Motherly Law

The Decision of a Life or Two or Three: What You Need to Know about Organ Donation

Checking the Box

It's not something I often think about, but every four years I briefly ponder it. It may or may not actually ever affect me, but should something happen to me or my loved ones, it will supply the clear answer to a very pressing question. The answer is a five letter word. What is this word I speak of?

On my driver's license there is a small red-lettered word. It is "Donor." It's been on my driver's license for years now when I had license issued from Texas, then Oklahoma, then Iowa and now Minnesota. It's something that as a young, teenage driver I barely thought about; honestly, the whole I idea of donating my organs was freakish to me back then.

In fact, I did not check the box for the 1^st or 2^nd license issued to me. But as I aged and gained wisdom and life experience I realized the importance of providing the gift of life, if possible.

Saving Lives

The stories are too many and all far too tragic of those who wait on the never-ending lists of organ donation. A few people are able to find matches among friends, family or strangers, but so many depend upon someone else losing a life in order to gain their lives back.

As joyous as it is for one family knowing that a loved one is being given a renewed and sustained life with the help of another's undamaged organ, it's equally devastating for someone else's family because one's gain is another loss. It's a cruel twist of fate. And yet, I imagine it can be comforting knowing that some part of their loved one is still living.

The statistics surrounding organ donation are astounding. Here are a few of them:

• 18 people will die each day waiting for an organ;
• 1 donor can save up to 8 lives;
• An avg. of 79 people receive organ donations each day;
• In 2010, 62% of living donors were women;
• In 2010, 67% of all deceased donors were White, 16% were Black, 13% were Hispanic and 2.3% were Asian

From the U.S. Govt. Information on Organ and Tissue Donation and Transportation website.

Clear Choices

Of course, there are also laws and regulations that control when and how organs can be donated. The Revised Uniform Anatomical Gift Act of 2006 made it possible for more people to be donors by allowing more family members to make such a decision when the patient can no longer do so. The RUAGA also explicitly says that no one can revoke the expressed decision to be an organ donor other than the patient. And the RUAGA provides for an organ donor registry through driver's licenses and donor cards in an attempt to increase organ donations.'

However, in doing so, the Act actually creates a conflict of interest. If a person has a donor card/driver's license designating him or her as a donor, but also has a signed directive expressly setting out end-of-life care, the donor card trumps the directive.

Organs must be "kept alive" as long as possible to continue to be viable until a transplant can be accomplished. Therefore, the Act has created this ethical issue regarding life support and "Do Not Resuscitate" orders and other medical care issues.

In 2008, the Commissioners of this Act did add revised wording to this section in an attempt to work out the kinks and resolve this problematic issue.

"Under this revised wording, if there is a conflict between the express wishes for end-of-life care and maintaining the viability of an organ for transplant, the patient-donor and the physician must confer to resolve that conflict. If the patient is incapacitated (a most likely scenario), then a patient's agent, if there is one and if "reasonably available," must resolve the conflict. Otherwise, "another person authorized by law other than" the UAGA will be asked to make that decision."

Section 21 of the RUAGA (2008).

This process must be accomplished as quickly as possible and the medical care of the patient will continue during this time to ensure medical suitability for the organs should they donated. This revised wording would seem to fix the problem, but many states that enacted the 2006 version of the UAGA have not enacted this language. {Note: Not every state has enacted the 2006 version either though.} 

This distinction is relevant only to those who have advance directives in place. If a person hasn't expressed end-of-life care wishes in a signed, notarized document, but has chosen to be a donor those are the wishes that will be honored. If a person has neither an advance directive nor a donor card, the person's agent or person designated in the RUAGA (a spouse, adult siblings, parents, adult children and grandparents) can make the final decision.

This information is not meant to discourage you from choosing to donate, rather I mean to make you aware of the issues surrounding these choices that can be discussed with loved ones, included in any advance directives and resolved before there is a need for an expeditious decision in the midst of emotion. Clarifying one's end-of-life choices is kind and considerate.

The Scoop

I, for one, do have "Donor" on my license and my loved ones know that's my choice. I always think about how I would feel as a mom if one of my boys needed an organ or tissue from a stranger and this was the only way to save his life, then I'd be praying that everyone was choosing to donate. Over and out...

