home educated kids than he has. Without question, they are sharper, better behaved, and just plain nicer kids than the average g-school product.

    To trade anedote for anecdote, my own four have plenty of friends, many of whom are enrolled in the local g-schools.

  • Hank Scorpio

    With all due respect, I just don’t value the judgement of people who’ve decided that homeschooling is the way to go.

    Yes, this opinion is based off of anecdotal evidence and my own prejudices. I’m sure there are some people who do a great job homeschooling children. The fact of the matter is, though, that if that’s the case I’ve never met them. You think homeschooling is great, and that’s your prerogative. From all the evidence I’ve seen, though, and I’ve met at least 20 people who were homeschooled in my life, not a one of them were normal people. That, to me, doesn’t speak highly of homeschooling.

  • Hank Scorpio

    Just to clarify, I’m of course not advocating outlawing or banning homeschooling. To each their own, and however you want to raise your children is your own business.

    With that out of the way, I think that homeschooling neglects a big part of how people become adults, and that’s the rat race. As horrible as it sounds, I think that the cliques that kids form, the bullying they do, and the flat-out meanness of children towards one another are important things for kids to get used to. Life isn’t fair. Life is a Hobbesian mish mash of conflict, and being forced to mix in it, is I think, healthy.

    I also don’t like the safety culture of kids being forced to wear helmets while bicycling, etc. I think getting hurt is a part of childhood as well.

  • Winzeler

    If you’re going to form and hold fast to an opinion on only anecdotal evidence and your own prejudice, then your judgment doesn’t deserve to be valued. By the way did you learn how to spell “judgement” in a public school?

  • Hank Scorpio

    judge·ment

    Variant of judgment.

    judg·ment also judge·ment

    1. The mental ability to perceive and distinguish relationships; discernment: Fatigue may affect a pilot’s judgment of distances.
    2. The capacity to form an opinion by distinguishing and evaluating: His judgment of fine music is impeccable.
    3. The capacity to assess situations or circumstances and draw sound conclusions; good sense: She showed good judgment in saving her money.

    If you’re going to criticize the spelling of others, open a dictionary first, nimrod.

  • Matt

    Yeah, this was a surprise to read on Samizdata.

    Cases like this, I think, will figure prominently in the building counterattack to homeschooling.

    With a million homeschoolers in the US, you’re guaranteed to have a handful of atrocities that can be used to show that homeschooling is bad, at least to people who are looking for reasons to believe that anyway.

    The argument would work just as well to show that mothers should not be allowed to take care of their infants except under state supervision. After all, some mothers murder their babies horribly. Is Antoine a parent? If so, I wonder how he would have felt about submitting his newborns to regular inspections by qualified social work professionals. If you have nothing to hide, it shouldn’t matter, right?

  • Tim Haas

    Hank: Lord knows why, but I’ll take you seriously for a moment.

    First, what are “well-adjusted” and “normal” to you? Those are words I would apply to few people I’ve ever met. Were there common deficiencies you noticed among these 20 people? How well, in fact, did you know them? Friends, acquaintances, 10 minutes of chat at a party?

    Second, were they homeschoooled their whole lives? Their last few years of school? Homeschooled because they were being bullied in state school? Or because they were kicked out for some kind of learning or social problem? In other words, what came first — the homeschooling or the (alleged) sociopathy?

  • Jeanne

    I have homeschooled in three states, attended at least 15 homeschooling conferences with hundreds of attendees, served as a homeschool support group leader, and literally worked with hundreds of families of homeschoolers. Hank’s observations about poorly socialized homeschooled children are just not representative of the whole of homeschoolers. A couple things to point out: Hank, you might be hanging around in places that attract abnormal homeschoolers. This is just not the experience of most homeschoolers I know. Two, I hope my kids ARE abnormal when compared to the overall population of kids I meet, especially middle school and high school-age kids. Three, many kids with poor social skills or who have “abnormal” behaviors, appearances, etc., are homeschooled for PRECISELY that reason. In other words, parents who have a child who is an extreme introvert or who has a weird obsession of train-watching or who has a hard time stopping thinking about chess or who ONLY wants to talk about computers or the Civil War or Mozart or Steeley Dan probably are more likely to need or benefit from homeschooling. Their parents find they can help them moderate and broaden and work out their differences and accept themselves with one-on-one social coaching, rather than throwing them to the wolves. Because, you know, there is no one who is going to have better social experiences in a public school than a kid who has Tourettes’ Syndrome, is focused on robot building, has no athletic ability, etc. Parents know this and homeschool an awful lot of these kids if they can. Many of these kids are going to remain “abnormal” if they are homeschooled, but if they are cherished and coached effectively, they will be better off than they would have been otherwise. Four, I think we would be wise to look at what should be considered “abnormal” and whose definition we’d use.

