KANSAS
Harassment of Home Schoolers Continues
Kansas has been one of Home School Legal Defense Association's most active states this school year. A "private school state," Kansas has no specific home school law, and home schools are generally recognized as non-accredited private schools.
In many counties, however, school districts continually refer home schoolers to the Social and Rehabilitation Service agencies, alleging the children are "not attending school." This year, nearly 75 member families throughout the state have been contacted by Social and Rehabilitation Services (SRS). The agencies vary in aggressiveness. Some SRS agents, such as those in the Wichita area, tend to be very positive towards home schoolers, whereas SRS agents in some other parts of the state tend to be very negative. We are happy to report, however, that every one of these situations has been resolved.
Eudora
Family D, new HSLDA members who recently withdrew their child from the public school, received a letter from a school official, stating, "if you choose to remove your son from his current enrollment, I will file a motion with the court. This will result in an unpleasant situation for both of us that I would prefer to work out without outside interference." Apparently, this particular school official did not understand, or did not want to understand, that home schooling is a legal option.
Johnson County
HSLDA has found that the SRS and prosecutor's office in Johnson County are consistently stubborn and hard to deal with. This fall, eight families were contacted simultaneously and told that the District Attorney's office was "required by Kansas law to investigate cases of truancy, or kids not attending school" and that they needed to supply information "concerning the private school education with which you are involved." Included with the letter from the District Attorney's office was a form for the families to fill out and return. The form asked for information concerning any prior public school enrollment, special educational needs, names of any non-students in the home, any other jobs held by instructors, the amount of time a counselor or psychologist was accessible to students, submission of lesson plans from the previous two weeks, a copy of recent test scores, reasons for home schooling, and any documents substantiating accreditation. These types of questions, of course, are not required by law.
HSLDA Attorney Christopher Klicka responded to the District Attorney on behalf of the families. The major problem with the questionnaire, Klicka said, was that there is no standard by which a reasonable person can be notified of what the District Attorney might think is legal or illegal. These questions are not defined in the law. Moreover, the families have no notice as to what answers would be considered adequate and what answers would be considered inadequate. Since the burden is on the school district or the state to prove that the home school is fraudulent and not meeting the requirements of a non-accredited private school, parents do not need to prove that they are operating a legitimate non-accredited private school. Furthermore, neither the District Attorney nor the SRS have the authority to approve or disapprove lesson plans, test scores, or textbooks. Those decisions are to be made by the parents alone.
Kensington
Several families received a home instruction questionnaire accompanied by a brochure entitled, "What You Need to Know about a Child Abuse or Neglect Investigation." Home schoolers are not required by law to provide the information requested on the Kensington form, and the school district is unnecessarily intimidating home school families by implying they are engaged in "child abuse or neglect."
Wellington
The SRS contacted an HSLDA family, alleging that they were "required by law to visit them and their family and be assisted by the family in obtaining information on their home-schooling program." An SRS official also tried to enter the home unlawfully.
Salina
The local youth services attorney tried to pressure one HSLDA family to prove their qualifications, demanding copies of their college and graduate degrees. He also insisted on obtaining a copy of their curriculum and a schedule of their hours of instruction. In a letter to HSLDA, the youth services attorney stated, "if your clients will not allow the state agents in their home to establish what they are teaching and how they are teaching their curriculum, then the only way to address the guidelines set out in Sawyer, may be to file a child-in-need-of-care petition and request a court order for discovery." The case the attorney referred to was a Kansas Supreme Court decision, in which the court ruled that the Sawyer family's home school did not qualify as a private school. The attorney apparently did not believe that this HSLDA member's school was any different. Attorney Christopher Klicka has continued to communicate with this attorney to convince him that prosecuting this family will violate their civil rights.
Another Salina member family was contacted by an SRS agent in November and told that they must immediately allow the agent to come to their home and talk with them and their children. However, the SRS agent refused to state the allegations being investigated. Attorney Christopher Klicka contacted the SRS agent in an attempt to learn what the allegations were, but was unsuccessful. Therefore, Klicka told the agent that the family could not cooperate at that time. Nearly two months later, the SRS agent sent notice to the family, finally admitting that the issue under investigation was home schooling. HSLDA responded, explaining how the family's home school was legitimate under the law.
Concordia
An occurrence similar to the one above was reported in Concordia, where a home school family was contacted by the SRS in August and harassed for a period of three to four months. HSLDA made countless phone calls to the SRS, but the SRS official refused to explain the nature of the allegations. After more phone calls and letters from both HSLDA and a state senator, the SRS finally relented and sent an apology letter to the family, stating,
"Due to the fact that you are uncomfortable with the concern we received about your children, we consulted with the SRS attorney and the county attorney … it was determined that there was not sufficient evidence to pursue an investigation of the allegations. We have screened out this concern and closed our file. We deeply regret the stress and worry we have caused you, please accept our most sincere apologies."
Hill City
The SRS contacted several families who had home schooled in previous years with allegations of truancy, simply because they were known to be home schoolers. HSLDA sent a letter to the Superintendent of Schools, pointing out his error in reporting these families to the SRS. The superintendent responded by apologizing profusely: "I can assure you since you have legally advised me that this report is not needed. I will gladly relinquish my responsibility for reporting. Any agency requesting information in the future will be given your address for direction. I appreciate the information you sent to me. I have never been informed of some of that information from any of our state associations in Kansas!" HSLDA is thankful that the Hill City Superintendent will not continue to harass home schoolers in the future.
Hugoton
Attorney Christopher Klicka received another apology, this time from an SRS worker. Some SRS agents had been contending that home schooling was illegal. HSLDA confronted the SRS with this problem, and a social service agent responded by stating that they understood home schooling was legal. The agent also said that the SRS would be satisfied with a written assurance from any home school family who was being investigated. The agent continued, "given some of the public school attitudes, it is more likely a case where the schools are ignoring such 'assurances' and phoning in their concern out of ire for their 'competitors.'" In other words, this social worker realized that many home schoolers were being turned in as a result of prejudice on the part of public school officials, who were losing money due to parents choosing home schooling.
Abilene
An HSLDA family was repeatedly harassed by an SRS agent, who insisted on making a home visit. HSLDA contacted the agent and explained that home visits were unconstitutional.
By God's grace, HSLDA has been able to resolve all Kansas contacts this year, keeping agents out of homes and satisfying school districts with short assurances instead of detailed information. No matter what school districts may assert, home schoolers in Kansas clearly do not have the burden of proving they are legitimate non-accredited private schools. The burden remains on the school districts to prove otherwise. If an HSLDA member is contacted by school officials or the SRS, they should call HSLDA immediately.
Printer Friendly Version
