Nebraska Top Blogs » Nebraska Family Forum

Feeds

3089 άρθρα από 71 πηγές

• Angela May's Omaha Nebraska Real Estate Blog (86)
• Around Peru, Nebraska (74)
• Belvidere, Nebraska Pop. 98 (24)
• Chris Beaton Real Estate Agent (14)
• Cranksgiving Omaha (26)
• CrossFit Omaha (194)
• Dunbar, Nebraska (25)
• Emily Dunbar (18)
• Equality Nebraska Coalition (49)
• Genealogy Lines (32)
• Golden Invitational (2)
• Group Ride Omaha (74)
• Home Access Solutions (37)
• In-Home Omaha Personal Fitness Trainer (18)
• IPM in Schools: The Nebraska Experience (34)
• Leavenworth Street (186)
• Leavenworth Street - the talk of Nebraska politics (25)
• Merriam Turkey Hunts - Nebraska Spring Turkey Hunts (25)
• Merriam's Turkey Hunting - Nebraska Spring Turkey Hunting (33)
• Miss Nebraska's Outstanding Teen 2011 (20)
• MTB Omaha (34)
• Nebraska Bead Society (42)
• Nebraska Beer (223)
• Nebraska Club Baseball Hits Home Run in Lincoln! (2)
• Nebraska Corn Kernels (163)
• Nebraska Family Forum (149)
• Nebraska Helmet Blog (10)
• Nebraska Hunting Company - Scott Croner (34)
• Nebraska Hunting Outfitters (25)
• Nebraska Master Naturalist (15)
• Nebraska Missing (8)
• Nebraska Nature and Visitor Center - Green Shoe Diaries Blog (37)
• Nebraska On Film (21)
• NEBRASKA OUTDOOR ADDICT (42)
• Nebraska Pop Festival 2011 - August 9th through August 14th (7)
• Nebraska Roots and Ramblings (33)
• Nebraska Sierra Club (10)
• Nebraska Tax Blog (32)
• Nebraska Trophy Whitetails (3)
• Nebraska Views (96)
• Nebraska Wildlife Rehab - Wildlife Rehabilitation and Education (25)
• Nebraska Youth Ministries (168)
• Nebraska/SW Iowa Blog (71)
• New Nebraska Network (25)
• Nutrisimple - CrossFit Omaha (25)
• Obituaries from American Citizen Newspaper, Omaha, Nebraska (11)
• Obituaries from Omaha, Nebraska, Newspapers (7)
• Omaha Bikes (58)
• Omaha Community Playhouse (60)
• Omaha Daily Photo (25)
• Omaha DEVO (25)
• OMAHA ELITE KETTLEBELL (31)
• Omaha Lens (50)
• Omaha Mortgage Planner Terry Williams (39)
• Omaha Sci-Fi Scene (43)
• Omaha TV News (25)
• Omaha Yum (25)
• Opera Omaha (55)
• Outdoor Nebraska - Nebraska Game & Parks (26)
• PEDAL OMAHA (25)
• Peg Maloney - ReMax Real Estate - Omaha, NE (31)
• Pilgrimage to Omaha (14)
• Prairie Fire - The Progressive Voice of the Great Plains - (16)
• Princess Nebraska (78)
• Teresa Elliott - Selling Luxury, Executive Homes in Omaha, NE (39)
• The Heart of Nebraska (26)
• THE YOU GO GENEALOGY GIRLS (32)
• Top 5 Nebraska (27)
• Universal Insurance Blog (12)
• University of Nebraska Press
• Welcome to Bennington, Nebraska! (13)

Nebraska Family Forum (100)

• Nebraska blogs (US-NE), 05/18/2012
• 16:36

  Parents must be involved in the governance of their local school districts

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  The Nebraska Family Forum has the simple mission of protecting the local control of education and the precious constitutional rights of parents to direct the education and upbringing of their children.
  
  It was our goal to restore local control over school attendance and promote district policies that would prevent innocent families from becoming entangled in the burdensome monitoring and intrusions of pre-court truancy diversion programs, DHHS, and legal action.
  We fought hard during this year’s legislative session to restore local control over school attendance, but there will be no significant changes in the coming school year if parents don't hold their school districts accountable for using common sense in their attendance policies and reflecting the strong family values of our local communities.
  Parents must be involved in the governance of their local school districts! “Eternal Vigilance is the Price of Liberty.”If parents are going to retain their precious constitutional rights, to direct the upbringing and education of their children, they absolutely must be involved; not just in their kid’s classroom but in the politics and policy making of their school districts.
  Many school board members are up for re-election, a new superintendent is being put in place in OPS, and it’s time for parents reach out to the candidates and find out what philosophies about family life and school drive their decision making.
  Gretna School District Policy has been a model for me, one that reflects the general values of our family centered state. It recognizes family life as a bedrock of child development and allows reasonable family travel to be excused. Gretna continues to recognize and trust the judgment of their school building principals as the ones most qualified to judge whether an absence is legitimate or not based on their first hand knowledge of the families and their students.
  Nebraskans are people who believe in freedom, who know it is essential to trust parents to raise their families without the heavy handed scrutiny of government intervention. We want our community schools to be places where common sense can be exercised by building principals who work closely with parents and students.
  --------------------------------------------------
  Things excused under Gretna Policy:(1) Illness (personal illness of student)(2) Bereavement or emergency in the family(3) Doctor or dental appointment which require student to be absent from school,(4) Court appearances that are required by a court order,(5) School sponsored activities which require students to be absent from school,(6) Family trips in which student accompanies parent(s)/legal guardian(s),(7) Religious observance,(8) Other absences which have received prior approval from the Principal.28
  
  
  More... »
  
  
• Nebraska blogs (US-NE), 05/17/2012
• 20:38

  NCCPR Report: Truancy Sidebar

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  
  When keeping a sick child home from school is a crimeAUTHORITIES SAY THEY NEED A “HAMMER” TO DEAL WITH “EXCESSIVE” ABSENSES.  BUT A SICK CHILD IS NOT A NAIL.
              In August of 2011, more than 20 families were forced to gather at the Douglas County Courthouse for an exercise in mass humiliation that sounds like something out of the 17th Century.            One-by-one the families, parents and children, were called to the front of the room to be publicly cross-examined by a deputy county attorney.            Their crime – and, in Nebraska, it’s literally a crime: During the previous school year, the children had been home sick from school for more than 20 days.            One family was struggling with cancer, two had children with mono.  Another was trying to cope with the deaths of his mother, sister and uncle.            The Omaha World-Herald described the process:
  One-by-one over the course of two hours, the families were called to the front of the room. [Mary] Reynolds-East and her husband [whose son had suffered from mono and strep throat] were next to last.Deputy Douglas County Attorney Jordan Boler told them they were called in because their son had missed more than 20 days for two years in a row. "That's a lot," she said.Boler asked whether the couple had done something to prevent their son from getting sick again this year — a question that frustrated Reynolds-East. "There's not much we can do," she said later. "Give him vitamin C?"[1]
              If the family can’t somehow come up with a cure for strep throat and other diseases this year, they could face a lot worse than humiliation.            In a bizarre move, apparently unheard-of in any other state and diametrically opposed to what national experts consider best practice, Nebraska has erased the distinction between an excused and unexcused absence from school. The very term “truancy” was replaced by “excessive absences.”            Any student absent for more than 20 days, for any reason, automatically is referred to the county attorney, who then has the option to prosecute the child, or charge the parents with “educational neglect” and take the child from them.            The percentage of Nebraska families likely to be affected ultimately will be significant.  In just one year, Nebraska schools referred 9,178 students to county attorneys as a result of the 20-day law.[2] That’s about three percent of Nebraska’s students in just one year.[3]Over the course of the 12 years that a child typically is in school, just think of how many families will experience at least one year where some combination of illness and family emergency might push them over the 20-day limit.            Authorities keep saying they won’t really take away children or do anything similarly drastic in cases where all or most of the absences are “excused.”            But the World-Herald reports that KVC, the “lead agency” serving southeast Nebraska (in effect, the equivalent of DHHS in that part of the state) says the number of families under their supervision because of school issues has quadrupled since the new law took effect. The story doesn’t say how many, if any, are in foster care.  But it does note that KVC itself wasn’t expecting this:
              Sandra Gasca-Gonzalez, president of KVC's Nebraska operations, said she was surprised at the numbers. In other states where she has worked, truancy is an issue handled by schools, not the juvenile court system, she said. [4] 
              In some parts of the state, it doesn’t take 20 absences to bring DHHS into a family’s life.  In 11 school districts in Douglas and Sarpy counties, as few as six absences leads to a referral to an intervention “team” that includes DHHS.            Even the threat is doing enormous harm to families.  A child abuse investigation – and when DHHS is involved, that’s what it is – is not a benign act.  Taking a child aside and asking questions about the most intimate aspects of her or his life, even in private, let alone as part of a public shaming, can do serious emotional damage.  And once DHHS is involved for one reason, it can go on the ultimate fishing expedition looking for other alleged “abuse” or “neglect.”            During the mass humiliation session in last August “one elementary-age girl clung to her mother, who explained the girl was terrified about what might happen to her. Illnesses had put the child over the 20 day mark.”[5]            Twelve-year-old Kylie Johnson also is under surveillance by a county attorney.  A combination of illnesses, family trips, and being a victim of bullying pushed her one day over the legal limit for absences.  The fact that she still gets As and Bs doesn’t matter.  “They put me under the impression I did something terribly wrong,” Johnson told a legislative hearing.[6]            All that stress is bound to affect schoolwork.  Beth Meyer of Lincoln, whose daughter missed 22 days of school because of illness, told the hearing “You’re taking my child, who is legitimately sick, through the court system and taking her from an A and B student to an F student.”[7]            Older students have another option.  A 16-year-old who had endured years of stress in her life managed to reduce her absences from 40 in one semester to only three the next.  But instead of praise, she was blasted in open court by a county attorney because she didn’t get her absences down to zero.  He recommended juvenile detention – jail.  Fortunately, the judge did not agree.            But rather than face any more torment from the system, the 16-year-old did the one thing still within her power: With only two math classes left before graduation, she dropped out.[8]            Proponents of the law argue that it’s working – attendance is up.  But the fact that more students are in school does not mean that more students are getting an education.            One parent sent her child to school with a fever of over 100 degrees – because she was terrified of exceeding the limit on absences.[9]  That’s not unusual, according to Dr. Lisa Whitcomb, a pediatrician at Methodist Physicians Clinic in Omaha:
              I see parents sending their children to school ill because they’re afraid they have missed too many days of school.  This is concerning both for the child and their classmates that might be getting exposed to infectious diseases. …  I have seen good parents taken to court over what seem to be to be legitimate absences.  I have one patient in particular who has been taken to court twice.  Mom also has been threatened with CPS for the absences of her child, who has recurrent illnesses and does well in school despite her absences.
              All of this is contrary to best practice in child welfare and juvenile justice.  In 2009, one of the nation’s leading child welfare and juvenile justice think tanks, the Vera Institute of Justice found that roughly half the states don’t even have “educational neglect” statutes – they leave it to the schools. The study was commissioned by the New York State agency that oversees county child protective services agencies (CPS is a county function in New York).  In it, the Institute recommended that if agencies like DHHS are not going to get out of educational neglect cases entirely, at least for older children, they should restrict the cases with which they get involved and reduce their role to offering genuinely voluntary help through a process called “differential response.”  The study also cited a series of better options for dealing with actual truancy.[10]            But in Nebraska, Judge Elizabeth Crnkovich reportedly said the law is needed as a “hammer” to get families to cooperate with the “help” she and others want to offer.  If she said that, it reveals the same appalling lack of knowledge of child development she displayed when she tore seven children in a “safe haven” family from the loving aunt who took them in because the aunt had not yet had time to buy each a separate bed and, yes, had not yet had time to enroll them in school (see p. xx).            A higher court judge understands this.  According to the World-Herald:
  Nebraska Chief Justice Michael Heavican to warn that courts are the "most expensive and least flexible" way to deal with truancy.  He said courts should be reserved for the most difficult and unresponsive truants, while others should be handled through school interventions and court diversion.[11]
  
  But even a diversion program causes tremendous needless stress when there is nothing to divert.  A “hammer” is not necessary to deal with a sick child because a sick child is not a nail.  Neither is a child whose only crime is to have been a victim of bullies.            That’s what happened to Victoria Herrera’s daughter.  Two years of torment for one of the very few Latino students in the Millard Public Schools[12]culminated toward the end of her third grade year when several classmates beat her with sticks on her way home from school.              When the school refused to protect her child (not our problem, said the school district, it happened on the way home) Ms. Herrera withdrew her child for the last 24 days with the intention of home schooling her.            With a new principal at the school the next fall, Ms. Herrera decided to give the school another chance.  But her daughter was placed in the same class as one of the worst of the bullies – and Ms. Herrera was told she and her daughter were being referred to the county attorney for “truancy.”            On the day of the first court hearing, her daughter was assaulted again, by another student, this time in the school.  But again, the school did nothing.  Well, not quite nothing: The principal kept the fourth grader in the office for three hours until she “admitted” the assault was an “accident.”            DHHS was called in to investigate – no, not the people who bullied Herrera, but rather Herrera’s mother. To her face, they told Ms. Herrera that clearly this was not a case of neglect.  Between that and her own lawyer saying she should just plead guilty, she agreed to jump through all their hoops.  Then the DHHS workers said exactly the opposite to the court – which promptly gave DHHS legal custody of the girl, though she was allowed to remain in her own home, under the constant surveillance of DHHS.            The ordeal ended only when the “guardian ad litem” named to represent the child’s best interests actually did just that.  She recommended that the case be dismissed. The child is being home-schooled.[13]            State Sen. Tony Fulton has proposed a simple, sensible solution for all this: His legislation, LB1165, actually would reduce the number of absences before school districts are required to intervene – but he would restore the distinction between an excused and an unexcused absence, and leave it to the discretion of the school district whether to refer the matter to the county attorney.[14]  If anything this law does not go far enough.  Nebraska should join the states that do not consider so-called “educational neglect” to be any of child protective services’ business.  School districts should be prohibited from involving DHHS in cases of either “excessive absences” or truancy.________
  And finally, one last item about that public humiliation session at the Douglas County courthouse last August: In order to attend the session, some of the children had to miss school.
  
  [1] Martha Stoddard, “Parents chafe at truancy oversight,” Omaha World-Herald, Oct. 2, 2011, [www.omaha.com] [2] Martha Stoddard, “Nebraska goes own way on truancy laws,” Omaha World-Herald, Oct. 2, 2011. [www.omaha.com] [3]Proximityone.com: Characteristics of K-12 Schools & Enrollment by State,  [proximityone.com] [4] Stoddard, note xx (second story) supra. [5] Stoddard, note xx, supra. [6] Martha Stoddard, “Truancy law has many on edge,” Omaha World-Herald  Feb. 14, 2012. [7] Christine Scalora, “Parents, students criticize truancy law,” Nebraska News Service, Feb. 14, 2012. [8] Nebraska Family Forum, The Gdowski Family: The intended target,  Oct. 20, 2011:  [www.nebraskafamilyforum.org] [9] Nebraska Family Forum, The Myles Family: Truancy Diversion for Sick Kids? Jan. 3, 2012: [www.nebraskafamilyforum.org] [10] Jessica Gunderson, et.al, Rethinking Educational Neglect for Teenagers: New Strategies for New York State, (New York: Vera Institute of Justice, Nov. 2009): [www.vera.org] [11] Stoddard, note xx (second story) supra. [12] Only three percent of school district residents under age 18 are Latino (National Center for Education Statistics, School District Demographics System, Race and Ethnicity 2000 Data (P.L.94-171) - Profile Data [nces.ed.gov] [13] Nebraska Family Forum, The Herrera Family: Is the law working?Feb. 1, 2012. [www.nebraskafamilyforum.org] [14] LB 1165 text: [nebraskalegislature.gov]
  
  More... »
  
  
• Nebraska blogs (US-NE), 04/12/2012
• 23:56

  LB 933 Signed by the Governor: April 06, 2012

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  The governor signed into law a hard fought compromise on Nebraska Truancy on April 6th, 2012. The change will hopefully improve the triage of truancy filings to the county attorney and prevent students with excused absences from the routine filing for truancy at 20 days.
  
  The change will take time to prove its effectiveness. I believe its critical that school boards across the state call for a review of school district attendance policy before the start of school next year. With the changes to the truancy law this year, just one unexcused day (if combined with 19 excused absences) will still result in a mandatory filing at the county attorney's office. While most students in Nebraska never get close to 20 absences, kids with serious ongoing illness and other special needs could still be vulnerable under Nebraska's truancy law in districts with highly aggressive attendance policies.
  
  In some districts a student who takes an extra couple days of family travel during the school year or misses school for competitive gymnastics or other highly competitive sports will accrue UNEXCUSED absences and could likely fall under the jurisdiction of law enforcement because no longer are these absence recognized as legitimate.
  
  I encourage School Boards to implement attendance policies that honor family time and parental authority. The Gretna School District policy as a model worth emulating.
  
  Gretna School District Policy:
  
  All absences, except for illness and/or death in the family, require advance approval.
  
  An absence for any of the following reasons will be excused, provided the required procedures have been followed:
  
  (1) Illness (personal Illness of the student)
  (2) Bereavement or emergency in the family
  (3) Doctor or dental appointment which require student to be absent from school
  (4) Court appearances that are required by a court order
  (5) School sponsored activities which require students to be absent from school
  (6) Family trips in which student accompanies parents/legal guardians
  (7) Religious observance
  (8) Other absences which have received prior approval from the Principal
  
  LB 933 final passage:
  
  Voting in the affirmative, 46
  
  Adams, Cornett, Harms, Lautenbaugh, Schilz, Ashford, Council Harr, B. Louden Schumacher, Avery Dubas, Heidemann, McCoy, Smith, Bloomfield, Fischer, Howard, McGill, Sullivan, Brasch, Flood Janssen, Mello, Wallman, Campbell, Fulton, Karpisek, Nelson, Wightman, Carlson, Gloor, Lambert,           Nordquist, Christensen, Haar, K. Langemeier, Pahls, Coash, Hadley, Larson, Pirsch, Conrad, Hansen,             Lathrop, Price
  
  Voting in the negative, 0
  
  Excused and not voting, 3
  
  Cook, Krist, Seiler
  
  More... »
  
  
• 23:22

  Millard Residents: It's Time to Act

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  Plan to attend the Millard School Board Meeting Monday!!
  