    If we’re going to trade anecdotes: I recently was at my two teen sons’ boy scouts meeting. There was a visiting scoutmaster from another troop, who did not know any of the boys or if the troop had any homeschooled members. While we were hanging out watching the guys do their thing, he picked out six kids who he deemed were “probably homeschooled.” Five of them were, and one attends public school. I said, how did you know? He said, well, my experience in scouts over the years has shown me that homeschooled kids tend to help the younger boys more, tend to deflect negative comments without aggression, and are more respectful of the “meeting place” – that is, they don’t run in the halls, mess with stuff that’s not theirs, etc. His own kids went to public schools, tho the youngest graduated probably over ten years ago. I ask, what are these things if they are not SOCIAL SKILLS?

    The social skills debate has pretty much lost its zing. Folks who have looked into it can’t find evidence to support the allegations of negatives. Homeschool families tend to participate in their community at HIGHER rates than non-homeschooling families, for instance. As someone suggested, do an internet search on this topic to find out more about homeschooling and the “S” word.

    Prosecute people who abuse their children, whether they homeschool or send their children to school. Abuse clearly violates the rights of children and the sanctity of their childhoods. But do not subject me and my family to government inspections any more than you subject other parents to government inspections. We all COULD be abusing our children. But our government, especially if viewed from a Libertarian perspective, is supposed to require more than that to turn me into a suspect who is subject to unreasonable searches or invasions of my privacy.

    Does “not sending kids to school” allow some terrible individuals to hide child abuse? Probably, but it doesn’t mean they’re really homeschooling. Does sending kids to school prevent all child abuse? Hasn’t seemed to work that way. Could schools or other government agencies sometimes be saying that abused children are “homeschooled” because they have failed in their duties to protect children with existing laws? Could be. Should we therefore give them more oversight responsibilities into our personal family lives? I don’t think so.

    Hard cases make bad law.

    Hands off my kids.

    Prosecute child abusers.

    Like for other American citizens, leave homeschoolers alone unless you have evidence against them.

  • Jeanne

    I have homeschooled in three states, attended at least 15 homeschooling conferences with hundreds of attendees, served as a homeschool support group leader, and literally worked with hundreds of families of homeschoolers. Hank’s observations about poorly socialized homeschooled children are just not representative of the whole of homeschoolers. A couple things to point out: Hank, you might be hanging around in places that attract abnormal homeschoolers. This is just not the experience of most homeschoolers I know. Two, I hope my kids ARE abnormal when compared to the overall population of kids I meet, especially middle school and high school-age kids. Three, many kids with poor social skills or who have “abnormal” behaviors, appearances, etc., are homeschooled for PRECISELY that reason. In other words, parents who have a child who is an extreme introvert or who has a weird obsession of train-watching or who has a hard time stopping thinking about chess or who ONLY wants to talk about computers or the Civil War or Mozart or Steeley Dan probably are more likely to need or benefit from homeschooling. Their parents find they can help them moderate and broaden and work out their differences and accept themselves with one-on-one social coaching, rather than throwing them to the wolves. Because, you know, there is no one who is going to have better social experiences in a public school than a kid who has Tourettes’ Syndrome, is focused on robot building, has no athletic ability, etc. Parents know this and homeschool an awful lot of these kids if they can. Many of these kids are going to remain “abnormal” if they are homeschooled, but if they are cherished and coached effectively, they will be better off than they would have been otherwise. Four, I think we would be wise to look at what should be considered “abnormal” and whose definition we’d use.

