It’s worth noting that the article makes clear that social services was already involved, but had not taken action to obtain a warrant. This is about the failure of social services to take action when appropriate, not about anything to do with homeschooling.
Bike Bubba - 02:01pm on 01/16/2008
I seriously doubt that any Times staffers went through the public school system as is.
Hairy Polemic - 02:01pm on 01/16/2008
So rediculous, any parent who is mentally sick and wants to keep his or her children in his or her range of control is going to say they are taking care of schooling at home. I wonder if she had purchased any homeschooling materials recently. I wonder if she had been making sure they were keeping up on their studies. I wonder if she gave them exams.
She was not home schooling her daughters. She was lying to cover up what she was doing. This article has nothing to do ith homeschooling and everything to do with the government taking control of families in order to protect them from themselves.
DBdowner - 02:01pm on 01/16/2008
Aren’t the public schools some of the most dangerous crime/drug ridden places in the country?
The Whistler - 02:01pm on 01/16/2008
Where did these NYT’s writer’s go to school? Where ever they went, I’ll be sure not sending my children!
Zsa Zsa - 02:01pm on 01/16/2008
Why? Because abusive parents can stay home and abuse their kids instead of keeping them under the watchful eye of the state.
Don’t parents of kids that go to school have the opportunity to abuse their kids when they aren’t in school.
On the other hand if parents don’t send their kids to school the perverts in school are out of luck.
The Whistler - 02:01pm on 01/16/2008
although parents are supposed to file an “intent to withdraw from school” form with the district, something that did not happen in the Jacks case, although school social workers made several attempts to visit the family and reported the childrens’ absence from school to authorities.
WAIT… WAIT… these children were still enrolled in the public school system so where does the blame of home schooling come in to it?
Only person to blame is the murdering mother. End of story.
Anna - 02:01pm on 01/16/2008
Aren’t the public schools some of the most dangerous crime/drug ridden places in the country?
Whistler,
Certainly Not! After all, they’ve got all those well crafted Zero Tolerance policies in place.
Bat One - 02:01pm on 01/16/2008
Thanks Bat, what was I thinking?
The Whistler - 02:01pm on 01/16/2008
Isn’t it sobering to think that the writer of this article, along with several of his sources and presumably a lot of his readers, seems to think that it’s the government’s right to perform surveillance on children as if the 4th Amendment didn’t apply?
And well said, Anna; what we have here is the failure of a social worker to act on numerous things, including no valid withdrawal (they were thus truant), failure to take a look at the records of the landlord/utility/etc.. What this actually has to do with homeschooling is beyond me.
By the way, it actually turns out that government schools are safer, by and large, than the neighborhoods they’re in. The reason is simple; most schools today have pretty much a dedicated beat officer to prevent further Columbine-style attacks.
It’s worth noting that the article makes clear that social services was already involved, but had not taken action to obtain a warrant. This is about the failure of social services to take action when appropriate, not about anything to do with homeschooling.
I seriously doubt that any Times staffers went through the public school system as is.
So rediculous, any parent who is mentally sick and wants to keep his or her children in his or her range of control is going to say they are taking care of schooling at home. I wonder if she had purchased any homeschooling materials recently. I wonder if she had been making sure they were keeping up on their studies. I wonder if she gave them exams.
She was not home schooling her daughters. She was lying to cover up what she was doing. This article has nothing to do ith homeschooling and everything to do with the government taking control of families in order to protect them from themselves.
Aren’t the public schools some of the most dangerous crime/drug ridden places in the country?
Where did these NYT’s writer’s go to school? Where ever they went, I’ll be sure not sending my children!
Don’t parents of kids that go to school have the opportunity to abuse their kids when they aren’t in school.
On the other hand if parents don’t send their kids to school the perverts in school are out of luck.
WAIT… WAIT… these children were still enrolled in the public school system so where does the blame of home schooling come in to it?
Only person to blame is the murdering mother. End of story.
Whistler,
Certainly Not! After all, they’ve got all those well crafted Zero Tolerance policies in place.
Thanks Bat, what was I thinking?
Isn’t it sobering to think that the writer of this article, along with several of his sources and presumably a lot of his readers, seems to think that it’s the government’s right to perform surveillance on children as if the 4th Amendment didn’t apply?
And well said, Anna; what we have here is the failure of a social worker to act on numerous things, including no valid withdrawal (they were thus truant), failure to take a look at the records of the landlord/utility/etc.. What this actually has to do with homeschooling is beyond me.
By the way, it actually turns out that government schools are safer, by and large, than the neighborhoods they’re in. The reason is simple; most schools today have pretty much a dedicated beat officer to prevent further Columbine-style attacks.