  Monday, April 16th @ 6 pmDon Stroh Administration Center5606 SOUTH 147th STREET, Omaha, NE
  It's time to ask our board to call for a review of school district attendance policy before the start of school next year. With the changes to the truancy law this year, just one unexcused day (if combined with 19 excused absences) will still result in a mandatory filing at the county attorney's office. In Millard a child who takes an extra couple days of family travel during the school year or misses school for competitive gymnastics will accrue UNEXCUSED absences and could likely fall under the jurisdiction of law enforcement because Millard no longer recognizes family travel as a legitimate excused absence.I will encourage the Millard School Board to implement attendance policy that honors family time and parental authority. I will suggest they use Gretna School District policy as a model.
  Gretna School District Policy:
  All absences, except for illness and/or death in the family, require advance approval.
  An absence for any of the following reasons will be excused, provided the required procedures have been followed:
  (1) Illness (personal Illness of the student)(2) Bereavement or emergency in the family(3) Doctor or dental appointment which require student to be absent from school(4) Court appearances that are required by a court order(5) School sponsored activities which require students to be absent from school(6) Family trips in which student accompanies parents/legal guardians(7) Religious observance(8) Other absences which have received prior approval from the Principal
  [https:]
  
  More... »
  
  
• Nebraska blogs (US-NE), 03/19/2012
• 16:49

  The Future of the NFF

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  Volunteer to Serve on the NFF Board of Directors or as a member of a committee!
  
  We need 9 people to be fully committed to serving on the board by the end of May if the NFF is to continue as an organization in our state!
  Please look over the list below and consider what role you can play in the NFF going forward. I know that many of you have worked hard to reach the goals set forth by the NFF and that most of you would like to see the organization continue to play a significant role in protecting the integrity of families in our state through active participation in state politics.
  
  Ultimately the direction the NFF takes and its continued presence in Nebraska politics is entirely reliant on the core supporters who are willing to volunteer to serve on a board of directors. The decision to continue with the NFF will be finalized by the end of May dependent on the numbers of volunteers who stand up to make this organization sustainable.
  Many Hands Make Light Work!
  With a committed board of directors to support the executive director and members willing to serve on committees, no one person will need to take on too much. Here is how we would like to organize and the positions and committees that will need to be filled.
  - Executive director – Stephanie Morgan*Provide clear leadership for the organization. Inspire and inform. Work with all board members regularly to shape the direction and focus of the organization. Meet often with the assistant director and secretary to evaluate the progress of current goals and assignments.
  - Assistant Executive director*Fill in for the Executive director when they are absent. Council with and support the executive director in leadership of the organization. Provide a unified message with the executive director and attend meetings in representation of the director.
  - Secretary*Keep records of core supporters, community partners, and contact lists for media and state officials. Work up meeting agendas and take notes at meetings. Produce phone trees and mailing lists. Send out organizational emails to core supporter and friends when directed. Publish a monthly email newsletter.
  - We need people willing to assist in Secretary duties, such as taking on the newsletter.
  - Treasurer*Take on the task of incorporating the organization and getting a non-profit status for the group. Establish and organization bank account. Organizational accounting of funds and expenditures, tax filings, and yearly financial reports.
  - Fundraising Committee: Will work under the Treasurer and help organize fundraising efforts and reach organizational goals for funding.
  - Education Director*Work with local school authorities and elected school boards. Help parents to organize local political action teams to influence local education policy. Watchdog for local education policy. Suggest policy changes needed in local school districts.
  - Education Committee: We need members to serve with the education director. If you would like to serve as a representative to your school district please let us know.
  - Legislative Director*Work with state lawmakers and committees. Help group members to be involved in legislative matters and political action. Watchdog for legislation that impacts families. Suggest positions the organization should take on proposed legislation and make suggestions for original legislation.
  - Legislative Committee: We need members to serve with the legislative director. If you would like to serve as a representative of your district please let us know.
  - Public Relations Director*Make contacts in local media. Write and distribute press releases. Make commercials and other public outreach materials (posters, mailings, newspaper ads, etc.). Book radio and TV spots.
  - Social media facilitator: Use social media to shape the organizational message and activate support for important legislation and other efforts.
  - Website developer: Website development and maintenance.
  Important Announcement!
  I announced to core supporters present at yesterday’s meeting that I will be moving out of state in the next year. My husband who works for the United States Defense Intelligence Agency has been looking to advance his career and this will mean that our family will relocate as soon as he finds the right position. We are not certain yet of the time frame but we are certain that it will happen before my son finishes his eighth grade year in 2013 (though it is likely to happen much sooner). In addition to organizing a board there is a pressing need for some willing person to serve as the assistant executive director with the intention of eventually taking my role as executive director. If you are interested and want to talk with me about it please call me: 402-301-9752
  
  If you think of someone you think would be an excellent candidate to direct the NFF please let me know.
  I can’t wait to hear from all of you!
  Stephanie Morgan
  Executive Director of the Nebraska Family Forum
  402-301-9752www.nebraskafamilyforum.org [https:]]
  
  More... »
  
  
• Nebraska blogs (US-NE), 03/13/2012
• 14:39

  Reflections from the panel discussion on child welfare and school attendance

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  A reflection from yesterdays panel discussion on child welfare: 
  
  After the Panel Discussion on Child Welfare hosted by Family Advocacy Movement (FAM),  I spoke with three women well aquainted with the truancy law debate, one who sits on the “truancy triage team” in Douglas County and the others who seemed to be closely involved with the process. They were not pleased with the amendment that would give schools more discretion over attendance. They felt that school districts need to be accountable to a "multi-disciplinary team" (namely them) for what they decide is legitimate or not.
  
  They not only didn't believe school districts (especially building principals) should be free to make these decisions, it was obvious that the idea of parents having a strong role in decisions about attendance was way out of bounds. In essence they seemed to think that their collective judgment is superior to the individual judgments of parents.
  
  They each gave examples of irresponsible parenting and mentioned family vacations and kids participating in competitive sports programs outside of the school curriculum as examples of irresponsible parental choices sanctioned by school districts.
  
  One of them commented that she certainly understands a why a student who has brain surgery would miss 20 days but not a student with ONLY allergies. I challenged her to be sensitive to children who suffer from sever allergies and immunological disorders which is all too common today. She said, "Well yes, but you just have those kids who say they're sick but aren't really very sick." She seemed to be saying that it’s her job (or the job of this team) to determine what is valid and reasonable, which kids are faking it and which parents are being too lax. 
  I proposed to them that the appropriate place for these things to be determined are in the home and in the local school districts that are susceptible to the political pressure of their constituents who fund and govern them. I explained that parents are not given a "free hand" by any means. They are required to report non-attendance and the reasons for it to school authorities and follow school district policy which is written by democratic consensus of that community.
  
  Do these women have authority? Yes. They have tons of authority. This is the team that goes through all the files when they come in to the county attorney. They are the ones who are “looking into things”. They make recommendations for what should happen in each case which for the most part the courts follow these recommendations.
  
  Sitting on the team are social workers, school administrators, judges, and attorneys. Representatives from every agency or department that has “statutory authority” over children. Missing are the parents, who have the primary “statutory authority” over their children.
  
  This team facilitates what Mike Horton experienced when he went to the mass meeting and they had “pre-sorted” the kids, this is the team that triaged (or pre-sorted) them. This team has the power to require a family to come to the court house or not, they recommend monitoring, truancy diversion, etc. They are the team responsible for sending Martha Myles daughter into triage (and yes they had the information about the health issue they just thought it was fishy and that there was possible neglect by the parent). This team is made up of unelected bureaucrats. Who are they accountable too?
  This discussion was a reminder that we have a great deal of work left to do. The discussion yesterday tended to ask the question, "How did Nebraska get to this place where families are ripped apart at the second highest rate in the country?" Richard Wexler said that either Nebraska parents are the suffer the most incompetent parenting paradigms in the country or it is the philosophies of the agencies and professionals with statutory authority whose philosophies are incompetent. 
  With philosophies that are hostile to family freedom and parental authority guiding those tasked with truancy diversion in our state it is clear that this battle is only beginning. Until people are willing to allow parents their natural rights and tolerate “mistakes in parenting” no child or family is safe from these “authorities” in child welfare.
  Richard Wexler said something last night about the difficulty that advocates of reform face when they are dealing with system administrators who firmly believe they are doing what is “best for the child” as they break the bonds between kids and their parents. 
  I again thought of the C.S. Lewis quote that is becoming a favorite of mine: “"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."
  
  More... »
  
  
• 00:10

  NCCPR REPORT: How to Save Nebraska’s Sinking Child Welfare System

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  Today a startling report from the National Coalition for Child Protection Reform was released by director, Richard Wexler, at a press conference at the capitol rotunda. The 57 page report on the state of child welfare in Nebraska is a startling call to action. The facts are indisputable! "Nebraska is an extreme outlier, tearing apart families at a rate more than triple the national average." The NCCPR report brings these numbers to life reporting that "if all of America were like Nebraska, more than a million children would be trapped in foster care", while that number currently stands at 400,000. "The obscene rate of child removal drives all of the other problems plaguing Nebraska child welfare."
  
  Family Advocacy Movement, directed by Melanie Williams-Smotherman, hosted a panel discussion this evening that brought together professionals and parents affected by Nebraska's system. The panel consisted of Vicki Maca DHHS administrator working on "Family Matters" the state-wide reform of NE CPS systems, Melanie Williams-Smotherman the director of FAM, James Holt an independent mental health therapist and licenced clinical social worker, Sarah Forrest a policy coordinator for Voices For Children in Nebraska, David Newell the President and CEO of Nebraska Families Collaborative, and Richard Wexler the director of NCCPR.
  
  There was general agreement among panel members that Nebraska's child welfare system is in grave danger; a belief supported by the facts. The main point: Far too many children are removed from their homes. There was general agreement that foster care should be a last resort and that better systems should be in place for prevention. James Holt spoke of his dedication as a professional to solutions that result in family unity, Vicki Maca spoke of the "Families Matter" reforms, Sarah Forest spoke of fairness and justice for kids, but Richard Wexler laid down the gauntlet when he said that the numbers tell the story of whether professionals and state leaders are serious about reform. He said, "Watch the numbers and we'll see if the words matter."
  
  In break-out discussions families and professionals mingled to discuss problems with the system as they have experienced them. Many topics were covered: coordination and contiguity of care, Initial assessments and front door policies, psychotropic medications given to youth in foster care, Physical abuse in the foster care, Financial incentives that incentivize improper care, adversarial court processes, civil rights violations, the influence of CASA, the anonymous hotline and the reporting of erroneous allegations, problems with the abuse register, and a serious break down of trust among all parties affected.
  A grandmother who had her young grandchildren removed from her care unloaded a massive pile of  psychotropic medications that her 10 year old grandson has been on since entering foster care several years ago. Truly disturbing was the fact that her grandson had never suffered behavioral or mental illness prior to his removal. David Newell mentioned that California law requires a court order to put a child on psychotropic medications allowing parents an opportunity to seek independent evaluations for the medical care of their children in foster care.
  There was significant discussion of court processes and the serious need for families to be better served by high quality representation. Parents and professionals discussed a wide range of abuses such as: the denial of due process, parents left to defend themselves to no effect, and adversarial processes that side line parents. There have been regular reports of public defenders meeting behind closed doors with the judge and prosecutor to make decisions for families before any discussion in open court. Richard Wexler testified that studies of best practices have shown that states that provided high quality legal representation for parents accused of child neglect or abuse witnessed dramatic reductions in foster care placement by leveling the playing field.
  The room was in general agreement that these failures have broken down the trust between parents and professionals! This system that tears the family apart at the 2nd highest rate in the nation has not only broken the trust between parents and the state, trust has broken down between the branches of government and the professionals task with serving families in need. Most damaging is the shattered trust between children and parents who fall victim to the system.
  
  It will take the fortitude and commitment of parents, professionals, and government to institute the reforms necessary to begin to rebuild this broken trust and set our state on a track that will serve families in need with respect and ultimately ensure the welfare of our most vulnerable citizens, our children!
  Nebraska Family Forum readers may be interested in the side bar on the truancy law in Nebraska on page 41.  [www.nccpr.org]
  
  More... »
  
  
• Nebraska blogs (US-NE), 03/09/2012
• 22:45

  Where do we go from here?

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  The Future of the NFF...
  
  This year has been a wild ride and the serious need to amend Nebraska’s truancy law has brought together an incredible group of Nebraskans. The Nebraska Family Forum is a varied group... parents and grandparents... libertarian to liberals... religious and agnostic... with one thing in common, a passion and commitment to strengthen families by promoting policies in our state that preserve and protect parental authority and the integrity of the family.
  
  There is much work to be done in this state and we need to decide whether the NFF has filled its purpose or whether it is an organization with a mandate to continue to work to preserve family freedom. One thing is certain, if the NFF is to continue to be a force in strengthening Nebraska Families it must officially organize.
  
  The road going forward is what has been on my mind lately and I need each of you to think seriously about your passion and commitment to this cause. Are you willing to play a larger role in the NFF? How will we organize? And, What will be our mission? These are the questions I want each of you to be thinking about as we approach the March 19th organizational wide meeting.
  
  Monday, March 19, 2012
  6:30pm until 9:00pm
  
  
  Paradise Bakery
  120 Regency Pkwy Ste 156, Omaha, NE 68114-4307
  
  
  
  View Larger Map
  
  If you have been encourage by the progress of the NFF and would like to see this group organize and continue to affect policy in our state then you need to be at the meeting March 19th with your thoughts to these questions in hand. We need a BIG group on the 19th, so do what you can to be there! RSVP via email or Facebook.
  
  Facebook RSVP:
  [https:]]
  
  More... »
  
  
• Nebraska blogs (US-NE), 02/29/2012
• 18:47

  A Compromise in the Legislature

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  A compromise on the truancy bill was advanced today on the floor of the Unicameral. The compromise will remove the mandatory filing to the county attorneys of kids with excused absences! It is a significant step forward in reaching our objectives, which have been from the beginning the restoration of local control over attendance policy, and protection of kids with excused absences, while narrowing the focus on kids with unexcused absences.
  
  This compromise is just that - a compromise. It does not implement the many solid ideas presented by Sen. Fulton in LB1165 (which was not advanced out of committee), but it has broad appeal and a good chance of moving forward in the legislature.
  
  When County Attorney Don Kleine spoke to the NFF at Creighton Law School on February 15, he talked about the 900 cases referred to his office that required no action and said that there is no need to refer cases to the county attorney when all of the absences are excused under school district policy.
  
  Monday we went to the Capitol with this simple message: Children with excused absences should not fall under the jurisdiction of law enforcement and that senators should partner with Sen. Fulton to fix Nebraska's truancy law in 2012. It is essential that schools not be forced to refer these students to county attorneys when those students are working with their school districts and their absences are excused.
  
  The hard work of passionate parents and citizens who have called and written senators numerous times for weeks on end, parents whose children were adversely affected and who braved the harsh judgments of total strangers to come forward to tell their stories to the press, and the many dedicated leaders who would not give up should be proud of how their efforts have changed the discussion in Lincoln and moved the ball forward.
  
  I believe that many of the senators we spoke to Monday listened. Sen. Fulton was contacted by senators who wanted to get this law fixed and discussions of possible compromises began. This morning Sen. Fulton and Sen. Ashford met and came to a compromise that was introduced on the floor by Sen. Langemeier as AM2245. Many senators argued in favor of the changes and said that the 2010 truancy law had been an affront to parental authority and the sacred freedoms of families.
  
  The amendment essentially states that school districts are free to choose which cases they referred to county attorneys when the absences fit into the description in Ashford’s box ‘A’: “absences are due to documented illness that makes attendance impossible or impracticable or are otherwise excused by school authorities.” They are not prevented from referring these cases, but they are not required to either.
  
  At the very least this amendment would put the onus for what is excused and unexcused back on school district administrators and school boards, who are more susceptible to public pressure and democratic redress. If the districts exercise this power aggressively and it results in abuse of the law, the local districts can be held responsible by the communities who govern and fund them.
  
  The downsides are still troubling. For example, if a student has only one unexcused day but reaches the 20 day threshold, schools would still be required to refer. However, they could choose to check box 'B', which indicates that the school is working with the student. This is particularly a problem in school districts who have changed their school district attendance policies in the wake of the 2010 law.
  
  Some districts removed important grounds for legitimate excused absences expecting that the law would provide them with political cover in the face of parental pressure. In these districts even a handful of days for family travel or athletics outside the school curriculum would result in a filing at the county attorney if the overall tally reached the magic 20 day mark.
  
  Parents have long relied on rational and reasonable school district attendance policy, and the common sense discretion of school administrators, and for the most part parents across the state would agree that there were no problems to speak of with their district's attendance policies prior to 2010.
  
  In general, parents have enjoyed a positive and cooperative relationship with their building principals, who retained the most discretion over whether or not to excuse an absence. For generations, school authorities have honored the authority of parents and their role in excusing their children from school based on their own best judgment.
  
  Unfortunately, many parents have become increasingly concerned with the policy changes made by their school districts in the wake of the 2010 law. What used to seem very simple - excusing your child from school - has become an intimidating, anxiety-causing process, as the attitude of school administrators has hardened and they insist on documentation for nearly all absences, and count even worthy family travel as unexcused. Some districts have taken the law as a challenge to crack down hard on non-attendance in any form. Lincoln Public Schools has been by far the most aggressive, as they have removed nearly every grounds for excused absence barring school activities and illness.
  