    If we’re going to trade anecdotes: I recently was at my two teen sons’ boy scouts meeting. There was a visiting scoutmaster from another troop, who did not know any of the boys or if the troop had any homeschooled members. While we were hanging out watching the guys do their thing, he picked out six kids who he deemed were “probably homeschooled.” Five of them were, and one attends public school. I said, how did you know? He said, well, my experience in scouts over the years has shown me that homeschooled kids tend to help the younger boys more, tend to deflect negative comments without aggression, and are more respectful of the “meeting place” – that is, they don’t run in the halls, mess with stuff that’s not theirs, etc. His own kids went to public schools, tho the youngest graduated probably over ten years ago. I ask, what are these things if they are not SOCIAL SKILLS?

    The social skills debate has pretty much lost its zing. Folks who have looked into it can’t find evidence to support the allegations of negatives. Homeschool families tend to participate in their community at HIGHER rates than non-homeschooling families, for instance. As someone suggested, do an internet search on this topic to find out more about homeschooling and the “S” word.

    Prosecute people who abuse their children, whether they homeschool or send their children to school. Abuse clearly violates the rights of children and the sanctity of their childhoods. But do not subject me and my family to government inspections any more than you subject other parents to government inspections. We all COULD be abusing our children. But our government, especially if viewed from a Libertarian perspective, is supposed to require more than that to turn me into a suspect who is subject to unreasonable searches or invasions of my privacy.

    Does “not sending kids to school” allow some terrible individuals to hide child abuse? Probably, but it doesn’t mean they’re really homeschooling. Does sending kids to school prevent all child abuse? Hasn’t seemed to work that way. Could schools or other government agencies sometimes be saying that abused children are “homeschooled” because they have failed in their duties to protect children with existing laws? Could be. Should we therefore give them more oversight responsibilities into our personal family lives? I don’t think so.

    Hard cases make bad law.

    Hands off my kids.

    Prosecute child abusers.

    Like for other American citizens, leave homeschoolers alone unless you have evidence against them.

  • John“I strongly disagree with Billy’s (1) point. Just because only happens a little, doesn’t mean we should ignore it.”

    You’re refuting an argument that I did not, and would not, make.

    You know what that’s called, and how valid is its logic, right?

    Right.

  • You have got to be kidding Antoine… the whole idea of ‘roll calls’ to see if a child is alright is bizarre when all you actually need is a functioning civil society.

    If you see your neighbour’s kids being abused, fine, do something. Othwewise why not have all wives report for preiodic examinations to make sure their husbands are not abusing them? How about pet inspections while we are at it.

    And as for socialisation, are you seriously suggesting the children cannot meet other children without conscripting them into schools? A little imagination please.

    This has got to be one of the least well thought out things you have ever written on this blog.

  • steve h

    You know, this reminds me of news reports about gun violence.

    People who know guns say that only the most egregious examples hit the news.

    I was a homeschooled student when homeschooling did not have a clear legal position (in the state of Michigan, USA, during the late 1980’s).

    Somehow, the local news never got onto the fact that hundreds, and later thousands, of children in the Detroit metro area were being educated by their parents. A conference would happen, drawing 1,000 attendees from all sections of the state, and it would never see the light of day on the news.

    But one parent who claims to homeschool would do something like this, and we’d see it all over the news.

  • Winzeler

    Ah, upon further inspection judgement is acceptable in Great Britain, as is favour, honour, etc., while judgment is the traditional American spelling -at least according to Noah Webster.

    Alas, I am American. Hope your English, Hank. Nevertheless, for what it’s worth, sorry.

  • Gene

    What you have seemed to miss is that this abuser was not the childrens biological parent. This is about the 3rd article of accusing homeschoolers for abuse when the abuser was actually a person who was raising someone else’s children for money, similar in the way a teacher is paid to raise someone else’s children.

    If there is a crackdown, people who want to raise other people’s children should be suspect, not the biological parents. What is the ideal job for a pedifile or someone who enjoys mentally torchering defenceless people….I would say teaching.

    The lady in Florida who was torchering those children also has a Masters degree in elementary education. She has been interested in torchering other people’s children for a very long time.

