Across the States
Adoption Agency Reports Family to DSS
The Smith family (name changed to protect family’s privacy) wanted to adopt a child and so they selected a well-known adoption agency, Wide Horizons For Children in Waltham, Massachusetts, to help them through the adoption process. During the course of the initial interview process, the parents filled out a questionnaire and attended several initial “screening” meetings with a social worker employed by the agency.
On the questionnaire, the family informed Wide Horizons that they occasionally use corporal discipline in correcting rebellious or defiant behavior. They assured the officials that they discipline their children lovingly and infrequently.
After three meetings, the adoption agency finally told the family they could not place a child with them unless they agreed not to use corporal discipline with the adopted child as well as with their own biological children. The family determined to reflect upon the meeting before responding. However, when they returned home that day there was a message from the adoption agency that the agency had made a referral of abuse to the Department of Social Services (DSS).* The Smiths were shocked and immediately called Home School Legal Defense Association for assistance in anticipation of a visit from DSS.
HSLDA Staff Attorney Michael Donnelly wrote a letter to DSS explaining that corporal discipline is legal in Massachusetts. Donnelly further explained that the correction described by the Smiths was appropriately and lovingly administered and was not abuse; nor was it sufficient to warrant a referral to DSS. Donnelly’s letter pointed out that courts in Massachusetts have held that this type of corporal discipline by parents is not abuse, regardless of whether parents use an implement or an open hand to administer discipline.
HSLDA helped our member family through this investigation by firmly stating to DSS that there was no need for the Smiths’ children to be interviewed or for their home to be inspected. DSS quickly determined that there was no reason to support the allegations and sent the parents a letter stating that the allegations were “unsupported.”
The unfortunate reality is that in many social services agencies, corporal discipline is almost always seen as abuse often as a matter of policy, even when the law of the state is clear that it is not a form of abuse. Of course, HSLDA encourages parents to use appropriate forms of discipline with their child commensurate with the child’s age and maturity.
‘HSLDA applauds families who are willing to consider bringing a disadvantaged child into their home through adoption or foster care. There is an increased risk of contact with state social services agencies that comes with increased scrutiny of the family. We encourage our members to carefully consider the pros and cons of becoming adoptive or foster parents and to be fully informed about the process before becoming involved with any placement agency.
— by Michael P. Donnelly
The Usual Suspects
In South Hadley, superintendent Gus Sayer requires that all first-time homeschoolers meet with him personally. Superintendent Sayer believes that it is his responsibility to personally interview all new homeschooling parents as if he were “hiring them as . . . teachers.” He also believes that it is his responsibility to ensure that children in his district are educated “properly.” But Massachusetts law does not require homeschoolers to meet with school officials as a precondition of approval. (In some cases, school districts may express a desire to meet with homeschoolers out of a desire to assist or support rather than control.) While homeschoolers may choose to meet with local school officials, it is not a legal requirement and we encourage homeschoolers in Massachusetts to communicate in writing.
In Chelmsford Public Schools, school officials asked the Jones family (name changed to protect family’s privacy) for their children’s birth certificates and for proof of residence. Massachusetts law does not require that homeschoolers provide this information. Apparently the school system felt that it had to treat homeschoolers the same as children in the public schools, which require a birth certificate to be kept on file for each child. Because the school was providing a “service” to homeschoolers in the district by “reviewing and approving” their homeschool plans, they wanted to “make sure” that they were providing “services” to bona fide residents. Home School Legal Defense Association supports members who do not wish to provide their local school district with documentation other than that required by law, particularly personal information such as a birth certificate or proof of residence.
In 2006, HSLDA Staff Attorney Michael Donnelly dealt with a number of member concerns in Amherst. School officials were refusing to approve homeschool plans that did not meet their arbitrary and unlawful requirements. After some litigation and letter writing, the district appears to be approving plans more readily this year. It has been reported, however, that the district is still requiring a midyear evaluation. Massachusetts law does allow superintendents to require periodic standardized testing—however, progress reports, work samples, or portfolios may not be substituted without the approval of the parents. HSLDA interprets Massachusetts law to require—at most—a single annual assessment in one of the forms above. Where possible, HSLDA encourages parents to utilize standardized tests since these are objective measures. In any case, HSLDA encourages parents to use the annual form of assessment that is best for their child.
— by Michael P. Donnelly
