Title: Surveys in America's Classrooms: How Much Do Parents Really Know?
Abstract: I. INTRODUCTION One could hardly argue that when parents drop their children off for football practice, day care, or summer camp they are surrendering all of their parental rights to the coach, the babysitter, or the camp counselor. When a parent leaves a child with the babysitter, generally the parent provides instructions as to what the child can and cannot do, eat, watch, and so forth. A parent is temporarily yielding authority over the child to the babysitter while maintaining the ability to give instructions regarding the care of the child. This is the doctrine of in loco parentis.' Schools often confuse this doctrine with that of parens patriae, a doctrine involving the permanent relinquishment of parental authority to the government, often against the parent's wishes.2 In an opinion that resoundingly favored a school board's rights over parental rights, the Ninth Circuit applied the doctrine of parens patriae in the school setting. The effect of the Ninth Circuit's decision in Fields v. Palmdale3 was a virtual relinquishment of a parent's ability to have a voice in what his or her child would be exposed to during the course of the school day, regardless of whether the information was a part of the curriculum. Historically, minor intrusions on a parents' control over their children's education were not an issue because of the greater respect shown by our legal culture towards the rights of parents and families. Today, by contrast, courts have seemingly ignored the rights of parents and families. The courts inappropriately apply the doctrine of parens patriae and invest the schools with the right to dictate how the lives of children should be directed. This article will discuss parental rights within the context of education and how several recent cases have interpreted those rights. Specifically, this article will address the rights of parents to control non-curriculum related material distributed within the public schools. It will examine measures that have been taken in various states and in the United States Congress to strengthen parental rights in the context of non-curriculum related materials such as surveys. Finally, the article will address how a recent Supreme Court case and several federal circuit court cases may have stifled Congress' attempt to strengthen parental rights. In Part II, the article will address the history of parental rights. Parental rights have been recognized for several centuries throughout English common law and stoutly affirmed for almost a century in American case law. Parents clearly have the primary duty to raise their children and care for them. However, the state, in some instances, has a secondary duty to provide services to children that are necessary to their development and health. This section will review several key Supreme Court decisions generally recognized for their discussion of parental rights and will address whether a parent's right to control the education and upbringing of his or her child is fundamental. Part III will provide a detailed explanation of Fields v. Palmdale4 and C.N. v. Ridgewood Board of Education.5 These two cases discuss the administration of surveys to public school students that led to constitutional challenges by several of the students' parents. Part IV will describe measures taken by Congress to protect parental rights and consider whether those attempts have been successful. This section will also explain how the measures taken by Congress to protect parents' rights may have been rendered moot by more recent Supreme Court decisions. Finally, Part V will discuss the implications of the Fields decision and potential ways the parties could have avoided or remedied the situation. This section will also address a variety of legal theories that the parties could have raised at trial and will explain what the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and the district court should have done in Fields. Finally, the article will express the significant differences between the Fields and Ridgewood decisions and the resulting implications. …
Publication Year: 2008
Publication Date: 2008-04-01
Language: en
Type: article
Access and Citation
Cited By Count: 3
AI Researcher Chatbot
Get quick answers to your questions about the article from our AI researcher chatbot