Anna

F is for Fear: Bad School Policies Affecting Good Kids {On a Soapbox....on a Tuesday}

School Contraband

I really hate the stories about the students, mostly boys, who once at school discover they have accidently brought a toy gun or small pocket knife in their backpack, book bag, lunch box or coat pocket; who report this to the teacher because the student knows this is contraband that shouldn't be at school; only to be tossed out of school and receive a record of bringing a "weapon" to school and a school suspension.

A boy from Georgia did just this a week or so ago. While in chess club, the 13 year old middle school student, discovered the 1.5 inch knife in the military style bag his aunt bought at a yard sale and gave him as a Christmas gift. The boy, upon discovering this knife, immediately alerted his teacher. His reward for this honest act? A 4-day, in-school suspension.

The Wrong Message

I can't tell you how angry this story and others like it make me. Disciplining an honest, well-meaning child in this way teaches two negative lessons: 1) don't tell the truth and 2) justice is a fraud.

We tell our children to tell the truth; honesty is the best policy. We tell our children that justice will prevail; the innocent will be free and the guilty punished.

And yet, our schools have responded to isolated incidents of evilness with fear. This fear has caused them to write harsh and unfair policies regarding ANY "weapons" brought to school, whether real or perceived, under ANY circumstances.

Lessons Learned

These school policies teach children to hide the truth {and the contraband} should they make such a discovery in their bags or pockets. These policies teach children that mens rea, or intent, doesn't matter, motives are unimportant, they are guilty by association and the school need not have any evidence to present against them to be found guilty of this "crime." These are lessons our students will learn at a young age and take with them all through school and into their adulthood.

We have thrown out the common sense response to the self-reporting of accidently {or unbeknownst to the student, as in this case} bringing a toy weapon or small knife to school. The response in such cases should be kind and appreciative. We should applaud and welcome those who come forward to admit the mistake and turn in the contraband; then remind all the students of the dangers of having any weapons, toy or otherwise, at school for a variety of reasons and tell them to carefully check their bags and remove any such items before coming to school.

The Scoop

Schools, in trying to protect the students, have instead hurt some of the "good" students. These policies are bad. These kinds of stories almost always make the news because they are unjust policies. Why must we punish the truthful, rule-following, upstanding students? The simple answer is Fear.

Fear controls much of how we run our lives. We must overcome fear and recognize the difference between students who are a threat and in need of intervention and students who are well-meaning, good kids, who sometimes make and honest mistake. Over and out...

Anna

Mountains Out of Molehills: The Power of Overreacting Re: Social Media

The Right to Express an Opinion

I have always been of the opinion that respect is earned; it is not simply applied to someone based on age and experience. There are those whose opinions on this matter differ from mine. But it is my opinion that sometimes a person of little experience and only a decade or so of years on this earth may have more common sense and intellect than a person with a great many years of life under the belt.

I have also always valued my constitutional rights, especially freedom of speech. I like to express myself through speech; and I don't like to be held back when articulating my opinion, as is often made clear here on Motherly Law. Social media platforms, in general, afford many opportunities for using our freedom of speech in ways our founding fathers would have never dreamed of.

A person enjoys this right regardless of education, background, age or financial status. Of course, some of these rights are lessened or restricted when dealing with minors, particularly when dealing with students. And yet, students must not be muzzled or taught that they are not free to stand up for what they believe in or agree with and express their opinion.

While there is not a lawsuit involved in this instance, it does allow for an interesting case study.

@emmakate988

The week of Thanksgiving, Emma Sullivan, a senior in high school, and her classmates from Shawnee Mission East High School in Prairie Village, KS, visited the Kansas State Capitol. Apparently, while on the tour of the capitol, Sullivan tweeted to her 60 or so friends following her on Twitter this statement:

"Just made mean comments at gov brownback and told him he sucked, in person #heblowsalot"

Sophisticated? No. Polite? No. Funny? Inappropriate? I guess it depends on your age and opinion of Gov. Brownback. Something to make a fuss over? Not in my opinion.

To be clear, Sullivan did not actually make any mean comments, in person, to Brownback, but Sullivan doesn't agree with some of Brownback's policies and was particularly disappointed by the recent cuts to state aid to schools.

After some of her friends were joking about what they would really like to say about Brownback, she took out her phone and sent this tweet. She says she merely wished to get a laugh from her friends on Twitter. That was it. She didn't think much about it.

The Overreaction

This statement would have been seen only by Sullivan's 60 followers on Twitter, if that many, if Brownback's Director of Communications, Sherienne Jones-Sontag, had not made a stink of it after running a routine search of Brownback's name on Twitter.

