Homeschooling Showdown in Brazil: Children to be Tested by Court in Battle Over Educational Rights of Parents

By Matthew Cullinan Hoffman

MINAS GERAIS, BRAZIL, August 18, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Two homeschooled
children face a battery of tests this week in a showdown between the
Brazilian government and a Christian family over the educational rights of
parents in the South American nation.

The children of Cleber and Bernadeth Nunes have already passed the entrance
exams for law school at the ages of 13 and 14, but that doesn’t satisfy the
Brazilian government, which has been trying to force them into its troubled
school system since 2006.

After over a year of battling authorities for the right to home school their
children, the Nunes’ two prodigies will be tested on a variety of subjects
to prove that their parents are not guilty of “intellectual abandonment”, a
legal term that indicates that one has not fulfilled the obligation of
providing for the education of one’s children.

The tests will include a wide array of subjects, including mathematics,
Portuguese, science, history, English, geography, arts, and physical
education. The family has been preparing their children for the test for
over a month, and the Brazilian media is covering the case.

The outcome could determine the future of homeschooling for countless
families who are currently forced to homeschool their children secretly, or
submit to the public education system.

Cleber Nunes believes that his children will pass their tests. He hopes that
a victory in his family’s case will legitimize homeschooling and pave the
way for pro-homeschooling legislation that is currently under consideration
in the Brazilian National Congress.

Bill 3518/2008, which is being cosponsored by Deputies Henrique Alfonso and
Miguel Martini, would allow parents to homeschool their children up to the
third grade, and would require annual testing to demonstrate their progress.
Those failing to meet minimum standards for two years would be required to
return their children to the public schools.

“After several failed attempts, I think our chances of being approved are
much better,” Nunes told LifeSiteNews.

“First, the failure of the Brazilian school system is clear. Second, because
now, more than ever, the efficacy of home schooling is being discussed,” he
said. “The fact that the children passed the law school exams proves that
they are at least five years ahead of other students of the same age.”

“This case has been in the nationwide media, and the great majority has
shown to be on our side,” he added.

In Brazil, a country with a tradition of heavy state control, the obligation
to educate one’s children is currently understood to be satisfied only by
attendance at a public school or licensed private school. The Nunes case
could change that.

The Nunes’ problems began in 2006 when they pulled their children out of the
public school system in response to the low educational standards and
anti-family values that pervaded the system.

The Brazilian system has received low rankings in international assessments,
according to Nunes, and is marred by high levels of violence and
intimidation on the part of students. Condoms are distributed in vending
machines to children as young as 10 years old.

State authorities responded by threatening to remove the Nunes’ children
from their custody, and to fine them the equivalent of $1,800, a high
penalty in a country with substantially lower incomes than the
industrialized world.

But the Nunes decided to fight the system with the help of pro bono
attorneys, and they now may be on the verge of achieving social legitimacy,
and even legal recognition, for homeschooling in Brazil.

Contact Information:

Cleber Andrade Nunes (speaks English)
cleber@andradenunes.org

Deputy Henrique Afonso
dep.henriqueafonso@camara.gov.br

Deputy Miguel Martini
dep.miguelmartini@camara.gov.br

For info about homeschooling in Brazil [in Portuguese]
http://www.escolaemcasa.blogspot.com

Brazilian Homeschooling Movement

Related Links:

Homeschooling Bill 3518/2008 (English translation)
http://lastdayswatchman.blogspot.com/2008/08/homeschooling-in-brazilian-congress.html

Homeschooling Bill 3518/2008 (Portuguese Original)
http://www.camara.gov.br/sileg/integras/572820.pdf

Previous LifeSiteNews Coverage:

Brazilian Government Prosecutes Homeschooling Family, Threatens to Remove
Children
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/mar/08030610.html

Source: LifeSiteNews<http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/aug/08081802.html>
Divulgation: http://lastdayswatchman.blogspot.com/

annemiller @ August 19, 2008   |   General, Legislative  |   Comments (0)

California Appeals Ruling

Here’s more information on the Appeals Court ruling.

http://www.nheld.com/BTN63.htm

annemiller @ August 11, 2008   |   General  |   Comments (0)