  If the amended truancy law passes and these district policies are not altered to reflect the "good-old Nebraska common sense" the Governor promised would be used by school and state authorities, there will be dire consequences for families in these districts. While the Nebraska Family Forum seeks to restore local control to the state truancy statute, on the tried and true principle that government closest to the people governs best, many parents have legitimate concerns that their elected school boards will not roll back these changes. The proposed amendment only works to restore respect for parental authority if parents hold school administrators accountable, and require that they respect parental authority.
  
  One thing is certain: school boards are elected, they work for the people who elect them, and district policies cannot go into effect until school boards vote for them. School board politics are democracy at work. This process is designed to work on consensus between elected school boards, administrators, and parents; and parents are going to have to organize to make sure that reasonable distinctions for excused and unexcused absences are established in their district policies before the start of school next year.
  
  Inscribed over the main entrance of the Capitol are the words, “The Salvation of the State is Watchfulness of the Citizen.” 75 years ago, George Norris, a "New Deal Republican”, fathered a new government in Nebraska we know today as the Unicameral. He said the two-house system was outdated, inefficient and unnecessary. When skeptics raised concerns that the unicameral would not preserve appropriate checks and balances to prevent abuse of power, Norris argued that the people would serve as a check upon the possible abuse of power by their elected officials with the right to vote and petition. Norris said, “Every act of the legislature and every act of each individual must be transacted in the spotlight of publicity."
  
  This should be a sobering challenge to every Nebraskan citizen. The Unicameral is a great departure from the collective wisdom of the founding fathers and puts the full power of governing into the hands of only 49 legislators with few checks and balances to restrain it. Only with the constant vigilance of the citizens of our state can freedom be guarded. This year we have been educated in this principle and I hope it is not a lesson that will be soon forgotten, because we have many more battles to fight to restore the proper balance between the honor of parental authority and school district authority over attendance.
  
  It is hard to expect school boards to be accountable to parents when so few parents voice their opinions to their school boards, whether those opinions are positive or negative. Parents must be informed, active, and vocal in holding their school boards accountable for the policies under which they live. We elect them to protect our interests, but if their constituents do not in large numbers communicate their expectations, we shouldn’t be surprised when they don’t meet them.
  
  There is work ahead if families are to regain the rights lost by the passage of the 2010 attendance law. The NFF will continue to inform parents in our state and remind them that "Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty."
  
  More... »
  
  
• Nebraska blogs (US-NE), 02/26/2012
• 19:41

  Open Letter: Sherry Buhrmann

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  What happens when the GOALS Initiative of Douglas and Sarpy Counties, superintendents, county attorneys, sheriffs, police departments, and boards of commissioners sign their names to a MOU that affirms a belief that school attendance is the "SINGLE most important element to the student's ABILITY to learn and be successful in school and LIFE"?.... This is what happens:
  
  The economics of the government of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA sees You, the individual, who one time was a child of God with inalienable rights now as a commodity, as a “Unit”. You provide the government with taxes, use taxes, or are a combination of a user and a taker. You exist as a possession of the government. The State then determines who and what money is returned to the “Units.”
  
  How does it feel to be owned?
  
  How does it feel to be told what to do and when to do it?
  
  How does it feel to be the taxpayer for the STATE?
  
  How does it feel to be told you are not smart enough to think for yourself as you are the property and responsibility of the STATE?
  
  I am angry! I have a desire to rebel and say, I am not going to pay your taxes, follow your rules and I will take care of myself and my family. But, that is not what civilized mature people do…. So, I am stuck with my anger.
  
  I recognize the best solution is to hope that the elected officials will wake up and reduce government, stop trying to fix people, control people and return to the constitution and LIBERTY. Yet, there is little reason for me to believe this will happen as we all slide down the slippery slope of servitude.
  
  If you think I’m nuts consider:
  
  They determined that constitution guarantees you free education. That has evolved to the current Nebraska law stating that kids MUST attend school, or you will be in court if they miss over 20 days. Did you know? The Omaha Public School sends names of children and families to the County Attorney’s office once your child misses 10 days of school. This is their “Watch List!”
  
  Even now the Douglas/Sarpy County Learning Community fueled by tax dollars from both Douglas and Sarpy County have decided that a school Social Worker will make home visits to identify "at-risk" factors in children's family homes. They will discuss any need of the child related to education. So, all areas of parenting are open to discussion, bed time, meal time, meal preparation, discipline, hygiene, medical needs, study habits, etc. The social worker will be the families touch stone to creating an educable child. Parents cannot be trusted to raise kids to be taxpayers.
  
  I’m not fooled. Yes, they will profile children and families to be recipients of home visits. I believe that a large number of visits will go to homes of racial and cultural minorities. The fiscal costs of this will exceed the estimate and the costs will go up for the State. Your taxes will go up.
  
  Once upon a time people had children for the joys of life, now government views individuals as a return on their investment. Voters are on the wrong road when they ask the State to be your caretaker. Government is “Big Brother”, an entity for the powerful to get more power by making you dependent. Please someone figure out how to stop government without riots, terror, threats, etc. Please!, before I lose self-control.
  
  Sherry Buhrmann
  Gretna, NE
  
  More... »
  
  
• Nebraska blogs (US-NE), 02/25/2012
• 12:27

  Open Letter: McEntarffer Family

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  I just saw the story run on 1011 regarding, I believe, Beth Meyers?
  
  We too received a letter this week regarding our 5-year-old's absences from school this year. Two of them from related illness with doctor visits, three from a death in the family and protocol that transpired. The letter cost the city the postage, the time it took for whomever to write it, and last I checked court costs were $44.
  
  This seems like an incredible waste, and lack of foresight on behalf of the legislative and governing bodies. To run parents through some meat grinder of a system where come time for court they simply dismiss the cases when they finally use some discretion and make the right call. (as was in Ms Beth Meyers' case)
  
  How many cases have to be dismissed at the taxpayer's expense before they will realize that this needs to be either recalled or improved immensely?
  
  What are we to do when we get to the point that we are AFRAID to keep our child home during illness, etc., due to fear from possible court proceedings driven from the county attorney's office?
  
  Do we send our kids to school with the flu, fever, etc., because for me, that doesn't seem to be in the best interest of the children.
  
  I don't even want to get started on some county attorney's assertions relating to the parent's discretion on what may be an excusable absence...
  
  Ben and Michaela McEntarffer Lincoln, NE
  
  More... »
  
  
• 11:52

  Truancy or Child Neglect, Which Laws Are We Talking About?

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  ABC Channel 8 in Lincoln reported on the truancy law and interviewed Beth Meyer, who fought for 9 months in court in her daughter's “truancy” case, despite the fact that all her daughter's absences were medically excused. Her daughter has suffered significantly under the law. She has gone from an A/B student to failing. Her self-confidence has been destroyed! A child with excused absences is now considered a TRUANT under Nebraska Law! Is that acceptable to our state? It certainly is to our governor, lawmakers, educators, and law enforcement.
  
  The Nebraska Family Forum and concerned parents are asking for the legislature to amend the law so that kids with excused absences NEVER fall under the jurisdiction of law enforcement. Sen. Brad Ashford, whose legislation rewrote Nebraska truancy law in 2010, "says that’s not possible because the state needs to have safe guards in place for kids who are abused or neglected.”
  
  Now we get to the real motivation behind Nebraska's approach to truancy. How else can you justify classifying kids who play by the rules as truants? This has been the only reason the state could justify this law. There is no need to refer students with excused absences to law enforcement, unless the state intends to investigate every case in order to determine if there is some “abuse or neglect” in the home.
  
  For this reason, the NFF has called this law a gateway law, a gateway to move families into the Nebraska CPS system, and further burden a very troubled system. Nebraska takes kids from their homes at the second highest rate in the U.S., and kids have been made wards of the state using the state's new truancy law as the vehicle. Yet, Nebraska lawmakers continue to brush off the fears of parents as irrational and ask Nebraska parents to "trust the good-old Nebraska common sense of state officials".
  
  It has been the position of the NFF that the number of children who are seriously abused or neglected by the willful thwarting of their education by their parents is very small. It is so small that it is an intolerable overreach of government to cast a net over all Nebraskan families - under the guise of preventing “truancy” - and then use that law as a vehicle to discover the remote cases of abuse and neglect within families. The innocent children and families who have suffered as a result are unacceptable casualties in this effort.
  
  The issue of child neglect and abuse, and the issue of truancy as defined by the US Department of Justice (as well as Sen. Ashford’s own web page) are very different issues and should be handled in different legal ways. If a parent is willfully thwarting their child’s education in such a way that it could be defined as “child abuse or neglect”, then there are laws in place to deal with these parents. In such cases, schools already have the authority and the statutory responsibility to report parents for child abuse and neglect. It certainly is not necessary to use a “truancy law”, which deals with a totally different legal class, to root out child abuse.
  
  Nebraska can and should establish a traditional truancy law (as the vast majority of states in the US) and define truancy as “unexcused” absences. Sen. Ashford's website says, "One of the first signs that can predict a path of trouble for many youth is their absence from school (other than for parent-excused absences and illness)". The NFF agrees whole-heartedly ! So let's focus on helping those kids who are absent without excuse.
  
  If a child’s absences are excused under their own school district policy they should NEVER be referred to law enforcement for “truancy”. The media needs to get it right: “truancy” and being absent should not be the same thing in a court of law! They cannot continue to report that “truancy” is down in Nebraska since the passage of the 2010 law, while calling all children who miss twenty days of school "TRUANT" regardless of the cause. These reports feed the misconceptions about this extremely flawed law!
  
  The NFF supports a simple and common sense amendment to the law, to prevent kids with excused absences from falling under the jurisdiction of law enforcement. This is not ground-breaking radical reform. This is good-old Nebraska common sense! We ask the Legislature and the Governor to demonstrate wisdom and common sense by protecting kids with excused absences from legal investigation. We hope they will put a stop to this radical and unbending commitment to redefine “truancy” in our state, reject the attitude of mistrusting all parents, and restore the attitude of trust toward the common sense ability of parents to work with their schools.
  
  View ABC story here: [www.klkntv.com]
  
  More... »
  
  
• Nebraska blogs (US-NE), 02/23/2012
• 11:44

  Living under the eye of the law

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  I have three children, two of whom are either disabled or sick.  My oldest daughter, 11, has Asperger’s Syndrome.  She was diagnosed last year after a battery of tests performed by an experienced psychologist in Lincoln.  She also completed an intense vision therapy program and continues to have an on-going occupational therapy program.  Due to all those appointments, plus a few small sicknesses, we hit the 20 day mark sometime in April 2011.  The social worker gathered all my data and the county attorney declined to prosecute.
  
  Fast forward to this year.  This same daughter missed two full weeks of school in September after pneumonia was diagnosed later than it should have been.  She then missed another week because she caught influenza (and yes, she had been vaccinated).  Now, on top of her weekly occupational therapy appointments—only 1.5 hours missed per week—her immune system is weak and she is catching every little virus she comes across.  We are now at 23 days absence.
  In addition, my second daughter, who is 9, had been diagnosed with IBS, anxiety disorder, and, as of yesterday, vestibular migraines.  She also missed a full week of school with a kidney infection.  So now we’re somewhere around day 18 for her.
  We have clearly had an unusal fall as far as attendance goes.  And I have documented every sickness by going to the doctor and wasting their time and my insurance co-pay so I can get a note even though I know we have a migraine situation occurring.   Or my oldest has a 100.5 fever.  Or the middle one hasn’t been able to poop for two days and needs to take a load of Miralax.
  In light of all this, our school social worker, who has been exceedingly supportive and helpful with us, told me this week she is concerned that the county attorney will only see that I have one child who was “on the list” both last year and this year and another child who is joining her.   It doesn’t matter that they both are excelling in school.  It also doesn’t matter that my kindergarten-aged son has attended every school day but one. (Because I’m going to drive him 15 minutes to school each day and let the others be truant?  Really?)
  I asked if I should get an attorney at this point.  The social worker said that the first round is basically herding the parents into the courtroom and having the judge “read the riot act” to them.  Hmmm…let me think about that…NO WAY am I going to be berated by someone for following the school’s handbook and keeping my kids out of school when necessary.  I’m so frustrated.
  So I’m holding on to the rollercoaster as it nears its apex.  Bring it on.
  
  More... »
  
  
• Nebraska blogs (US-NE), 02/21/2012
• 13:27

  Children cannot possibly learn when they are missing 20 or more days

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  Parents have been contacting their senators to ask that kids with excused absences NEVER fall under the jurisdiction of law enforcement. The communication between parents and state officials is uncovering a major disconnect between what some parents believe is acceptable in the course of childhood, and what Nebraska lawmakers have determined is harmful to children.
  
  I've written earlier of comments made by Nebraska Education Commissioner Rodger Breed and other state educators who believe that there is NEVER good reason to miss school other than the occasional serious documented illness. Governor Heineman has repeatedly said that if "kids aren't in school they can't learn", and there is an assumption being made by the legislative body that kids who miss 20 days of school or more can't possibly learn!
  
  This idea, of course, is foreign to many parents of excellent students who occasionally travel during the school year with their children, have chronically sick kids who miss school often, or have children who are very involved in extra-curricular pursuits outside the school curriculum. Many students maintain excellent grades because of the things that pull them away from school from time to time and the excellent parents who make sure that excellence in school is the objective.
  
  My own honor roll student received his best marks in school the year he missed the most school. That year he missed 24.5 days of school due to a combination of ordinary sick days, family travel, and taking advantage of a unique opportunity to participate in an outdoor summer theater which started rehearsals late in May. The debate that choices like mine has caused to rage in Nebraska has been anything but civil. In the comment page of the Lincoln Journal Star, one reader made the comment that parents who travel with their kids when school is in session are "immoral"!
  
  It seems that many state officials share this belief. In response to a correspondence from a Nebraska father, who wrote senators expressing his concern that the current "truancy" law reaches too far into the lives of Nebraska families, Sen. Gwen Howard responded by expressing her sympathies for sick children but said, "I am not as sympathetic for students who hit the 20 day limit because of family vacations or other trips. Children cannot possibly learn when they are missing 20 or more days without any consequences."
  Nebraska State officials are using statistics that show a 30 point gap in standardized tests between perfect attenders and those who miss 20 or more days to support this belief and forward their agenda to put all students in this group under the jurisdiction of law enforcement. It comes as no surprise to me that this statistic is manipulated to deny the fact that among the group who miss 20 days or more, there are kids who score as well as kids with perfect attendance. By the nature of statistical data there are A, B, and C students in the mix, and the obvious question must be asked, since when is it a crime to be a C student? Are there not C students among those with near perfect attendance as well?
  My own independent research of the link between school attendance and school attainment shows that the affects of attendance on educational outcomes overall is murky. A comprehensive study done in Glasgow, Scotland, found that the connection between absence and academic performance only became striking when the students missed excessively (over 28.5 days). "In a school year of 190 days, each 1.9 days of absence above the average of 28.5 days decreased the total of the English and mathematics grades gained by pupils by only 0.1 of a grade". Not earth-shattering!
  
  The faultiness of connecting educational outcomes so directly to school attendance was demonstrated in this same study when they found that that “25% of pupils who gained a grade 1 (A) in mathematics had a record of absence for more than 5.2% in one year, whereas 25% of those getting a grade 7 (Failing) were absent for less time than this, 4.8%. Even more striking was that generally, a quarter of all pupils getting low grades (5, 6 and 7) in mathematics did not miss a single day’s schooling and were model pupils in this respect.”
  
  Certainly there is data in numerous studies that shows a link between attendance and grades, but it is important that we not make the mistake of concluding that correlation is causation. Researchers across the nation have been careful to point out that low academic achievement could just as well cause, truancy as be one of its effects.
  
  Studies aside, it is evident is that the Nebraska school attendance law is an effort to reshape a parenting paradigm that has long accepted that parents have a natural right to make such judgments on behalf of their children. The law bypasses local school district policy, which in many cases excuses absences related to "family travel" and honors a parent's natural right to make these judgments. It requires schools to ignore their own school district policies and refer all students to law enforcement at 20 days of absence, regardless of the individual circumstances of the student and family.
  The Nebraska Family Forum has asked for a simple, common sense fix to the law. Allow local school districts to craft attendance policy with the aid of elected school boards and the input of the communities who fund and govern them; and honor that policy by ensuring that kids whose absences are excused by school authorities NEVER fall under the jurisdiction of law enforcement for truancy.
  I would ask those who support Nebraska's current "truancy" law, which is more "immoral"? To usurp the natural rights and responsibilities of ALL Nebraska parents in order to have oversight in every case that may lead to delinquent behavior, OR to allow parents to choose whether or not it is appropriate for their child to participate in club sports, take a ski trip, or stay home an extra day to recover from the flu?
  
  More... »
  
  
• 11:41

  Sen. Ashford's Truancy Fix Falls Short of Parents Expectations

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  Press Release
  
  It is not the intent of Nebraska truancy law to cause heart ache for families whose children are sick or otherwise excused.
  
  Parents ask, why then do children with excused absences need to be referred to law enforcement and fall under the jurisdiction of county attorneys?
  
  Omaha, NE, February 21, 2012: Nebraska lawmakers and state officials have repeatedly said that it is not the intent of Nebraska’s truancy law to cause heartache for families whose children are sick or otherwise excused by school authorities. If state leaders are sincere in this assertion, I hope they will consider stories like this one from Millard mother, Martha Myles - a story that must be told!
  
  Martha’s daughter entered Douglas County “truancy diversion” last year, despite the fact that her absences were due to serious illness. Martha felt pressured into the "voluntary" “truancy diversion” as her only option to avoid court proceedings. Their personal lives were probed and Martha and her daughter felt violated by the whole process. Martha has been working with doctors for years to diagnose what causes her daughter’s severe migraines and other related illnesses. She and her daughter have endured the added stress of being under the constant scrutiny and monitoring of law enforcement for the “excessive absenteeism” of her daughter.
  