  • Tim Haas

    Following on Gene’s point, and Chris’s much earlier, let us remember it was the state that entrusted these children to such people as this:

    If the allegations are true, Linda Dollar may have been acting on an abusive past. She wrote in a Department of Children & Families application in 1995 that she left home at age 16 because of her alcoholic father, who was “verbally and physically (not sexually) abusive.” She also wrote that her first marriage ended because of “abuse.” She gave no other details.Tallahassee Democrat

  • lunacy

    Jeanne’s scout master’s description above fits my homeschooled son to a tee.

    If “normal” means quick to cheat and lie, easily swayed by group concensus, lacking in compassion toward others, quick to rate one’s performance against the average or mean of the herd rather than one’s own capacity, than I don’t want “normal” for my child.

    And yes, as Gene points out, these people are not the biological parents of these children. Some were adopted and some were wards. This horrific case is yet another example of the STATE failing children. The state didn’t just place one, or two children with these monsters. The state place SEVEN children with them. Seven times over these people were deemed by the state to be fit parents. Where was the state when child number four, five, or six was placed?

    Trust the state to have MY child’s best interests at heart? Not in this lifetime.

    Lunacy

  • I did not call for state schools, nor for the prohibition of home schooling (in fact I do not even concern myself here about inspection for education standards at all).

    The worst mistake made by the old liberals in America and Europe was to advocate public-funded schools. The rest of the Welfare State follows from an assumption that the state is responsible for the education of children.

    My use of the term “roll-call” is more like a form of Habeas Corpus. The problem is that some families use home-schooling and move around in order to hide the abuse (sexual or otherwise) that they are inflicting on children. If letting a child outside once or twice a month is upsetting the family routine, then I am concerned.

    Who said the roll-call needed to be a government activity? If I gave that impression, I apologise.

  • Shawn

    One could just as easily argue that the tragedy at the school in Beslan was an example of what happens when you send children to a state school.

    Of course that would be a stupid argument, for the same reason that Antione’s is.

    I know many home schooled children, and they are almost all better behaved, better mannered and better educated than those who go to state schools. Socialisation can be provided in other ways than sending them to an instition where most of the “teachers” think ripping a child from its mothers womb is a “human right”.

  • Perry,
    Thanks for the constructive criticism.
    Regarding this comment:
    “If you see your neighbour’s kids being abused, fine, do something.”

    Following the link would have shown that the children were hidden from public view for the best part of ten years. I think that is the whole problem in cases of this kind.

  • Shawn,
    the Beslan atrocity could just as easily have taken place in a shopping mall or a private school.

    Frankly one could argue that beaches should be closed because of tidal waves if we go down that track.

    I do not call for any kind of prohibition of home-schooling. I merely point out that if children are kept for years behind closed doors at home, however rare abuses may be, they will go undetected. That is precisely what seems to have happened in Florida on this occaision.

  • “Who said the roll-call needed to be a government activity?”

    Ah. So, anyone would be safe in ignoring the roll-call.

    Good deal.

  • Gene

    Antoine, I am sure you have heard of the other cases where abused kids were out of the public eye because of homeschooling and I think you are stating concern for their safety.

    Remember when the school system states concern for childrens wellbeing, it is really because the school is losing attendence money. Plus, when the parents discover it improves family life and the child’s education, they will tell their friends, and the school will lose more and more attendence money. Their best strategy is to discredit homeschooling and try to make it illegal so the school can survive.

    Vox Day uncovered there were 166 deaths of school-age children at the hands parents in one year. The portion that were non-biological parents or homeschoolers was not given. That same year, there were 836 deaths from school bus accidents. That is almost 5 times more deaths just from transporting kids for school. http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=41577

    *****
    however rare abuses may be, they will go undetected. That is precisely what seems to have happened in Florida on this occaision.

    ******
    What happened in Florida was a criminal, using govenment child protective services laws, to navigate her way into a job where she would have easy access to helpless victims, just like every other teacher who has been caught (or not caught) using their job to access other people’s children undetected. Google on “teacher charged”.

