Judge Ned Mangum of Wake County in North Carolina, while handling a divorce proceeding for Thomas and Vanessa Mills, has ordered their three children to attend public schools this fall. He believes the homeschooling their mother has provided over the last four years needs to be challenged.
Adam Cothes, a spokesman for Vanessa Mills, said the children routinely had been testing at up to two years above their grade level, were involved in swim team and other activities and events outside their home and had taken leadership roles in history club events. A statement released by a publicist working for the mother, whose children now are 10, 11 and 12, said Mangum stripped her of her right to decide what is best for her children’s education. The decision is raising eyebrows among homeschooling families, andone friend of the mother,Robyn Williams, has launched a website to publicize the issue. Williams, who is a homeschooling mother herself, said that Mills originally moved into a home-school schedule because the children were not doing as well as she hoped at the local public schools.
The judge, when contacted by the media, explained his goal in ordering the children to register and attend a public school was to make sure they have a more well-rounded education. “I thought Ms. Mills had done a good job [in homeschooling],” he said. ”It was great for them to have that access, and [I had] no problems with homeschooling. I said public schooling would be a good complement.” The judge said the husband has not been supportive of his wife’s homeschooling, and “it accomplished its purposes. It now was appropriate to have them back in public school.” Mangum said he made the determination on his guiding principle, “What’s in the best interest of the minor children,” and conceded it was putting his judgment in place of the mother’s.
According to a proposed order submitted by the father’s lawyer to Mangum, “The children have thrived in home-school for the past four years, but need the broader focus and socialization available to them in public school. The Court finds that it is in the children’s best interest to continue their homeschooling through the end of the current school year, but to begin attending public school at the beginning of the 2009-2010 instructional year.” The order proposed by the father’s lawyer also conceded the reason for the divorce was the father’s adultery. It also specifically said the father would not pay for homeschooling expenses for his children. The order also stated, “Defendant believes that plaintiff is a nurturing mother who loves the children. Defendant believes that plaintiff has done a good job with the homeschooling of the children, although he does not believe that continued homeschooling is in the best interest of the children.”
Although this ruling is confined to one family, homeschooling advocates can’t help but be reminded of the state wide ruling in California last February that stated parents could not home school their children unless they were credentialed teachers. Ultimately, the 2nd Appellate District Court in Los Angeles reversed its own order, affirming the rights of California parents to home-school their children if they choose.
This situation brings about a much more important debate than whether you agree with homeschooling or not. The bigger question here is if a judge should be allowed to replace a parent’s belief with his own to alter an environment where children are thriving.
(Photo By: Scol32)
Comments
Crystal Arcand
April 10th, 2009 - 10:16:13 AM
Can we say, "Seething?" It is not the government's right, a judge's right, anyone's right but the parent's how a child is educated.