  At last week’s Truancy Q&A with Douglas County Attorney Don Kleine, hosted by the Nebraska Family Forum, was told by Mr. Kleine that her experiences were due to inadequate staff and resources to deal with an overload of truancy cases last year. Whatever the reason for her daughter falling into the net meant to catch “truant” kids, she has been informed this week that her daughter will again be referred to the county attorney. (Read Martha’s Story here: [www.nebraskafamilyforum.org] )
  
  At the Truancy Q&A hosted by the Nebraska Family Forum, Douglas County Attorney Don Kleine agreed with the idea that kids whose absences are excused should not have their names referred to his office for further investigation. Don Kleine is one of the many public officials who have promised that they have not taken – and will not take - action against students whose absences are excused to the satisfaction of school district policy. If it is true that state officials have no intention of proceeding in any case where the student’s absences are excused, then there is no need require a referral at 20 days in these cases, and the law should be amended to reflect that reality.
  
  For this reason, parents associated with the Nebraska Family Forum continue to support an amendment that would ensure that students with excused absences NEVER fall under the jurisdiction of law enforcement. However, LB933 - the truancy fix being worked on by Sen. Ashford and the Judiciary Committee - still requires these cases be reviewed by county attorneys. Hopefully, Sen. Ashford and his committee will see the need to improve LB933, to prevent students like Martha Myles daughter from ever being referred to the county attorney. It is the position of the Nebraska Family Forum, which has worked closely with families affected by the law, that students whose absences are excused under school district policy should NEVER be referred to law enforcement.
  
  More... »
  
  
• Nebraska blogs (US-NE), 02/18/2012
• 09:35

  Open Letter: Mike Horton

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  written by: Mike Horton of Elkhorn, NE
  The more I hear from everyone, the more I wonder if the problem goes beyond the unfortunate intrusiveness of the law and legislators' beliefs that they know best, and has exposed another even more subtle, yet insidious agenda on the part of public education. If one talks to teachers, and I have, they seem far less enthusiastic in their support for this law. 
  Every administrator I have talked to or heard comment on it, thinks this is the best thing since dry erase boards. One must ask the question "Why?" All we hear, and what was reinforced continually when I was a public school teacher, what is best for the students should be the goal. How does removing the distinction between an excused and unexcused absence do that? 
  I would think that the school districts would hate being restricted in this way. So logically, there must be a reason that they support this. Despite what they say about kids needing to be in school and how important that is for test scores, etc., this somehow feels disingenuous. I come back to the question as to what would happen if my daughter decided to quit doing any work, and actively decided to fail all her classes. Would the school report me to the authorities? If so, on what bases? As far as I know we do not have any legislative mandate on minimum performance, but is that the next step? 
  I contend that nothing would happen other than the school would fall back to whatever prescribed protocol they have for students who fail. In discussing this with teachers across the greater Omaha area whom I am acquainted with, I have heard agreement with my belief that the education community's complete lack of support on this issue is the result of financial motivations. 
  If this is not the case, I challenge Dr. Breed or any other school district's superintendent to justify to me how having a law designed to assist children with issues that have a negative impact on attendance and or academic performance is served one iota by punishing a single child who doesn't fall into the aforementioned group. How does distinguishing excused from unexcused prevent the authorities from assisting the population intended? 
  If they want to trot out "Parents are lying to the schools" argument, I then challenge them to prove that. Anyone actually think they can do that? And let's say for the sake of the argument that they can. Would not discovered instances of this be then classified as non-excused? The authorities could then take whatever appropriate action is reasonable and prudent. If this is truly about "Truancy" then let's adopt a strict law. 
  Personally, as a former teacher, if a child has more than 5-10 UNEXCUSED absences in a school year, is not performing adequately academically, and or there is a lack of cooperation and communication from the parents, then intervention is probably warranted. If those conditions are not present, however, then what is the schools' concern? In closing, this situation seem to be similar to organized public education's lack of support for teacher accountability and or school choice. 
  I can not speak for other school districts, but I can attest that in Elkhorn, if you try to deviate from their prescribed methodology, you are fought every step of the way and in some cases may find yourself in a more adversarial relationship with your children's educators instead of a cooperative one.
  
  More... »
  
  
• Nebraska blogs (US-NE), 02/16/2012
• 08:22

  Should kids with excused absences be referred to the county attorney?

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  KETV Reports:
  
  "Kleine said that Douglas County school districts referred 3,000 students to his office for missing more than 20 days last year. Of those, Kleine said 900 cases were dropped." The NFF asks why do those 900 cases need to be jamming up the legal system at all?
  
  Kleine, Ashford, and many other state officials have emphatically said that when a child's absences are excused they have no intention of intervening. The NFF asks, if that is the case then why is it necessary to refer students with excused absences to the county attorney at all?
  
  Read more: [www.ketv.com]
  [www.ketv.com]
  
  More... »
  
  
• 08:12

  "Never, Never, Never Give UP" ~ Winston Chruchill

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  Omaha World Herald reports LB933 to move out of committee.
  Many of you may be very discouraged by the advancement of Ashford's truancy bill because it still requires that students who miss 20 days for any reason still be referred to the county attorney.
  
  I want to tell you a story. I tell you this story to help you understand that this is not the end of this process and that the very fact that some truancy bill came out of committee means that the conversation continues and that is a good thing.
  
  The Story:
  
  In 2011, LB 463 would have allowed schools to refer any student who missed 10 days to the GOALS team, even if those days were excused, and we worked very hard to have that changed so that those being referred to the GOALS team were only students with UNexcused absences. We testified at the committee hearing, but the bill moved on without that important change. We did not stop, and two days before its second floor vote Ashford added the change that ensured that only kids with unexcused absences would be referred to the GOALS team.
  
  I tell you this story because LB 463 changed a great deal from the beginning to the end. Its final passage is what counts. Were we able to stop it all together? NO. But we made important changes that helped protect kids from even more government over-reach.
  
  We are not done! This is not over, now the subject of "truancy" and changing the law continues for months while it is debated and amendments are offered and so on. There are still opportunities to get the fixes we're working for. So don't lose hope! Just keep working!
  
  "Never, Never, Never Give Up" ~ Winston Chruchill
  
  
  
  More... »
  
  
• Nebraska blogs (US-NE), 02/15/2012
• 23:41

  Open Letter: Chad Lehmer

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  First and foremost, I am a sinner who has been saved by grace, I am a Christian.
  
  1st Timothy 1:15. "This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief."
  
  I start with the above statement and verse, because my beliefs are predicated on my deep and abiding love of Jesus Christ, albeit a sinner. In my family this means that God has given us our children to raise according to his will, not ours (however He has given us the tools to do so) and definitely not the will of the state.
  
  I don’t pretend to know or have all the answers, I do have opinions and it is my opinion “the state” does NOT have the answer.
  
  I have fundamental constitutional rights to decide what is best for and how to raise my children according to my beliefs!
  
  I’ve read many stories on the NFPF website/blog page and they both sadden and enrage me. I’ve started and stopped writing this letter many times; I feel that many have stories that need to be told more than mine. However it is also important, I believe, for everyone to know where I am coming from.
  
  During the 2009/2010 (do you remember that year, I’ll give you a hint, swine flu) school year I became immediately aware of the “truancy” law, one of my five children had missed fifteen days of school, due to “un-documented” illnesses, that’s right, UN-DOCUMENTED, I did not take my child to the doctor just because he was ill. I do not take my children to the doctor for every little thing, I’m confident I can pull a splinter out of my child’s finger, I’m confident that I can deal with various cuts and bruises and I AM confident I can decide when an illness requires medical attention.
  I’ve deviated, my apologies, I received a letter from the truancy office, whose name escapes me at the moment; I really need to find that letter; the letter told I needed to appear before the truancy office to explain my child’s absences. My thought was “Why, I’ve called my child in sick for all the days my child was sick”. The letter gave me a date and time to show up, if I recall correctly, I believe it said something about referral to the CA should my child miss five more days of school. This upset me greatly. 
  There was no way I was going to take a vacation day from work just to show up to a meeting that I was not comfortable with, not to mention the fact that the time of day would require me to pull my other two children out of school, making them absent, to go to the meeting. To finish up my truancy story (if I tried to write it all out I would probably end up with a novel), I called the truancy officer, ready to unload on him, I must admit he was quite calm about the matter, which calmed me down greatly (this was to my benefit), I told him that I would not be able to make to the meeting and asked if this call would suffice.
  After some going back and forth and telling him that my other kids would be absent if I had to go, he agreed that the call would suffice, but not until after he threatened me with being reported to the CA, if my child missed five more days of school, I scoffed at that statement and told him to bring it on, I will gladly argue my case in front the CA or any judge for that matter. At any rate the matter was settled I did not have to meet with the truancy officer (with my child). That is pretty much were my story ends, my child did not miss an additional five days of school and we were not forced into arguing with the CA or any of that, thank the Lord! 
  I am dedicating this paragraph to a single comment made by the truancy officer. The gist of the comment was, not quoted verbatim: “It is the schools job to teach the kids about responsibility and work ethic, they need to be taught that in the real world, when they have a job, they will not be able to just take a day off whenever they want, even if they are sick”. UM, NO! THE SCHOOLS JOB IS TO TEACH! (I.e. Math, English, spelling, etc.). That comment absolutely got my blood boiling and I laid into the truancy officer on that one. I don’t know about you, but when I look for a job (assuming you don’t need one immediately, then you take what you can get), I don’t look for the one that is going to give me the least amount of perks, one day of vacation, one day of sick time, no paid holidays, etc. I told the truancy officer a little about my current job and what kind of perks I get. He tried to back me into a corner, by saying something to the effect of, “Well you can’t just use those anytime you want to, you have to have some sort of advanced notice.” Again, WRONG, I can pretty much use my company given time anytime I want, he backed off. 
  OK, sorry for that rant, again the truancy office was trying to make the case that somebody has to teach the kids work ethic, and was trying to sell the idea that it was the schools responsibility. In my opinion, this goes to show you the overall mindset of our public school system, however it does not stop there, this is in general the mindset of our government officials as well, and we can see this in Senator Ashford and others. 
  I will finish up with a few more comments; lately we’ve seen more media attention drawn to our plight. Along with this (as we can see on the OWH website) brings some crazy opinions out of people. How can you call me a bad parent, because I’m ok with my child’s excused non-truant absence, whether for being sick or any other matter I believe is in my child's best interest? I take personal offense to that, even though most of these comments are made about other parents, who have far worst situations than I. This has nothing to do with teaching children responsibility; it has everything to do with parental freedom and religious freedom.
  
  Why is a parent referred to as a deadbeat, when they keep their parenting responsibility instead of giving it to the state?
  
  What happens when “they” try to take something away that you care deeply about?
  
  What will you do when they come after your children?
  Chad LehmerOmaha, NE
  
  More... »
  
  
• 00:33

  Kylie Jackson's Committee Testimony: Feb 13, 2012

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  TESTIMONY FOR THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
  NEBRASKA LEGISTLATURE
  FEBRUARY 13, 2012
  LB1165-PROPONENT
  
  Hello senators, my name is Kylie Jackson. I am 12 years old in 6th grade at Pawnee Elementary School in Omaha. I am here to read my statement in support of Senator Tony Fulton’s bill, LB1165. In order to be here today, I am absent, not truant even thought this law wants to label me that way. I don’t like that label pinned on my name.
  
  
  I’m a great student. I behave like I am supposed to, I pay attention in class, and I finish and turn in all of my assignments on time every day, and if I was sick my mom would always call the school office and ask them to get my work for the day so I wasn’t behind when I came back to school. I am here today getting an educational experience I couldn’t get in my class at my school. During last school year, I received 2 once-in-a-lifetime opportunities. 
  In February, I got to go to Kennedy Space Center to see one of NASA’s last space shuttle launches. That was very important to me because I want to be an astronaut when I grow up. My mom and I tried really hard to see a launch, but this was the first and only time we were fortunate enough to. I missed 8 days of school on that trip. I learned a lot about the space program and the history of the space shuttle. 
  Then in April, I got to go the Bahamas for a family reunion for my Dad’s side of my family. There I met new relatives who I didn’t even know existed. We went on a bus tour and learned about the history and culture of the Bahamas. I even got to swim with the dolphins, which is something I will never forget. I missed another 4 days. 
  When I went to Florida, all of the work I would be missing was made up before I left. My teacher even gave me a fun project to do while I was there. She didn’t give me any work to do when I went to the Bahamas in April because I was so far ahead of my class. I didn’t just go on these trips for fun, I went for an experience I couldn’t get in my classroom. 
  I was absent a total of 12 days by then. I was sick quite a few days last year and I was bullied frequently. By the end of April, I’d been gone 20 days. Then I missed one more day because I was sick again. That got me up to a grand total of 21 days missed by the end of my 2010-2011, fifth grade year. 
  Even through my strep throat and sinus infections, staying home for getting bullied, and my trips, I had spectacular grades. I was on the 2nd Honors (A-B) Honor Roll for 3 quarters and 1st (all-A) Honor Roll for one. In June, my mom got a letter in the mail from the Sarpy County Attorney AFTER school was over and done with. The letter said that my attendance would be monitored. Monitored? That put me under the impression that I did something terribly wrong and I wasn’t allowed to miss any school days in my 6th grade year. 
  I started feeling nervous when I started missing school because I was sick. I’ve already missed 4 ½ days this year, and I am missing today for this. My older sister got married in Hawaii this past November, and I was unable to go. That’s wrong. I shouldn’t have had to miss my own sister’s wedding because of this law and its possible consequences on my family and me. How would you feel if you were in this situation? That disappointed my whole family. This law can’t simply define kids like me. I’m not going to have a horrible life when I grow up because I was occasionally absent from school. I’ve learned a lot while my seat has been vacant and my chair at school is cold, but the things I’ve learned on my travels were things I NEVER could have learned while sitting in my seat at class.
  
  More... »
  
  
• Nebraska blogs (US-NE), 02/14/2012
• 18:19

  [nt]

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  
  
  
  More... »
  
  
• 18:06

  The Media Covers Truancy Hearings Extensively!

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  The Impact of Yesterday’s Legislative Hearing
  
  This morning I awoke to a hurricane of emotions swirling on the NFF Facebook group, my inbox was full and my phone exploding with text messages from angry despondent parents who hung their hopes on yesterday’s committee hearing. For those families who came prepared to give their three minute testimonies the experience has been discouraging and infuriating. Instead of feeling like their government heard them and is listening they went away with even less confidence in the political process. I have been concerned by a hopelessness in the words of so many.
  
  For a year I been working to engage families impacted by Nebraska’s truancy law in the political process and I was proud to see so many of you come to the hearing despite the bad whether, sit through 4 hours of discouraging testimony by Nebraska “experts” who see no problem with addressing truancy in this way. I know how discouraging it can be, believe me, it is emotionally draining and often you are left feeling the overwhelming desire to give up.
  
  Whatever the intent behind Sen. Ashford’s chosen format yesterday, today it has been fuel to the fire, that no one can control. It has widened the gap between concerned parents and the committee tasked with fixing this law. The conversations I have had with Sen. Ashford, his LA Stacey Conroy, and others on the committee, they have expressed a desire to work out a solution that will protect innocent children. I believe we want the same thing, a solution, and I believe we can get it.
  
  I know it is hard, but don’t give up, don’t be discouraged! We need to be positive and continue to make our case to the media, lawmakers, and the Governor. We’ve come further than anyone expected a year ago. Last year when I first sat down with Sen. Fulton he said that it was going to be a Goliath effort. We were looking at turning around an entire government stubbornly holding to their idea as the best solution to addressing some areas of serious concern. Every state official who has been active in this effort has recommended no changes be made to the law, and yet Sen. Ashford has three bills on his desk to consider, including his own.
  
  It may be a Goliath effort, but remember that David took down Goliath with a small stone. Have faith the mountain can be moved and never give up. This is no defeat, this is not a failure! It is an extraordinary feat. We have gone from news coverage that was dismissive of parents' concerns, to news coverage that is effectively communicating those concerns, and telling the personal stories that underlie them.
  
  Here are the news stories that have come out of the hearing yesterday. You should be proud of your efforts!! Let’s keep it up. Come to the Q&A tomorrow and show the media that people want this fixed and keep the pressure on!!
  
  Lincoln Journal Star
  [journalstar.com]
  
  Omaha World-Herald
  [www.omaha.com]
  
  North Platte Bulletin
  [www.northplattebulletin.com]
  
  North Platte Bulletin - Letter From Brenda Vosik
  [www.northplattebulletin.com]
  
  KETV Channel 7 - Omaha
  [www.ketv.com]
  
  1011now.com
  [www.1011now.com]
  
  KLKN TV (ABC in Lincoln)
  [www.klkntv.com]
  
  KMTV, Channel 3 (Omaha)
  [www.kmtv.com]
  
  And Stephanie's interview with Scott Voorhees
  [www.kfab.com]
  
  More... »
  
  
• 16:07

  Testimony before the Judiciary Committee 2/13/12

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}

  My name is Brenda Vosik. I live at 1422 So. 158^th Circle in Omaha, in the Millard School District. I am speaking in opposition to LB917, which amends LB800 by carving out special protections for only two groups.

  Nebraska’s excessive absenteeism law needs to be changed, and quickly, as many innocent, non-truant, children are suffering under it. However, LB 917 does not provide the protections these innocent children need while still pursuing students who are really truant, which means “absent without permission.” While protecting children with serious documented illnesses and those visiting with a parent returning from deployment is a laudable goal, it doesn’t prevent many other non-truant students from falling into the clutches of law enforcement unnecessarily.

  It seems that what parents know for a fact – but public officials are choosing to ignore – is that there are many legitimate reasons to be absent from school. Children in our state who are absent for good reasons, with their parents’ permission, are regarded as truants under our current law and would still be targeted under LB917. Here are a few real-life examples from Nebraska families.

