Has school destroyed your creativity and self-confidence? I'm working on a book called Recovering From School, to help you heal the damage caused. Join the Patreon or Newsletter to be notified about updates. Paid Patreon members will get early draft previews, as well as a free digital copy when it's done.
Some homeschoolers oppose youth rights, prefer parental "authority"
The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) doesn't do everything right, but it's a huge step in the right direction for getting young people to actually be treated as individual human beings, with their own opinions and their own individual hopes and dreams, instead of as property of their parents.
Apparently this scares some overly-controlling parents who are worried that their kids would freely choose their own path instead of "be brought up" to be like their parents.
Here are some news articles and commentary I found on the subject, with my comments inbetween (in italics):
United Nations children’s treaty jeopardizes parental rights and homeschooling
The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC), adopted by the United Nations General Assembly and opened to nations across the world for ratification in 1989, may significantly weaken the rights of parents to raise and homeschool their children. Crucial parental decisions such as who our children associate with, what type of discipline is used, whether we take our kids to church, what they read and whether we homeschool, would be decided by the state and possibly international law.
Did anyone ever think to ask the kids what THEY want? Oh no, of course not, they're not really PEOPLE, are they?
From here:
America is poised to adopt the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. President Obama supports this treaty. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has been a leading advocate of this treaty for over twenty years. Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) has “promised” that this treaty will be ratified during this term of Congress.
If this treaty is ratified:
* The laws of all 50 states on children and parents would be superseded by this international law by virtue of a specific provision of the US Constitution which expressly declares treaties to be supreme over state law. Virtually all law on children and parents is state law.
* Good parents would no longer be entitled to the legal presumption that they act in the best interests of their children. Instead, the government would have the authority to overrule all parents on any decision concerning the child if the government believed it could make a better decision.
* Parents could no longer spank their children.
* Children would have the legal right to choose their own religion. Parents would be permitted only to give advice.
* America would be under a binding legal obligation to massively increase its federal spending on children’s programs.
Wow, imagine that - parents not being able to physically hit people smaller than them! Why don't you pick on someone your own size, you bully? And indoctrinating people into believing what you want them to - what, you don't want your kids to be able to think for themselves?
UN Treaty Jeopardizes Homeschool Freedom in Britain
On June 11, 2009 a report on home education in England by Graham Badman, a former Managing Director of Children, Families and Education in the County of Kent, was accepted in full by the British Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families. The report makes the case that homeschooling should be extensively regulated in England. In short, the Badman report recommends that the state should have the authority to choose the curriculum for homeschoolers and he used Britain’s treaty obligations under the UNCRC to justify this intrusion.
Nowhere in the article does the HSLDA seem concerned whatsoever about what the kids might actually want. No, it's all about the parents. They always know everything. Now, I don't believe the government would generally be any better at raising kids (just look at the public school system), but to throw out youth rights entirely just because of that one little thing? Shows where their priorities are... clearly not with the kids.
Personally I think it's worth it - EVEN if it does make homeschooling a bit harder. So what? If people actually LISTEN to kids more, they can be homeschooled if they want, they will grow up without so many mental issues stemming from not being listened to enough, and even if their "curriculum" is more regulated, at least they will feel VALUED AS HUMAN BEINGS and not just parental property that will only have value once it reaches the magical age of 18.
That is, of course, assuming the treaty actually does everything it says it will. With the government in charge, it probably won't. But it's like the constitution - even if it gets blatantly ignored at times, it's still there, in writing. And can be used in court.
UN Convention on the Rights of the Child: U.S. Homeschoolers’ Fears Confirmed in British Report
According to BBC News, the British government, following a report provided by former education chief Graham Badman, will force homeschoolers in England to register with the State and allow authorities access to their homes at least once a year. The stated purpose of this government oversight is to ensure that homeschooled children in England are receiving a “suitable education.” [1]
If “parents do not meet certain standards,” according to the BBC, the children can be “sent back to school.”