Victory in the California Case

Here are links to today’s articles about the unanimous decision of the California Court of Appeal for the Second Appellate District:

Homeschoolers Win Landmark Case

In a 3-0 decision the California Court of Appeal reversed its earlier ruling which would have required homeschoolers to be certified teachers in order to homeschool. (HSLDA) More >>

A Great Victory for California Homeschoolers

In a unanimous decision, the California Court of Appeal for the Second Appellate District today ruled that “California statutes permit home schooling as a species of private school education.” (HSLDA) More >>

Home Schooling Constitutional in CA
Jody and Jim Brown
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Legal/Default.aspx?id=208120

[Thanks to Joe Guarino!]

annemiller @ August 9, 2008   |   General, Legislative  |   Comments (0)

Appeals court upholds home schooling by non-credentialed parents

By Sharon Noguchi

annemiller @ August 9, 2008   |   General, Legislative  |   Comments (0)

D.C. State Board of Education Approves New Restrictive Homeschool Regulations

NOTE FROM HEAV: Please pray for D.C. homeschoolers as they face these increased regulations, and continue to pray that the hearts of the State Board of Education might be softened. News like this is an important reminder that we still need to be diligent to guard our homeschooling freedoms lest they be taken from us.

If you haven’t already done so, please consider joining both HSLDA and HEAV. HSLDA works to monitor and guard homeschooling freedom across the nation, and HEAV works year round within Virginia to initiate and promote beneficial legislation and to defeat legislation that would negatively affect homeschoolers.

Note: HEAV members also save $20 on their HSLDA memberships.

- The following notice is from the HSLDA E-lert Service -

For the first time in over 15 years, a United States jurisdiction has enacted laws that significantly increase restrictions on homeschooling freedom!

This past Wednesday, the D.C. State Board of Education (SBOE) approved the State Superintendent of Education’s June 27 draft of the home education regulations. After some discussion, the SBOE voted 5 to 1 in favor of the superintendent’s regulations.

Only Board Member William Lockridge voted “no.” When giving his reasons, he exposed the unbridled discretion the Superintendent would now have over homeschoolers. Lockridge likened the new power of the Superintendent over parents as a type of “socialism.”

These regulations were objected to by many—the Board recorded receiving over 2,800 emails, 400 phone calls, and written comments in opposition.

This was the third public session held to discuss these regulations. In the first session, over 120 homeschoolers attended and over 30 testified including lengthy presentations by Chris Klicka, Mike Donnelly, and Scott Woodruff of HSLDA. That resulted in the removal of the worst requirement: home visits by D.C. school officials.

However, in spite of testimony presented by Ethan Reedy, President of D.C. Home Educators Association, and Chris Klicka of HSLDA, the Board passed the new restrictive regulations. It was clear the Board already had its mind made up. (Klicka’s written testimony can be reviewed online here).

HSLDA had even delivered a letter signed by 10 congressmen on the House of Representatives Committee on Oversight and Government Reform encouraging them to “work with HSLDA to ensure that the proposed changes in the city’s rules … will not have an adverse impact on homeschooling families in the District.” All to no avail.

Among other things, the new regulations require annual notification of a parent’s intent to homeschool on a future form developed by OSSE (Office of the State Superintendent of Education), maintenance of a portfolio of schoolwork, and up to two annual portfolio reviews by the OSSE to determine whether a homeschool program, in OSSE’s opinion, is providing “regular, thorough instruction” in the required subjects. No guidelines are provided by the Board giving the OSSE arbitrary discretion to implement these provisions.

To read the new regulations, click here.

HSLDA is working on an analysis to guide our D.C. members in their response to this development. Please stay tuned for further information as OSSE’s deadline for notification (August 15) approaches.

annemiller @ August 4, 2008   |   General, Legislative  |   Comments (0)

Favorable Development in the California Homeschooling Case

- From the HSLDA E-lert Service

Dear HSLDA Members and Friends:

To read more visit HSLDA’s California Homepage.

