Dear DSCPS, That's it I'm cheating!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not the PP, just curious how this policy addresses the status of a child in a joint custody situation? Surely both parents don't have to prove residency, so who's to say what exactly is going on with the 2nd parent?

I would imagine that if the child spends more time in one jurisdiction, he would be considered a resident of that jurisdiction for the purposes of public education.

I think in any truly "joint" custody situation - meaning a child spends weekly time with both parents, the parents should be able to choose which is the best school within their options. Really, a child can have two residences and there is no misrepresentation going on. There are divorced families at my child's school that have parents in and out of boundary and it would NEVER cross my mind to consider the split of time and entitlement to attend, that is just heartless. There are really not a lot of benefits to having divorced parents so I doubt this is a deciding factor, be nice and leave this one well enough alone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not the PP, just curious how this policy addresses the status of a child in a joint custody situation? Surely both parents don't have to prove residency, so who's to say what exactly is going on with the 2nd parent?

I would imagine that if the child spends more time in one jurisdiction, he would be considered a resident of that jurisdiction for the purposes of public education.

And you would be wrong. Joint custody is complex and every family is different, but at base the principal rests upon not "carving up" the child based on what is convenient for one or another parent. The parents will accommodate the child's need to have them both in his(her) life. The schools will do the same thing. This is why Michelle Rhee's children were allowed to attend Oyster even though it is their father who lives IB.

[Anonymous]

How do you report someone?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Once you are in the school, and you "move" back, your child should be able to stay, even if the address has changed.

This is NOT true, the policy was changed under Rhee. It is now at the principal's discretion. I have heard that principals at a few of the JKLMO schools are not alowing kids to return the following year if they move OOB during the year. A family that enters as an OOB family can live anywhere. The schools are really over enrollment capacity and this is one of the only ways to lower the numbers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How do you report someone?

Well, first you sell your soul to the devil, recognizing that you are trying (and that's the operative word - trying) to deprive one of your children's classmates of the only school community they have ever known.

Believe me, not only will the staff not want to act on your information, but we will never forget who "helpfully tried to bring it to our attention." And if we can make things administratively difficult for your family? We will.

Just so you know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not the PP, just curious how this policy addresses the status of a child in a joint custody situation? Surely both parents don't have to prove residency, so who's to say what exactly is going on with the 2nd parent?

I would imagine that if the child spends more time in one jurisdiction, he would be considered a resident of that jurisdiction for the purposes of public education.

And you would be wrong. Joint custody is complex and every family is different, but at base the principal rests upon not "carving up" the child based on what is convenient for one or another parent. The parents will accommodate the child's need to have them both in his(her) life. The schools will do the same thing. This is why Michelle Rhee's children were allowed to attend Oyster even though it is their father who lives IB.

PP. I'll concede that I am wrong if you can cite some authority for your position. The law is very clear that an individual can only be a resident of one state or DC. I do not believe that being the child of divorced parents with a joint custody agreement fundamentally alters this principle. Even a child who has suffered the pain of a broken home and has parents who share custody and live in to different jurisdictions is only entitled to claim residency in one state or DC.

If you know of case law or statutory authority to the contrary, please enlighten me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Once you are in the school, and you "move" back, your child should be able to stay, even if the address has changed.

This is NOT true, the policy was changed under Rhee. It is now at the principal's discretion. I have heard that principals at a few of the JKLMO schools are not alowing kids to return the following year if they move OOB during the year. A family that enters as an OOB family can live anywhere. The schools are really over enrollment capacity and this is one of the only ways to lower the numbers.

The problem with "grandfathering" families who were once IB is that it opens the door to flagrant abuse. If you want to get into a JKLM and you strike out in the OOB lottery, just rent an IB apartment just before residency verification time. Once your enrollment is accepted, give up the apartment. You won't be asked to prove IB status for a whole year.

The following year, when you cannot establish IB status, give the principal a heart-wrenching story about how you family is experiencing hard times and can no longer afford the IB apartment, etc.

[Anonymous]

Some of your bitches really need a life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Some of your bitches really need a life.

Others need an education.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not the PP, just curious how this policy addresses the status of a child in a joint custody situation? Surely both parents don't have to prove residency, so who's to say what exactly is going on with the 2nd parent?

I would imagine that if the child spends more time in one jurisdiction, he would be considered a resident of that jurisdiction for the purposes of public education.

And you would be wrong. Joint custody is complex and every family is different, but at base the principal rests upon not "carving up" the child based on what is convenient for one or another parent. The parents will accommodate the child's need to have them both in his(her) life. The schools will do the same thing. This is why Michelle Rhee's children were allowed to attend Oyster even though it is their father who lives IB.

PP. I'll concede that I am wrong if you can cite some authority for your position. The law is very clear that an individual can only be a resident of one state or DC. I do not believe that being the child of divorced parents with a joint custody agreement fundamentally alters this principle. Even a child who has suffered the pain of a broken home and has parents who share custody and live in to different jurisdictions is only entitled to claim residency in one state or DC.

If you know of case law or statutory authority to the contrary, please enlighten me.

Are we talking about a child claiming residency in two different states? My understanding is that we're talking about a child with parents who are IB for two different DC schools (both of which fall under the aegis of DCPS and ergo the child gets to choose the IB school).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Once you are in the school, and you "move" back, your child should be able to stay, even if the address has changed.

This is NOT true, the policy was changed under Rhee. It is now at the principal's discretion. I have heard that principals at a few of the JKLMO schools are not alowing kids to return the following year if they move OOB during the year. A family that enters as an OOB family can live anywhere. The schools are really over enrollment capacity and this is one of the only ways to lower the numbers.

The problem with "grandfathering" families who were once IB is that it opens the door to flagrant abuse. If you want to get into a JKLM and you strike out in the OOB lottery, just rent an IB apartment just before residency verification time. Once your enrollment is accepted, give up the apartment. You won't be asked to prove IB status for a whole year.

The following year, when you cannot establish IB status, give the principal a heart-wrenching story about how you family is experiencing hard times and can no longer afford the IB apartment, etc.

And if that fails, just rent another efficiency IB apt. for a month.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Are we talking about a child claiming residency in two different states? My understanding is that we're talking about a child with parents who are IB for two different DC schools (both of which fall under the aegis of DCPS and ergo the child gets to choose the IB school).

The original issue was whether children dropped off at DC schools in cars with MD plates were violating the rules. One PP suggested that, while a child might live MD with mom, his dad might be a DC resident. Thus, the PP argued, the child was in fact entitled to attend a DC school on the basis of the father's residency. However, as DCPS policies clearly state, to be entitled to public education in DC, the child must be a DC resident.

As for DC resident children of divorced parents both of whom are also DC residents and have a joint custody agreement, I imagine that you are correct, PP. The child is probably entitled to claim IB status at either parent's address.