Should parents have complete control over thier children's education or should the state have a say in it?

There is a growing movement of parents who think that the government has no right to interfere with raising of children. They believe that compulsory attendance is a violation of thier rights.

The founding fathers never addressed this issue specifically, because at the time of the founding of our country, governments did not interfere with family life in any way. Family life was considered private, and punishment for child and spousal abuse and neglect of any form was carried out by friends, family and neighbors without the assistance of the authorities, unless someone died.

What do you think? Should we get rid of cumpolsory attendance?

Which alternative do you think is best? Home school, private school, etc.

Most home school students are better educated and have higher test scores than those at school. As long as the children are doing well the state needs to keep their nose out of it.

I teach and I've learned that most parents are frigging idiots who have no clue about what goes on in their childs life. It's like pulling teeth to get them to meet with me about their child's future. Poor kids!

The state has NO right whatsoever in the way your child is brought up! The only time I would approve of the government butting in would be if the child was in danger. If it were up to the state, then all of our children would be raised as atheists.

i think in the begning parent should guide them which school they should go. later, when the child grows it should be up to them which university, college they want to go or which subject they want to study.

The states should have a standardized ciriculum and set of standards for anyone attending public school. However, the states should not dictate where a person's kids should go to school. I think the vouchers were the beginning thought of a possible good thing, but much like other things the idea has to be improved. If a parent knows a local school is filled with criminals and drugs, and would rather see their child use their share of public funding towards part of the tuition in a private school, all well and fine. But if the private school costs more than the public, the parents are then responsible for the rest. Of course the child can be refused by the private school if the payment cannot be made or if standards are not met. Schooling should be provided for all, when other options do not exist. But more parental control of their own children's education is a must in my opinion.

The problem is that this is not an "all or nothing" proposition.

The State wants absolute rights to complete control of the educational system and the people in it.

Parents should have access to the school, the records of their children, and full knowledge of the cirriculum that is being taught.