Thank you for your continued prayers for the California homeschooling case, In re Rachel L. Last night, Mr. L’s attorney in the juvenile court reported to Home School Legal Defense Association that the juvenile court judge terminated jurisdiction over the two youngest L children in a hearing held on July 10, 2008. Mr. L is represented by Gary Kreep, who is the director of the California-based United States Justice Foundation, which has long been a close ally of HSLDA and homeschoolers in California.

Two years ago, the children’s court-appointed lawyers had asked that the two children be ordered to attend a school outside the home. That request became the basis for the court’s February ruling that homeschooling is illegal in California. The appellate court later vacated its own decision and set the case for rehearing. Oral argument on the rehearing was held on June 23, 2008 and a decision could be handed down at any time.

Mr. L’s appellate attorneys with the Alliance Defense Fund will be making the appellate court aware of this new development immediately. They will move to dismiss the petition pending in the court of appeal on the ground that the petition is now moot. In other words, the children are no longer under the jurisdiction of the juvenile court. Therefore, any decision by the appellate court based on the two-year-old petition could not be enforced against the L children.

“This is a significant favorable development toward preserving homeschooling freedom in California,” said Mike Farris, Chairman and Founder of HSLDA.

Keep praying!

Sincerely,

J. Michael Smith
HSLDA President

annemiller @ July 24, 2008   |   General, Legislative  |   Comments (0)

Rehearing in Homeschooling Case

[From HSC (Homeschool Association of California); www.hsc.org]

Rehearing in Homeschooling Case

On Monday, June 23, the Court of Appeal in Los Angeles held oral arguments for the rehearing in the In re Rachel L homeschooling/abuse case in California. I flew down for it along with HSC’s lawyers from Wilson, Sonsini, Goodrich & Rosati. Elizabeth Bryant, HSC’s legal co-chair, did all the driving in crazy LA traffic, and Leslie Buchanan, HSC’s president, came to listen. Karen Taylor of CHN was there, as was CHN’s counsel (who’s really an HSC legal volunteer, Jerry Salcido). CHEA’s representative couldn’t come, but their counsel was there. HSLDA came as did the man who worked with me on the brief about the history and efficacy of homeschooling that was filed on behalf of several schools, advocacy groups and businesses such as AtoZHomescool and Diane Flynn Keith. There was a reporter there from the LA Times, but very few people who looked like regular members of the public (security was VERY tight). The court did not permit any TV cameras to show up.

The arguments were long (two and a half hours in a hot courtroom) and thorough. The judges asked lots of questions, with some consistent themes. As soon as you thought you had one judge pegged as to how he or she was thinking, he or she would ask another question that made you wonder about your prior conclusion. They were reasonably generous about letting people finish their presentations or points even if they ran over a little on time.

Some of the attorneys presenting made wonderful arguments that we loved. Others were potentially damaging. Most of the folks on our side did a really good job. One woman from Munger Tolles, who represented CHEA in our joint brief, made a presentation on behalf of all three groups and did very well.

It is absolutely impossible to predict how the court will rule on this — whether it will be narrow, sweeping, or something entirely different, and we don’t want to feed any rumor mill. It’s just too hard to read those tea leaves, although I am sure some people will try.

They have 90 days to do something, which means we should expect a ruling by late September. All three of the big groups will, of course, coordinate to make sure we give consistent advice about how to homeschool come fall, and will work together after the ruling comes out should any change in advice be necessary. If the ruling goes against us, our pro bono firms have assured us that they’re in it for the long haul and will be with us every step of the way.

As before, we encourage everyone to keep on doing what they’ve been doing, to keep showing the world a positive image of homeschooling, to educate their friends and neighbors about homeschooling, and to stay informed.

If you have any questions, please don’t hesitate to write me.

Debbie Schwarzer
HSC Legal Co-Chair

annemiller @ July 1, 2008   |   General  |   Comments (0)

Homeschool Is a Constitutional Right for Parents

[Thanks to Judi Munday for sending us this article!]

