Radicals New Push for Background Checks For Homeschool Parents

A recent movement led by progressive advocacy groups has sparked intense debate over a proposal that would require homeschooling parents to undergo background checks. This initiative aims to impose additional regulations on homeschooling, a domain historically characterized by minimal governmental oversight.

Proponents of the measure argue that it is a necessary step to ensure the safety and well-being of homeschooled children. However, critics contend that such regulations infringe upon parental rights and represent an unwarranted expansion of government control.

The campaign for background checks gained significant attention following a contentious article published in Scientific American.

The piece, entitled “Children Deserve Uniform Standards in Homeschooling,” advocates for stricter regulations, emphasizing the need for background checks to protect children from potential abuse and neglect. The article’s authors argue that, without such measures, homeschooled children may be vulnerable to harm, given the lack of external oversight in many homeschooling environments.

“Children deserve the same protections regardless of their educational setting,” asserts the article in Scientific American. “Implementing background checks for homeschooling parents is a straightforward measure to enhance the safety and educational quality for these children.”

Critics of the proposal argue that it is a solution in search of a problem, pointing out that instances of abuse among homeschooling families are statistically rare. Furthermore, they highlight that the vast majority of homeschooling parents are dedicated to providing a high-quality education for their children, often motivated by concerns over the public-school system’s ability to meet their children’s needs.

A report from the Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA) underscores the argument against increased regulation. The HSLDA emphasizes that homeschooling families should not be subjected to additional scrutiny simply because of their educational choices. The organization contends that existing child welfare laws are sufficient to address any potential issues of abuse or neglect.

“The overwhelming majority of homeschooling parents are law-abiding citizens committed to their children’s education and well-being,” says Mike Donnelly, Senior Counsel at HSLDA. “Requiring background checks would unjustly burden these families and infringe upon their fundamental rights.”

Conservatives also view the proposed background checks as a broader assault on educational freedom and parental rights. They argue that such measures could set a dangerous precedent, leading to further intrusions into family life and education. This perspective aligns with a long-standing belief in limited government intervention and the primacy of parental authority in child-rearing and education.

Family Research Council President Tony Perkins considered Scientific American’s push against homeschooling on Thursday’s episode of “Washington Watch” with Mike Farris, founder of the Home School Legal Defense Association.

Perkins asked, “[W]hy is the Left so threatened by parents leading their children’s education?” And more specifically, how should we respond to it all? Farris replied, the “editors of the Scientific American need a basic course in constitutional law.”

He continued, “The federal government has no jurisdiction to implement the kind of plan that they are calling for,” which happens to be “a very draconian plan.” Ultimately, it seems “their motive and their operational plan … would be just, on its face, unconstitutional.”

Farris pointed out that one of the reasons for their argument is that parents who choose to homeschool often “teach their kids about creation as opposed to evolution,” which “is something, clearly, that people have the right to do.” And so, he added, for the editors of Scientific American to have a problem with that says a lot about their motivations.

“It’s almost laughable,” Perkins noted. He recalled the editors’ call for parents to undergo background checks. “[A] background check?” he hooted, “to teach your own children?”

Farris concurred, stating it’s “amazing” how parents can be with their children all day, “but if you want to teach them about math and reading and science in the Bible, then you have to have a background check. It just doesn’t make any sense.”

The debate over homeschooling regulation is not new, but it has gained renewed urgency in recent years as the number of homeschooling families has surged. This increase, driven in part by the COVID-19 pandemic, has brought greater visibility to the homeschooling community and intensified scrutiny from various quarters.

Despite the growing push for regulation, data indicates that homeschooled students often outperform their public-school counterparts academically.

According to a study by the National Home Education Research Institute (NHERI), homeschooled students score, on average, 15 to 30 percentile points higher on standardized academic achievement tests than their public-school peers. These findings challenge the notion that homeschooling inherently compromises educational quality.

Proponents of homeschooling emphasize the personalized nature of home education, which allows for tailored instruction that meets individual learning needs. They argue that this individualized approach is a key factor in the academic success of many homeschooled students.

As the debate continues, it remains clear that any effort to impose new regulations on homeschooling will face significant opposition from a well-organized and vocal community. This community is deeply committed to preserving the autonomy and flexibility that homeschooling provides.

In conclusion, the proposal for mandatory background checks for homeschooling parents is a contentious issue, reflecting broader societal debates over the role of government in education and family life.

While advocates of the measure argue that it is necessary to protect children, opponents see it as an overreach that threatens fundamental freedoms. As policymakers consider this proposal, they must balance the need for child safety with respect for parental rights and educational diversity.