  Students attending funerals are not protected under our current law or under this amendment, LB917. Many of you may remember the tragic automobile accident that killed an Omaha South High School teacher in November 2010. After his wife’s death and funeral, the teacher’s widower received a letter warning that his eighth grade daughter was excessively absent and threatening action by the County Attorney. Those days missed for her mother’s funeral were counted towards this child’s “truancy tally.” I think we can all agree that is terribly wrong. Under our current law, this child was not protected from legal action for attending her own mother’s funeral, and she wouldn’t be protected under LB917.

  A group of talented young Omaha dancers was selected to perform in the Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade. It was on the front page of the Omaha World-Herald. They had to miss three days of school to participate—three days that count toward their “truancy tally.” These girls were clearly not truant but were treated as such under our current law. LB917 would not change that. Nebraska Education Commissioner Roger Breed, speaking to this very committee in December, stated that students like these young ladies, students who aspire to high-level athletics or other exceptional achievements, cause a “resource issue” for our schools; in other words, their success is a problem rather than a source of pride for our state. I’m afraid we won’t need to worry about this “problem” for long. It will eventually solve itself as our highest-achieving students and athletes move to other states that treat them with respect instead of as truants.

  An honors student from Lincoln High School responded to the earthquake in Haiti by attending a weeklong national youth service trip to help build sustainable housing for 40 displaced Haitian families. This young lady is not running around committing crimes, doomed to a life of failure because she was absent for a week. In fact, she is here today and she is still an honors student with a 3.82 GPA and 12^th in her class of 357. This is another of Nebraska’s “resource problems” who, according to our law, should have been seated at her school desk instead of helping her fellow human beings that week. Something tells me our Creator would disagree with that position. This young lady is clearly not truant, but is regarded as such under our current law. LB917 would not change that.

  A young man earned a perfect 36 on his ACT. He took two days off of school to visit an Ivy League college. Based on our current law, there is no excuse for that and those two days count toward his “truancy tally”. What is this telling our highest achieving students? Perhaps the message is that Nebraska students can now only aspire to their local community college, under threat of legal action. Is that really the message we want to send? This young man was clearly not truant, but is regarded as such under our current law. LB917 would not change that.

  Every day, hundreds of students across Nebraska have bad colds or flu, they run low grade fevers, they are vomiting. Per school policy and common sense, they are supposed to stay home; many are even sent home by the school nurse. Isn’t it ironic that even when children are sent home by the school nurse with minor ailments such as colds and flu, fevers, rashes, head lice and pink eye, their absences are counted toward their “truancy tally”? Actually, it’s more than ironic, it’s ridiculous, it’s appalling, and I would find it hard to believe if it wasn’t happening every day to people I personally know. Many parents, including me, are now sending their children to school with these ailments, against their better judgment, against the advice of their family doctors, and contrary to the pleadings of school nurses. In some of the Millard Public Schools, small children who go to the school nurse complaining of illness are told how many days they’ve missed, and are pressured to “tough it out” and stay at school. At Beadle Middle School, a young lady was kept at school in spite of the nurse finding lice on her head, although her sister was sent home because of the same issue. Why? This girl had pneumonia the week before and the school wouldn’t allow her to miss any more days because of the truancy law. She was told to go back to class and not touch anyone. As a parent of a public school child, this is not o.k. with me and I’m sure it wasn’t o.k. with the dozens of other parents whose children were exposed to those lice—all because of our ridiculous truancy law. It’s frightening that until children with these minor illnesses are protected from legal action, parents will continue to send them to school, putting their own health and the public health in jeopardy. These children are clearly not truant, but our law treats them as such. Amendment 917 does not change this.

  Our one-size-fits-all definition of truancy substitutes the irrational judgment of the state in place of the common sense of the parent. Since when is the state a better parent than I am? What arrogance for the state to tell me, and my family’s doctor, when it’s best for my child to stay home.
  

  Although the new excessive absenteeism law desperately needs to be changed, LB 917 is not the way to do it. Instead of casting a wide net over every family in Nebraska and then carving out tiny little exceptions, let’s fix the entire law and fix it right by returning to the true definition of truancy: absent without permission.

  
  
  More... »
  
  
• 14:46

  Kids Scared of Being Taken From Their Parents over Truancy

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  I am 15 years old and I have been sick because of these stomach problems I have had since I was in the fourth grade. I am now a freshman in high school. I have missed 20 days of school due to these stomach issues I am on honor roll at Central High and I am a honors student. My stomach issues were never diagnosed but the still keep happening some doctors say its what I'm eating or its just stress. I don't know what to do or even if a court will believe my story because we don't have any doctors notes or anything like that on file. My parents are worried I'll be put into a foster home because my mom misses a lot of work to be home with me and that also looks bad.
  ~ I'm sick, but in Nebraska I'm "TRUANT"
  
  More... »
  
  
• 13:51

  Truancy Bill Under Revision - by KLKN TV in Lincoln

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  Nebraska's new truancy law is receiving increasing media attention, as the stories of the families affected by it increase in number and variety. Yesterday's Judiciary Committee hearing for LB 1165, LB 917 and LB 933 drew the attention of many media outlets. This TV news story highlights the concerns of NFF member Christine Bates and her daughter, Dominique.
  
  More... »
  
  
• Nebraska blogs (US-NE), 02/13/2012
• 23:14

  State Authorities Press for Access to the Private Medical Records of Minors: Is HIPPAA Violated?

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  This mother shares her experience with the shifting attitudes of school authorities related to school attendance since the passage of the 2010 school attendance law. The story demonstrates the very dangerous effects on parental authority and the integrity of families when the state constructs policies and procedures that do not honor the natural God-given rights of parents to care for and judge what is best for their children. This mother would prefer to remain anonymous because of fear of retaliation against her by school and state authorities. 
  I am a retired widow with a B.S., B.A., B.S.E. and 16 years experience in teaching in the public schools with an "A+" evaluation for effective teaching, and my sons mother. Despite this my judgment to care for my own child has been under scrutiny because of Nebraska's truancy law. My son needs medical care supervised by his own doctors of my and his choosing without government interference or scrutiny. When I hospitalized him several times in 2009 to 2010 and took him out of school for doctor appointments, I was called into a meeting at his school and received letters from the school district and a phone call from the school social worker requiring me to defend my actions.
  
  I was threatened with the possibility of having his medical care removed from my ability as his parent to make medical choices for him based on my knowledge as his mother of his needs according to his doctors. I was told that I had better mend my ways or I would find myself in the county attorney's office and possibly in court. I was rudely told I needed to support my son's education and to stop trying to interfere with it. I do not need to be threatened with losing my parental rights and removal of my child from my home because I am following the direction that his doctors have recommended. Parents, of course, want educated children. To accuse any parent with medical needs children of not wanting educated children is ridiculous but that is what is happening due to this flawed law.
  
  We do not need school personnel and the court system looking over private medical records and deciding if doctors and parental choices are the correct choices for students because these choices were/are taking students out of school more than 10- 20 days in a semester/year. I believe the current truancy Nebraska law that is requiring any parent to defend their family by turning over medical records for the purpose of governmental evaluation or face the disruption of their family is an invasion of privacy and is a direct violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. My son has a right to privacy. I will not state his diagnosis here because I believe in the right to privacy of medical records. His medical records did and do support his need to be absent from school at that time. I should not be threatened with having to pay legal fees/take action to defend him. All the school should have needed is/was a medical note they received from his doctor(s) verifying he was absent for medical care and that should be the end of it
  
  Parents of medical needs children are not having their needs fully met in public schools in Nebraska. Parent are being told they do not know what their kids need, are not knowledgeable enough to make decisions or lack the education to understand the needs of their student so the government needs to take over. In a State with one of the worst child foster care records in the entire United States, the threat of government interference is horrifying...so I removed him from public government scrutiny by taking him out of public school and placing him in private school.
  
  I responded to these threats, that the doctor's opinion and my opinion of my son's needs were possibly incorrect and possibly needed the supervision of the government and school officials under the direction of the county attorney, by my choice to remove him from this high school who threatened and bullied us. His medical needs and educational needs are now met in a private school setting without the government interfering with our family choices. His previous high school now can show his "truancy" improved because he is no longer counted because he is no longer there. So what are the statistics on truancy actually showing?. How many kids are being removed from the public school system at additional expense to their family so their families can protect them and their medical record privacy from their own government. How many families do not have the resources to make the choice I felt forced to make? Is this the America we want?
  
  He is lucky to have enough family/medical support so he can attend private classes. He is expecting to graduate from high school with approximately a "B" average but the threats by the government to his family should have never happened.
  
  
  
  More... »
  
  
• 21:21

  Forced Seat Time vs. Quality School Time

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  The active and concerned mother who wrote this experience did not identify herself or daughter by name. Please understand that parents fear that their student will be retaliated against if they make their objections public. This is just one more sad fact of the contentious nature of the law.
  
  I was told by the attendance clerk, in the district where my daughter was enrolled, that when the school pulls students out of class for school activities like field trips, band trips, athletics and other activities it is counted by the school district toward the 20 day maximum absences allowed in one year. Therefore, my daughter must now be concerned about participating in too many school activities/sporting activities that pull her out of her regular classes. If she does too many school activities she could end up with not enough "forced seat time" in her regular classes and be over the 20 day maximum and be reported to the county attorney for too many "excused" absences.
  
  She knows she has to watch out for too many excused absences because she got a letter last year that she took very seriously. While we were told not to worry, she did not want to take the chance of missing another day of school to explain her active lifestyle to the county attorney. My daughter didn't even attend her granduncle's funeral this past month and has dropped out of her high school sport because of fear of being drawn into the county court system for excessive absences for family funerals and excused school activities. It would have been her 5th family funeral over the past 4 years. She is only 16. She should not have to worry about the government affecting her personal liberty to attend these events.
  
  She is but one of thousands of school kids in this situation. Good kids should not be punished for "excessive absences" because they want to experience as many school activities and sports as their teachers and grades might support. Students are then effectively being told to participate in school/athletics but watch out not to too participate too much. Is this the true intent of the law passed by Nebraska lawmakers?
  
  There needs to be an exclusion in the truancy law for excused school sponsored activities/club sporting activities for kids who are getting a 3.0 or better and being successful in school. Her teachers have effectively allowed her to do work on the Internet - like a home school student - and attend to her schoolwork after or before school to get all work done to make up for missed "forced seat time". Given her weighted 4.4 GPA, I believe she is being effectively educated and that a combination of "quality school time" and her teacher's assignments done on the internet that make up for any "forced seat time".
  
  She does a club sport and sometimes misses school to compete and attend specialized camps in her sport. She is highly likely to compete this sport in college and get a scholarship for competing it. She holds 7 other AAU All American titles and over a dozen national championships medals in the various the club sports she has competed. She is typical of our Nebraska teens.
  
  Excused school field trips and athletic activities are as valuable as "forced seat time" in a classroom as long as regular classroom class material as long as academic indicators demonstrate that the material is being learned. Therefore, excused school field trips and athletic activities should not be counted in the 20 day maximum of days out of school. She should be allowed to feel that she could participate in her school/athletic activities without risking being reported to the county attorney as an excused "excessively absent" student. A truant!
  
  We ask that the law be altered to allow good students access to all their school and club sports have to offer. She only has 4 years to enjoy high school. She will never get another chance to enjoy all her excellent school has to offer, so naturally she wants to take advantage of as many school activities and classes as she might be qualified for given her AP gifted honors school schedule.
  
  Nebraska has many talented students and she is but one of the many thousands of gifted students/kids in Nebraska. Let them participate in all that our great Nebraska schools have to offer in "quality school time" instead of "forced seat time."
  ~ Active Nebraska Mom
  
  More... »
  
  
• 20:54

  Lawmakers Hear Concerns Over Truancy Law - Video - KETV Omaha

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  Watch News Cast here:
  Lawmakers Hear Concerns Over Truancy Law - Video - KETV Omaha
  
  We certainly don't have to go back to the way things were before the 2010 school attendance law to see that it is fixed going forward. Action 3 reports that Nebraska Truancy Law may have "worked too well", in the words of Sen. Brad Ashford. That is a crafty political take on it. The most solid fix for the law is the bill Sen. Tony Fulton introduced his bill, LB1165, to the Judiciary Committee today in Lincoln.
  
  This bill is a strong, clear truancy statute that designates appropriate control over attendance policy to school districts, and the communities who fund and govern them. There is a clear point of legal intervention which provides essential protections to the innocent, but does not cripple the ability of schools to expose serious educational neglect. It empowers legal authorities to reach truant students early while ensuring that children with excused absences will never be punished under the law.
  
  If the Fulton’s bill is adopted by Sen. Ashford he will have established a law that is just, known, and predictable; a law that places appropriate restraints on government and will prevent the arbitrary use and abuse of power.
  
  More... »
  
  
• 20:48

  Parents, Students Head to the Capitol

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  Watch the News Cast here:
  Parents, Students Head to the Capitol
  
  Action 3 News reports that Nebraska Truancy Law may have "worked too well", says Sen. Brad Ashford, after hearing the first hand experiences of innocent kids and families caught in the net. Sen. Tony Fulton introduced his bill, LB1165, to the Judiciary Committee today in Lincoln. The only bill offered that will restore local control to school district policies to define excused and unexcused absences for purposes of preventing innocent students from coming under legal review.
  The Fulton bill will restore the distinction between excused and unexcused absences as an important indicator of "at-risk" behavior. The law will provide a more targeted, well defined, and predictable trigger for legal intervention. It will restore local control to school districts and the families and communities that govern and fund them. It treats excessive absenteeism and truancy as separate issues that should be addressed in different ways.
  
  More... »
  
  
• Nebraska blogs (US-NE), 02/09/2012
• 23:37

  The Costello Family

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  My son is 8 and attends his neighborhood school in the general education classroom in Millard. He has Down Syndrome, reflux and an immune dieficiency that requires weekly infusions. Even with the infusions he gets sick easily. Last year (2010/2011) he was diagnosed with celiac disease. Hashimoto’s thyroiditis, and had two penile surgical procedures. He has a low base temperature so if he reaches 99.3, the school is required to send him home. Additionally, his cousin committed suicide and he missed school to attend the funeral.
  
  
  Everytime I got the letter, my blood boiled and added to our family anxiety. (My husband also lost his job during this time and my 80 yr old mother collapsed and was hospitalized after my nephew’s death) We had excellent support from our school and the social worker. She told us the school sends a letter with their recommendation, and she assured me that it should help. We received a letter in September, after the kids were back in school, from the DA that our case would not be pursued.
  
  Now Ethan has several specialists he sees that require us to leave school for appts. He had undiagnosed mono for most of the first semester. He was often tardy because if he has a bad night of sleep we let him sleep in or his day at school is unproductive. He must wait 30 min after taking his first pill of the day before he can eat, so we cannot rush his morning. The earlier start is also hard for us. His sleep apnea was also diagnosed this year, to and he has been sicker than usual even with the infusions. His immunologist also believes his body is not tolerating his current medication, causing extreme fatigue, so we have taken him off and hope antibiotics will control his expected infections without hospitalization.
  
  I don’t know how much his obvious disability played into our experience. I will say that our experience was better than most, although we did experience stress. In reading the other stories, it sounds like the schools were not supporting the people much either. Our social worker told us she believes their recommendation carries a lot of weight. Perhaps part of the problem is with schools that fail to look outside the box and support special needs.
  
  Even with the positive outcome last year, I stress about his truancy this year. My Ethan has already missed more than 15 days, and I send him to school when my gut tells me I should keep him home The school and the social worker tell me not to worry, but it’s always possible the Court will decide to investigate my case. I think about the time and money spent on a case that is obviously going to continue.
  
  Mary Costello
  Mom to Ethan
  Millard Public Schools
  Omaha, NE
  
  More... »
  
  
• Nebraska blogs (US-NE), 02/08/2012
• 19:10

  Parents Fight Back

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  Action 3 news reporter, Sarah Te Slaa, quoted Douglas County Attorney, Don Kleine, who said that he has not - and will not - take families to court who have legitimate excuses. He said "NO sick children have been prosecuted" in Douglas County. Sarah Te Slaa reports that despite this assertion every student is "investigated" when they miss 20 days regardless of the reason. Gwenn Woomer Aspen, said that "Parents know what's right for their own children!" While it may be true that no families of sick kids have been convicted of truancy under the law, it is certainly untrue that these families have not been pursued by law enforcement. Send your feedback to Action 3 news at: feedback@action3news.com
  [www.kmtv.com]
  
  More... »
  
  
• Nebraska blogs (US-NE), 02/06/2012
• 16:52

  Committee Hearing to Fix Truancy Law

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  
  You're Invited!!
  
  Parents, students, and community leaders to share the personal impact of the 2010 truancy law with Judiciary Committee Monday.
  
  The Committee will hear 3 bills to address significant problems arising from the law. The parents of children who have fallen victim to the broad parameters of the law plan a strong showing at the committee hearing Monday!
  
  Lincoln, NE, February 13, 2012: Expect a packed house as parents, students, and community leaders to show support for the Fulton bill, LB1165 on Friday afternoon at 9:30am at the Capitol (Hearing Room 1113). LB1165 ensures that children with excused absences - including kids who are sick, spending quality time with a deployed parent, visiting a sick relative, traveling with family, and pursuing athletic and educational excellence - will never be punished under the law.
  
  Despite the dozens of news stories, emails to the governor and other lawmakers, and the Nebraska Family Forum website that has documented the unacceptable consequences of the 2010 school attendance law, some key senators and state officials still believe there is little creditable evidence that families who are cooperative with their school districts and have children with legitimate absences are being affected by this law.
  
  State officials continue to laud the success of the law based on a sharp increase in school attendance and believe that there is nothing wrong with putting thousands of innocent Nebraskan families under the jurisdiction of law enforcement in the pursuit of improved school attendance. In a fervent attempt to have their experiences heard and given priority in policy changes going forward, parents will offer themselves up as the evidence that the law is too broad and susceptible to abuse.
  
  These families are compelling evidence to support the Fulton bill that will put government back in its proper order and strengthen the role that parents play in the local governance of their schools.
  RSVP on Facebook
  
  More... »
  
  
• 16:23

  Truancy Q&A with Douglas County Attorney Don Kleine

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  You’re Invited!!
  
