The
Benevolent Bureaucrat Theory
By Howard Richman
[from Issue 80 of the PA HOMESCHOOLERStm newsletter]
The proponents of HB 2560 appear to have
developed a new theory, "The Theory of the Benevolent Bureaucrat."
That could explain why they argue so persistently that the following passage in
this bill will only affect the bad things that school districts do, not the
good things:
b) Nothing in this section shall be construed
to grant by implication or otherwise to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania or any
of its officers, agencies or subdivisions any right or authority to control,
manage, approve, supervise or make any suggestion, rule, standard, regulation,
policy, procedure or requirement as to the control, management or supervision
of a home education program.
These bill proponents argue that after this
passage of this bill knocks out the current policies, the
Department of Education would find some way to reinstate its policy recognizing
homeschool organization diplomas and that school districts would find some
way to reinstate their policies permitting school sports participation.
Those of us who have actually had to fight
for these policies through years of active and patient effort (click here, for example, to
read how the policy recognizing homeschool diploma organizations came about),
understand fully well that we are not dealing with benevolent bureaucrats who
will seek to overcome the new hurdles imposed by the law. We are dealing with
tired and overworked people who we had to corner to get them to do what they
have done. We understand that these bureaucrats will be very pleased to tell
us, if this bill were to pass, "I'm sorry, you know we would like to help,
but this new law prevents us from doing anything."
Ironically, these same proponents who appear
to believe in the "Theory of the Benevolent Bureaucrat" when it comes
to diploma recognition and school sports have a completely different theory
about the power of the bill's language when it comes to the bad things that
school superintendents do. They believe that this language will prevent the
school districts from investigating complaints from nosy neighbors or concerned
family members: "Johnny is on the street during school hours and isn't
receiving an education." They believe that in that case the superintendent
will say, "I'm sorry, you know I would like to investigate, but this new
law prevents me from doing anything." Actually, what the superintendents
will do is use the remaining tool they have -- and they have a doozy. They will
go to family court where they will charge the family with "neglect,"
a form of child abuse. The family will no longer just be fighting for the right
to homeschool, they will be fighting for custody of their own children. If you
don't believe me, look at how
complaints are investigated in those states that don't have requirements and
protections written into their laws.
The due process procedures of the current law
tell the superintendents what they need to do to investigate a complaint
against a homeschooling family -- first the superintendent requests additional
documentation, then there is a due process hearing with an impartial hearing
officer to hear whether education is taking place. At the hearing, the family's
evaluator, a professional educator, can testify, based not only upon the
portfolio but also upon his or her interview with the child, that education is
indeed taking place. If the family were to lose, the penalty at the end of the
process is either a remedial program or having to put their child in school for
one year -- not losing custody of their child. Those who would throw out the
"baby with the bathwater" should think twice before they discard
these important due process protections.
Click here for more
information about HB 2560
Click here to see other
articles from our newslletter
Click here to return to our home page