Judges Reject 'Parental Rights'

Federal courts rule that parents have no constitutional right to 'dictate individually what the schools teach their children.'

Photo by DigitalVision

Claiming a violation of their "parental rights," some parents have recently hauled public school officials into court and asked federal judges to overturn educational decisions they don't like. Their lawyers argue that parents have a constitutional right "to direct the upbringing and education" of their children, including the right to override the decisions of democratically elected school board members.

To date, they've not enjoyed much success. A sampling of recent decisions:

In May, a federal judge in Texas rejected Tom and Traci Jeffrey's claim that the Bells Independent School District violated their parental rights when it refused to reschedule a Spanish III class at a time of day that would enable their daughter to enroll, even though the refusal hurt her chances to be valedictorian.

"Put simply, Ms. Jeffrey's parents do not have a constitutional right to direct, control, or determine what classes or curriculum the Bells ISD will offer its students," the court declared.

The Second Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in June that a Connecticut parent has no right to have his child excused from a mandatory health education course.

Turk Leebaert removed his seventh-grade son from a Health and Family Life course after the Fairfield Board of Education refused to excuse him from the fourth quarter of instruction. As a result, he received an F for the course.

Leebaert then sued the board in federal court claiming a violation of his "parental rights." He specifically objected to class lessons "defining self-esteem," discussing "the negative consequences of using drugs, marijuana and alcohol," promoting "respect for others' feelings, rights and differences," and "practicing social pressure resistance skills."

In ruling against Leebaert, the court declared: "If all parents had a fundamental constitutional right to dictate individually what the schools teach their children, the schools would be forced to cater a curriculum for each student whose parents had genuine moral disagreements with the school's choice of subject matter. We cannot see that the Constitution imposes such a burden on state educational systems."

To rule otherwise, the court warned, "would make it difficult or impossible for any public school authority to administer school curricula responsive to the overall educational needs of the community and its children."

In May, a federal court in Maine rebuffed efforts by home-schooling parents to force the state to allow their children to compete in state-sponsored track meets as part of the team for a religious school.

Although Maine requires local school districts to allow home-schooled students to participate in their athletic programs, Sammy and Susan Pelletier didn't want their children to be associated with the public school program and sought a court order requiring the state to allow them to compete on behalf of Seacoast Christian School, which they did not attend.

While the state's rule "may have unhappy consequences for the Pelletier family," the court said, it does not violate their "parental rights."

In July, a California federal judge rejected a "parental rights" lawsuit seeking monetary damages from a volunteer school counselor and her principal for surveying students at a Palmdale School District elementary school about sex.

Although the counselor had obtained signed parental permission slips for almost all of the students, several parents who had consented complained that the slips did not adequately explain the sexually explicit nature of the questionnaire.

In dismissing the case, the court ruled that parents individually don't have the "right to control a public school district's curriculum simply because they have chosen to send their children to public school."

There is one caveat, however. As most educators know, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) grants to the parents of special needs students a much larger say in how their children are educated--through their involvement in the development of Individualized Education Programs.

--Michael D. Simpson
NEA Office of General Counsel