Instead, Jones-Sontag contacted Sullivan's principal and reported her tweet to him because it wasn't respectful. Based on this statement, I am assuming that if Sullivan had tweeted something along the lines of, "Wow, I am in awe of our amazing governor; what an honor it is to meet him" Jones-Sontag wouldn't have contacted the high school.

However, it wasn't and she did. Sullivan was then called into the principal's office and told to write an apology letter to the Gov. Brownback, the school's Youth in Government sponsor, the districts social studies coordinator and others. Sullivan reported to the Wichita Eagle that her principal had said it was embarrassing and that she had created a huge controversy.

Jones-Sontag felt that the tweet was inappropriate and thought the organizers of this school-sponsored state capitol visit should be aware of what was being said by a student in the group.

The school district spokesperson, Leigh Anne Neal, issued a statement to the Wichita Eagle explaining the school district's policy, in general, prior to being fully apprised of this incident,

"...students on school-sponsored field trips, in which they are representing the school, would be expected to conduct themselves in accordance with school district policies, including use of electronic devices. Students may express their personal beliefs, views and opinions, as long as they do so appropriately and in accordance with school policies."

Ironically, just a few days after this incident and the media coverage across the country, Sullivan had several thousand followers on Twitter. She now has almost 16,000 followers. So, is Sullivan one of these young, teen pundits spouting off about candidates and politics? No, not in the least. In fact, before this incident on November 21^st, Sullivan was like most teens, conversing with friends about teen topics, with a number of tweets regarding the new Twilight movie.

Playing Nice

And yet, even after all of this media attention and the 15,000 plus followers, Sullivan is still not using her voice simply for the sake of getting attention. She has tweeted only a few statements regarding this issue.

In another ironic twist, it was Gov. Brownback, not Sullivan, who issued the apology last Monday. Brownback stated that his staff had overreacted to this tweet and was sorry for that. Sullivan decided not to write the letters of apology and the school backed down from their demand that she do so because they felt that she had a constitutional right to express her opinion regarding the governor and did not break any rules.

The Scoop

According to the New York Daily News, Jones-Sontag had this gem of wisdom to offer, "It's also important for students to recognize the power of social media, how lasting it is. It is on the Internet."

Now, isn't that really a lesson for Jones-Sontag to learn? After all, if Jones-Sontag had simply left well-enough alone and never brought Sullivan's tweet to the attention of her principal and the school trip organizers, Sullivan would still have 60 followers on Twitter and neither the national media nor I would know the names Sherienne Jones-Sontag or Emma Sullivan.

So, yes, Sherienne, social media can be powerful and viral, if a statement is made by a celebrity of some sort or if an obscure tweet is brought to the attention of the country. In this case, Jones-Sontag's overreaction to an obscure 18 year-old girl's completely harmless tweet, ended up heaping negative attention on herself.

In the end, Sullivan and Brownback came out looking good. Sullivan stood her ground and won; and Brownback realized the overreaction and quickly put a stop to damaging his own name and reputation by issuing an apology. Fortunately, all legal action has been avoided in this account; and all ended well.

Except, that is, that students in Sullivan's school are now harassing and bullying her over this tweet and the ensuring media attention. She seems to again be standing her ground and taking it all in stride, saying in one tweet, "let's move on." Her original tweet that started this episode may not have been elegant, but Sullivan seems to have conducted herself very appropriately in handling this matter. Over and out...

Anna

Occupiers: Go Home {On a Soapbox}

Honestly, when I read the accounts of what's happening at various Occupy {Take your pick of cities} all I see if a bunch of unruly kids acting poorly. Let me stress that I am nowhere near being included in the 1% of the wealthy Americans. I join the protesters in their frustrations of Wall Street and all it has come to represent. We work hard and never seem to get anywhere; gas, groceries, clothes, healthcare and everything else just keep rising in cost, even when income does not.

That being said, I don't think this protest is the way to accomplish anything. I see people trashing public streets, parks and plazas; I see police being called away from other areas of the various cities where police presence is essential to protect people from crime; I see criminal activity, such as drug use and even a drug overdose at the "campsites"; I see rudeness and crudeness to employees who are simply trying to get inside a building to their offices and do their jobs so that they can make a living; I see people injuring police officers who are just following their orders so that they may keep their jobs; I see people who may have started with good intentions looking a lot like the bad guys now.

