ParentalRights.org » Blog

The now famous California appeals court ruling has given many people the opportunity to ask a lot of offensive questions about parents and their ability to educate their children. Thomas D. Elias, a syndicated columnist certainly asked a lot of questions in his recent column.

His column starts off bad by accusing people of having a “knee-jerk” reaction to the ruling but it really runs off the tracks with this paragraph which follows quotes from the governor and other sources about the right of parents to direct their children’s education:

But pause for a moment and substitute the word “nourishment” for “education” in all this. Do parents have the right to provide as much or as little nourishment for their children as they like? If they don’t provide adequate nourishment, don’t they at some point become guilty of child abuse?

Who is claiming that, Mr. Elias? No one is saying parents have a right to abuse their children and no one is advocating that. It is insulting that you presume parents guilty in this way.

He goes on:

These questions lead to another: What about the rights of children to a quality education? Sure, many of the approximately 175,000 home-schooled California kids do get quality instruction from their parents. But what about children whose parents speak little English? What about those whose parents have less than a high school education of their own? How can they possibly be getting quality education in these circumstances?

Couldn’t all the same questions be asked about the California public schools? Why are parents the ones who are suspect but the state isn’t?

This line of thinking really goes to the heart of the question about parental rights. There are two legal doctrines at debate here: Read the rest of this entry »