House Education Committee: Chris Hamilton

Representative Stephen R. L'Heureux, Chairman (contact information removed)
Representative David W. Hess, Vice Chair
Representative Timothy E. Easson, Clerk
Representative Debra A. Naro
Representative Michael A. Balboni
Representative Mark S. Carter
Representative Barbara J. Hagan
Representative Paul C. Ingbretson
Representative Clifford A. Newton
Representative W Packy Campbell
Representative Michael B. Asselin
Representative William J. Remick
Representative Nancy F. Stiles
Representative John L. Ward
Representative Clair A. Snyder
Representative Charles B. Yeaton
Representative Claudette R. Jean
Representative Claire D. Clarke
Representative Deanna P. Rush
Representative J Timothy Dunn
Representative Kimberley S. Casey
Representative Emma L. Rous

April 4, 2006

Thank you, Mister Chairman, and members of the committee. My name is Chris Hamilton, and I am a homeschooler from Brookline. I am here to express concerns that I have about how this bill will affect homeschoolers, and to propose a small change that will minimize the impact on homeschoolers.

The home education law has been in place for nearly fifteen years now, and I think it has served the state well. Its purpose was to clarify the rights and responsibilities of homeschooling parents, and over the years has produced no court challenges to its validity. (Prior to its creation, there were a number of court cases brought by homeschoolers against districts over whether conditions set by districts violated a parent’s constitutional right to homeschool.) During those years, homeschoolers and their parents have every right to be proud of their accomplishments, which include numerous admissions to technical schools, colleges and universities, gainful employment in professional and trade jobs, creation of their own businesses, and numerous awards for their accomplishments. Homeschooled children today constitute approximately 2% of school-aged children in NH. The DOE reports that there were 4,503 homeschooled children with home education programs in 2004-2005.

I want to thank the sponsors of the bill for their expressed intent NOT to affect homeschoolers. After my testimony before the Senate Education Committee about how the bill affected homeschoolers, sponsors created an amendment which they believe gives homeschoolers a blanket exemption. I and many homeschoolers appreciate the intent, but do not believe the language used accomplishes that intent. I also want to thank the DOE and the Governor’s Office, who have been working with a small group of homeschoolers to clarify each other’s understanding of the situation after the amendment was adopted by the Senate.

It would solve a lot of problems for homeschoolers if the law could be written to increase the age of compulsory attendance only for public school students! However, the US Consititution's 14th amendment guarantees equal protection under the law. Many homeschoolers believe that if NH law were written with a blanket exemption for homeschoolers, it could be declared unconstitutional. The challenge would likely come from a parent of a public school student who was not permitted to withdraw his/her child. The reasoning would be if homeschooling parents have that freedom, why shouldn't all parents? That's why it is important to have some mechanism for exemption in place that is the equivalent of an option open to all parents.

One such candidate is an affidavit/statement/letter from a parent stating that the home education program is complete, which would be the equivalent of a diploma. (Credit for this idea should be given to Cathy Hamblett, Home Education Advisory Council member nominated by the NH School Administrators Association.)

(b) The child is receiving home education; or the child is no younger than sixteen, was formerly receiving home education, and a parent or guardian has signed an affidavit stating that the home education program is complete;

The conditions for issuing an affidavit need not be set by the state; non-public schools are permitted to issue diplomas without government standards. As long as the parent is the one deciding when to issue the affidavit that ends the reporting requirements, most homeschoolers will see minimal change from current law. They will simply issue the affidavit when their children turn 16. There will be a small number of homeschoolers who may wish to access public school classes or extra-curricular activities who, if they chose to submit such an affidavit, might no longer have access to these programs. It will be up to each homeschooling family to decide whether there is a greater benefit from ceasing to report to the state or from access to public schools.

Even if it were possible to write a blanket exemption for homeschoolers over 16, most homeschoolers do not believe the language of the bill as amended by the Senate accomplishes that.

(b) The child is receiving home education and is therefore exempt from this requirement;

The most logical grammatical antecedent for the phrase "this requirement" is the requirement to attend school, specified in the main paragraph of 193:1 I. It was a great surprise to the homeschooling community to hear the meaning Ms. Heath conveyed to us, that "this requirement" refers to the increase in the age of compulsory attendance. Many of us have been trying to figure out how that meaning could be construed from the language of the bill. Given how difficult it is for us, we conclude that it will also be difficult for school officials, law enforcement officers, judges, and future legislators. I believe the best solution to this problem is to define more the exemption more precisely in the statute.

The current language of the bill also puts homeschoolers in a Catch-22. In order to be exempt from "this requirement", a parent of a child over age 16 will be required to establish that his child was receiving home education. One establishes that by creating a home education program as defined in RSA 193-A. So in order to be exempt from reporting requirements, homeschooling parents will have to report!

The language I put forward is just for discussion purposes, and not necessarily the best possible language. There are homeschoolers besides myself who would be willing to work with legislators to craft language that would minimize the impact of this legislation on homeschoolers. We would be very happy to work with you toward that goal.

Sincerely,

Chris Hamilton