  Nebraska Family Forum hosts Truancy Law Q&A with Douglas County Attorney Don Kleine, moderated by KFAB’s Scott Voorhees.
  
  This community meeting will give parents, community leaders, and concerned citizens an opportunity to engage in an open dialogue about problems arising from the controversial truancy law. Feb 15th @ 6:30 pm, Creighton Law School (2120 Cass St., room 124).
  
  Omaha, NE, February 15, 2012: The Nebraska Family Forum has been at the forefront of a grass roots effort to fix the 2010 “truancy” law that has deviated from the legal definition of truancy, “to be absent without permission” (US Department of Justice), and has caused students with excused absences - including kids who are sick, spending quality time with a deployed parent, visiting a sick relative, traveling with family, and pursuing athletic and educational excellence – to fall under the jurisdiction of the county attorney.
  
  This shift in discretion over school attendance and the punitive approach to improving attendance has been a great source of distress and anxiety for hundreds of parents in our state. Douglas County alone has been flooded with a 1000% increase in truancy filings since the passage of the 2010 law. Still Don Kleine and his office have given their official support for the law and recommended that the legislature make no changes to the law for at least two years.
  
  The innocent families who have fallen into the broad punitive net of the law are finding it difficult to sort out who is to blame for the miscarriage of justice. The schools tell them it is the law that is at fault, but legislators and county attorney’s say they are strictly following the recommendation of school administrators to guide the process that determines which families are pursued. Organizers hope that an open and honest dialogue with Don Kleine and other invited guests – Sen. Ashford, members of the judiciary committee, and learning community superintendents - will provide answers for the families affected.
  
  More... »
  
  
• 10:19

  Forcing children to stay in school wastes resources and creates resentment

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  Great Letter from the Omaha World Herald's Public Pulse February 5th:
  
  Forced attendance isn't answer
  
  At the University of Nebraska in the 1960s, my work-study included grading and monitoring tests for a doctorate of psychology. One day he told me that he'd dropped out of high school and joined the Merchant Marines at age 16. High school wasn't working for him.
  
  Dropout rates and truancy issues will be solved not by more policing but by more options. Forcing children to stay in school wastes resources and creates resentment.
  
  If public schools are jails to be endured at all costs until a child reaches 18, then say so. Metal detectors, police on campus and prison terms like "lockdown" bear witness to increased punishment replacing guidance, options and role models.
  
  Teachers are victims of restrictions on teaching, too. If we are truly pro-education, the Legislature must put school-choice bills on the floor and debate them.
  
  Legislation that requires children to stay in school until they are 18 isn't the answer.
  
  Nydra Karlen, Bellevue
  
  More... »
  
  
• Nebraska blogs (US-NE), 02/05/2012
• 17:54

  The Gazinski Story

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  My personal experience with this well intended yet misapplied law was last year with my 9 year old daughter. She had been struggling with stomach issues and allergies for years and we were dealing with ongoing tests and various doctor visits to try and find an accurate diagnosis. During this time my daughter was missing partial or full days of school. 
  As with most school children she would contract an occasional virus or bacterial infection and I was directed in these situations to keep my daughter home to rest and recover. Her school also has guidelines for when your child should stay home as not to infect others. I follow these guidelines. As a result we received several letters stating that my daughter had exceeded the maximum number of absences and we would be called into court if we did not document the absences. 
  I explained this to my doctor after he advised that she stay home for an entire week with a particular severe virus and a high fever. He offered to write a letter, which we then sent to Douglas County. It was very frustrating to be a responsible parent dealing with a sick child and to get warnings from my daughter's school and Douglas County as if we were committing a crime. I also feel this is a waste of time, money and resources.
  Margie GazinskiOmaha, NE
  
  More... »
  
  
• Nebraska blogs (US-NE), 02/02/2012
• 14:37

  The Cooley Story

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  My sons and I lived through this "truancy" hell. When my sons dad became ill (in another state) and then died, his attendance went beyone 20 days. The school knew what was happening, however that aparently didnt matter. We ended up in court, with the county threatening to take my son away. Thankfully we had a sensible judge that dismissed it. But I have to ask. Which one of us is being neglectful? Me for allowing my son to grieve and deal/adjust as he needed to? Or the state, for threatening to take away his only family, and increasing his stress past what most adults can handle? They are fixated on numbers and not letting us be parents.
  
  Heather Cooley
  Irving, Nebraska
  
  More... »
  
  
• 14:35

  Robin's Story

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  My child was just removed from my home for using this "truancy law", my daughter suffers from chronic illnesses and is not truant. If it is the last thing I do I will make sure that Judge Crnkovich does not get reelected! My child was so upset and because of her emotional outburst the judge had her led off in handcuffs! I want her gone!
  
  I have a KVC worker who has been good to talk with today. My daughter is doing better today and will be at School tomorrow. We are going to try and get my doctor to write up a comphrensive report because the county attorney, the prosecutors nor the judge have a clue what it means to be a child with a chronic illness.
  
  I was told once that the guardian ad litem could not talk to me because they represent the child! I greatly doubt the are in fact representing my child. Every last single officer of the court are way to cozy with each other. I don't believe they are not there to be advocates for children.
  
  It is time that someone actually thinks about how laws like this harm innocent children and families who are doing nothing wrong, and are trying to do what's best for their kids. I'd like to know if they would be at work everyday with their migranes, flu, etc. And even if they went, how could they be effective at their jobs. It works the same with sick kids in school, just because they are forced to be there, it doesn't mean they can learn. Who can even think straight when they are sick, much less concentrate on learning something!
  When I made this point to the judge she was lessed than impressed. Her response to me was, "Children need to be in school." So when I get my daughter back I will be sure to send her to school even if she is vomiting. I will instruct her to vomit in public places, don't even attempt to make it to the rest rooms, that way she has witnesses.
  Robin
  Omaha, NE
  
  More... »
  
  
• 14:05

  Donna's Story

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  My son has missed over 30 days of school this year with being diagnosed with Asthma, a broken foot , and several 2 day absences which we finally found out was a chronic gall bladder issue in which he had surgery and had to get it removed.
  
  After his surgery I pushed him to go back too soon because I was afraid that too many missed days will result in my having to face a judge!!! I realized what this was doing to him and kept him a week out of school to recover, his health is more important than this state law so I am prepared to fight it when it comes my way, which will be soon as the school social service person has written me telling me she has sent us to the distrct attorneys office. 
  My son holds an A to B average even with all the missed days, he is having a really BAD year, he is not being TRUANT.
  
  The funny thing is, I watched the governor on channel 7 on sunday morning and he was asked about the law, he said it is not for medical cases or good kids. He doesn't seem to understand that even if it is not for the "good kids" we are still being scrutinized like the parents that dont care!! We still have to go through the same channels and prove ourselves to a court. This is unacceptable!!!
  
  Donna
  
  More... »
  
  
• 14:03

  Community Voices: Mary

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  There are many key lawmakers who have expressed a belief that if innocent families are not prosecuted then there is nothing wrong with the way the law is written. They have said that they believe there must be county attorney oversight in all cases to verify if a child who is reported ill is actually ill. It is astonishing to me that they are so out of touch, that they can not perceive how this "oversight" is viewed by the innocent families who have to live under it. Short an to the point, Mary, is yet another mother of a child with special needs who understands that this law should never include sick kids.
  My family was hauled into court because of Nebraska’s “truancy” law. With our attorney present we provided documentation to the county attorney of our child’s illness and they dropped the charges. Since then I have received another letter from the school, but it hasn’t gone any further because I provided a copy of a letter I had given to the county attorney from my child’s doctor. I believe this law is a horrible law because families like mine have enough to deal with without having to constantly worry about this law too.
  
  Mary Colofiore
  
  More... »
  
  
• 13:14

  The Johnson Story

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  Each child is unique and different and as you will read some have other issues they and their families deal with each and everyday. While they miss school more than most kids, it is most certainly not because of truancy, often it is because they are fighting to stay healthy.
  
  My husband Scott and I are foster parents or also called extended family home parents of a 12 year old young man. He joined our family when he was 8. He is considered medically fragile, medically complex, and severe profound. Here is a list of some of his diagnosis, 35-36 weeks completed gestation, Spastic Quadriplegia, Seizure Disorder, Osteopenia, Horseshoe Kidney, Hearing Deficit, Hyponatremia, Iron Deficiency Anemia, unspecified, Hydrocephalus, Cleft lip and cleft palate, Scoliosis, Chromosome Abnormalities, Multiple congenital anomalies, Astigmatism, Patent ductus arterioles, ASD (atrial septal defect) Chorioretinitis, Reactive Airway Disease, Hypoventilation, Periarticular calcification, Pyelocalyectasis, Undescended testicle, Pelviectasis, Neurogenic bladder NOS, Osteroporosis, Static encephalopathy, Mental retardation, Developmental Delay, Feeding difficulties, and History of recurring pneumonias.
  
  Some of the procedures he has had are, repair of cleft lip and palate, placement of gastrostomy tube for feeding, fundoplication, tracheostomy, infusaport placement, and shunt placement.
  
  He has always missed a lot of school. Sometimes due to health issues, sometimes due to Dr. appointments, and sometimes due to weather. When he is sick, it takes him longer than most kids to recover and also we do not like to take him out too soon as he could easily catch something else. We do try to schedule Dr. appointments around school and take him in the afternoon, but that does not always work out. For instance, he attends the Children's Developmental Clinic and that takes about 4 hours or so of seeing all of his specialists. They also sometimes will run tests, X-rays, etc. He gets fitted for his AFOs, and anything else that he might need. This starts at 8AM and goes til 12 noon or so. He also attends the Boys Town Cranial Facial Clinic.
  
  We have always kept him in when the weather is bad. If the weather is 25 or below he stays in. I know that one cannot catch a cold just by weather temperature, however, our son, has Osteropenia (brittle bone disease) and I cannot help but feel that he hurts when the weather changes and dips down. So we keep him inside. I try to put myself in his place. Also we are fortunate enough to be able to choice him to JP Lord school and we love it and so does he. But if the road conditions are terrible then that is also a factor we look at as well. You must understand that when he misses school for any reason, we are not taking him out shopping, or anywhere else for that matter. We are home caring for him.
  
  Last summer (2011) was the hardest summer we have ever had with him. It started in July with the diagnosis of a pseudo cyst that was found behind his g button. That was drained, but it led into the diagnosis of the first of two shunt malfunctions that we were to deal with. The neurosurgery team replaced the tubing and moved it to the other side of his abdomen. The cyst and 1st shunt malfunction hospitalization started 7/14/2011 and came home July 28. He was then readmitted on August 9, 2011 with a second shunt malfunction and had another surgery and did not come home until August 24th. Now, he has had really no time to recover from either of these major surgeries.
  
  He was readmitted on August 26 with Pseudomonis (pneumonia in the trachea) and was not released to come home until September 13.
  
  So under this law, he made the truancy list before he even had a chance to start school. It was not due to playing hooky or laziness, or anything else. He was in the hospital and trying to recover. We did however, take him to school September 27 as he was doing well. He did miss in October because he takes Pamidrionate Bone Drips for bone density and that was over two days. Sometimes they wear him out and he needs to rest. In November he was admitted with Jaundice and it turned out that he had a gall stone. (11/21-11/23) In December he had his dental work done, which requires him to be put under anesthetic.
  
  There are also other circumstances that we deal with. There are times when he will get his days and nights mixed up. I do not think it is the school's responsibility to 'babysit' my son. If he is up all night playing in his bed and I know that he will sleep for the most of the day, he can sleep here at home. There are also various meetings that we have with those from various agencies that work with us and him. They need to see him and there are times when they have come to school and they work around his schedule for the most part, but there are times when it cannot be helped. He also has his court reviews as well.
  
  I have been a Special Education Para for many years and at his IEP I suggested to SKYPE him in with his class and work with him here in the home while his teacher can see us and was told no. I do work with him here when he is home regardless as I do not want him to regress and lose what skills he has gained. Some of the things I have worked with him on are physical therapy, i.e. stretching, range of motion, head control, focusing, visual tracking, hand to mouth, i.e. teeth brushing, using his communication device, reading to him, social interaction, helping around the house, i.e. weather permitting his chore is to fill the bird feeders and squirrel feeders. He has helped mix cake batter, make cookies, etc. So you see when he is home and not recovering from an illness or anything he not left to do nothing.
  
  He missed in January for weather and then he got sick. He then was hospitalized from 1/19-1/26 because of sickness. He is home and doing better, but we are keeping him home as he is finishing an antibiotic and this virus is around. We plan on sending him back once his antibiotic is finished. Hoping that by that time this virus will be over with.
  
  You all must understand that he is our son and we love him very much and want what is best for him. We have been told that he has been healthy since he has lived with us. In fact, he went from a less than 50% survival rate to he can live into adulthood.
  
  There needs to be a change in this law to accommodate children like our son in this situation. These kids fighting everyday to stay healthy and sometimes staying alive and the least little thing could turn into something major. Their families are fighting for their kids as well.
  
  Debby Johnson
  
  More... »
  
  
• Nebraska blogs (US-NE), 02/01/2012
• 19:53

  The Herrera Family: Is the law working?

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  For Victoria Herrera, she believed her trust was well placed in Millard Public Schools, a district with an unmatched reputation for excellence. She had no idea just how poorly misplaced her trust was until the passage of Nebraska’s invasive truancy law in 2010, that has been used by as an excuse for schools to crack down hard on what they deem to be “trouble parents”. The past year has been an unimaginable nightmare for her young daughter and her family as they fell victim to Nebraska’s heavy-handed approach to “improving school attendance”.
  
  For her daughter, it started with bullying in 1st grade, bullying her mother did not understand the full breadth of until her daughter reached 3rd grade. 3rd grade was the year she began allowing her daughter to walk home from school on her own, but she never imagined that her daughter would be assaulted by several kids who had persistently tormented her for years. With only 24 days left in the 2009/2010 school year her daughter was beaten by several kids with sticks on her way home from school.
  
  As if the beating her daughter got wasn't injury enough the reaction of Millard school administrators and Douglas county police was unforgiveable. Victoria talked to the Neihardt Elementary school principal where her daughter was enrolled about the bulling and the serious assault specifically and the school took no action against the students who were responsible, sighting the excuse that the school is not responsible for what happens to a student on their path home from school. Even after contacting the Superintendent of Millard Schools, Dr. Keith Lutz, there was no effort to resolve the issue at the school level and no effort to contact the parents of the kids responsible.
  
  With only 24 days left of the school year, and school authorities unwilling to address her daughter’s safety, Victoria pulled her daughter from school with the intention of home schooling for the remainder of the year. The summer passed without incident and with the hiring of a new principal, Victoria was willing to try to work it out with her school and hoped that her daughter’s 4th grade year would be better. Victoria requested that her daughter be placed in a class without any of the children who had bullied her, but the school placed her in class with one of the primary culprits and the bullying continued. To make matters worse she was told that she was being referred to the county attorney for “truancy”.
  
  Victoria said the authorities at her school were “so sweet to her in person” they reassured her that the truancy filing was a mere formality and nothing was likely to come of it. What she experienced next could not have been further from that. She was sickened by the way she was treated at Douglas County Court. Victoria said, “I didn’t even get to talk!! I wasn’t allowed to tell my story.” The officials she met with berated her and made it very clear that if your child misses 20 days of school or more you’re just a bad mom! Because of the way she was treated she decided to get a lawyer.
  
  On the day of her first court hearing her daughter was assaulted by a boy at school. The boy yelled at her during lunch, “If you don’t shut up I’m going to hit you.” When she ignored his threat he hit her with students and teachers as witnesses. The principal handled the incident by telling her daughter to smack him, saying “show me how he hit you”! The principal held her daughter in the office for three hours until her daughter “admitted” it was an accident. The school district never reported the incidents to the police and when Victoria called the police they told her to her face they would not make a report. While her family was trying to cope with this ordeal the situation in truancy court got worse.
  
  Victoria did hire an attorney at great expense to her family, but her attorney advised her to plead guilty to the truancy charges, assuring her that it would be over quickly. What she quickly learned was that this gave the courts complete power over her family. She had asked that her daughter not talk to the school physiologist anymore because the physiologist told her “she was being hit by boys because she was pretty.” They ignored her request and did it anyway.
  
  Victoria decided she’d had enough and filed her home school paper work. She received the approval and was set to home school when the judge put an injunction on her and ordered that she keep her daughter in school until she had met the requirement of the court for her homeschooling. Even though Victoria met the requirements of Nebraska’s home school law, the court ordered that her curriculum be closely monitored. She was required to give them everyday lesson plans but she jumped through all their hoops.
  
  Despite her cooperation the court took Victoria’s daughter from her custody at one of the court dates, making her a ward of the state for 20 days, though she remained at home. They placed Victoria on the child neglect and abuse list and ordered in home visits from social workers. The social workers who visited her home were kind and reassuring and even told Victoria that this case was clearly not a case of neglect and that Victoria was in no danger of losing her daughter to foster care. Then the same social workers reported the exact opposite in court.
  
  Victoria’s ordeal recently came to an end, largely due to a glowing letter written to the court by Amber Morris, her children’s court appointed attorney at litem. Her very good recommendation in favor of Victoria and her lawyer’s ability to get certain reports from the social workers thrown out ended her case.
  
  Throughout the ordeal Victoria could not believe the duplicity of the school authorities, DHHS social workers, and law enforcement. Everyone who tried to calm her, to tell her they were on her side, that she had nothing to worry about. Victoria jumped through legal hoops to pull the records her school had sent to the county attorney and she was appalled at what she read. The Millard school professionals who she had placed her trust, who were so sweet to her face, lied to her face and threw her to the wolves. If she had known from the beginning of the process how untrustworthy Nebraska educators and state officials are she would never have pleaded guilty, never have signed their paperwork, she would have fought it outright!
  
