Massachusetts SD 2259

September 2003
October 2003
November 2003
December 2003

Email sent to Friends of AHEM, September 23, 2003

Proposed Senate bill re Home Education

Advocates for Home Education in Massachusetts has learned of a late-filed bill (SD 2259) on the Massachusetts Senate docket, currently in the Joint committee on Rules. The bill was filed by Senator Brian Lees (Republican--FIRST HAMPDEN AND HAMPSHIRE). Because the bill was filed late, the Joint committee on Rules has to decide whether or not to release it to be admitted and assigned a number, from where it would be assigned to the Education Committee.

SD 2259 would add a phrase (in red below) to Chapter 76, Section 1, the Compulsory Attendance statute:

"Every child between the minimum and maximum ages established for school attendance by the board of education, … shall, subject to section fifteen, attend a public day school in said town, or some other day school approved by the school committee,… but such attendance shall not be required of a child whose physical or mental condition is such as to render attendance inexpedient or impracticable subject to the provisions of section three of chapter seventy-one B or of a child granted an employment permit by the superintendent of schools when such superintendent determines that the welfare of such child will be better served through the granting of such permit, or of a child who is being instructed through a home education program approved in advance by the superintendent or school committee, or of a child who is being otherwise instructed in a manner approved in advance by the superintendent or the school committee."

Tampering with the statute in this way does nothing to help homeschoolers, (we already have the legal right to homeschool as we are considered to fall in the "otherwise instructed" category) and could conceivably make life more difficult for us. Adding new language to Chapter 76 could open the door to a reinterpretation of the Charles case which now sets out the guidelines for homeschooling, and this would create in the best case confusion and in the worst case possible restricting of our homeschooling freedom. Also, by introducing the term "home education" into legislation, it may become necessary to define it which could well be opening another can of worms. Either of these scenarios leaves the possibility of making it harder to homeschool in MA. For these reasons, AHEM is opposed to this bill.

In our communication with Senator Lees's aide, the Senator's stated intention was to help homeschoolers with this bill, so we don't want to alienate him, but we do want to show him that there is an alert, concerned, and active homeschooling population here in Massachusetts whose opinion he needs to take into account. The Senator's aide asked AHEM to write him a letter explaining our opposition to the bill, which we have done (copy below). We encourage you to write or call him as well, especially if you are one of his constituents, and let him know where you stand on this issue. Remember, you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar--be cordial, but firm!

Senator Brian Lees
State House
Boston MA 02133
Tel: (617) 722-1291

DISTRICT REPRESENTED: FIRST HAMPDEN AND HAMPSHIRE. — Springfield, ward 2, ward 5, precincts C to H, inclusive, wards 7 and 8, East Longmeadow, Hampden, Longmeadow, Ludlow and Wilbraham, in the county of Hampden; and Belchertown, precincts B and C, and Granby, in the county of Hampshire.

Talking points about SD 2259 include:

No need for a change of this kind to Chapter 76, the compulsory attendance statute.

Homeschooling is clearly legal in Massachusetts and guidelines for its oversight are set out in the Charles decision.

Changing the wording of Chapter 76 would open the door for a reinterpretation of Charles, possibly making life more difficult for homeschoolers and superintendents than at present.

Entering the phrase "home education" into law could lead to a need to define the term, which could have unforeseen negative consequences.

Ask the Senator to withdraw the bill.

Using your own words is most effective. Please let us know if you write or call Senator Lees, and ideally send us a copy of your letter. We'd like to track how much and what kind of input he is getting. (Even a simple reply to this email with "I called" in the subject line will be appreciated.) We will keep Friends of AHEM informed of any developments we learn of.

Letter from AHEM to Senator Lees

Advocates for Home Education in Massachusetts
PO Box 1307
Arlington, MA 02474
September 23, 2003

Senator Brian P. Lees
State House
Boston, MA 02133

Dear Senator Lees:

Advocates for Home Education in Massachusetts (AHEM) is an advocacy organization for Massachusetts homeschoolers. We would like to thank you for being supportive of homeschooling, and trying to help homeschoolers in the state by filing SD 2259, which would amend the Compulsory Attendance statute. For various reasons, however, we must register our opposition to the bill, and ask that you withdraw it immediately.

Firstly, the amendment to G.L. c. 76, Sec. 1 will not help homeschoolers who currently homeschool legally in Massachusetts, nor will it aid school officials in their oversight function. A reading of Care and Protection of Charles (399 Mass. 324, 37 Ed. Law Rep. 934 ) quickly demonstrates that the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court carefully considered the statute in question, and found that homeschooled children were included under the clause "otherwise instructed." Care and Protection of Charles, which created the framework for homeschooling oversight in Massachusetts in 1987, rests on the statute as it currently stands, quoting the very section of the statute your bill seeks to amend: "General Laws c. 76, Sec. 1, requires that 'every child between the minimum and maximum ages established for school attendance by the board of education…attend a public day school in [the] town [where the child resides] or some other day school approved by the school committee…but such attendance shall not be required…of a child who is being otherwise instructed in a manner approved in advance by the superintendent or the school committee…'" Charles thus acknowledges that homeschooling falls under the "otherwise instructed" category of the current G.L. Ch. 76, Sec. 1, later reinforcing this by saying, "Having concluded that the approval process under G.L. c. 76, Sec. 1 (our emphasis) is constitutionally permissible…"

Secondly, we are concerned about the potential problems this bill could create for both homeschoolers and superintendents. Care and Protection of Charles acknowledges both the state interest in the education of its citizenry, and the parental right to home educate children, striking a balance between these two factors. For over fifteen years courts and superintendents have successfully applied the guidelines set forth in the Charles decision. We are concerned that adding new language to Chapter 76 would open the door for a reinterpretation of Charles thereby creating confusion where none now exists, and making life more difficult for school officials and homeschoolers. Another concern is that entering the phrase "home education" into law could lead to a need to define the term.