Monday, June 23, 2008 (SF Chronicle)
Homeschool is a constitutional right for parents
Damien M. Schiff

Can California force parents to send their children outside the home for their education, regardless of the quality of instruction they receive at home? Today, the California Court of Appeal in Los Angeles will hear arguments in a case raising this issue - the constitutional rights of parents to direct the education of their children. The case arises out of a dependency hearing in which court-appointed attorneys for Jonathan and Mary Grace, two minor children who had been receiving instruction at home, asked the trial judge to order them to attend public school. The judge refused on the grounds that the parents have a constitutional right to homeschool their children. But the Court of Appeal reversed the ruling and interpreted California law as requiring homeschooling parents to have teaching credentials.

Understandably, the appellate court’s decision in February created an immediate controversy with homeschooling and parental rights’ advocates across the nation. Subsequently the Court of Appeal, in an unusual move, decided to withdraw its first decision, request additional briefing, and hear the case again.

But - should the court ultimately rule the same way - a mandate against homeschooling, rather than a focus on the merits of this individual case, makes no sense. For one, the court can resolve the appeal without addressing the constitutional issue by interpreting state law not to mrequire credentialing for homeschool instructors.

Read the rest of the article

Damien M. Schiff is an attorney with Pacific Legal Foundation. He submitted a brief to the Second District Court of Appeal, arguing against the court’s earlier ruling that outlawed homeschooling for non-credentialed parents. A link to our brief is at www.pacificlegal.org.
Copyright 2008 SF Chronicle

annemiller @ July 1, 2008   |   General, Legislative  |   Comments (0)

Keep Praying for the California Case

- From the HSLDA E-lert Service

Dear HSLDA Members and Friends:

On Monday, June 23, 2008, HSLDA founder Mike Farris argued in defense of homeschooling in the California Court of Appeal in the now-infamous Rachel L. case. In February, this same court had ruled that homeschooling is illegal in California. The court later vacated its own decision in response to a request for rehearing filed by attorney for the father, Gary Kreep of the United States Justice Foundation, with substantial assistance by Farris and other attorneys at HSLDA. Farris argued as a friend of the court on behalf of HSLDA’s 15,000 member families in California, as well as Focus on the Family, and Private and Home Educators of California.

Farris was joined in his defense of homeschooling by lawyers representing the Attorney General and Governor of California, the Superintendent of Public Instruction, California’s three largest homeschooling groups (California Homeschool Network, Homeschool Association of California and Christian Home Educators of California), Pacific Justice Institute on behalf of Sunland Christian School, and Alliance Defense Fund lawyer Jeff Shafer, on behalf of the family.

“The weight of legal and scholarly authority presented to this court in defense of homeschooling is unprecedented,” said Farris, who has argued dozens of similar cases since founding HSLDA 25 years ago.

In addition to those who presented oral argument, friend-of-the-court briefs in support of the right of parents to homeschool were submitted by Pacific Legal Foundation, National Legal Foundation, Sutherland Institute, Liberty Counsel on behalf of 13 members of Congress, Gifted Homeschoolers Forum, et al, Seventh Day Adventist Church State Council, Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence (prepared by noted law professors David Llewellyn, John Eastman, and Erwin Chemerinsky), American Center for Law and Justice and The Western Center for Law and Policy.

Farris is guardedly optimistic that the three-judge panel will not repeat its earlier error, but he covets your prayers. “The homeschooling movement has been successful not because of the work of lawyers but because the Lord has blessed it,” noted Farris. “We must always remember Proverbs 21:1—‘The king’s heart is in the hand of the Lord, like the rivers of water; He turns it wherever he wishes.’ ”

A decision is expected within a few weeks.

Sincerely,

J. Michael Smith
HSLDA President

To read more, visit HSLDA’s California Homepage.

annemiller @ June 30, 2008   |   General  |   Comments (0)

Texan Homeschoolers and the Recent Seizures

The following article was posted in the Texas Homeschool Coalition Newsletter on May 22. Please keep the situation in Texas in your prayers.

Appeals court rules Texas had no right to seize sect kids
By LISA SANDBERG and TERRI LANGFORD San Antonio Express-News and Houston Chronicle

SAN ANGELO — A Texas appeals court ruled today that a San Angelo judge exceeded her discretion when she ordered the state to take custody of children from a polygamist sect.

The order by a panel of the 3rd Court of Appeals in Austin gave State District Judge Barbara Walther 10 days to vacate her order, which applied to more than 460 children.