  • Gene

    Remember when the school system states concern for childrens wellbeing= concern for homeschooled childrens wellbeing

  • Regarding the idea of some sort of government inspection to detect child abuse:

    As the linked article states right in the beginning, the children in this case were adopted. In other words, the government already had its chance, and blew it.

    In the comments, Hank Scorpio wrote:

    “From all the evidence I’ve seen, though, and I’ve met at least 20 people who were homeschooled in my life, not a one of them were normal people. That, to me, doesn’t speak highly of homeschooling.””

    Given what is considered “normal” these days, I would say that it speaks very highly indeed of homeschooling.

  • Jeanne

    Antoine, you state that the children were not seen outside for ten years and that is the problem. I’ll say. If my children are not seen outside for ten years, you may suspect me of child abuse or neglect or even just of “hiding something.” But don’t suspect me because I’m homeschooling, and don’t make my burden to prove that I’m not a criminal higher than your burden to prove that you’re not a criminal.

    The funny thing is, folks who don’t know about how homeschooling really works often complain that they see children outside “too much” or during “school hours.” My teenagers were stopped by the police recently because they were in Pizza Hut during “school hours.” (All parties handled the situation well enough – except I would complain about the dispatcher who called my home to confirm they are homeschoolers and delayed telling me the purpose of her call, causing me panic that they may have been in a bike-car accident. But it was fine. Since then, I have made a carefully worded card for my teens that states they are within compliance of compulsory attendance laws and MAY CHOOSE to show this card with their parent’s signature as evidence of that). My neighbors will tell you that we are constantly coming and going and have the most used basketball goal in the neighborhood – by all the kids who live around us as well as by our own kids. Other homeschoolers are not as outdoorsy or busy or may live in a more remote area or be more reclusive and be perfectly “normal.”

    In FACT, my nearest neighbors (one child in day care and one public school) are gone from home all the time — leave before the sun comes up and get back with their two small children after dark, and their kids don’t seem to have any kind of “outdoor life” at all. Maybe THEY are the ones who are hiding something.

    I think we’ve managed to get our default in the wrong place.

  • Jeanne

    Antoine, you state that the children were not seen outside for ten years and that is the problem. I’ll say. If my children are not seen outside for ten years, you may suspect me of child abuse or neglect or even just of “hiding something.” But don’t suspect me because I’m homeschooling, and don’t make my burden to prove that I’m not a criminal higher than your burden to prove that you’re not a criminal.

    The funny thing is, folks who don’t know about how homeschooling really works often complain that they see children outside “too much” or during “school hours.” My teenagers were stopped by the police recently because they were in Pizza Hut during “school hours.” (All parties handled the situation well enough – except I would complain about the dispatcher who called my home to confirm they are homeschoolers and delayed telling me the purpose of her call, causing me panic that they may have been in a bike-car accident. But it was fine. Since then, I have made a carefully worded card for my teens that states they are within compliance of compulsory attendance laws and MAY CHOOSE to show this card with their parent’s signature as evidence of that). My neighbors will tell you that we are constantly coming and going and have the most used basketball goal in the neighborhood – by all the kids who live around us as well as by our own kids. Other homeschoolers are not as outdoorsy or busy or may live in a more remote area or be more reclusive and be perfectly “normal.”

    In FACT, my nearest neighbors (one child in day care and one public school) are gone from home all the time — leave before the sun comes up and get back with their two small children after dark, and their kids don’t seem to have any kind of “outdoor life” at all. Maybe THEY are the ones who are hiding something.

    I think we’ve managed to get our default in the wrong place.

  • John K

    The gun argument is a better example in this situation: Guns laws have stripped law-abiding citizens of their right to own arms to protect themselves–all with the promise that it would stop criminals/gun crime. But that approach belies a complete misunderstanding of the concept of “law abiding citizen.” Lawful people will never use a gun to commit crime. Criminals will use whatever means necessary. They will no more abide by the gun laws than they would the laws against burglary, rape, assault, etc. Why would any rational person expect a criminal to comply with a gun law, when the very definition of “criminal” suggests they are law breakers.

    I think the idea behind much gun control legislation is that it will somehow keep guns out of the hands of criminals. It is the “arms pool” theory, whereby if the pool of legally owned arms in society is kept as small as possible, criminals will find it difficult to get hold of them.

