Parental Rights Under Assault In Education

A seminal cultural issue is the tug-of-war over parental rights and children's education. Increasingly parents are demanding more involvement in what's taught in schools. School districts are pushing back, contending they know what's best for students. Parental rights stop at the school's front door.  

A high-stakes battle over the issue has reached the nation's highest court.  The case involves Maryland parents pitted against the Montgomery County Board of Education.  Parents sued the district over LGBTQ themed books for pre-Kindergarten and elementary-aged children. 

The Supreme Court is expected to hand down a decision in the case this summer.  The suit has reignited the simmering battle over school books, curriculum and teachers classroom guides. Many school boards and the teachers union have erected roadblocks to parental oversight of their child's education. 

At issue in the Maryland case, is the Montgomery County Board of Education's refusal to allow parents to opt out classes that use books with LGBTQ themes in elementary school.  Montgomery County is the 14th largest district in the nation with more than 160,000 students, including 70,000 elementary kids. 

In 2022, Maryland's largest district announced revisions to its curriculum would include new storybooks with young LGBTQ characters to foster diversity and inclusion.  Parents decided to take the issue to court in 2023 after the district refused to honor opt-out requests for students after saying it would.  

Maryland has a law as many states do that requires parental notification and the ability to opt-out of sexual education classes and controversial readings on related topics. The board's own guidelines guarantee parents may seek opt-outs and alternative assignments.  

The board reversed course when a vocal group of parents protested that the opt-out amounted to a violation of their First Amendment rights. Three families took issue with the powerful board, arguing the books subject matter infringed on their free exercise of religion. 

It's worth noting that the opposition group included members of the Catholic, Muslim and Ukrainian Orthodox churches.  They did not challenge the curriculum or demand the school district stop reading the books to other students.  All they asked was the right to have their children excused from the class.

The media has tried to frame this as book banning.  That is patently untrue. Others have contended that religious beliefs don't belong in public schools. But the parents are not lobbying to teach a religious point of view on LGBTQ.  They just don't want their kids exposed to gender affirming messages.

A Montgomery County district board member defended their decision by claiming if books "offend your family's religious values or your core beliefs is just telling (your) kid, 'Here's another reason to hate another person.'"  That irrational judgment reflects the board's contempt for parents. 

Parents should not be asked to surrender their right to instill religious upbringing for their children. Issues surrounding family life and human sexuality are at the heart of many religions teachings. Parents are the best guides on these matters, especially at the elementary and pre-K level. 

It helps to know the content of the richly illustrated books to understand the parents' position. The books, read to pre-K and elementary school-age children, champion pride parades, gender transitioning and pronoun preferences for children.  

As one example, a book tasks three-and-four-year olds to search for images from a word list that includes "intersex flag," "drag queen," leather and the name of a celebrated LGBTQ activist and sex worker. Teaching guides suggest it is "hurtful" if students question these ideas.

The books included "My Rainbow," about a mother who makes a rainbow colored wig for her transgender daughter. Another, "Love Violet," tells the story of a girl who develops a crush on her female classmate Mira. Only Mira made "Violet's heart skip," the book emphasizes. 

One book describes the story of a girl attending her uncle's same-sex wedding. Another, innocently named "Puppy Pride," tells the story of a dog that gets lost during a pride parade.  The deceptively disguised LGBTQ ideology unfolds on the pages. 

The books were front and center when the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in April.  The case landed at the high court after the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the parents of children enrolled in Montgomery County public schools had no right to be notified or opt-out their kids.

The high court has an opportunity to ratify parental rights and religious freedom in its decision.  In addition, the justices should make it clear that parents--not the state or school district--should have the right to decide when to introduce their children to sensitive issues about gender and sexuality.

Do Parents Have a Say In Their Kids Curriculum?

Skirmishes are erupting across America over parental involvement in the curriculum of public schools. Teachers unions and many school boards are crusading for their right to exercise control over what a child learns. Parents are pushing back, fighting for the imperative to influence curriculum content for their kids.

The confrontation over the competing ideas on education is sparking a national debate that first ignited in Virginia and has spread like a wildfire from big cities to rural school districts. Online learning during the pandemic, opened the eyes of many parents, who were vaguely aware of what their kids were taught.

