Does Council bill just let people keep their kids home and not educate them?

[Anonymous]

From the Council's emergency bill:

"Further, students whose families who have made the choice to keep them home due to concerns 72 around the safety of the school environment and school buildings should be able to receive an excused absence from their school. The bill grants the school the ability to provide this excused absence through January 15, 2022."

https://legiscan.com/DC/text/PR24-0375/2021

Does that mean anyone can keep their kid home, not do any virtual learning (since just being concerned doesn't qualify you for virtual), not homeschool, and just have a semester of excused absence?

How...how is that legal?

[Anonymous]

I hope the Mayor vetos that part of the bill if possible, or implements it in a highly restrictive way. It’s probably the most reckless and worst part of the bill and allows parents to engage in educational neglect. Parents who want to keep kids home should homeschool or find an actual virtual option like Friendship.

[Anonymous]

the mayor can't veto.

[Anonymous]

for people who profess to care about kids, this is truly appalling.

[Anonymous]

Leading the nation in terrible education. What a horrible horrible bill.

[Anonymous]

and this portion of the bill was done to appease pumpkin mom and the upper SES people who are just scared. Not for people with kids with actual medical needs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:From the Council's emergency bill:

"Further, students whose families who have made the choice to keep them home due to concerns 72 around the safety of the school environment and school buildings should be able to receive an excused absence from their school. The bill grants the school the ability to provide this excused absence through January 15, 2022."

https://legiscan.com/DC/text/PR24-0375/2021

Does that mean anyone can keep their kid home, not do any virtual learning (since just being concerned doesn't qualify you for virtual), not homeschool, and just have a semester of excused absence?

How...how is that legal?

Well, it would be legal in this case because the D.C. Council writes a law making it legal. Doesn't seem like smart policy, but I also don't know the considering kids truant if they're home due to health and safety concerns is a good alternative.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From the Council's emergency bill:

"Further, students whose families who have made the choice to keep them home due to concerns 72 around the safety of the school environment and school buildings should be able to receive an excused absence from their school. The bill grants the school the ability to provide this excused absence through January 15, 2022."

https://legiscan.com/DC/text/PR24-0375/2021

Does that mean anyone can keep their kid home, not do any virtual learning (since just being concerned doesn't qualify you for virtual), not homeschool, and just have a semester of excused absence?

How...how is that legal?

Well, it would be legal in this case because the D.C. Council writes a law making it legal. Doesn't seem like smart policy, but I also don't know the considering kids truant if they're home due to health and safety concerns is a good alternative.

They wouldn't be truant if parents would commit to homeschooling. As it is, there is nothing they have to do. And apparently CPS can't come and check to see what's going on.

Seriously, the Council is trying to get kids killed, or at least doesn't give a flying eff about their education.

[Anonymous]

So I could just say, "I'm scared of covid at school", keep my kid home for months....and that's it? I don't need to educate them? I could just let them wander the streets? CPS wouldn't come to check on me?

[Anonymous]

I surely hope that a legal interpretation of that sentence would be that it only applies to students with the medical reasons (self or family member) referenced in the beginning of the paragraph.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I surely hope that a legal interpretation of that sentence would be that it only applies to students with the medical reasons (self or family member) referenced in the beginning of the paragraph.

I surely hope that as well. But I don't understand why they would therefore have "excused absences". Those students would qualify for a virtual school, and therefore would not be "absent."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I surely hope that a legal interpretation of that sentence would be that it only applies to students with the medical reasons (self or family member) referenced in the beginning of the paragraph.

No, I think this is the Council pandering to a$$holes and not having an understanding of the repercussions of their actions.

It's like they aren't even adults.

[Anonymous]

This is really scary. I work as a case manager with DC Medicaid. School is extremely protective for thousands of DC kids--it gives them food, daily structure (and time away from the chaos at home) and in some cases keeps them away from actual physical harm.

I have no idea what the council is thinking. This is going to be devastating to many DC kids whose parents don't or can't have their kids' best interest at heart. I know it's hard to imagine this but many parents make daily and long-term decisions that harm their kids. We saw this in the pandemic--tons of kids who were not schooled at all because there was no-one in the home to login them on, there were many parents who sold the school-owned devices, etc. And this was just the educational neglect (there is physical neglect, abuse, etc).

[Anonymous]

This passed into law, right? It's a done deal? The parents who advocated for this should be ashamed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is really scary. I work as a case manager with DC Medicaid. School is extremely protective for thousands of DC kids--it gives them food, daily structure (and time away from the chaos at home) and in some cases keeps them away from actual physical harm.

I have no idea what the council is thinking. This is going to be devastating to many DC kids whose parents don't or can't have their kids' best interest at heart. I know it's hard to imagine this but many parents make daily and long-term decisions that harm their kids. We saw this in the pandemic--tons of kids who were not schooled at all because there was no-one in the home to login them on, there were many parents who sold the school-owned devices, etc. And this was just the educational neglect (there is physical neglect, abuse, etc).

Please, please write to the council and the council's staff about this:

Chair: Phil Mendelson [e-mail]
Mendelson's staff: [e-mail], [e-mail]

At-large: Anita Bonds [e-mail]
Staff: [e-mail], [e-mail]

At-large: Elissa Silverman [e-mail]
Staff: [e-mail], [e-mail]

At-large: Robert White [e-mail]
Staff: [e-mail], [e-mail]

At-large: Christina Henderson [e-mail]
Staff: [e-mail], [e-mail]

Ward 1: Brianne Nadeau [e-mail]
Staff: [e-mail], [e-mail]

Ward 2: Brooke Pinto [e-mail]
Staff: [e-mail], [e-mail]

Ward3: Mary Cheh [e-mail]
Staff: [e-mail], [e-mail]

Ward 4: Janeese Lewis George [e-mail]
Staff: [e-mail], [e-mail]

Ward 5: Kenyan McDuffie [e-mail]
Staff: [e-mail], [e-mail]

Ward 6: Charles Allen [e-mail]
Staff: [e-mail], [e-mail]

Ward 7: Vince Gray [e-mail]
Staff: [e-mail], [e-mail]

Ward 8: Trayon White [e-mail]
Staff: [e-mail], [e-mail]