The destruction of public property and need for extra police detail is only using up precious taxpayer money; money that could have gone to help those who go to bed hungry; those who can't afford heat in the winter; those who have no coats; those who have no shelter; those who are searching for jobs; those who are trying to make ends meet despite working countless hours day in and day out; those who are the furthest from the elite 1%.

When it's all said and done, when we move on and this is but a vague memory, will Occupy Wall Street and its offspring Occupies have accomplished anything positive? I think not.

I'm disappointed in the way these people, who I think mean well, have conducted themselves. While I agree with the idea with which they hatched this plan, I don't condone how they have gone about trying to make a statement. They are beginning to harm those whom they are technically representing; police, those "fighting for the cause", employees who are not part of the 1%, but happen to work in the financial districts and industries, etc.

So, Occupiers, I speak to you. Pick up your water bottles, coffee cups, sleeping bags, tarps, pillows, bullhorns and cardboard signs, repair any damage you have done to publicly owned statues, benches, roads or paths, replace any uprooted or smashed flowers, shrubs or trees, leave things as they were when you arrived and go home. There are other ways. You're creative and inventive; you can think of something more peaceful and less destructive. Over and out...

Anna

 

 

Mississippi Underestimated: Answering the Question of Personhood

Free Choice

I recently saw a quote from a conservative governor stating that he had vetoed a particular bill because he didn't want to micromanage the actions of adults. This quote struck me as odd for a number of reasons. To name one, it's conservatives who typically are trying to take away the choice of abortions for all women. Isn't this also micromanaging adult women's actions?

Let me be clear. I am not a proponent of abortions. I don't know a single soul who is. I am a proponent of free choice. Abortion is not something that I would choose, as far as I know. But then again, I've never been in a position to have to make this decision; so I can't say for certain. I am certain that I cannot make that decision for anyone else though; it's not for me to say what others do with their bodies.

I think that a woman or a man should have the choice of making decisions regarding her or his body without the state interfering with this choice because someone else living in that state may disagree with the choice that person makes. The decision to have an abortion for any reason is one of the most personal choices I can think of.

An Argument for Conservatives

I liken my argument to that of gun rights. I, personally, don't think that people should own guns for personal safety or hunting. I, personally, think that people with guns make our society less safe. However, not everyone agrees with me. There are those who think it's vitally important to have firearms in the home in order to protect the family. There are others who enjoy the sport of hunting.

I will leave them to their sport and their sense of security. I will not tell them they can't own guns, even if they are safe with them and follow all the laws regarding firearm ownership and don't threaten others or commit crimes with their firearms. That is their right.

MS 26

Well, it's also a woman's right to decide what happens to her body. Yesterday, the people of Mississippi went to the polls to vote on a number of items, one of which was Initiative 26. "MS 26" as it was termed may have been on the MS ballot, but it was an issue that could have affected all women across this country. I spent my evening watching my Twitter stream with the hashtag #MS26 {I met some lovely ladies from MS too.} and monitoring MS election results.

If MS 26 had succeeded it could have opened the flood gates rushing toward the eventual overturn of Roe v. Wade. Well, it didn't. The people of Mississippi came through in the name of women's rights.

The exact wording of MS 26 is this:

Should the term 'person' be defined to include every human being from the moment of fertilization, cloning, or the equivalent thereof?

57% of the voters in MS answered this question with a resounding, "NO" despite the time and money spent by Personhood USA in hopes of a "yes" vote.

Personhood USA

Personhood USA is a Colorado based "Christian" nonprofit organization that "serves the pro-life community by assisting local groups to initiate citizen, legislative, and political action focusing on the ultimate goal of the pro-life movement: personhood rights for all innocent humans."

What this means is that a grassroots team showed up in MS and planted the idea of putting this question to the vote of the people in hopes of stirring the pot into a frenzy that could lead other ultra conservative states to do the same. The Personhood Mississippi website says if the vote was yes, a legal challenge would be set up to challenge Roe v. Wade. Of course, the website also says that the most important reason to vote yes is that it will honor God and show love to their neighbors in the law system. Clearly, Personhood USA was appealing to the conservative Christian voters of that state.

Strong Southern Women

Mississippians responded with their own grassroots fight, explaining to would-be voters that MS 26 could have more far reaching effects, such as infertility treatments, access to contraception and women's health, in general. Personhood USA thought it could appeal to the deeply conservative, Christian, low-income and uneducated citizens of MS. They were wrong. Mississippians are smarting than that.