The New York Times, in an effort to sabotage the nascent parental movement, echoed the arguments of an education establishment invested in mandating every aspect of a child's learning. The Times headline could have been written by the establishment:

"Parents claim they have the right to shape their kids school curriculum.  They don't"

The Times authors conceded that parents have an obligation to raise and educate their children. Then the writers added: "This right, however, does not mean that public schools must cater to parents individual ideas about education."

In The Times view, parents can send their children to private schools if they don't like the curriculum.  This patrician attitude is exactly what is wrong with today's educators, teachers and schools.  If parents don't like what their kids are being taught, then find another school.  If only most parents had that option.

Teachers unions are chagrined that any parent has the audacity to tell an educator what content might be inappropriate for their children. Unions view parental involvement as a nuisance.  Here's a sample:

"In our constitutional order, children's freedoms take priority over parental freedoms.  Given the overriding importance of schooling to democracy, our laws elevate and protect the rights of children to learn and to grow as citizens," the educational lobby insists.

Educational elitists compare the current wave of parental 'interference' to segregation.  In that era, they claim parents fought to preserve racial division in schools. With Critical Race Theory a current lightning rod for parents, the education establishment is playing the race card to silence dissent.

Ironically, African-American parents as well of those of mixed-raced children are among the most vocal opponents.  A Nevada mother of a mixed-race son sued the public school over a curriculum that teaches Critical Race Theory tenants, which elevate racial identity over individuality. 

Despite the Times claims, unions and educators are on the wrong side of the law.  Federal statutes and Supreme Court decisions have reinforced the rights of parents to be involved in their children's education. They are in charge of their child's learning, not unelected teachers, education bureaucrats or unions.

In 1925, the Supreme Court in the case of Pierce versus the Society of Sisters ruled: "The child is not the mere creature of the state...the state of Oregon, by forcing parents to place their children in public schools, unreasonably interfered with the liberty of parents and guardians..."

Although educators dismiss the nearly century-old decision as outdated, the court's ruling has been cited in more than a 100 Supreme Court decisions and nearly 70 by lower courts. The concept is enshrined in American education.  Why change it now?  What is different today?  What are educators afraid of?

In 1978, the Congress passed a federal law that protects parents right to review curriculum.  The law, in the form of an amendment to existing legislation, is known as the "Protection of Parents Rights." Under the act, parents have the right to review a copy of their child's curriculum.

Despite the rulings, courts continue to tinker with the right of parental involvement in education. In 2005, the Ninth Circuit Court in Fields versus Palmdale School District ruled the foundational right to control the upbringing of a child "does not extend beyond the threshold of the school door."

The education establishment usurps the ruling to justify its efforts to fend off the parental movement.  With air cover provided by the legacy media, the establishment has mounted a disinformation campaign to brand parents efforts as anti-LGBTQ, anti-African American and anti-sex-education.

In addition, the education establishment blames conservatives for using this as a hot button political issue, while accusing them of not being interested in the welfare of children. Despite the bluster, the education fraternity is losing because many states have moved to expand parental involvement in education.

Indiana, Georgia, Florida and Texas--to name a few--have seized the initiative to fashion new laws to reinforce the rights of parents to be the primary decision makers in all matters involving their children. That includes protecting children from age-inappropriate classroom materials.

In Georgia, the House version of a parental right bill gives parents the right to review all classroom materials, the right to access all records relating to their children, bans the teaching of "divisive concepts" on race and prohibits transgender girls from playing on girls sports teams.

Democrats claim the bills are election fodder for Republicans and nothing more without acknowledging the right of parents to be involved in the education of their children.  They allege the movement could worsen an antagonistic relationship between parents and teachers.

Notice how parents are painted as the villains.  The education establishment, which contends it values parental involvement, wants to control what students are taught, irrespective of the views of the parents. Education elitists value parents tax dollars but not their rights.

Federal, state and local spending on kindergarten through twelfth grade in the U.S. totaled $734.2 billion in 2021, according to the National Center for Education Studies.  The federal Department of Education contributed $73.5 billion of that amount.  Those billions were paid by parents and those without children.

Taxpayers, especially parents, deserve the right to demand their children get an appropriate education.  Those with the financial means are deciding to pull their children out of  public schools. Eleven percent of students were home schooled last year. Homeschooling leaped five-fold for black families. 

There are 34,576 private schools in the U.S., serving 5.7 million kindergarten through twelfth grade students.  Private education accounts for 25% of the nation's schools and 10% of students. Enrollment is declining in public schools, which lost 1.2 million students at the start of the 2022 school year. 