  Victoria Herrera
  Millard Public Schools
  Omaha, NE
  
  More... »
  
  
• 19:42

  Closing the Truancy Loophole

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  Author: Melanie Williams-Smotherman, Director of Family Advocacy Movement
  
  A report from my observations and recordings of LB996 testimony in the Education Committee of the Nebraska Legislature:
  __________
  
  Monday, January 30 - I attended the hearing of the Legislature's Education Committee to testify in opposition to LB996, a bill introduced by Sen. Wightman that would raise the legal age for when teenagers could leave high school with their parents' notarized permission from 16 to 18.
  
  While we know a majority of kids remain in high school, even with the notable failures of our floundering educational system to engage and address special needs (which has only worsened through "No Child Left Behind"), we also know there are many legitimate reasons why a 16 or 17 year old may choose to pursue other avenues of education (like a GED and entering college early) or work (like a specialized trade), according to individual conditions and needs that can only be found outside of the traditional school setting.
  
  The timing of this particular bill (LB996) was not a surprise to those of us who have been working so hard to have Nebraska's new attendance law amended.
  
  The reason it was no surprise is because Sen. Ashford had indicated in a news story that lawmakers would be "closing the loophole" with regard to the possible prosecution of teenagers and their parents for "truancy" and "excessive absenteeism."
  
  It's unfortunate that Sen. Ashford believes that parents exercising their rights and responsibilities to protect their youth and family from undue privacy invasion by state and county officials and potential prosecution by county attorneys and juvenile court judges is a "loophole" that needs to be closed, but apparently he's not alone.
  
  I heard reference to this agenda several times yesterday, all uttered by school administrators, like the superintendent of Lexington Schools, and bureaucrats like Roger Breed, Nebraska Commissioner of Education, who each painted a dire picture of parents as spineless and irresponsible - just waiting to allow the destruction of their own children by signing away their opportunities for a brighter future. They further characterized our kids as would-be delinquents, if it weren't for all of these superintendents, principals, senators and lobbyists, because - according to them in testimony after testimony for this bill - their deep caring about our children is all that is standing in the way between a successful career and life ... and prison.
  
  Instead of recognizing that LB800 and LB463 created a situation that over-reaches, it appears as though some lawmakers are scrambling to "close loopholes" and crudely brick up any possible escape routes.
  
  Ever more responsible youth and their parents could be caught up in yet another over-reaching law through LB996, that is not based on shocking statistics showing the need for it, but which would - nevertheless - deny important flexibility for some to appropriately address their own individual needs.
  
  Of course, another so-called "unintended consequence" of the passing of LB996 would be that the compulsory attendance ages would surpass the age for when it is legal for a youth to enlist in the military with a parent's consent (17) or even marry and begin a family with a parent's consent (17).
  
  Perhaps rolling back those legal rights will be next.
  
  When one of our daughters was younger, she was asked if she knew what a lie was. Her response was, "Yes; If you tell a lie, then you have to tell another lie to cover that lie, and another one to cover that one, and then it gets all confusing."
  
  That's how I see LB996. It's a disingenuous attempt to cover for another bad law. If it passes, then we should expect yet another contrived bill to be pushed in order to cover that bad law, and so forth, until we have so many more "unintended consequences" - all which could have been prevented with a little honesty and common sense, and most importantly, a healthy respect for the rights of parents to act in their own children's best interests.
  
  Senator Ashford introduced the first bill, which addressed creating technical schools (such as Omaha Tech used to be), to provide specialized trade training for kids who may not be college bound.
  
  In his argument for this, he said, "The world is changing and not every kid will follow the same path."
  
  The fact that each person is in individual that cannot be stereotyped or defined by one challenge or situation is, of course, one we agree with. And for this reason, we oppose an attendance law that strips individual parents of their rights to care for their own children by excusing them from school when it is important for the child of that family. And it is also why we oppose LB966, a bill that would "close the loophole" on avoiding prosecution for "excessive absenteeism" (as Sen. Ashford put it) by raising the legal age (from 16 to 18) for when older teens can drop out of school with their parents' permission.
  
  People need to be free to make individual choices that best meet the unique needs of their own families and the children they love and care for. Laws like LB966 characterize everyone who may need to leave school as delinquents headed for a life of failure, and their parents as spineless, irresponsible dolts that would throw away their children's future at the first chance, if it weren't for the interventions of state senators, school administrators, and bureaucrats pushing laws to force everyone to comply with "The Collective."
  
  Sen. Wightman brought and introduced LB966. He made comments about how this law is necessary to prevent parents from just irresponsibly signing their children out of school and condemning them to lives of menial labor or lives of crime.
  
  The room was stacked with white, middle-aged, balding and greying men - all of them school administrators, politicians, and bureaucrats - and each taking their turn at the witness stand to share their utter disdain for the capability of parents, as well as their absolute doubt about the existence of self-motivation in children.
  
  The Superintendent of Lexington Public Schools (Todd somebody - I'll review my recording of the hearing when I have time to get names and exact quotes) gleefully reported that he has already turned over several families to the county attorney in his county for "excessive absenteeism." He didn't specify whether the absences were due to actual truancy or being sick or for other reasons, but he did drop the fact that he is even referring kids with as few as three "unexcused" absences, "to head off a bigger problem." He said he has a great relationship with the county attorney, who always acts quickly at his request, and that he is able to use the threat of the county attorney to make students and families comply.
  
  He also said he has students as old as 19 and 20 still in high school there, and he has referred them to the county attorney also. (!!!)
  
  I think it's important for us to call and ask him to provide more details, so we can better understand what he means by "unexcused" and what he has actually done with these students. If he is sending students with 3 parent-excused absences (or whatever they may be) to a county attorney, we need to know about that.
  
  He actually asked the rhetorical question: "What gives a parent the right to potentially make a decision that is not in the best interest of the student?"
  
  He also asked why anyone would think that at 17, kids no longer need and education.
  
  When Sen. Cornett openly pondered what benefit there is (and if it's even possible) to force a 17 year old to school when he/she doesn't want to be there, and she asked whether that wouldn't just cause a situation where they won't learn anyway, and where they may actually be disruptive to the learning environment for others, the Lexington superintendent said, "Oh, well we have expulsion policies; If a student is disruptive, we can always expel them for up to a year." (!!!!)
  
  In other words, it's okay for school officials to deny our kids an education without fear of prosecution, but if we parents believe it's in our child's best interest to miss some school, our motives are questioned as though we are known criminals.
  
  This man then appealed to the senators with regard to Nebraska's new "truancy" law, by saying "If I'm going to go to this trouble to prosecute, that will just be a waste of resources when a parent can just come sign them out."
  
  And the hearing was just getting started...
  
  Chad Denker - Seward High School principal and representative of Nebraska Council of School Administrators - said, "We need to get rid of the crutch of allowing parents to sign kids out of school."
  
  He then used the opportunity to take a swing at homeschooling parents by saying that if parents didn't like the rules, they could always "QUOTE" homeschool them." (He made sure to emphasize the "quote," suggesting that parents are not capable of educating their own children).
  
  When Sen. Sullivan asked him, "Why do kids drop out?" his response was, "That's a complicated question. For some families, education isn't a priority."
  
  In other words, he wouldn't even entertain the notion that schools and their curricula may fail to engage students and may not meet their unique needs.
  
  He also said he has "very good luck with the county attorneys."
  
  When Sen. Council asked him whether this was really a huge problem, "How many people are actually signing their kids out to avoid prosecution?" he responded with "I really don't have those figures, because we don't track that."
  
  One of the senators (I think Sen. Avery) asked "Are they (parents and kids) signing out to get out from under county attorneys, or are they cooperating?"
  
  "Cooperating???" With what? Allowing the state to intervene with their families because their children suffer disabilities or illness? It's so frustrating to listen to these lines of reasoning when these people have no apparent sense of what is really happening to law-abiding citizens - their constituents.
  PART 4 - Roger Breed, Nebraska's Commissioner of Education since 2009, was up next.
  
  He said the mission of schools today is that ALL STUDENTS be high school graduates and "college ready."
  
  He said this bill would help fulfill the "PS1" (or PS3?) goal of 90% graduation rate.
  
  He tossed out - as a small bone - that it would be good for schools to "try to re-engage students in school," but those meaningless offerings of self-deprecation about how the schools should also do more in helping to keep children better engaged aren't being driven by law or any punitive accountability measures if they don't.
  
  Only kids and parents will be punished for not accepting what is available, and LB996 is one more way in which our lawmakers are threatening to limit even more of our choices in appropriately addressing the needs of our kids.
  
  Senator Ken Haar (not to be confused with Sen. Burke Harr), made a mention to Roger Breed that, "There doesn't seem to be a downside" (to raising the legal drop out rate). Of course, Sen. Haar said this before leaving the hearing room to go do something else, and before any opposition testimony was heard.
  
  That seemed irresponsible, and it concerned me greatly that a representative would suggest that there could be no downside to a bill that restricts the legal choices of constituents.
  
  Jon Habben - Nebraska Commission of Rural Schools Association - was next.
  
  He used some twisted, reverse-psychology **** about how parents may be just waiting until their kids turn 16, so they can (for their own selfish benefit) cut their kids loose from school and no longer be responsible for them. (!!!!)
  
  Sen. Council seemed to latch on to this straw man scenario. She said, "Jon, you drove home a theme. You are talking about parents who might be thinking, 'I can't wait for this kid to be 16, so I can just sign him out of school,' - because that never forces the parent to admit, 'I don't care if my kid drops out or not.'"
  
  ??? What? The contrivances in questions and comments were becoming unbearable.
  
  Whenever there seemed to be a hope at a critical question for the assumptions that had to be accepted to follow these people's logic, the testifiers wouldn't really answer them, but used the opportunity as a springboard for 10 more minutes more of false rhetoric.
  
  Not once did ANYONE ask about the responsible parents who actually care deeply about their children (the majority) using the opportunity to sign their 16 or 17 year old out of school for legitimate reasons.
  
  Jon ended his testimony upon this magnanimous soap box: "We should push kids further; We should be doing better for kids."
  
  John Bonito (Registered lobbyist for the Public Schools Governance Board) was next. While he identified himself as a proponent, he actually seemed to give arguments for NOT passing LB996. It was weird.
  
  He said "Maybe we need MORE independent learning ... Maybe some kids won't fit or need the traditional diploma."
  
  He also said, "We may ramp up truancy if we move this (LB996) without protections in place. Not all students fit as a square peg into a round hole."
  
  I was completely confused by his testimony, since he would have done well to give it as an opponent.
  
  Up next for proponents to LB998 was Craig Emmel (Exec. Dir. of Building Bright Futures).
  
  He said, "It's time to 'close the loophole'. We'll join 21 other states with compulsory education until the age of 18."
  
  He said Nebraska would have to "figure out how to handle the GED question" (???), but that in his opinion the GED was inferior to high school. "But that's another topic."
  
  He also threw out the magnanimous (and meaningless) bone: "We need to put more resources into providing different paths and meet high-risk needs."
  
  When asked by Sen. Council if this bill was even necessary, given the lack of knowledge about how many parents actually even know they can sign their kids out at 16 to avoid the truancy courts, Emmel said he didn't know.
  
  But he decided to use a rhetorical tactic by suggesting that it can be used as a way for parents to avoid court. "I don't know; Maybe it's just a handful, or maybe it's 30, 40, or 50 (parents who have used this "loophole")."
  
  30, 40, or 50???? Where did those arbitrary figures come from? How in the world was this not questioned by our lawmakers??
  
  And that's when I stopped taking notes. I think it was time for OPPONENTS of 996, and I was the only one.
  
  I got through my 3 minutes, and I wasn't asked any questions from which I could share more insights. That was it....
  
  It was a very tough day.
  
  Hopefully our spirits can be raised on Friday with a HUGE showing of dedicated people willing to prioritize this the hearing at 1:30. The media, lawmakers, and public will be watching to see if it's just a handful of noisy mothers, or if there really is a significant movement willing to push back against these deep inroads threatening our rights and the well-being of our children.
  
  More... »
  
  
• Nebraska blogs (US-NE), 01/30/2012
• 19:44

  There is more to learning than attendance

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  written by: Scott Jurgensmeier
  
  The single-minded focus on “excessive absenteeism” would seem to fly in the face of every other issue that we discuss with relation to education. We are told that we need qualified teachers or students won’t learn. We are told that we need clean buildings that are in good repair or children won’t learn. We are told that schools need to be safe; if kids do not feel safe they will not learn. We debate what curriculum and what level of technology we should have to insure children can learn. We discuss proper class size with the thought that if classes are too large children won’t learn. We provide discounted or free lunches and/or breakfasts to kids, as hungry kids won’t learn.
  
  I am not arguing against any of the above items. I am merely pointing out that it would seem that kids actually have some part in whether education is going to be successful. There is more to learning that being at a certain building for a prescribed period of time. My daughter broke her arm once and she missed time from school. I could have forced her to go to school in those first few days, but as she cried in pain all day she would not have learned anything much and would have distracted from the education of other children and the work of the teacher.
  
  If a child feels harassed by CPS workers and County Attorney’s with the fear they will be taken from their family, this could easily impact their ability to learn.
  
  More over the final level of this law is actually separating children from their parents. The position of this law is that by taking my child from home she would learn better. In the real world, if the Court took my young daughter from her family she would not be thinking about Math. She would be thinking about home and family. Being placed in Foster Care would actually be more likely to inhibit her learning for a longer period of time than missing 20 days in a school year.
  
  A child needs to be in a safe, clean building, with plenty of food, good teachers, modern technology and small class sizes to learn. But we are to believe that missing their family and not understanding why they can’t go home will have no impact on educational achievement.
  
  More... »
  
  
• Nebraska blogs (US-NE), 01/28/2012
• 13:49

  The Personal Impact: Kids With Special Needs

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  It is sometimes hard for those whose children enjoy full health to understand how difficult it is for parents with special needs children; to have your parenting constantly evaluated and scrutinized by professionals and experts. The politics of dealing with school administrators and advocating for your child can be very difficult. This Millard mother has written her family's personal story but prefers her family's identity to remain anonymous.
  
  I have three children, two of whom are either disabled or sick. My oldest daughter, 11, has Asperger’s Syndrome. She was diagnosed last year after a battery of tests performed by an experienced psychologist in Lincoln (we live in Omaha). She also completed an intense vision therapy program and continues to have an on-going occupational therapy program. Due to all those appointments, plus a few small sicknesses, we hit the 20 day mark sometime in April 2011. The social worker gathered all my data and the county attorney declined to prosecute.
  
  Fast forward to this year. This same daughter missed two full weeks of school in September after pneumonia was diagnosed later than it should have been. She then missed another week because she caught influenza (and yes, she had been vaccinated). Now, on top of her weekly occupational therapy appointments—only 1.5 hours missed per week—her immune system is weak and she is catching every little virus she comes across. We are now at 23 days absence.
  
  In addition, my second daughter, who is 9, had been diagnosed with IBS, anxiety disorder, and, as of yesterday, vestibular migraines. She also missed a full week of school with a kidney infection. So now we’re somewhere around day 18 for her.
  
  We have clearly had an unusal fall as far as attendance goes. And I have documented every sickness by going to the doctor and wasting their time and my insurance co-pay so I can get a note even though I know we have a migraine situation occurring. Or my oldest has a 100.5 fever. Or the middle one hasn’t been able to poop for two days and needs to take a load of Miralax.
  
  In light of all this, our school social worker, who has been exceedingly supportive and helpful with us, told me this week she is concerned that the county attorney will only see that I have one child who was “on the list” both last year and this year and another child who is joining her. It doesn’t matter that they both are excelling in school. It also doesn’t matter that my kindergarten-aged son has attended every school day but one. (Because I’m going to drive him 15 minutes to school each day and let the others be truant? Really?)
  
  I asked if I should get an attorney at this point. The social worker said that the first round is basically herding the parents into the courtroom and having the judge “read the riot act” to them. Hmmm…let me think about that…NO WAY am I going to be berated by someone for following the school’s handbook and keeping my kids out of school when necessary. I’m so frustrated.
  
  So I’m holding on to the rollercoaster as it nears its apex. Bring it on.
  