In reaction to criticism that the standards by which parents will be judged are ill-defined, Mr. Badman responded, “This is not some woolly statement; they will be judged on their [educational] plans. These statements should contain some milestones for children to achieve.”
One unnamed homeschooling parent told the BBC that she would not favor monitoring visits from the local authority because it had failed in its duty to provide a suitable education for her son in the first place.
This could be a problem for unschoolers.
Robert Kunzman: The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child vs. the Parental Rights Movement
Good parents (whether homeschoolers or not) see education, broadly construed, as part of their job description: raising a child involves constant teaching, and the most important lessons in life generally occur outside of school walls. But most homeschoolers take this a step further. They don't see any real distinction between this broader notion of education and formal schooling itself—which makes sense, if homeschooling is just woven into the fabric of everyday family life. And if homeschooling is seen as simply part of parenting, then it becomes easier to understand why many homeschool parents view government oversight of education as an unjustifiable intrusion into their sacred domain.
United Nations' threat: No more parental rights
Expert: Pact would ban spankings, homeschooling if children object
A United Nations human rights treaty that could prohibit children from being spanked or homeschooled, ban youngsters from facing the death penalty and forbid parents from deciding their families' religion is on America's doorstep, a legal expert warns.According to the Parental Rights website, the substance of the CRC dictates the following:
* Parents would no longer be able to administer reasonable spankings to their children. (There is no such thing as a 'reasonable spanking')
* A murderer aged 17 years, 11 months and 29 days at the time of his crime could no longer be sentenced to life in prison. (Nobody should be sentenced to prison - they need mental help of some kind, not punishment - prison will only make them worse)
* Children would have the ability to choose their own religion while parents would only have the authority to give their children advice about religion. (What good is a religion if you didn't choose it yourself?)
* The best interest of the child principle would give the government the ability to override every decision made by every parent if a government worker disagreed with the parent's decision. (Wouldn't trust the government with that, but somebody has to do it... better than nothing I guess)
* A child's "right to be heard" would allow him (or her) to seek governmental review of every parental decision with which the child disagreed. (Same as above. Something like this is NEEDED though. Unfortunately I can imagine some of the more immature kids abusing this feature to the point where nobody takes it seriously anymore.)
* According to existing interpretation, it would be illegal for a nation to spend more on national defense than it does on children's welfare. (As it bloody well should be.)
* Children would acquire a legally enforceable right to leisure. (Most excellent!)
* Teaching children about Christianity in schools has been held to be out of compliance with the CRC. (This is stupid though. By all means teach 'em about it, but don't enforce it as "the only way".)
* Allowing parents to opt their children out of sex education has been held to be out of compliance with the CRC. (How 'bout letting the kids opt out themselves?)
* Children would have the right to reproductive health information and services, including abortions, without parental knowledge or consent. (A good thing on its own, but only as long as there's more emphasis on the information part - knowledge is good. We wouldn't want irresponsible kids running around getting pregnant and then getting abortions - oh wait, lots of adults already do that.)
So yeah. Basically, I think the treaty will do more good than harm, even though it does have a few not-so-good side effects.
What do you think?
Where to next? Pick one!
- Check out the Alternatives to School section
- Join our Patreon
- Sign up for our newsletter
Posted in: Commentary on January 5, 2010 @ 11:40 PM
Tags: Homeschooling, Parents, School, Society, Youth Rights
If you like what we're doing here, you can become a Patron and sign up for our newsletter!
The Christian Right hoo-ha about the CRC revolves around a central issue they will not answer - that they want parents to have total rights over their children, to enforce their moral codes and religious-politico beliefs. When one of their blogs complains it will give kids the right to play then we need to worry. The CRC emphasises the primary role of parents over the state but says the state has a duty to act where kids have their rights denied - well that should keep them busy for a while ... But it also says kids DO have rights, as people, separate from their parents who may not dispose of them as they see fit - this also is UK and US law anyway.
It comes down to whether parents see their children as owned property or as developing people whose interests are held in trust ( a sacred notion if ever there was one).