The present situation, which ensures the parental right to homeschool, allows for the variety of educational styles homeschoolers embrace, protects the state's interest in the education of its citizenry, and clearly includes homeschoolers under the "otherwise instructed" clause in G.L. 76, Sec. 1, is far preferable to the potential detrimental factors SD2259 may lead to for homeschoolers and school officials.

We strongly urge you to withdraw this bill.

We would be very pleased to discuss this further with you or meet with you if you feel you need clarification for any of the points we have made. Please keep us posted on how you plan to proceed.

[end of letter]

top of page

Email sent to Friends of AHEM, October 2003

In September 2003, Advocates for Home Education in Massachusetts alerted our Friends to the existence of SD 2259, a late filed bill by State Senator Brian Lees. SD 2259, if passed, would amend M.G.L. Chapter 76, section 1, the Compulsory Attendance Statute, to include the category "home educated" under the categories of people excluded by the Compulsory Attendance Statute. Currently, homeschoolers are exempt from M.G.L. Chapter 76, section 1, falling under the "otherwise instructed" category.

After several discussions with Senator Lees's office, AHEM representatives determined that passage of SD 2259 would not be in the best interest of Massachusetts homeschoolers, and wrote to Senator Lees, outlining our reasons for opposing the bill. We encouraged AHEM Friends to do the same.

In all of our discussions with Senator Lees's office, it has been apparent that SD 2259 was filed with the intention of helping homeschoolers. Despite our opposition to passage of the bill, all AHEM commmunication with Senator Lees's office have stressed our appreciation for his concern, and our hopes for working together in the future.

AHEM representatives continue to communicate frequently with Senator Lees's office. The bill remains with the Rules Committee and has not moved from that committee. Because it was a late filed bill, it has several hurdles to clear before making its way to the Education Committee. At this point, it seems unlikely that the bill will move from the Rules Committee and will most likely die there. We will continue to closely monitor SD 2259, and should further action be warranted, we will quickly alert you.

top of page

Update on SD 2259 November 2003

In November, AHEM received a form letter reply (below) from Senator Lees regarding our letter of September 23, 2003 (above) regarding his late filed bill SD 2259 "An Act Relative to Home Education." It seems from this letter that his position has not changed--he does not plan to push the bill nor does he plan to withdraw it.

We are curious if any of you who wrote to Senator Lees received a reply--was it the identical one? Please let us know!

We have responded to the Senator, keeping lines of friendly communication open while letting him know that our concerns stand and we will continue to watch the bill lest it progress out of the Rules Committee. The text of our letter to the Senator follows his letter to us below.

Letter from Senator Lees to Advocates for Home Education in Massachusetts:

November 11, 2003

"Thank you for contacting my office regarding Senate Docket 2259, "An Act Relative to Home Education." I appreciate learning your thoughts on this legislation.

Please know that I recognize your support for home schooling in Massachusetts and agree with you. I have many home schooled students in my district and understand the advantages associated with choosing this form of education for some families. To that end, the intent of the bill I filed recently seeks to make that process easier for both students and administrators, by specifically providing a reference to home schooling in the Massachusetts General Laws, and striving to eliminate the need for certain time-consuming regulatory procedures.

I am aware of your concerns with respect to the potential negative effect that such a reference may have on home education programs and will be certain to keep your thoughts in mind should this bill be referred to committee for further consideration.

Thank you again for your input. Please do not hesitate to contact me should you have further questions on this or any other matter."

[end of letter]

top of page

Letter from Advocates for Home Education in Massachusetts to Senator Lees, December 2003:

December 1, 2003

Dear Senator Lees:

On behalf of Advocates for Home Education in Massachusetts, I would like to thank you for your letter of November 11, 2003 regarding Senate Docket 2259, "An Act Relative to Home Education." I would also like to thank you for your consideration and time in responding to our concerns and inquiries regarding this proposed legislation. Both you and your staff have been very responsive in this regard.

Please know that we greatly appreciate your advocacy regarding homeschooling. While we acknowledge that the intent of the bill is to help homeschoolers, we will continue to monitor the status of Senate Docket 2259 because of our previously discussed concerns with the bill. We appreciate your consideration of our point of view and your willingness to consider our concerns should this bill be referred to committee for further consideration.

Thank you again for your efforts on behalf of homeschoolers. Please feel free to contact us if we can be of any assistance.

[end of letter]

AHEM representatives will maintain communication with Senator Lees's office. The bill remains with the Rules Committee and has not moved from that committee. Because it was a late filed bill, it has several hurdles to clear before making its way to the Education Committee. At this point, it seems unlikely that the bill will move from the Rules Committee and will most likely die there. We will continue to closely monitor SD 2259, and should further action be warranted, we will quickly alert you.

top of page

Back to Archives: Legislative Issues

The information on this website does not constitute legal advice; it is provided for informational purposes only.