Read the rest of the story….

Parental Rights and CPS
By TIM LAMBERT

In April, Texas officials initiated the largest removal of children by CPS (Child Protective Services) in the nation’s history. The removal was instigated by phone calls from a woman who identified herself as a sixteen-year-old girl in the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (FLDS) community near Eldorado, Texas. She said she had been forced to marry a man in his fifties and was being abused. On the basis of her calls, a judge granted a court order to authorities to enter the property of the group and investigate the allegations and to issue an arrest warrant for the man identified as the husband of this woman. The state has now all but admitted that the call was a hoax and has dropped the arrest warrant for the man named. News reports identified the caller as a 33-year-old woman in Colorado, a former member of the sect with a history of making such calls.

The raid with armed officers and tanks resulted in the removal of every child from the property, with mothers initially allowed to accompany their children. According to press reports, almost 500 children were removed from the property without resistance from the parents or families. The sect practices polygamy and arranged marriages of underage girls; by media accounts the members are very industrious and productive and require modest dress for the women, who do not cut their hair or wear make-up.

Texas law requires a hearing to be held within 14 days of the removal of children to review the evidence of abuse/neglect and a judge must rule on whether or not CPS has evidence of abuse/neglect to justify the continued separation of the children and their parents. The judge in this case held a hearing for all the children at the same time with over three hundred attorneys representing the children and parents. Most of the attorneys had never even spoken with the clients they were representing or had access to them. While a case could and should have been made that underage girls who were pregnant or had children should be removed because of the clear evidence of sexual abuse, the judge ruled that all children should remain wards of the state. CPS then separated the children from their mothers, including children as young as 13 months and teen boys, about whom no one had alleged abuse or neglect.

Attorneys for the FLDS parents filed an appeal of this decision with Texas Third Court of Appeals arguing, “… ‘at most’ the Department of Family and Protective Services showed that only one group of children - girls 15 and over - were at risk because of underage marriage practices of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. Instead, the state removed all children based on future risk and without considering less-traumatic alternatives for the children.”

This action has resulted in a national focus on the FLDS group and the handling of these kinds of cases by CPS. The controversy stems, in my opinion, from a difference in regard to a view of parental rights. Some argue that the government was justified in taking all of the children in spite of what appears to be a lack of evidence of abuse and/or neglect of some of those children. In fact, CPS claims that all the children are at risk because of what the group believes regarding polygamy and marriage at a young age. The problem with this view is that the law clearly requires evidence that the children are in imminent danger of abuse and, according to legal experts, taking such actions based on what people believe rather than their actions is illegal. The state should not remove children from their parents without clear evidence of abuse and/or neglect.

Some have expressed the opinion that these people are dangerous. They seem to hold this view because of the appearance of the people, their views on dress and make-up, their withdrawal from society, and their teachings that our society is sinful, in addition to their practice of polygamy and underage marriage. In short, they are different from the culture at large, and thus the allegations against them are more believable; also government officials have made the allegations, and therefore, they must be true. Many home educators have responded to these arguments with anxiety, recognizing that many of those comments could be made about many who homeschool as well.

While many of us teach our children the biblical view of government, that God established it for the restraint of evil-doers, we should also emphasize that our government requires the assumption of innocence until the proof of guilt. News stories in Texas have recently reported the 33rd incident of a wrongly- convicted man in a Texas prison who has been proven innocent by DNA testing. This man served 27 years for a crime he did not commit. This should give us pause. We should be careful about believing those accused by CPS are guilty, based only on CPS allegations and news stories.

I have received comments from home schoolers who champion CPS as “heroes for the family 99% of the time.” While this might be true to some extent, it is little comfort for innocent families who happen to be in the percentage of families who suffer at their hands. The attitude exhibited by CPS workers in dealing with the FLDS families was publicized by a report released by John Kight, chairman of Hill Country Mental Health- Mental Retardation Center in mid-May.

“‘We don’t condone what they say went on out there (at the ranch), but we’re just aghast at the methods they used to go out there and take the kids away from their mothers,’ Kight said. ‘We want him (Texas Gov. Rick Perry) to hear first hand what went on, … how abusive CPS was and how they’ve trampled all over their rights.’