Nearly everything promoted by 'Parental Rights' about the CRC is utter nonsense and ideologically-motivated flim-flam.
No, this seems too much bad to take with the good.
It's not a good thing, in my opinion.
I mean, it's good that kids will be able to dispute their parents' decisions, but that should be a family thing, not a government thing. the stuff about the right to leisure and choosing your own religion is cool (but most kids already do that,) and I like the 'spend more money on kids than weapons' thing, but I don't trust the government with much, and definitely not with choosing
But why can't we have youth rights without the government adding their stupid policies into our families, regulating homeschooling....
I mean, I want to unschool my children when I have them someday, and I wouldn't want the gov't breathing down my neck because of the way I taught my children.
Parents should have certain rights, if they align with the idea of letting a child grow to be their own individual.
I don't know, I just don't trust the government with this.
The govenment deicides what parents do thing is pretty bad. The government shouldn't be raising the kids- the parents should! Sure, some of the treaty has good points, but it'll do more harm than good. I don't the government should decide how parents raise their kids- that's not their job! The government's job is to keep the people together and keep the country from falling apart, not raise kids. I mean, yeah some of the rights are actually good, like being able to not have religion forced on you and getting a right to leisure, but others like the government raising thing, will become a MAJOR issue and there will be bad things over it. I don't know anything about the CRC, but it probably isn't good. I say, ethier revise it, or don't ratify it at all. I don't want the govenment to make the v-chip on my TV work, even though my parents kept it off.
As much as I love the idea of this treaty being ratified and finally giving youth a legitimate voice, I worry that it will cause a split in the youth rights movement. It will pit the radical right-wing members against the mainstream movement and the last thing student activists need right now is a goddamn civil war. I hope it does get ratified, but we have to be ready for problems, and we also have to understand that this isn't the final victory and there will still be a long way to go yet.
I have to say as a parent who deeply respects my children's autonomy and choice, I am terrified of government having more control over their lives than me.
You cannot start from the assumption that the state is a friendly entity that wants what you (a young person, or child) want and will help you to get it through something like the UNCRC.
For me, the "right to play" *is* problematic because it makes the state the ultimate arbiter of suitability. How can a gvoernment official know what is right for each individual child? What if they decide that dressing up or wearing face makeup is inappropriate, for example? (In the UK children wearing unusual clothing is already enough for a social worker to flag up concerns, if they so wish, as it is potentially a sign of a child not being socially integrated, apparently).
Whoever mentions unschooling is correct. If the Badman recommendations are passed into legislation in the UK then unschooling (autonomous education) will be threatened if not wiped out completely, and that will be done in the name of the UNCRC. An unschooled child (and there are many people who adopt this approach here) might insist that they are being taken seriously, that their autonomy is cherished, that their parents love them and want the best for them - but it will be so easy for an prejudiced official (who believes in a different way of parenting/educating) to judge that the child is not receiving a suitable education as per UNCRC and that his or her "right" to an education must be enforced by making them to go school - regardless of whether they have been failed in the past by that school, bulllied to point of suicide attempts etc. It's barbaric.
I am so sorry but in the face of the state I *do* claim my children as my property, although it pains me to say it because they are not objects but human beings. However when I look at the institutionalised power games and sexual abuse that is rife in state provision (please email you if you need evidence, I have reams of it) I do not believe that it should *ever* be the parent of first resort. The outcomes for children who leave care are truly appalling.
Freedom is everything but I am deeply suspicious of rights - they sign you over to the mercy of something that is at least as authoritarian and controlling as an unpleasant parent. It is worth thinking about.
Someone has to be in charge in a family and it should be the parents. Not to say that kids shouldn't be listened to and their views respected but seriously if a child wants to stay up until 1AM playing computer games on a school night then the parents need the authority to tell them NO and set a reasonable bedtime. There are a host of other issues where the parents need to make rules for their children to follow. Children do not always know what is in their best interest. And obviously the rules should vary with the child's age. Older children (teens) should be allowed to make more decisions regarding their life then younger children.