The idea of the personhood question evolved from U.S. Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart's observation during Roe v. Wade oral arguments when he said, "If it were established that an unborn fetus is a person, you would have an impossible case here." Now Personhood USA is trying to do just that. 

The Scoop

There are a number of laws in place that regulate the how, when and where abortions are performed, by whom and upon whom. It's not a spur of the moment, lightly taken, frivolous decision....ever. And the laws in place protect those who for whatever reason have come to a clinic for an abortion. Without these laws, providing this right, abortions would still take place, but behind the scenes, without safeguards, without regulating the who or what or when or where.

In the past I wrote about laws with unintended results. If the voters' answer to MS 26 had been yes, this would have been one of those laws. This issue is not about choosing abortion; this issue is about choosing for one's self. The people of Mississippi have chosen for themselves. Over and out...

Anna

 

The Million Dollar Question: Pop Culture Clues

What makes an idea or an article novel or appealing? What makes a reader choose to click a link? What makes a message amazing, eye-opening or viral? What makes an online writer stand out from the hundreds and thousands of others just alike floating around, bumping into each other out in cyberspace? That is the million dollar question, isn't it?

I'm working on figuring this out. And when I do have the answer, I'll let you know. I know this much; the answer has just as much to do with what will not put you in reach of the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow as it does with what you should be doing to earn the gold star.

Here's what I know thus far:

1. There is no instant formula for fame and fortune in writing;
2. The more you write, the more you hear your own, true voice; and
3. The more you understand your readers, the more you know how to temper what readers want to read with what you want to write.

So, with these truisms in mind, I have a few fun questions for you, Dear Reader:

This survey is anonymous, and I would be so incredibly grateful to you if you would take just a few minutes of your time to answer the questions. The questions are completely random and whatever jumped into my head as I typed. While this is true, I do think these questions will give me great insight into how to choose topics and how my readers will perceive certain issues, etc. And I promise you know all the answers to this survey!

Thanks so much in advance for helping me get closer to the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, so to speak. Over and out...

Anna

Legal Tails: Laws Protecting Animals and People

A Fear of Dogs

Years ago when living in Iowa, I remember being at a friend's home for a small gathering of new acquaintances. These friends had two dogs, one of which was at least part Pit-Bull Terrier if not full-blooded, and also one of the sweetest dogs you might encounter. I recall another friend there who it quickly became apparent was terrified of dogs. My friends apologized for having theirs out and put them in the basement away from the party.

The terrorized friend then related her story of being attacked by a friend's dog years earlier. This dog had never attacked anyone before, but had lunged at her, and she was severely injured and taken to the hospital. Her physical scars had healed, but her mental scars will probably never go away. If this had happened to me, I would probably have different feelings about dogs. When I see a dog that is powerful and intense, I think of her story.

In Reference to Yesterday's Post {It's easier if you just go read it: Animal House}

In yesterday's post I gave you a detailed account of my crazy chaotic household full of cats, dogs and kids. You now know how I feel about animals in general {I love them...in case you missed yesterday's article} and you know that my pets and kids mix and mingle and all equally share the home with us.

Yesterday I also shared two examples of when the mix of pets and kids goes awry with very disturbing facts and endings. A reader alerted me to another similar tragic incident that occurred just a few days prior to the 2 week baby being mauled by the family dog in Houston. This story comes from North Carolina. Five dogs were taken away after one or more of them attacked and killed a 9 day old baby girl. Among these dogs there is at least one Rottweiler and one Pit Bull Terrier. The authorities are also investigating that incident to determine whether criminal charges should be issued or whether this was simply a horrible tragedy.

These news stories are frightening and might be enough for some people to rush to conclusions about parenting styles or about having pets at all if kids are in the house. These stories are not meant to scare or threaten anyone. There are many wonderful reasons to expose kids to pets. They are simply a reminder that pets are animals and can be unpredictable at times. If we make sensible choices and err on the side of caution then most situations can be avoided.

It's important to realize there's a lot we don't know about the dog mauling cases: we don't know whether the dog(s) had been introduced to the infant through smells, etc., whether the parents knew or should have known reasons to keep the dog(s) and baby separated, whether the parents were negligent in failing to keep the two separated and whether the parents were diligent in their care of their infants. The investigations of these two terribly sad incidents will determine the answers to these and other questions in deciding whether to charge anyone with a crime. Regardless of any of these facts, two families have lost their tiny, innocent, brand new babies, and I doubt anything else matters to them at this time.