    The only flaw in this theory is that it does not work. Criminals are extremely resourceful people, and if there is a demand for a product, whether it be drugs, guns, gambling, whatever, they will fill it.

    Here in the UK all guns are pretty strictly regulated, and handguns are banned. There is thus no way for criminals to get hold of handguns from the legal pool, because ther is no legal pool. Yet since the ban in 1997 handgun crime has inched up by a mere 400%.

    Criminals have been busy making their own guns, or else importing guns from places like the former Yugoslavia. It is no problem for a criminal with any sort of connections to get hold of a gun in the UK. The only reason a criminal does not use a gun is because he does not want to. The only reason a law abiding person does not use a gun in self-defence is because the law won’t let him.

  • Della

    I went to a state school. I remember on day we were introduced to this man who would be taking after school classes, I noticed the way he was looking at the boys and I thought he might like boys. I was young and didn’t know this was a big problem at the time, I thought no more of it, I never met him again.

    Fast forward to about 8 years later and the man I met that day enters the nearby primary school and kills 16 children and a teacher. He was Thomas Hamilton one of the worlds worst spree killers.

    That horifficly terrible event is not an inditment of schools, state schools, the quality of education there which was really very good, or anything other than that twisted bastard. I had a nice time at school, but I can never go back there without thinking of what happened and I hate that.

    If I had children I would send them to a private school, not because of what happend, just because I think that’s what would be best for them having met people who went to private school. American libertarians seem to be keener on homeschooling because private schools are uncommon there for some reason, I don’t think it would be better than a private school education.

  • Wouldn’t it depend on the private school?

    Some private schools are pretty crummy. The one I went to in Grade 1 was sued by parents a couple years after my mother pulled me out. I had failed that grade 1 year, having spent nearly my whole year sitting on a stool in the hall for “disciplinary reasons”. The lawsuit had something to do with other kids being “disciplined” in much less acceptable ways, though I never learned the details.

    Some public schools are great, and some are awful. I guess the same could be said for homeschools, though I suspect a parent’s natural interest in the welfare their child is likely to act as mediating factor. Lazy, disinterested or uncaring parents generally don’t homeschool.

    I also think a rollcall would be a terrible idea. If it weren’t run by the government and backed by force of law, then what would compell abusers to let their children go in the first place? And if it was, it would be a horrible imposition on our freedoms. I can’t think of any other situation in which ALL citizens in a particular catagory are required to show up and be medically inspected (that’s the point, right? otherwise how will you catch the abuse?), except in dictatorships.

    Also, homeschooled kids don’t stay home all day. Mine spend a lot of their week at the pool playing with other homeschooled kids, or running around the neighbourhood. It’s like we’re living in a kind of permanent summertime, with some academic work tossed in. Life couldn’t be better, or more social.

  • Jay Kominek

    How is this magical roll call going to detect missing children if they’re not on a list? How are you going to compel parents to put their kids on this list?

    While not too many women do it any more, it is entirely possible to give birth at home, rather than in a hideous disease ridden hospital. Between that, and the mother staying in doors for 6 or 7 months, nobody is going to know the kid even exists.

    Maybe we can have a roll call on everyone, so that we can determine when women become pregnant!

    I’m sure everyone has statist laspes, what with having been subjected to so much of the crap. Why, I occasionally catch myself thinking “gee, public schools wouldn’t be so bad if they only made the kids read the constitution and taught them marksmanship.” I feel they’re excusable so long as you admit that it was a stupid idea, rather than sticking to it.

  • Jeanne

    Have you heard the latest case in the news of a parent harming her children?

    http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/02/05/alabama.killings/index.html

    Read it. Being school attenders did not save these children from being killed. They simply did not return to school after the “holidays.”

  • You said

    There are two benefits of even the most useless schools. Children meet other children their own age, which is useful if one is not intent on becoming a hermit.

    Are you suggesting that the only way for children to meet other children is in a school? As an adult do you need to be in a school to meet other adults? There is life outside of school.

    You said

    So having children turn up somewhere where their disappearance or injury will be noticed is a valuable function of schools. Perhaps they need to open twice a month for roll-call and then let them go home?

