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

[Anonymous]

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/23/podcasts/nice-white-parents-serial.html

Thank you, nice white parents!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/23/podcasts/nice-white-parents-serial.html

Thank you, nice white parents!

You’re embarrassing yourself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do you care what others do? We planned to keep ours home if we did not get into virtual. Given the health pandemic, lack of safety precautions it was a no for us.

I don't think anyone cares what you do personally but they do care about how what you're doing affects others given the lack of resources available to DCPS. If this is were just a case of being able to throw some additional money at virtual options, pretty sure no one would care that you want to stay home until it's "safe". But that is not the case, and people don't want their in-person experience ruined to accommodate a minority of parents, most of whom sound like they need health anxiety therapy instead of actually needing a virtual option.

This is exactly it. 7 pages of people complaining about equity when they very obviously are just worried about being inconvenienced

+1 it’s the schools open at all costs folks freaking out that this will affect them (it won’t) and doing it in the name of abused kids that they really don’t give an F about.

no that's the other thread about charters.

I don't understand why you aren't concerned about child abuse or educational neglect.

I *am* concerned about it. That’s why I’m glad the council recognizes that parents keeping their kids home temporarily this semester aren’t abusing or neglecting them. CPS has more important things to do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do you care what others do? We planned to keep ours home if we did not get into virtual. Given the health pandemic, lack of safety precautions it was a no for us.

I don't think anyone cares what you do personally but they do care about how what you're doing affects others given the lack of resources available to DCPS. If this is were just a case of being able to throw some additional money at virtual options, pretty sure no one would care that you want to stay home until it's "safe". But that is not the case, and people don't want their in-person experience ruined to accommodate a minority of parents, most of whom sound like they need health anxiety therapy instead of actually needing a virtual option.

This is exactly it. 7 pages of people complaining about equity when they very obviously are just worried about being inconvenienced

+1 it’s the schools open at all costs folks freaking out that this will affect them (it won’t) and doing it in the name of abused kids that they really don’t give an F about.

no that's the other thread about charters.

I don't understand why you aren't concerned about child abuse or educational neglect.

I *am* concerned about it. That’s why I’m glad the council recognizes that parents keeping their kids home temporarily this semester aren’t abusing or neglecting them. CPS has more important things to do.

So a parent says “hey it’s fine I’m just going to send my kid to school at all, and they aren’t going to do virtual school, no worries!” And somehow this is ok with you. You realize this was illegal for a reason a week ago?

[Anonymous]

^^not send my kid

[Anonymous]

I guess it’s fine only if the school says it’s fine. Which seems….oh…odd for a school to do — say “yeah ok no worries just keep your kid home and don’t send them in. That will be fine for our test scores and everything we’ll have to do to catch up your kid when they maybe come back.”

Or maybe schools ALSO don’t care? Why would schools allow that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do you care what others do? We planned to keep ours home if we did not get into virtual. Given the health pandemic, lack of safety precautions it was a no for us.

I don't think anyone cares what you do personally but they do care about how what you're doing affects others given the lack of resources available to DCPS. If this is were just a case of being able to throw some additional money at virtual options, pretty sure no one would care that you want to stay home until it's "safe". But that is not the case, and people don't want their in-person experience ruined to accommodate a minority of parents, most of whom sound like they need health anxiety therapy instead of actually needing a virtual option.

This is exactly it. 7 pages of people complaining about equity when they very obviously are just worried about being inconvenienced

+1 it’s the schools open at all costs folks freaking out that this will affect them (it won’t) and doing it in the name of abused kids that they really don’t give an F about.

no that's the other thread about charters.

I don't understand why you aren't concerned about child abuse or educational neglect.

I *am* concerned about it. That’s why I’m glad the council recognizes that parents keeping their kids home temporarily this semester aren’t abusing or neglecting them. CPS has more important things to do.

Honestly, keeping your healthy kid home because you’re scared of covid actually is neglect at this point. Especially if they have any special needs or mentsl health issues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do you care what others do? We planned to keep ours home if we did not get into virtual. Given the health pandemic, lack of safety precautions it was a no for us.

I don't think anyone cares what you do personally but they do care about how what you're doing affects others given the lack of resources available to DCPS. If this is were just a case of being able to throw some additional money at virtual options, pretty sure no one would care that you want to stay home until it's "safe". But that is not the case, and people don't want their in-person experience ruined to accommodate a minority of parents, most of whom sound like they need health anxiety therapy instead of actually needing a virtual option.

This is exactly it. 7 pages of people complaining about equity when they very obviously are just worried about being inconvenienced

+1 it’s the schools open at all costs folks freaking out that this will affect them (it won’t) and doing it in the name of abused kids that they really don’t give an F about.

no that's the other thread about charters.

I don't understand why you aren't concerned about child abuse or educational neglect.

