Joanne Jacobs blogged about a recent court ruling in California. Apparently, in 2002, a few parents sued the Palmdale School District after the school surveyed the children about their thoughts on s*x. The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed the case. The court found that parents have no rights when it comes to what their children are taught. Nor can they do anything if the schools teach something that they object to. Here's what the unaminmous court ruling said (PDF) .
We agree, and hold that there is no fundamental right of parents to be the exclusive provider of information regarding sexual matters to their children, either independent of their right to direct the upbringing and education of their children or encompassed by it. We also hold that parents have no due process or privacy right to override the determinations of public schools as to the information to which their children will be exposed while enrolled as students. Finally, we hold that the defendants' actions were rationally related to a legitimate state purpose.Stop and read the two comments in bold again. And then add to that what the court also said in this decision a little further into their opinion.
As the First Circuit made clear in Brown, once parents make the choice as to which school their children will attend, their fundamental right to control the education of their childrenis, at the least, substantially diminished. The constitution does not vest parents with the authority to interfere with a public school's decision as to how it will provide information to its students or what information it will provide, in its classrooms or otherwise. See Yoder, 406 U.S. at 205.Can it be any clearer? The court is looking at the whole issue from the perspective of what is best for the state. And teaching s*x and surveying elementary school children is in their best interest and rational. NOT the child's or the parent's. The interest of the state appears to be the highest concern.
We further hold that a psychological survey is a reasonable state action pursuant to legitimate educational as well as health and welfare interests of the state.The welfare of the state? The schools are making it easier and easier to outsource parenting. And now the court is making it legitimate. When will parents wake up and see what's going on? The court has just ruled that the parent does not have any authority to interere with the public school's decisions about what to teach and what information it will provide . And parents think THEY are going to reform the schools. Dream on!
And just how old were the children surveyed? Seven to ten years of age! The program was dropped because of complaints. But with this court ruling it will be interesting to see how the schools respond and what the long term effects of this will be on our society.
I"m amazed that more parents didn't join this suit initially. Have we really gotten to the point where parents are this apathetic and the schools and court this powerful?
This is a case that I hope is appealed. But why wait for the courts to rule - just homeschool. Especially if you live in this California district.
The discussion continues at the new "Miranda" rights for parents. Spunky writes a humorous but truthful look at what this ruling means to parental rights.
Also, WorldNetDaily and Focus on the Family Citizen Link have written about this ruling as well.