It's also important to note that none of the dogs have been sentenced to death at this point which probably indicates that none of the dogs have had any run-ins with the law before; meaning no previous reports of biting, etc., up-to-date vaccination records and current licenses. Once the investigations have ended, the fate of these dogs will also be determined. {By the way, the python from yesterday's scenario was spared and is in the custody of the state now. Given the fact that she was being starved to death by her owners having not been fed for over a month and was severely underweight she was not blamed for this death.}

Protecting Your Household and Others

These are things you should know already, but let this serve as a reminder. Again, we sometimes forget these basic requirements of pet ownership. In order to protect your pets, yourself and others, you must keep your pets' vaccines current, renew licenses and keep your pet in its cage, inside a fence, on a leash or whatever enclosure is appropriate for your pet.

If you don't have an umbrella insurance policy, you might look into getting one that would cover the defense and damages of an incident involving your pet and another outside of your household {Check with policy/insurance agent for details regarding coverage.}

It's also important to be familiar with the local, state and federal laws that apply to you and your pet, depending on the type of pet you have. Laws regulating pets are centered on three basic principles: public safety, public health and animal welfare. That is to say, it's the intent of the authorities to protect the public against brutal and often fatal attacks of the owner, members of the household or a member of the public; prevent the spread of diseases, often diseases that are not native to the U.S. or animals here; and put a stop to animal neglect and animal cruelty, which so very often occurs with exotic pet reserves, horse farms or puppy mills.

Local Laws

For the most part, if you have only domestic pets, rather than exotic pets, local ordinances basically provide for licensure and leash requirements and may limit numbers and size of animals, etc. Licensing will ensure that pets are being regularly vaccinated for rabies and any other required vaccines. Licensing also aids in tracking and identifying missing or found pets.

If you are new to a city or a new pet owner or both, be sure to check your local ordinances regarding pets.

Exotic Pets and Laws

If you have exotic pets, there are many other laws and regulations that will apply to you on local, state and federal levels. The definition of exotic pets varies from state to state. So, if you have any question whatsoever as to whether your pet is "exotic" and whether there are laws that apply to your pet, check your area's ordinances, statutes and regulations on all levels.

State Laws

Due to the level of concern over attacks by animals and animal neglect by the owners, more states have passed laws banning certain types of animals in the last decade or so. If you are considering getting an exotic pet, which this term can include some reptiles, fish and birds that may not seem exotic to you, be sure to check the law prior to getting your new pet. For a comprehensive guide to state laws regulating animals, check Born Free USA.

Federal Laws

There are a few federal laws that apply to pets, such as the Endangered Species Act and the Animal Welfare Act. For more information on these laws and current legislation regarding federal law and animals, check Born Free USA for their list of federal bills they are tracking, etc.

The Scoop

Overall, the message is this, know the law and follow the law for your sake, your pet's sake and for other's sake too in regards to pet licensing, vaccines and leashes, cages, fences, etc. Tomorrow I'll be discussing tips for keeping your kids safe around animals. Over and out...

Anna

 

Homegrown: An Increase in Homeschooling

Limitations

I think a person should know his or her limitations. I'm all for reaching for the stars, dreaming big, stretching one's self, learning as much as possible, going on adventures and trying my hand at a multitude of tasks, but I do know my limitations. For instance, I know that I can't climb a telephone pole {it's a long story}; I know that I'm a lousy camper; I know I'll never be a mathematician or a physicist; I know I'm no good at flipping pancakes and omelets; and I know I absolutely cannot blow up a balloon {I have no idea why though}.

I also know that I would be a terrible teacher to my Darling Boys. Of course I teach them things every day, both intentionally and unintentionally {both good and bad}, I expose them to art, culture, nature, food, and more when we go on our mini {and many} adventures, I explain words, sayings, jokes, signs, actions and more by the hour, but a homeschooling parent I'm not.

This is not to say that I think ill of those who do homeschool their kids; I don't. I just know that I am neither patient enough, nor do I have the desire to teach my Boys at home. I do think that my children have been and will be greatly rewarded by meeting, interacting with and learning from the other teachers they have and will come into contact with, whether it's in a music class or swim lessons or tee ball or preschool or nature camp or kindergarten and so on.