“Eleven employees of the Hill Country Community Mental Health-Mental Retardation Center recently provided written reports of their experiences at the request of the regional governing board. Each expressed frustration - and some anger - at how CPS treated the children….

“‘Never in all my life, and I am one of the older ladies, have I been so ashamed of being a Texan and seeing what and how our government agencies treat people,’ wrote one employee of Hill Country Community Mental Health and Mental.” Deseret News, 5-13-2008

One MHMR worker stated, “I witnessed a small boy, maybe 3 years old, walking along the rows of cots with a little pillow saying, ‘I need someone to rock me, I just want to be rocked, I want to find a rocking chair.’ Two CPS workers were following him and writing in their notebooks but not speaking to him or comforting him. Sally and I started toward him but his 8-year-old brother came and picked him up, saying ‘I’ll take care of him.’ ,,,That little boy will always be in my mind. How can a beautiful healthy child be taken from a healthy, loving home and be forced into a situation like that, right here in America, right here in Texas?”

“Chairman John Kight said he wants state legislators and the governor to hear the employees’ stories. ‘You have damaged these children for their lives,’ he said. ‘This is an agency that looks like it’s gone out of control.’” - Salt Lake Tribune, 5-13-2008

The reports by these MHMR workers seem to support anecdotal evidence that we hear from home school families who have experienced similar actions by CPS workers. In fact, the FLDS circumstances are not uncommon. Often an anonymous, malicious, false allegation is made against a family; sometimes children are removed without evidence of abuse/neglect; and it is not at all uncommon for a judge to grant CPS continued custody of children without evidence for as long as 18 months, while the family tries to meet the demands of CPS to regain their children. In the FLDS case, children have been housed all over the state, and some families are being required to travel 1800 miles per week to visit their children, in addition to working to provide for their families and taking the training and testing required by CPS. In fact, some believe that what CPS is requiring of these families is not possible to accomplish.

Texas law requires CPS to investigate any allegation of abuse or neglect, and there are countless examples of anonymous calls resulting in innocent families being put through circumstances similar to what has happened to the FLDS families. Although a statute is in place to prosecute such false claims, they are rarely, if ever, pursued by district or county attorneys. In fact, CPS and the state encourage people with any concern for a child to call CPS. This kind of public exhortation, coupled with aggressive responses by CPS officials, often result in innocent families being harassed and children being emotionally abused.

The THSC office took a call recently from a home school family whose children were standing at the curb of their front yard calling for their dog who had escaped, when a woman stopped her car and told them they should not be outside. The children ran into their home, and the well-meaning woman called the local police who forced their way into the home “because the children were in danger.”

Many have asked, what can we do? Pray for these families and for others who have to deal with CPS investigations. Follow the news that THSC PAC publishes on this and other issues that could impact home schooling. Contact the governor, your state representative, and state senator and express your opinion.

Certainly no one with whom I have talked in the home school community supports polygamy or underage marriage, but many hold the view of the MHMR workers that CPS is out of control and must be held accountable. One MHMR worker stated, “I have worked in the domestic violence/sexual abuse programming for over 20 years and have never seen women and children treated this poorly, not to mention their civil rights being disregarded in this manner. It makes us all wonder how safe anyone is who has children.” Many home schoolers with whom I’ve talked have voiced the same concerns, in my opinion, legitimately.

Read the reports of the MHMR workers

Here are links to letters written by staff members from the Hill Country Community Mental Health-Mental Retardation Center, which provided assistance to FLDS women and children in San Angelo shelters in April. They are critical of conditions in the shelters and how child welfare workers treated the women and children. Sal t Lake Tribune, 05/13/2008

• “This was a travesty.”
• “This situation was a tragedy.”
• “It was heartwrenching.”
• “Our roles became… confidant and a broker.”
• “That is a very good question.”
• “Ashamed of being a Texan.”
• “I often felt helpless.”
• “Vast amounts of hypocrisy.”
• “Even to be an observer was difficult.”
• “This incident… is not what America or Texas stands for.”
• “Even the simplest request was discounted.”

annemiller @ June 30, 2008   |   General  |   Comments (0)