The education monopoly is showing signs of cracks.  The erosion of support for public schools is hastened by the education establishment's hostile attitude toward parents' request for curriculum transparency.  Ignoring parents will one day doom the public education system to irrelevance.    

Department of Education Earns Failing Grade

Of all the cabinet-level agencies sponging off American taxpayers, none are as lumbering, bureaucratic or as redundant as the Department of Education.  The department should be abolished, its 5,000 employees furloughed and its $68.1 billion budget returned to taxpayers.

With a stroke of his pen, President Jimmy Carter signed a law in 1980 creating the department. Prior to then, the agency was a part of the Department of Health, Education and Welfare. Carter championed the idea of upgrading education to cabinet level status.

Like many of President Carter's ideas, it was poorly conceived.

States already had their own Departments of Education.  Yet Carter and Congressional Democrats insisted on another layer of government to establish policy for federal assistance to education.  Among the other duties envisioned for the agency was the collection of education data and enforcement of civil rights.

As with most Washington bureaucracies, the department strayed far afield from its mission.  Soon the department was immersed in school curriculum, standards and student achievement.   From its humble beginnings, the agency with the smallest staff of the 15 cabinet departments now has the third largest budget.

Unfettered by congressional oversight, the department continues to embellish its mission.  The agency proclaims its new role is "to promote student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness by fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access."

If that sounds like government gibberish, that's because it is.

Student achievement falls woefully short of the government's pomposity.  Academic performance has sunk to new lows in the 98,000 public schools and the nation's young people lag far behind their global classmates.

In the most recent international testing, 15-year-olds in the U.S. ranked 25th in math among their peers from 34 countries.  The Paris-based Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development administered the testing and released the results in December, 2010.

U.S. teens fared only slightly better in science and reading, finishing near the middle of the pack. American students ranked 17th in science and 14th in reading.  Asian countries, including South Korea, Japan, Singapore and Hong Kong, were among the leaders, easily outdistancing U.S. students.

More taxpayer money won't guarantee U.S. students will catch up. 

In the last ten years, federal spending on education has nearly doubled.  Taxpayers doled out $46.2 billion to the department a decade ago.  In President Obama's recent budget, he requested $77.4 billion. All that cash trickles down to the state and local level with lots of strings attached.

The non-partisan Government Accountability Office reported that 13,400 federally funded full-time employees were needed by state education agencies just to implement Washington-mandated programs.  All those bureaucrats do not teach a single student.

In its review, the GAO found the education department precipitated 41 percent of the administration burden at the state level.  States are forced to add staff with no responsibility other than feeding the federal government's insatiable appetite for reports and data. 

The situation has worsened with the implementation of President George W. Bush's education initiative known as No Child Left Behind.  The education policy was drafted by the late Sen. Ted Kennedy and passed into law in 2001.

According to the Office of Management and Budget, Bush's brainchild has boosted paperwork for state and local governments by 6,680,334 hours at an estimated annual cost of $141 million dollars.

Who picks up the tab for all those millions of dollars?  You do. 

State governments provide 46.9 percent of the money for public education.  Local school districts furnish 44 percent.  The feds kick in 9.1 percent.  Total taxpayer spending on public schools stands at an all-time high of well over $500 billion.

The Cato Institute, a Washington think-tank, reported that per pupil expenditures in constant dollars increased 25 percent from 1995 to 2005.  On average, it now costs $11,800 to educate one pupil in a public school for one year.  Even that figure is likely understated.

The institute studied major metropolitan school districts and discovered that the per pupil spending on average was 44 percent higher than local educators reported.  Slipshod record keeping, mathematical errors and lack of competent accounting staff were the main causes of the discrepancy.

If there was a direct correlation between money and student performance, Washington, D.C. public schools would be a shining example to follow.  The district spends $22,400 per pupil, nearly double the national average.  However, its achievement test scores rank the district near the bottom.

The inconvenient truth is that money alone won't improve education.

Instead of massive increases in funding, policymakers need to implement reforms designed to improve resource allocation.  Any effort should include curtailing the blizzard of red tape generated by the Department of Education and elimination of the agency's 11 regional offices and 13 field locations. 

Local school districts should decide what works best to improve education. They are directly accountable to parents and voters in the district.  No such accountability exists for the superfluous Washington elitists who oversee education. 

It's time to turn out the lights, send the bureaucrats packing and lock the doors at the Department of Education.  Taxpayers would be better off.  More importantly, students would be, too.