In short it says not to do things out of sheer panic or fear; the laws haven't changed. But, do participate in the petition to request that the CA Supreme Court "depublish" the judges' opinions.
*******here's her posted letter*********************
I have been astonished about the hype about this case. So many have
been making sensational claims that parents will be criminally
prosecuted, etc.
Please rest assured about a number of things. First, the law, other
than this court's interpretation, hasn't changed. Parents involved in
a truancy prosecution might face criminal charges, but only after a
rather lengthy series of hearings and court orders, and only if the
parents failed to comply with the orders. It would be a criminal
contempt charge, which isn't nothing but doesn't land you in Pelican
Bay.
We have never known conscientious parents ever to be prosecuted under
truancy laws to the point of contempt charges. It's highly unlikely.
The media also appear to be saying that no one can teach their
children without a credential. I am not certain that the holding is
that broad, and I also doubt it would survive legal challenge.
The holding really applied to private ISPs (there are persistent
mistatements, that began with fact statements in the case, that the
family was enrolled in a charter. Obviously a school with the
name "Christian" in it wouldn't be a public charter. It was a private
ISP). It could be read by someone reading broadly as applying to any
situation where the child is not continuously in the presence of a
credentialed teacher.
The court started on a very slippery path of appearing to think that
some situations were OK and others weren't, effectively trying to
enact an entire code of regulations for governing this situation from
the bench. He hasn't been given the constitutional authority, of
course, to do this.
How do we get rid of this case?
There are a number of paths. One is seeking actual review by the
Supreme Court. HSC and at least several of the other major groups'
legal teams aren't in favor of that. Even if you could get the court
to accept your petition (they only take 3-5% of cases), the chances
that it will be decided the way you want aren't real good. It's a
very dangerous road to take, because if the Supreme Court were to
affirm the appellate court ruling on either of the main points
(constitutional or statutory), there aren't many options left. The
constitutional argument, of course, could be appealed to the US
Supreme Court, but the statutory case about the proper interpretation
of the California Education Code could not. California Supreme Court
is the last stop on that road. If that happens, then you have two bad
choices that I'll discuss below.
There is another much easier choice, and it's the one we want, as
well as the one being trumpeted in the HSLDA petition. You ask the
California Supreme Court to depublish the opinion, or, in other
words, have them say that while this might have been the right result
in this particular case involving this particular set of facts, the
court finds that the reach of the opinion is overbroad and should not
become law for the entire state. That is the choice we all (meaning
HSC and, I believe, the other groups) want.
You get this by filing a letter with the Supreme Court in compliance
with the applicable rules of court. While anyone can file one by
stating their interest, we DO NOT think it is an appropriate use of
grassroots activism. We DO NOT want every HSC member or HSLDA member
or grandmother or irate citizen dashing off their letters to the
Supreme Court. There are sober, measured, legal arguments to make
about why depublication is appropriate, and those arguments are made
after researching the applicable standards, etc. The Supreme Court
will not be swayed positively by public outcry. In fact, it could
backfire, and backfire badly.
If the Supreme Court affirms on the statutory points, then the two
bad choices are to either seek legislation or to do nothing and hope
that a further case is brought that can involve a better set of facts
and better explanation of the issues (and reaching a better result).
Both are very dangerous. Legislation isn't the answer because of the
extraordinary strength of the teachers' union. It is unlikely we will
see any legislation ultimately pass that gives us the freedom we have
today. And the second choice is dangerous. I know lots of families
that would make terrific test case defendants -- they're
conscientious, they actually get their kids educated, they follow the
laws. But we don't get to pick who the family is. As a friend of mine
said, we couldn't have gotten a worse set of facts for this case if
we had a contest.
We are trying to get one or more of the fanciest law firms in the
state to help us on taking the fangs out of this case. We know what
we're doing. Please let us do our jobs.
I would be personally, professionally, and, as a representative of
HSC, globally grateful if everyone on this list would calm down and
ask others to calm down. Specifically, I would ask people:
a. Not to write to the Supreme Court or any court.
b. Not to talk to their legislators or make any public statements
about a need for legislation.
c. Tell their neighbors, friends, lists, groups both of the above and
to educate them about the choices available and about how panic isn't
necessary, marches on Sacramento aren't necessary, etc.
I wish this were the type of situation where we could put the fury,
passion and energy of the members of this list to good use. Trust me,
if we end up having to go the legislative route, we will have that
situation at some points. But this isn't that type of situation, and
too many folks stirring things up hurts instead of helps.
Thanks for listening.
Debbie Schwarzer
HSC Legal Team Co-chair
*********Here is more information about the case************
The good news is that the HomeSchool Association of California, the California Homeschool Network, the Christian Home Educators Association of California and the Homeschool Legal Defense Association are all working together, as one unit, to deal with this.
Everyone in California should join, or renew membership to, one of the four groups who are working on this case.
If you are in California and you are not a member of one of these groups, go now and join! Then, join their e-lists so that you can have minute-by-minute information on what is going on. Don’t rely on sensationalist news or blogs entries (or even non-sensationalist ones like mine). Being on the e-list is also the best way to be aware of how you can help.
In California, there is no reference to “homeschooling” in the laws or education codes. Independent homeschoolers generally enroll in a private school independent study program, or they create their own private school in their home, and enroll their children in that school. The laws were designed for that purpose in mind, with different wording for schools that have less than six children, and who are being taught by a family member.
The judges’ ruling says that that a child has to be either physically attending a private school, or he has to be tutored by a credentialed teacher, and those are the only two choices. Well, you can see why people are panicking!
The truth is that the ruling is wrong. And, there is no indication that it was intended to change California law. In fact, if you look at the ruling, it has a strong implication that it was a last resort effort to get this family out of a many-year struggle with the state.
What does this mean for the larger issue - how homeschooling is conducted in the state of California? So far, nothing. Nothing at all. Everything is exactly as it was a week ago.
------------------------
In the Turner case, it seems that the family did not have their kids enrolled in any school, for some reason--that is, they said they were homeschooling the kids, but in reality they hadn't fulfilled their legal duty within the provisions of the law of either filing a private school avidavit or enrolling their kids in a charter (public) school.
2. Consequences of Parental Denial of a Legal Education
Because parents have a legal duty to see to their children’s schooling within the
provisions of these laws, parents who fail to do so may be subject to a criminal
complaint against them, found guilty of an infraction, and subject to imposition of fines or an order to complete a parent education and counseling program. (§§ 48291 & 48293.) Additionally, the parents are subject to being ordered to enroll their children in an appropriate school or education program and provide proof of enrollment to the court, and willful failure to comply with such an order may be punished by a fine for civil contempt. (§ 48293.) a
No comments:
Post a Comment