    Schools can’t control the abuse that happens in their own buildings. They can’t control the abuse that happens to babies, or to adults. Schools aren’t the answer to the abuse question. At the end of the day you can’t control, legislate, or phsically stop all the abuses that take place in this world. Government has been dealing with abuse forever, and they aren’t any closer to making it go away. Sending kids into a school isn’t going to stop the abuse.

  • Daryl pointed out

    As one of those who is imposing “freakdom” on my (not the State’s) kids, I’d like to gently tell Hank that his acedotal “evidence” is a load of crap. I imagine I’ve run into just a few more home educated kids than he has. Without question, they are sharper, better behaved, and just plain nicer kids than the average g-school product.

    Daryl and I often don’t agree but on this point we see eye to eye, not to mention I’ve known an awful lot of public schooled freaks! Dylan Klebold and Columbine High School mean anything to anyone? Oldly enough most of the freaks we have running around were public schooled.

  • Della I’m curious about you comment

    American libertarians seem to be keener on homeschooling because private schools are uncommon there for some reason, I don’t think it would be better than a private school education.

    I don’t know where you got the information that private schools are uncommon here? We have private schools everywhere, with exception of the rural areas, and even some of those have them.

  • Lynda

    Here’s a novel idea, how about if we start at the beginning and look at how these people got hold of SEVEN kids that weren’t their biological children.

    Perhaps avoidance of the issue of just how bad the child protective services are in Florida?

    AND, because children aren’t in a public or private school doesn’t mean they are homeschooled. Quite frequently they are simply truant.

    Quite frankly, I am tired of every yahoo and his second cousin using homeschooling as a label for folks that pulled their kids out of public school without any intent to homeschool. Time to find another whipping boy!

  • Lynda

    Antoine wrote: “Following the link would have shown that the children were hidden from public view for the best part of ten years. I think that is the whole problem in cases of this kind.”

    This isn’t accurate. The landlady in TN was interviewed and she saw the children and thought they didn’t look happy but didn’t see any good enough reason to call CPS. Others have stated similar things.

    However, having worked radiology for several years, I can tell you that we never had any homeschooled children in for full body scans (these are routine in CA on any suspected child abuse cases). We had lots of school aged children but the majority of abuse cases occur prior to school age, as do deaths from abuse.

    Some of the more famous abuse cases, such as the doctor in NY, occured to children who were attending school. Until you can legislate behavior, abuse laws don’t mean too much and sending kids to school has never stopped the abuse. While teachers are a high % of the reporters, a very small number of their reports turn out to be accurate.

    This is NOT a homeschooling issue. In this and several other cases coming out of FL, such as the child they *misplaced,* it is a failure of the appropriate agency to do their job!

  • Della

    private schools are uncommon there for some reason

    I don’t know where you got the information that private schools are uncommon here? We have private schools everywhere, with exception of the rural areas, and even some of those have them.

    Having looked it up I can’t really say who’s right, private schools don’t seem to be comparable in the USA since the market driver is completely different. 83% of the private schools are religious schools, and most of them are very small. In Britain that is not the case, the majority of private schools make thier money by providing top quality education, not religious dogma, people can get their bit of religious dogma in state system for “free”.

    Maybe these differences account for differences in attitude towards private schools between Britain and the USA, I wouldn’t want to send my child to a private religious school, wheras the choice of secular private schools around here is excellent.

  • The whole argument about “homeschooled being freaks” is wheeled out constantly by those who are against it. The amusing thing is that its detractors never really say how they are freaks. I have met plenty as well and they tend to be well-adjusted knowledgable individuals who tend to be way ahead of their contempories both intellectually and in maturity. I can tell you that I much prefered speaking ot the homeschoolers at YR conventions than those who had gone to state schools in places like the midwest.

    Just because there was bad incident, by non-biological parents does not mean homeschooling is bad. The fact that children get killed all the time in the state schools seems to escape some of the schrill cries about this case.

    The state should not be in the business of education. It is understandable to see why teacher’s unions are against it as well as “social engineers”, but it does strike me as a wee bit odd that any libertarians would be against it.