Choosing to Homeschool

That said, there are a number of parents who are choosing to homeschool their kiddos. There are a variety of reasons for making such a decision. Here are the top motivators for homeschooling based on several polls and studies found online {in no particular order}:

• Concerns regarding school environment {other students, drugs, safety issues, peer pressures, etc.};
• Concerns regarding the curriculum, academic environment and faculty or staff;
• Concerns regarding a child's special needs that isn't being met at school;
• A wish to teach religious instruction;
• A wish to teach in a nontraditional format; and
• Concerns regarding a child's physical or mental disability

Sources referred to: www.secularhomeschools.com & www.wikipedia.org referencing a 2007 poll by the U.S. Department of Education.

Honestly, these are great reasons. I have many of these same concerns for my children, but I still know I'm not the right teacher for them. Instead I have a school that I believe will address the issues and concerns I have about public education.

Staggering Statistics

The number of children being homeschooled has dramatically increased from 1999 to 2007 {the last time a survey with this data was collected}. In 2007, there were 1.5 million students being homeschooled in the U.S. representing 2.9% of students; in 2003 there were 1.1 million students being homeschooled, representing 2.2% of students; in 1999, there were 850,000 students being homeschooled, representing 1.7% of students.

According to the National Center for Educational Statistics, the increase from 1999 to 2007, represents a 74 % relative increase. Interestingly, the percentage of parents who reported their reason for homeschooling to be for religious instruction increased from 72% in 2003 to 83% in 2007.

    Sources: www2.ed.gov & nces.ed.gov

The Scoop

Homeschooling looks to be an increasingly popular choice. Will the number of students homeschooled continue to increase? Or is this merely a trend in educational choices? Homeschool Laws Part II is coming up this week. And stay tuned for a guest post from a mom who is about to start homeschooling her child. Over and out...

Anna

You might also like:

The Changing Seasons: Types of Schools Available to American Children

The Measure of an Education: A Look at U.S. Education System Statistics

A Plea to MN Public Educators

Birds of a Feather: Tips for Choosing the Best School for Your Child

 

Learning from Home: Homeschool Laws Part I

Desire to Homeschool

When I was in elementary school I hated going to school. My brother and I attended a private, Christian school with a rigid and isolating teaching format. My mother was a teacher, and I would beg her to take us out of that school and homeschool us. I think she considered it a few times, but she never agreed to do it. Instead, we moved from south Texas to the Texas panhandle and changed schools.

In retrospect, I'm not sure if homeschooling would have been the right answer, but it sure seemed like it to me at the time. While homeschooling has certainly been a viable option for many, many years, in the last several years, the idea seems to have become more mainstream. There are a number of reasons for this shift. And I think that each family has their own, personal reasons for choosing this route.

I have come across quite a few homeschooling mamas blogging about their experiences and sharing ideas and philosophies on Twitter and Facebook, making the practice more noticed and more accepted. I have even run into homeschool curriculum companies at blogging conferences. Homeschooling is becoming a popular choice.

Several friends, who don't blog, who don't know each other and live in different states, have decided to homeschool their children. Both have told me the plan is to start with the first born child, give it a year and see how it goes, with the caveat that they can always choose to send the kids to school if things don't go as planned. I say, "More power to you."

If homeschooling is something you're interested in, you must start by doing some research to ensure that you're following your state's laws when it comes to homeschooling your child(ren).

Legality, in General

Here's what you need to know about what the laws regulates and where you can find it:

The legality of homeschooling, in general, has been the subject of debate since compulsory education began in Massachusetts in 1852. The argument has since shifted to topics involving funding, resources, curricula and standardized testing, beginning in the late 1980s.

Homeschooling is legal in all 50 states. The Supreme Court has ruled that states do have the power to regulate educational requirements, but states cannot require students to attend public schools. Homeschools fall under private school law in some states, church school law in other states and a few have homeschool statutes {also referred to as other means of education or alternative education}. Some states require homeschool groups or associations, qualifying them as private or church schools. For each state's requirements, check the Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA).

Parent/Teacher Requirements

Another consideration is the education of the parent who will be teaching the children at home. Surprisingly, 41 states do not require the homeschooling parent to meet any educational qualifications as a teacher. The District of Columbia and 9 states require at least a high school diploma or GED. TN requires no qualification for grades K-8 and North Dakota has no educational requirements for the parent, so long as the parent instructor is monitored by a certified teacher for two years.

RI and MA are the only two states that require approval from the local school district, school board or state commissioner prior to homeschooling. Other states simply require a notice of intent to homeschool be filed with local school officials.

