Sometimes that's untenable, for a myriad of reasons. Parent(s) can't get a job in the new location, the family currently lives somewhere where they're tied to extended family -- by choice, etc.

The point is that those are choices. I am well conscious of "untenable" and also know that if you put everything on the table, things are more tenable than most people think. It's like the family at JZ's hospital that she talked about who had the child whose heart condition made him suffer at high altitudes. They needed to move, but they wouldn't because they'd lose close family ties. I think that's a poor balancing of all the priorities. They thought it was untenable - but it really wasn't.

I am a major public school advocate. however, I can think of a number of people who don't fit the mold. Takeing a cild out for a year - like ouise- sounds like a good stratagy. and I can think of a number of high school students ( my DH was one) that are self motivated kids , that get stiffled in the high school program. When there are things like sudden drops in grades - there are reasons. But there are kids that do the opposite. a friends's oldest never did well in school. he is now in a high school with a block system - that means he is only has three classes at anyone time. Which works better for him.

I think all parents have to say about school at some point : "Yes, they teach that at school. But I think it's important you learn this..." Or is that because I was little crippled child hippie-spawn?

Awwwwww.

I have returned.... how's Ginger?

Como esta el povre gringo che necesita ajuda?

As for the religious whackjobs -- if your agenda is (mostly) the one in charge, well, of course keep your kids in public education.

Well, there's something to be said for being familiar with the mainstream -- and knowing when you're in it and when you're not. I haev nothing but pity for the kids who grow up in small-town Kansas, learning bad science about evolution, and then arrive at college ready to major in biology, only to find they may need remedial classes.

It's one thing to learn X, and then say, "I don't agree with X" or "I don't want to study X" or "I want to eradicate X from all our lives"; but it's another thing entirely not to have any exposure to X in the first place.

Signed,
hated mushrooms on sight till many years later, when I was convinced to try them and realized I liked them a lot.

The point is that those are choices.

God, I've typed and deleted 3 different responses to this, and they're all devolving into defensiveness and serious anger on my part.

I'm not feeling well today; I'm getting a cold, and I feel feverish. So I'm not going to let loose with unwarranted anger, here.

I just want to note this: yes, those *are* choices, but sometimes, Hec, you come across as though the only correct choice is the one that you support. But really, there's often more than one correct choice.

That's all. I'm going to disengage until I'm less bombarded by Germs O' Doom.

I think all parents have to say about school at some point : "Yes, they teach that at school. But I think it's important you learn this..."

Don't you think there's a breaking point? When you have to keep explaining to little Sammy why the way his teachers and the kids he wants to be his friends have such divergent viewpoints from his?

I had it aggravating enough trying to be non-Christian in a Jamaican school. In England, I had a teacher go to bat for me to be able to avoid the Christian ceremonies.

Small freaking potatoes, because except for one creationism incident, the actual lessons didn't diverge from home values very much.

That doesn't mean it's not huge for some people, even if they hold viewpoints with which I disagree mightily -- how do you convince a child to hold your values and put others down on tests?

serial:

I haev nothing but pity for the kids who grow up in small-town Kansas, learning bad science about evolution, and then arrive at college ready to major in biology, only to find they may need remedial classes.

Then they should have been homeschooled to avoid the bad science, or find a university that keeps teaching it.

I don't think homeschooling will harm the child any more than public schooling won't.

I really don't believe that's an even bet. Actually, I don't think smart kids suffer too much from mediocre schools. I think they'll excel anyway, and they'll get happy teacher attention. (Bad schools are another story. Mediocre students in mediocre schools is also another story.)

Am I prepared to sacrifice my child's education to prop up the education of the country as a whole?

Well, I'm not advocating that. Emmett went to a private kindergarten and I can imagine making that choice again. I'm just saying on two different fronts I dislike home schooling. One, I think it overvalues one-on-one parenting. Two, I think public education the most valuable tool for maintaining a viable democracy.

eta: Ooops. Public education being the valuable tool.

Is there a place for people without children in them to help fix the public schools?

Oh god yes. My co-worker, a gay black man my age, who does not have children, works many many hours with two foster children as their Big Brother, but also as a liason with their school. Aside from that, I simply dislike the attitude of people who don't have children who vote against taxes which support schools primarily because they have an "I don't benefit from it so why should I pay" attitude.

works many many hours with two foster children as their Big Brother

Founded by my great-great uncle, Irving Westheimer.