    As someone has said above, this is not about the business of education its about the failure of the foster parent/adoption mechanisms.

  • CV

    Della, is there any reason a private school can’t provide both? In the my part of the USA schools run by the Roman Catholic church have a reputation for providing the best education available. Many non-Catholic parents send their children to Catholic schools.

  • CV, in Miami, at least when I lived there, Jewish parents sent their children to Catholic School because they knew it was the best education around.

  • by Jay

    Maybe we can have a roll call on everyone, so that we can determine when women become pregnant!

    Excellent idea, Jay.

    http://home.kc.rr.com/milhmschlhq/homeschooling_eye_on_CBS.htm(Link)
    Click on:
    Thanks to CBS for the important idea of background checks on parents

    As part of Homeland Defense the Conception Yield Agency (CYA) will be established to ensure that no citizen is left untracked.

    And read the disclaimer at the end. ;>

  • Gene

    The education I received after finishing college made my college experience look like a joke and k-12 look like a prison sentence.

    The best learning experience I have come across are seminars on one topic ranging from a few hours to a couple weeks with the program designed by experts in the field or videos or audio tapes by experts.

    I have been listening to audios in the car since 1984 at the rate of over 250 hours per year, being coached by experts in all types of non-fiction such as business, public speaking, economics, politics, history, philosophy, strategy, time managment, investment, goal setting, psychology, motivation, accelerated learning, genius, vocabulary, raising children, men are from mars and the list goes on.

    I have learned the topics on tape so well, I can publically speak on several subjects without preparation, just from listening in the car. The few times I have spoken for a large group, a couple people have asked me afterward if I was a professional speaker. I even got a “wow” from my spouse on one occasian. I never would have become proficient on any topic from a text book or reading alone, nor developed the guts to speak in public.

    Educational tapes have been around since the 60’s and the schools either don’t know how good they are or they want to hide that fact from the public.

    The only thing I can say about my college education is that I am in a position to say it was almost six years of supplementing teachers wages and all it did was consume all my money and a large chunk of my youth and it was almost worthless. At least I can say I have a college education.

    If college was this bad, I find it difficult to imagine private k-12 is better than homeschooling in the majority of cases.

  • Kristopher Barrett

    I did see one comment that I couldn’t let go unrefuted….

    The notion that schoolyard bullying is a part of a child’s social developement.

    Hogwash.

    The best way to socialize children is to socialize them with adults, so they have a clue about how adults should socialize.

    Allowing children to do their own “Lord of the Flies” style socialization has been one of the greatest disasters of state schooling.

    Bullying causes Columbine type shootings in the US, and teen suicides elswhere. Socialization skills are too damned important to allow children to learn them hap-hazardly from each other in state-run institutions.

  • Kristopher,

    That’s precisely the point. The “socialization” that Mr. Scorpio wants to occur (eg. at a school) happens under the worst possible circumstance (coerced attendance, no sanctuary available) and at the worst possible time (pubescence), when kids do not have the tools to cope with mob behavior, nor a means of escape either.

    Lord of the Flies wasn’t really fiction, you know — other than its characters.

    Since teachers are no longer allowed to discipline children (who are by definition sociopaths, because they haven’t yet learned social skills), what’s left is barely-controlled anarchy, of the worst kind.

    Kristopher has it right: children learn socialization best from associating with adults, especially their parents.

    As for the anecdotal slur about homeschooled kids being “not normal”, it should be noted that university admissions people and military recruiters are discovering that it pays to enrol homeschooled kids over their publicly-schooled counterparts: the former have better self-discipline, are easier to teach and, mostly, are better-educated.

    Your personal experience may be different, of course (and it seems to be just that), but even a cursory look at how homeschooled kids have turned out in general makes me think that your experience is not representative.

  • Antoine Clarke: The kids are adopted/warded. If I’m not mistaken, the state have “roll calls” of sorts for these kids – the State of Florida screwed up this time, not homeschooling.

    Most homeschooling syllabus, if not all, recommends or even require parents to take their kids out for educational trips, enrol them in co-curricullar activities, etc. Those kids have been locked up for 10 years – doesn’t seem like the foster parents have been practicising the home schooling method the way it was intended.