Curricula

Homeschool curriculum requirements range from fairly strict to very loose. Some states require parents to provide information about their curriculum, including lesson plans; other states merely require certain subjects be covered, but don't require any documentation; and still others categorize homeschools as private schools, allowing them the freedom to choose which subjects will be covered based on what the instructor deems appropriate for the child(ren).

Standardized Testing

Standardized Testing is a hot issue whether talking about homeschools or public schools right now. There are 24 states with standardized test or evaluation requirements. Out of those states, 13 require alternatives to testing and 11 states require standardized testing only.

Compulsory Attendance

There are a number of state court decisions on the subject of compulsory attendance. VA and VT allow for a religious exemption from compulsory attendance. Five states require the time spent on educational instruction must be the equivalent to public school instruction. A few states require merely "regular and thorough" educational instruction. ND, NY and PA actually impose high school graduation requirements for homeschooled students. However, courts in 6 states, including MN, have struck down compulsory attendance statutes with regards to homeschools, finding the statutes unconstitutional based on vagueness.

The Scoop

There is much to research, learn and organize before deciding to whether to homeschool your child(ren). This may seem like a daunting task, but there are many resources at hand.

In Homeschooling Laws Part II, I will present information about resources, access to extracurricular activities, religious rights, parental rights, etc. I will discuss motivations for deciding to homeschool and homeschool statistics in other posts this week, as well. Additionally, I will have a guest post from a mom and teacher by profession who has decided to homeschool her children. Over and out...

Anna

 

Open Hearts and Minds: Embracing Diversity

Our Neighborhood

We live in a culturally rich neighborhood; there are Latino, Caucasian, African, Hispanic, Asian, and African American families living in our neighborhood. The school Darling 1 will go to starting in September is equally culturally rich. Some might see this as a negative point, but I see it as a positive.

Toleration

So often our society uses the word "toleration" when discussing diverse cultures and practices. Tolerate is defined as, enduring without repugnance; putting up with something; or allowing the existence, presence, practice or act of without prohibition or hindrance; permitting; from the Latin tolerates, meaning "to bear."

Toleration really isn't much. It shouldn't be viewed as much of an achievement on one's part. It's just a tad past putting up a fight against something or hating something or disallowing something. Tolerating is what someone does when trying to enjoy a lovely summer night while swatting at swarms of annoying mosquitoes.

I would make the argument that tolerating differences is not enough. Teaching toleration will not change our reactions and perceptions to those who are different in skin color, religion, education, backgrounds, languages, beliefs and family dynamics. Teaching our children (& ourselves) to see differences as an opportunity to learn from someone and embrace the unique and diverse experiences each of us bring to our society should be our goal.

Everyone is Different

To accomplish this, we must accept that each of us is different from other human beings in some way. A conservative relative from Texas is fond of saying, "Well, that's different!" about the more liberal and unfamiliar practices he has encountered on various trips to visit us in Minnesota. It's true; things are done differently in different neighborhoods, in different states, in different regions, across our great country and certainly beyond our borders. And this is good news.

If we were all the same in looks, in beliefs, in tastes, in ideas and in thoughts there would be no passion in life; there would be no reason for changing how we do things or when we do things or why we do things; there would be little to explore and learn; and there would be no debates or discussions. In short, we would be an awfully dull society.

Embracing Differences

How can we, as parents, be sure to teach our children to embrace diversity in every way? Here are a few ideas:

1. Keep lines of communications open with your kids; talk frequently and openly about a variety of subjects, including news stories, political issues, religions, ideas in general and history;
2. Expose your family to as many cultures as possible through neighborhood events, museums, festivals, books, music, etc.;
3. NEVER EVER tell jokes that put down or poke fun at any ethnicity, gender, socio-economic group, disability or any group of people;
4. If someone is making racial remarks in front of you and/or your child take a stand against such remarks and tell the person why you object to such statements;
5. Treat all persons with respect and honor;
6. Do not fear people who are dressed differently than you or look different than you or speak another language than you;
7. Celebrate differences;
8. Be open-minded, but don't compromise your own beliefs; and
9. Of course, meet and get to know as many people from different backgrounds as possible.

The Scoop

These are but a few suggestions about teaching your kids to embrace differences among our fellow citizens. How do you ensure your kids will grow up with open minds and open hearts and yet still be secure about their own belief systems? Over and out...

Anna

You might also like:

Bringing Up Baby: Tips for Raising "Good People"

Giving from the Heart: Tips for Raising Thoughtful, Generous Kids

There's a Storm a Brewin' in Minnesota: NOH8MN