.-= Alasandra´s last blog ..This makes us sick =-.
Correction- I'd really like for this document to be ratifed, but the government control thing's gotta go. Unless the parent is abusive and/or neglects the child, the government has no control over how a parent raises a child. Also could someone clarify that CRC thing? I want to know what that is.
Sorry about all the posts, but I just re-read the draft and I don't know what most of it means- could somebody translate it into simpler words?
Good lord man! I'm 15-16, and i tell you what if my parents hadden't treated me like a younger person and treated me as a young one, plus making my right a little less then an adult. I'd be a terrible kid! Buddy, you have somthing coming when you have kids. If i ever where to homeschool when im older i'd do the same thing they did to me.
See look at it like this. With out parental control where are we at? Think back in later times where we could actualy keep are car doors unlocked. (well way before my time) Mother always told me that she could easily keep the doors of anything unlocked, but now you can't do that. Why? Cuase no one for the past 2-3 generations have tought there kids right!
A child is a blessing, but if you can't teach them or control them then there a curse. I know about five families that have splet up, or have unrully children. (With a few exeptions) And you know what? Anytime the parents get on the child and make them behave like a good kid and not a murderous kid, i go *YEEPIE!!!*
Did you know there is a fine line between good kids with parents and a bad line? you can tell the differance can't you? Sure there might be a few exeptions. HomeSchooling in no way is bad, I never ever plan to marry a guy with out class, and manners to other people, and i sure as hell will never let it happen to any of my friends without a fight!
Now your thinking im one of them stuck up white chicks that is homeschooled, but im not. Franckly i act more school kid like with the manners of a homeschooler. My brain is not fried, nor will it ever be. Parental rights RULE! I will always stand by it, becuase it makes a family whole, plus it keeps the child from doing things the shouldn't (like DRUG, MURDER, EXTERA) Plus im closer to my family then most kids and there dog.
Well, there you have my oppinion on this topic. And im 15! Put it through your guy's head, parenting is needed!
@Septmeber - I think you're misunderstanding this completely. As long as a parent is being reasonable, loving and understanding, there's no problem with them having control, because they won't abuse it and because they'll be a good role model to their kids and probably won't need to RESORT to using it because their kids will respect them. Those are not the parents at issue here - the issue is with the ones who are NOT reasonable, loving or understanding. The kids of THOSE parents are the ones who need legal rights to protect them from turning out as messed up (or worse) than their parents. Those are the kinds of kids that end up doing drugs, murdering people or whatever. Not the ones that had good parents. If all the parents in the world were good, there would be no need for 'youth rights' really. But unfortunately there are a lot of really bad parents, and thus someone needs to stand up for the kids who have to survive living with those people every day. And no, I don't think the government will do a better job, but someone has to do it, and this is a small step in the right direction. Mostly.
i think that a parent should totally NOT have the right to choose theur kids future for them. after all whos life is it? i mean really.... parents alot of time are messed up and so to push that ona kid is a terrible thing. i mean think about u guys... a person is treated completely different just in one day- like when your 17 to 18- how much different are you in that one day???? come on you guys i say we should change the law on homeschooling so that parents dont keep screwing there kids over and taking away their lives.
my mom took me out of school against my will and i couldnt do a thing about it. no matter what i said- my word was nothing. she had complete comtrol. she isnt a qualified teacher, and i dont get along with her so my education is going down the tubes and i have to sit there and watch it. but im sick of it... so please help me. help all the kids, if you care and are reading this, please help give your voice to those who have had theres taked away. we'd luv ya for it- after all we all derserve the best, and i think that we need to live our lives for us, not for our parents. thanks for listening. it means alot to get this out there.
On one hand, I understand there are over-controlling parents and this can be a problem in homeschooling (it can also be a problem for kids who attend public school but the public school types won't talk about that). On the other hand, this seems like too much government control.