North Carolina judge takes aim at home education
- Mar 17, 2009 - 7
You may have heard about a North Carolina judge’s pending order that may place three children in public schools this fall because the home-schooling their mother provided over the last four years needs to be “challenged.”
This case should deeply concern every American who values parental rights and the freedom to make the best educational choices for their children.
As a part of the ongoing and contentious divorce case of Thomas and Venessa Mills, Wake County District Court Judge Ned Magnum issued the ruling March 6. Since then, home-schooling supporters have flooded Wake court officials in protest, according to The News & Observer in Raleigh, NC.
In ordering the children to attend a public school, Judge Magnum said that while the Mills children are “thriving,” they need to be exposed to the “real world.” Their father has objected to the children being exposed to a “religious-based science curriculum.”
“It will do them a great benefit to be in the public schools, and they will challenge some of the ideas that you’ve taught them, and they could learn from that and make them stronger,” Mangum told Venessa Mills in an early March court hearing, according to the Charlotte Observer.
Yet it is parents, not judges, who are responsible for determining the best education options for their children.
The under-reported facts in this case are that the children were in public schools before their mother began home-schooling them in 2005 and that the children tested at or above their grade levels—by as much as two years after their home-schooling experience.
In putting his judgment above that of the mother’s, Judge Magnum was acting far above his pay grade. It is not the judge’s business to make sure these children have a “well rounded education,” as he said during the court hearing.
For a judge to take such action, he or she must have a compelling reason, such as the mother endangering the children, or compelling evidence that education is not taking place. In this case, the mother is not putting her children in danger and the Mills children’s test scores reportedly reflected improvement after several years of home education.
This is an example of what happens when judges run amuck, and it is reflective of the growing assault on parental rights in this country.
If attacks like this one continue, it is not beyond my imagination that we could see lawmakers in our country drafting legislation like exists in Germany today. German parents are forbidden from teaching their children at home, as the country sees “a legitimate interest in countering the rise of parallel societies that are based on religion.”
We are not there yet, but a devastating decline can often begin with a seemingly insignificant downward step.
Please pray for this mother and those who are trying to help her overcome this judge’s ruling. Remember this family that is being torn apart by divorce. The final order in this divorce case has not been written. Please pray for our nation’s leaders and policy makers that they would value and protect families, in general, and parental rights, in particular.
Parents, not judges, should have the final say in where and how their children are educated.
The Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission works to educate families about the importance of Godly parenting. To learn more about this crucial issue, additional resources are available here. If your church is interested in purchasing bulletin inserts or other materials on parenting, please visit our “online bookstore“http://www.parable.com/familybookstore/default.asp?group=1868.
Further Learning
Learn more about: Family, Children, Education,
Comments are closed. Please use our contact form if you have any thoughts or questions.
comments
1 On Mar 18th, 2009, at 5:53am, Jean Kaufman wrote:
As parents, we are to to teach our children the ways of the Word…Train up a child in the way he should go…parents are responsible for their growth. A village is not the training arena but the home. Since parents have no control what is taught in our public schools, it is for the best of a child to learn a good foundation in life with home schooling to learn discernment before going into this Sodom and Gomorrah scene. I admire any parent who has this interest in their child. We don’t throw our children to the ‘wolves’ and then pray the wolves remain docile.
2 On Mar 18th, 2009, at 6:18am, Ron Denlinger wrote:
Del Tackett in “The Truth Project” talks about “sphere sovereignty.” I see this judge’s order as an example of the violation of sphere sovereignty and another incident in which the state moves toward being lord of all.
Here in Lincoln, IL, the Regional Office of Education attempted to challenge home schoolers through attempting a city ordinance daytime curfew. This is something citizens can attempt to intercept. In our case we were able to present arguments, raise public awareness , etc. (and thankfully we prevailed). But how does one fight against arbitrary rulings of judges who have fewer checks and balances? It is frightening.
And yes, this is something that must be of concern to all citizens (even those who might agree with the sentiments of the judge regarding home schooling). We must care about this overriding issue of sphere sovereignty and speak out before Caesar has taken all that belongs to Caesar and all that does not belong to Caesar.
3 On Mar 18th, 2009, at 6:56am, Mrs. Donna Boerger wrote:
God has given us the responability to raise them up in the Lord.To know his ways to please Him. Religious freedom is the freedom parents need to do their job and teach their children.May God be glorified.
4 On Mar 18th, 2009, at 7:44am, Charles Enlow wrote:
Here is a case in which the judge has said, in effect, that between religion and secularism, the state chooses secularism and will impose it upon individuals. He implies that his reason for doing so is that religion is inferior to secularism and has to be quashed.
5 On Mar 18th, 2009, at 11:21am, EB wrote:
I think we’re missing a large point of this story: the father is a parent, too. Why do “parent’s rights” apply only to one parent? Doesn’t the father have the right to guide his children’s education just as strongly as the mother does? I don’t think the judge is beyond his bounds here, since he’s not actively searching for families to force into public education; he’s simply giving the father the ability to enforce his own rights.
6 On Mar 19th, 2009, at 6:14am, Jean K wrote:
In answer to Eb’s concern about the father’s right also….the father should have been concerned when he was in the family unit. His duty was still ‘to train up a child in the way it should go’. If he had done his duty, there would not be this issue. The children are now being torn with a broken home and a change in learning only to gain a point against the mother by the father. Children are not pawns, to be used for revenge. This father, as all fathers, will answer one day on just how he taught his offsring to praise and glorify our Maker. We all need to pray for this father’s bitterness and obviously, his salvation. We might include the judge also.
7 On Mar 19th, 2009, at 6:49am, Ron Denlinger wrote:
Also, in answer to EB. The broken home is a big part of the story, granted, but “father’s rights?” And exactly when should the state step in to make sure the father is getting his fair share of influence of the children and in what areas? Should this also happen in the case of parents who are not divorced or separated? If I disagree with my wife about whether or not to discipline my children or when they should go to be or with whom they should hang out, can I also take this to court to enforce my “father’s rights?”
Seems to me the question is whether or not we want to go down the slippery slope of asking the state to solve problems that are our responsibility and not theirs. The answer, more and more, seems to be that we do indeed want the government to do everything possible to meet our every need.