Well since all of these decisions seem perfectly reasonable I would say the state comes first in looking out for the best interests of the children.

Doug’s comment would suggest to me, at least, that he would be perfectly willing to hand his kid(s) over to the state because of the foregone conclusion that parents know not of what they speak. It would further suggest to me that he believes in socialism and capitalism which is not what this country was founded on.  So I would suggest that perhaps Cuba or Russia might be a better fit for Mr. Little.  The mindset of this particular legislation, as in Ontario, is the first step toward a non-democratic society. It impedes upon parental rights and we are heading in a direction where parents are going to be withdrawing their children from public education.  So sad - loss of funding for our boards of education.

I agree with Karen on the latter of her comment. Parents need to wake up and raise their children. The government has no right to dictate how and what a child is taught regarding sexual orientation or sexuality. It is the parents job to inform and give consent. Period.

I have one daughter.

She went to public daycare at age one

She went to public K—12

She went to public post secondary.

I was more than satisfied.

I am a democratic socialist. I am not a communist.

I’m a Canadian. I’m Very proud of it. And I have no political leanings. Nanny states never worked for my family. We taught our children to be self-sufficient not welfare sponges.

Strengthening the governments hand when it comes to parenting children is leaning towards communism.  We do not need a system of social organization in which all economic and social activity is controlled by a totalitarian state dominated by a single and self-perpetuating political party. I will disagree with anyone who supports this.

I do not see what is all the hulabaloo about Bill 10. It is all about the best interests of the dichotomy of children we have in this contemporary society.

http://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark/2015/06/10/what-sex-ed-protests-tell-us-about-culture-wars-cohn.html

If you read the above piece by Martin Regg Cohn you will see that things are quite different than some think.

Since day 1 and for decades, parents have had the right to remove THEIR CHILDREN from any and all classes in sex education. Either they fail to understand this OR they have been badly misled to believe that it will be IMPOSED on their children OR something more sinister is afoot.

Judging from the homophobic protest signs and rhetoric, one might come to the conclusion that the protesters want the curriculum slowed down, revised or dropped for ALL children not just their own children.

With polls showing the majority SUPPORTS the curriculum one might assume that this is a case where a minority of parents are attempting to impose their will on the majority of Ontarians.

It seems that is what Martin thinks. That is what I think. Otherwise when the parents are told YOUR children will not have to stay in class for the curriculum why they don’t say “oh we misunderstood thank you” and go home?

Disruption The Only Way — Disestablish Public Education

Learning webs — self-propelled arrangements for education — Ivan Illich (Deschooling Society,  1971) said compulsory institutions called public schools would be replaced.  That was decades ago. It’s taking a long time, mainly because this field is ruled by institutional priorities — self-survival, coercion of clients, curtailing accountability, more funding demands, etc.  Anything but primary devotion to the needs of its clients.  The public school system cannot reform itself.  Altogether different approaches are being found which challenge educators who defy evidence regarding effective methods and practices.

1 Disrupt the disruptions — A student’s learning growth should not be hampered because of teacher strikes, withholding of Progress Report Cards to Parents, teacher incompetency (for e.g. the constant shortage of math teachers), etc.  Students go through their prime learning stages once in their lifetime. Parents are increasingly withdrawing their children to more stable learning opportunities, whether at home or in private schools.  Tutoring is increasingly being used to offset school-based deficiencies in teaching reading and math.

2 Education Savings Accounts — A brilliant strategy is being implemented in a few states in America.  ESAs are accounts that parents can open (if applicable) in the names of their school-age children and where the state deposits 90% of the public school allotment. The latest such plan, Nevada’s, goes the furthest in allowing a wide choice of alternatives, including home education and doesn’t restrict approvals only to special needs students or poverty.  Today, behold, a journalist parent, a long champion of ESAs, was asked to prepare a draft for Nebraska !  Even if we don’t have the credentials of a Deborah Andrews shouldn’t we all send drafts to our local province or state?

3 Teacher Training Needs Massive Overhaul — How common are the complaints that new teachers aren’t trained in the basics of teaching reading and math?  Instead, much time is spent on theory, philosophy and social justice.  Wisconsin is considering abolishing tenure in its public universities because of the perceived dominance of left-leaning professors.  In another area, that of the growing charter school movement, CMOs (charter movement organizations) are developing their own teacher training, especially to accommodate blended learning shift (using technology and academics).

4 Legal Actions By Parents — Increasingly parents are considering court suits for malpractice or recovery of extra school expenses.  The Moore Case after a 15 year legal battle finally had their costs of private schooling for a dyslexic son covered plus damages but the results in reformed practice seem minimal for other special needs children in Canada. 

5 Battleground Schools (Mathison, Ross, 2008) — This two-volume book set, throughout its many encyclopedic chapters and with over 100 specialist writers (according to my count most left-wingers), clearly forecasts that the dichotomy in public education (standoff) will continue between educators who believe in progressivism vs traditional teaching.  “ . . . the ideas and programs of the pedagogical progressives have been so fully incorporated into standard notions of schooling that we hardly notice them.” (p501)  Both teachers and parents who are not of the progressive persuasion find little comfort in these continuing ideological wars.  Why can’t there be non-political education?  Will there be a shingle in front of a school in the near future that says:  “Non-political school” ?

6 Exits, Alternatives, Vouchers, Tuition Tax Credits, ESAs — Parents have little faith in the system responding to their concerns, the needs of students, or paying attention to research evidence about successful approaches.  In face of this attitude there is increasing search for effective solutions in the lifetime of students.  A system which serves its institutional needs first is in serious question when education is seen as a necessity for a self-sufficient, productive future for our young people is at stake.

When you say “disruption’  to parents they run.  Vast majority of parents quite satisfied.

MY tax dollars - MY child - MY choice.  The education system does not stand “in loco” parentis” nor does it have any “duty of care” attached to it. There are some awesome educators in the system and there are some that we as parents have no business entrusting the care of our children to.  Education is not about what is putting the best interests of the child in place first which is another premise in law attached to parents in a separation situation.  Education is all about the almighty dollar, how to hold on to it, and how to protect those within the system.  “Trust us” - absolutely not.  With Ombudsman oversight and the ability to hold the system to account according to law as opposed the imperialistic attitudes of those within the system come September, I hope to see things start to change.

The government decides what is taught, when it is taught and to a large extent how it is taught. This is not the parents prerogative.

You can opt out of sex ed only. Otherwise if you keep children away without an approved alternative you will be charged with truancy.