Proponents of ‘homeschooling’ routinely claim it is legal for parents to rear their children as they see fit. This view ignores the parens patriae doctrine — the primary legal basis for the judicial regulation of custody and the legislative enactment of compulsory schooling laws for the benefit of all children. This article challenges claims that ‘homeschooling’ is legal (without qualification) with evidence of the continuing vitality of the parens patriae doctrine in two North American jurisdictions. In New York and Ontario, where ‘homeschooling’ is not statutorily prohibited, the state through its legislative and judicial organs continues to limit the custodial authority of ‘homeschooling’ parents on the ground that children’s independent welfare and developmental interests include exposure to public formative influences.
Alexander, K. and Alexander, M.D. ( 2005) American Public School Law. Belmont, CA: Thomson West.
2.
Bielick, S. ( 2008) ‘1.5 million homeschooled students in the United States in 2007 (NCES 2009-030)’. National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences. Washington, DC: US Department of Education.
3.
Blokhuis, J.C. ( 2009) ‘Parens patriae: A comparative study of sovereign authority and public education policy in the Province of Ontario and the State of New York’, PhD dissertation, University of Rochester , New York. Available at https://urresearch.rochester.edu/institutionalPublicationPublicView.action?institutionalItemId=7272 (accessed 8 April 2010).
4.
Brighouse, H. ( 2005) ‘Channel One, the anti-commercial principle, and the discontinuous ethos’, Educational Policy19(3): 528-49; reprinted in R. Curren, ed. (2007) Philosophy of Education: An Anthology, pp. 208-20. Malden, MA: Blackwell .
5.
Brighouse, H. ( 2006) On Education. London: Routledge.
6.
Brighouse, H. and Swift, A. ( 2003). ‘Defending liberalism in educational theory’ , Journal of Education Policy18(4): 355-73.
7.
Brown, A.F. ( 2004) Legal Handbook for Educators. Scarborough , ON: Carswell.
8.
Chitty, J. ( 1820) A Treatise on the Law of the Prerogatives of the Crown and the Relative Duties and Rights of the Subject. London : Butterworth.
9.
Curren, R. ( 2000) Aristotle on the Necessity of Public Education. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
10.
Curren, R. ( 2006) ‘Developmental liberalism’, Educational Theory56(4): 451-68.
11.
Curren, R. ( 2008) ‘Indoctrination’, in G. McCulloch and D. Crook (eds), International Encyclopedia of Education, pp. 310-11. London: Routledge.
12.
Custer, L.W. ( 1978) ‘The origins of the doctrine of parens patriae’ , Emory Law Journal27: 195-208.
13.
Dembitz, N. ( 1971) ‘The good of the child versus the rights of the parent: The Supreme Court upholds the welfare home-visit’, Political Science Quarterly86(3): 389-405.
14.
Demos, J. ( 1970) A Little Commonwealth: Family Life in Plymouth Colony . New York: Oxford University Press .
15.
Dwyer, J.G. ( 1994) ‘Parents’ religion and children’s welfare: Debunking the doctrine of parents’ rights’, California Law Review82(6): 1371-448.
16.
Dwyer, J.G. ( 1996) ‘The children we abandon: Religious exemptions to child welfare and educational laws as denials of equal protection to children of religious objectors’, North Carolina Law Review74:1321-478.
17.
Dwyer, J.G. ( 2006) The Relationship Rights of Children. New York: Cambridge University Press.
18.
Feinberg, J. ( 1980) ‘The child’s right to an open future’ , in W. Aiken and H. LaFollette (eds), Whose Child? Children’s Rights, Parental Authority, and State Power, pp. 124-53. Totowa, NJ: Rowman & Littlefield; reprinted in R. Curren, ed. (2007) Philosophy of Education: An Anthology, pp. 112-24. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
19.
Gaither, M. ( 2008). Homeschooling: An American history. New York: Palgrave.
20.
Goldstein, J., Solnit, A.J., Goldstein, S. and Freud, A. ( 1996). The Best Interests of the Child: The Least Detrimental Alternative. New York: Free Press .
21.
Grubb, W.N. ad Lazerson, M. ( 1982) Broken Promises: How Americans Fail Their Children. New York: Basic Books.
22.
Kunzman, R. ( 2009) Write These Laws on Your Children: Inside the World of Conservative Christian Homeschooling. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
23.
Levinson, M. ( 1999) The Demands of Liberal Education. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
24.
Merry, M. and Howell, C. ( 2009). ‘Can intimacy justify home education?’, Theory and Research in Education7(3): 363-81.
25.
Peters, S.F. ( 2003) The Yoder Case: Religious Freedom, Education, and Parental Rights. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas Press.
26.
Ray, B.D. ( 2001) ‘Homeschooling in Canada’, Education Canada41(1): 28.
27.
Reich, R. ( 2002). Bridging Liberalism and Multiculturalism in American Education. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
28.
Saxon, W. ( 1999) ‘William Ball is dead; defended religious rights’New York Times, 18 January. Available at http://www.nytimes.com/1999/01/18/us/william-ball-is-dead-at-82-defended-religious-rights.html (accessed 8 April 2010).
29.
Smolin, D.M. ( 2006) ‘Overcoming religious objections to the Convention on the Rights of the Child’, Emory International Law Review20: 81-110.
30.
Strike, K. ( 1982) Liberty and Learning. New York: St Martin’s Press.
31.
Sunstein, C. ( 1987) ‘Lochner’s legacy’, Columbia Law Review87: 873-919.
32.
Tamir, Y. ( 1990) ‘Whose education is it, anyway?’, Journal of Philosophy of Education24(7): 161-70.
33.
Todres, J., Wojcik, M.E. and Revaz, R., eds ( 2006) The U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child: An Analysis of Treaty Provisions and Implications of US Ratification. Leiden: Hotei Publishing.
34.
Yuracko, K.A. ( 2008) ‘Education off the grid: Constitutional constraints on homeschooling’, California Law Review96: 123-84.