I *am* concerned about it. That’s why I’m glad the council recognizes that parents keeping their kids home temporarily this semester aren’t abusing or neglecting them. CPS has more important things to do.

Honestly, keeping your healthy kid home because you’re scared of covid actually is neglect at this point. Especially if they have any special needs or mentsl health issues.

It does seem like a nice cover for neglect, at least educational neglect.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I guess it’s fine only if the school says it’s fine. Which seems….oh…odd for a school to do — say “yeah ok no worries just keep your kid home and don’t send them in. That will be fine for our test scores and everything we’ll have to do to catch up your kid when they maybe come back.”

Or maybe schools ALSO don’t care? Why would schools allow that?

Don’t make it seem like this is the school’s fault. This is a law by the governing body of DC. What is the school attendance counselor supposed to do? How can they verify a kid is being kept home but also not being neglected/abused/underfed etc? But guess who will have to deal with the fallout from kids not being in school for two whole years or kids being abused at home with no adults checking in on them? The school personnel. This bill is incredibly dangerous and irresponsible.

And if a kid is abused the counsel will say ‘well it was up to the school to excuse the absence’ as if they didn’t create this system to begin with.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guess it’s fine only if the school says it’s fine. Which seems….oh…odd for a school to do — say “yeah ok no worries just keep your kid home and don’t send them in. That will be fine for our test scores and everything we’ll have to do to catch up your kid when they maybe come back.”

Or maybe schools ALSO don’t care? Why would schools allow that?

Don’t make it seem like this is the school’s fault. This is a law by the governing body of DC. What is the school attendance counselor supposed to do? How can they verify a kid is being kept home but also not being neglected/abused/underfed etc? But guess who will have to deal with the fallout from kids not being in school for two whole years or kids being abused at home with no adults checking in on them? The school personnel. This bill is incredibly dangerous and irresponsible.

And if a kid is abused the counsel will say ‘well it was up to the school to excuse the absence’ as if they didn’t create this system to begin with.

Oh I’m in agreement. I don’t think the Council cares at all about answering those questions. I think a school has to do what it has always done — notify CPS if a kid isn’t coming to school at all and doesn’t have a medical reason to not be in school. CPS then should go and investigate. The school should say that the kid needs to be in school, and disenroll the kid if they don’t come in.

The council did give the schools power to do that, at least, and I think schools should exercise that power, for the sake of children.

But I would also encourage you to write your council member.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guess it’s fine only if the school says it’s fine. Which seems….oh…odd for a school to do — say “yeah ok no worries just keep your kid home and don’t send them in. That will be fine for our test scores and everything we’ll have to do to catch up your kid when they maybe come back.”

Or maybe schools ALSO don’t care? Why would schools allow that?

Don’t make it seem like this is the school’s fault. This is a law by the governing body of DC. What is the school attendance counselor supposed to do? How can they verify a kid is being kept home but also not being neglected/abused/underfed etc? But guess who will have to deal with the fallout from kids not being in school for two whole years or kids being abused at home with no adults checking in on them? The school personnel. This bill is incredibly dangerous and irresponsible.

And if a kid is abused the counsel will say ‘well it was up to the school to excuse the absence’ as if they didn’t create this system to begin with.

That does suggest that schools would have some sort of liability concern wrt allowing these excused absences. I guess we will see whether schools now feel pressured to go back on their original stance of CPS and disenrolling. If they do, then any resulting abuse or neglect is really on them.

[Anonymous]

I can’t wait until all the screaming matches we have next year when some of us - myself included - insist that our vaccinated kids not wear masks ten hours a day.

[Anonymous]

I genuinely cannot see how anyone can morally support this. It is legally sanctioned child abuse, agreed to only so some wealthy parents get to keep their charter spots.

[Anonymous]

Did you all read the legislation? It’s not a free-for-all keep your kids home/no learning. It expands the category for virtual learning to families who have immunocompromised adults in the home, for example; and allows quarantining kids to have excused absences vs. in excused. Talk about living in a bubble. Lots of families have multiple losses due to COVID. If a family wants to do virtual school to reduce risk of transmission to vulnerable caregiver, that’s what this does.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Did you all read the legislation? It’s not a free-for-all keep your kids home/no learning. It expands the category for virtual learning to families who have immunocompromised adults in the home, for example; and allows quarantining kids to have excused absences vs. in excused. Talk about living in a bubble. Lots of families have multiple losses due to COVID. If a family wants to do virtual school to reduce risk of transmission to vulnerable caregiver, that’s what this does.

Read the first post which is a direct quote from the legislation. It allows schools to grant excused absences to anyone if they are just worried about Covid, until January 2022.

Virtual school would mean not mean absences.

Maybe you should read the legislation. It does what you say but it also allows anyone to just stay home (without virtual and without applying for homeschool), if the school allows.