  More... »
  
  
• 11:10

  LB 821 Poses Great Danger to the Family and Civil Liberties

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  On Sunday, Jan. 1, there was an article in the Omaha World-Herald about legislation that will be introduced during the current session of the Nebraska Unicameral.
   Questions about child welfare to dominate Nebraska Legislature - Omaha.com [www.omaha.com]
  It reads:"Nebraska's 2012 legislative session looks to be the year of the child.
  "During the next four months, lawmakers will wrestle with key questions about the future of child welfare and juvenile justice in the state.
  "How they answer...those questions will shape the lives of abused and neglected Nebraska children and youthful troublemakers."
  But how they answer those questions will also shape the lives of regular, ordinary children too, especially since Nebraska has been showing an unsettling willingness to draw the parameters wider and wider for what constitutes an "abused" or "neglected" child or "youthful troublemaker." Nebraska has a serious problem with breaking up families – it does so at the second highest rate in the nation. And it has recently begun removing children from their families for what the state deems to be poor school attendance, under the new “truancy” law.
  It’s good that Nebraska is working to address the serious problems in its child welfare system, and some positive proposals are being advanced this session. However, two of the proposals mentioned in the article, and brought together in one bill, LB 821, are deeply concerning. These proposals would only intensify the problems the system now faces.
  LB 821 proposes to create a 26-person Children's Commission, and a brand new state children's agency. (LB 821 - [nebraskalegislature.gov] ) The bill recognizes the major problems with Nebraska's current child welfare system, but it proposes to remedy these problems by creating more government!
  In addition to the simple paradox of creating more government to solve a problem created by government, I believe that these two legislative proposals present a threat to every Nebraska family in another way.  These two proposals would establish in Nebraska a framework that could implement the concepts contained in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), an overreaching document which the U.S. Congress has refused to ratify for 22 years.
  The UN CRC was written in 1989. It aims to bring the oversight for every child's welfare under the jurisdiction of the state. You'll find that many good ideas are expressed in its wording ( [www2.ohchr.org] ), but in practice, it replaces the judgment of parents with those of unelected state bureaucrats. It views the family with suspicion, and attempts to regulate the affairs of every family in accordance with the values (or, some might say, lack of values) of these unelected bureaucrats. It is a serious threat to the fundamental rights of parents, and thereby, a serious threat to children.
  One of the features of the UN CRC at the international level is the institution of an 18-member unelected committee, the Committee on the Rights of the Child, which is made up of members considered to be “experts” in child welfare. This body directs countries on how to implement the CRC’s agenda. In essence, it tells countries what they feel countries need to do to improve children’s welfare, and how to treat its citizens in accordance. It would take pages to catalogue the offenses committed by this committee against free societies, family integrity, and children’s welfare.
  Now back to Nebraska. LB 821 creates a huge, unelected Children’s Commission, which “shall consist of twenty-six members representing the three branches of government and a wide array of public and private stakeholders." Not only does this echo the UN structure by creating a committee with the power of oversight and direction, it creates a commission in which all three branches of government are brought together. This is dangerous!
  The protections afforded by our system of government are dependent on these branches staying separate. Bringing them together in such a fashion creates a situation in which judges will be ruling on things they've already reached consensus on with legislators and the governor; and legislators will be passing laws that they've already reached consensus on with the judges who might hear challenges to those laws. And these decisions will be about what’s best for your children.
  Commissions such as this almost inevitably move the social and political climate in a direction which accepts the collective “society” as better at determining what is best for a child, than are the parents of that child. When 26 people with this kind of power sit around a table together and agree about what’s best for children, it will be very dangerous for people who have other ideas.
  The agency created by LB 821, the Department of Children’s Services, is directed to be a "child-focused" agency. A child welfare system that proposes to focus on children will miss the mark. A healthy child welfare system must be “family-focused.” A “child-focused” system creates a culture in which the state employees tend to believe they always know what’s best for the children who come into their system because, once again, of the collective consensus, which they are charged to implement.
   A “family-focused” system recognizes that virtually all parents love their children, that children’s psychological and often physical well-being are dependent upon being with their parents – even when there are problems – and that when there are serious problems in a family that require intervention, whether that family is wealthy or poor, well-educated or ill-educated, lives a healthy lifestyle or doesn’t, parents just need support in learning skills to care for the child they love.
  Furthermore, creating this children’s agency will increase the danger to all Nebraska families as the agency seeks to do what government bodies always seek to do: increase power, and the funds that come with it. The “child welfare” system in this country is already a $1 billion-plus industry.  A state children’s agency is likely to put more families in danger as it seeks to compete with other state agencies for that power and those funds.
  Other sections which create serious concerns about the effects this bill would have are as follows (with commentary in red and using page and line numbers, rather than sections of the bill, to make it easier to locate):
  pg. 4, line 16 - "An independent entity specializing in medicaid analysis shall conduct a cross-system analysis of current services and funding sources to...provide information which will allow the replacement of state general funds for services to at-risk children and youth with federal funds, with the goal of expanding the funding base for such services while reducing overall state General Fund expenditures on such services." They want to find ways to make Nebraska more dependent on federal dollars for its child welfare services.
  pg. 7, line 1 - "The executive committee of the Nebraska Children's Commission is created. The executive committee shall consist of the members of the commission listed in subdivisions (2)(a) through (e) of this section. The executive committee shall advise the commission with respect to the interaction among the three branches of government related to child welfare programs and services. The members of the executive committee shall each represent his or her own branch of government, and no member of the executive committee shall participate in actions that could be deemed to be the exercise of the duties and prerogatives of another branch of government or that improperly delegate the powers and duties of any branch of government to another branch of government." They recognize the potential for problems in this area, and they think a line in the law will prevent it from happening.
  pg. 7, line 18 - "Such networks shall permit community collaboration to strengthen the continuum of services available to child welfare agencies and to provide resources for persons outside the child protection system."  They want to provide ways to draw kids into state services that are not in any need.
  pg. 8, line 14 - "Provision of leadership, by the commission and the Department of Children's Services, in intentional strategies to support high-quality evidence-based prevention and early intervention services that reduce risk and enhance protection for children." This may mean appropriate services for people who are already in the system, but this is far from clear. It could very well mean that since there are many children whose family life doesn’t justify a need for state intervention, the state needs to come up with more ways to peg children as "at-risk" to get them into the system.
  
  “Prevention” and “early intervention” rely on profiling to create categories of “pre-crime.” When applied to those who have done nothing wrong, and used to justify government involvement, it becomes preemptive intervention – “you might have a problem,” “something could happen.” An example of Nebraska already engaging in this type of “pre-filing” is the new truancy law, which operates from the premise that a child “may” become a delinquent if he misses 20 days of school, and therefore the state is justified in creating a juvenile court file on him and dragging his family through an intrusive “diversion” process.   This is not something that people and families in a free society have to worry about. Passing this bill, and creating a system with this potential, would be a giant leap away from a free society, and huge danger to families.
  pg. 9, line 3 - "The Department of Health and Human Services shall implement a process to obtain and utilize data analytics, business intelligence, or similar information technology for accessing real time data in order to foster better decision making with the goal of better outcomes relating to services to children and families." The biggest problems with this provision are the broad, nebulous nature of it, and the glaring question, “Why?” Why does HHS want this power? HHS is in the business of providing social services to those who need them. It should not be in the business of monitoring all Nebraskans. In light of the provision mentioned above (pg. 8, line 14), we have the potential for a system that watches people’s behavior and allows the state to pull them in although no crime has ever been committed.
  
  There is much to be concerned about in this bill. Should these proposals pass legislative vote and become law, I believe the agenda of the UN CRC would be well on its way to being implemented in Nebraska, through the apparatus created by this bill.
  The solution to Nebraska's child welfare crisis does not lie in creating more layers of government to oversee and intervene in families' lives. Instead, it lies in strengthening - through legislation and the culture it fosters - respect for the bond between parents and children, and respect for the natural rights of parents; in lies in expanding and emphasizing child welfare systems that make in-home care top priority; and it lies in scaling back - not expanding - the government apparatus that has the authority to make life-altering decisions for Nebraska's families.
  The Health and Human Services Committee of the Legislature will hold the public hearing on this bill Wednesday, February 1 at 1:30, in room 1510 of the Capitol. Please contact the Health and Human Services Committee and your senator, and ask them to oppose this bill and work on a better solution to Nebraska's child welfare system crisis.
  
  Contact Info for HSS Committee [news.legislature.ne.gov]
  Contact info for Senators [www.nebraskalegislature.gov]
  
  More... »
  
  
• Nebraska blogs (US-NE), 01/27/2012
• 21:57

  The Sumsion Story

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  My son, Spencer, is an early intervention miracle. He was diagnosed on the Autism Spectrum before he turned three years old. Through the hard work of many dedicated teachers and professionals, at nine, most people cannot tell he is on the spectrum.
  Unfortunately, due to personnel changes in the Butler County School District, his education experience deteriorated. After a month in school this year, he came home almost every day, in tears. He withdrew into himself, lashed out at me and generally seemed to forget how to smile or communicate. He regressed to melt downs almost every day and began hitting and throwing things at school.
  After observing in the classroom, it was immediately apparent to me and to an Autism Coordinator that I called in, that the classroom was set up in a way that overloaded his senses and the adults interacting with him lacked the skill or desire to accommodate his unique educational needs. The situation escalated to a point where I pulled him out of school to remove him from the hostile environment.
  When I finally had him home, I spent the first month unable to educate him in math or reading. My curriculum consisted of convincing him that he was a good boy. No parent should have to experience telling their child they are a good kid and have their child respond with eyes wide with surprise, and whisper, “I am?”
  Put yourself in my shoes. My child, who came so far against the odds of his disability, was taught at school that he was a bad kid. Why would I send him back to a place where he received that debilitating message?
  With no previous knowledge of homeschooling procedure in Nebraska prior to pulling my son, I was unaware of the excessive and stifling rules associated with changing learning environments. Spencer missed enough school before the paperwork was processed that I received a letter from the county attorney threatening prosecution if I didn’t send my son back to school immediately.
  At that point, I had no viable alternative. I sent him back and I watched him deteriorate once again. I cannot adequately communicate the relief I felt once I received my homeschooling paperwork and I could again make decisions for my child’s education without fear of criminal charges.
  What I didn’t understand through the whole ordeal is why I would be threatened with truancy charges when I knew where my child was and I took the initiative to educate him.
  No law, no matter how well meaning, should force a parent to send a child to a hostile environment. No state, especially not Nebraska, should penalize a parent for taking over the reins of an out of control situation. I beg you. Bring reason back to truancy definitions and stop parental persecution for making decisions about their child’s heath, education and well-being.
  Sabrina Sumsion
  
  More... »
  
  
• 21:48

  The Mancebo Family

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  This law is a nightmare! My child has Chronic Fatigue Syndrome & was suppossed to be allowed 2 rest breaks per day. Her teacher last year decided that she was "faking" the need for breaks & refused to let her have them even after multiple meetings with the District Special Ed people, principal, special ed teacher & school nurse.
  
  Since she was not being given the breaks she needed there were many days that she was having flare ups & she stayed home because she knew that her needs would not be met by the school. I received letters with a final one indicating that I would be refered to the County Attorney's office if she had one more absence.
  
  I called the school social worker & thanked her for the letter and told her that I was truly looking forward to my day in court because I was looking forward to being able to share with the County Attorney how the school had ignored her rights and the legal requirements placed on them through her IEP.
  
  Miraculously, I never received another letter, even after my daughter missed additional days. This year has been better. The teacher has honored the IEP & the breaks have allowed my daughter to be in school the majority of the time.
  
  Tami Maldonado-Mancebo
  Millard Public Schools
  Omaha, NE
  
  More... »
  
  
• 21:40

  The Hanigan Family

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  I am extremely concerned about the new Nebraska Truancy law. My child has been suffering from severe anxiety and what we originally thought was severe depression starting last spring. We arranged mental health counseling but saw little improvement over the spring and summer despite increasing mental health therapy to twice a week. The psychiatrist diagnosed my daughter with high functioning Autism/Aspergers and said that rather than depression we were seeing sensory overload and shut down. She recommended working with an OT as well as continuing counseling and medication. To do Occupational Therapy she must miss class once a week. This therapy has eliminated her need to spend hours curled up in a ball to deal with sensory overload.
  
  Luckily for us the occupational therapy was able to happen during study hall and lunch so it is not  counted as an absence, but even if she had to miss class, we would be much better off to miss class rather than wait months for a non-school time to open up. Unfortunately we may still exceed the 20 absence rule by the end of the school year.
  
  The days that my daughter misses school are not optional, if she is going to return to being a functional healthy teenager she has to see the psychiatrist. She also had to miss school to be hospitalized . My daughter is Autistic and fighting mental health problems, I can not imagine how much distress it will cause her if she has to appear in court for being truant!
  
  We are in a no win solution. We could avoid the truancy law by having our daughter drop out of school, but this would be a drastic solution, especially since she is a good student who despite her mental health issues managed to have a 3.5 GPA for the 1st semester.
  
  We could home school, but I can not provide as good an education as she is receiving and she loves school. So for now we will hope she does not get sick for the rest of the school year and that by some miracle we manage to keep her absences under 20. It is wrong that my daughter who is already dealing with debilitating anxiety must also worry that she will wind up in court because she is seeking treatment for her anxiety.
  
  I can assure you that she has read every Internet article about the poor families that have had to go to court due to health related absences. Why is it that the state of NE thinks it is acceptable to add stress and discourage necessary medical care for children on the grounds that some parents falsely claim their children are ill. I always thought we strove to protect the rights of the innocent.
  
  It would seem to me that the law could at least allow the schools and parents to agree that an absence is necessary or beneficial for a child so that only absences where the school and parents disagree would need to be turned over to the court system. I sincerely hope that Nebraska amends this law. I have heard that it is dramatically reducing absences but the personal and emotional cost to families dealing with medical crisis is unconscionable. It is no different than saying it is okay to make 99 innocent men stay in jail if it helps keep one guilty man from going free. This is how France operates not the United States.
  
  Linda Hanigan
  
  More... »
  
  
• 01:29

  The Volkmer Family

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  My 18 year old son goes to Syracuse Public School in Syracuse Ne. He has missed 57 periods - which in an 8 hour day is 7 days plus 1 hour. He has a stomach disorder which we have been working to diagnose and we finally saw a GI specialist last month. The school has turned him over to the county attorney for excessive absences! I am so upset over this!
  
  All of my son's absences have been excused by the school, they are marked as medical, the day of his grandfather's funeral the records show it as an absence. The records do not show any unexcused, on all of these days I called the school letting them know what was going on. Only 4 of these days are "documented" in the sense that I have a doctors note, but I don't take him to the doctor every time he's sick it isn't necessary.
  
  He missed one day when his grandfather passed away.
  
  The school is aware of is stomach issues, the guidance counselor thinks he has nothing to worry about since he has his time made up. Syracuse school states you must make up any thing over 10 periods, he was over in 7th and 8 period with 11 absences as he will get sick at times after lunch. This is also the time of day he would get in to see the doctor which is in a different town .
  
  I am so confused by this law that I had to get an attorney, I am a single parent on limited income so getting the attorney wiped out my savings. His absences are 7th & 8 period not the entire day! He has better grades then in the past several years and according to the guidance counselor less absences than last year when he was first afflicted with this stomach disorder. I know what to do! Our attorney has filed a denial to this court hearing. She is reading up on this as she is unfamiliar with this new truancy law too.
  
  Vicki Volkmer
  
  More... »
  
  
• 00:27

  Open Letter: Vicki Schmer

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  I am extremely concerned and quite frankly....angry...about this truancy law. I have a child with a chronic health condition and, like it or not, he misses school from time to time. Should I have sent him to school with RSV and a temp of 105.4 or risk going to jail? I know this is completely over simplifying this issue. I will rally every single person and parent that I know to get this repealed.
  
  The hemorrhaging of students in northwest Omaha's OPS district is unbelievable and my family is one of those moving elsewhere. We would rather lose money on our homes than lose our children to a school district that would rather think of itself as a welfare business. 
  Parents need to stand up and let people know that we will not be pushed aside. I honestly think there are lots of people who are concerned about this, but have no idea what to do to address the issue. Circle the wagons....the parents are coming!!!
  Vicki Schmer
  Omaha Public Schools
  Omaha, NE
  
  More... »
  
  
• Nebraska blogs (US-NE), 01/26/2012
• 23:34

  The Judiciary Committee will hear the three bills to fix Nebraska’s truancy law

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  SAVE THE DATE!!
  Friday February 3rd starting @ 1:30 pmNebraska State Capitol, Hearing Room 1113.  
  WRITE YOUR SENATORS. COME SHOW YOUR SUPPORT!
  
  The Nebraska Family Forum Supports the Fulton Bill, LB 1165, here's why:
  
  

  1. LB 1165 will put government back in its proper order. It is a strong, clear state truancy statute that designates appropriate control over attendance policy to school districts, and the communities who fund and govern them. 
  2. It allows authorities to reach truant students much earlier than they could under the old statute, by requiring students with unexcused absences to be referred to law enforcement much sooner. 
  3. It ensures that children with excused absences - including kids who are sick, spending quality time with a deployed parent, visiting a sick relative, traveling with family, and pursuing athletic and educational excellence - will never be punished under the law. 
  4. LB 1165 honors the rule of law upon which a civil society must be based. If this committee will pass Fulton’s bill you will have established a law that is just, known, and predictable; a law that places appropriate restraints on the politic and will prevent the arbitrary use and abuse of power. 
  5. LB 1165 removes the power of county attorney’s to get involved at any stage in the process to address “excessive absenteeism”. There is a clear point of legal intervention which provides essential protections to the innocent, but the bill does not cripple the ability of schools to expose educational neglect.

  
  
  More... »
  
  
• 13:43

  The Svoboda Family

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  I don't have time to write the details of my experience with this "truancy" law, but I can tell you that the stress and aggravation that the law caused us is substantial and these stories are not limited to the Omaha area. 
  Our experienced occurred while we were in Ogallala when my grade school boy was having terrible problems with his ear infections and operations. We continued to have trouble this year while going to Lincoln High in which we told the school that the activity would be too strenuous and he would get ill and he did. 
  Trying to deal with the schools in themselves and trying to get your child educated is enough stress for special needs parents without these letters from the county attorney. I had a feeling the school in Ogallala liked the feeling of power that the letter from the county attorney gave them.
  
  Amy Svoboda Lincoln, NE
  
  More... »
  
  
• 12:14

  The Bartenhagen Family

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  In my opinion the 2010 School Attendance Law is a foolish law setup by lawmakers that are worried about offending someone, so rather than pointing to specific districts and even specific schools within that district that aren't doing a good job they pass a one size fits all law because that is the politically correct thing to do.
  
  Last year my son had a series of 3 brain surgeries and therefore missed over 20 days of school. The school was very aware of why he had missed school; in fact the principal, his teacher, and the school guidance counselor all visited him while he was in the hospital. We received the letter that said he missed 10 days of school and also the letter that he missed 20 days of school and it was referred to the county attorney. Prior to receiving each letter the principal called and apologized for the letter saying that it had to be sent and obviously she knew why my son had missed school. We were never contacted by the county attorney. These letters were a waste of my time, the school districts time, and the county attorneys time.
  
  If there are specific school districts and\or schools within that district that are not doing a good job of enforcing their truancy policy and are unable or unwilling to know why students are gone, those individual districts\schools should be held accountable. Furthermore if they then don't have the ability make an intelligent decision as to whether that student has an acceptable reason for missing school than the administrators should be replaced with someone that can. An individual that is being paid to manage a school should be able to understand the difference between brain surgery and skipping school and if they can't than that should be dealt with on an individual basis, not by burdening the entire state with an unnecessary law.
  
  Mike Bartenhagen
  
  More... »
  
  
• Nebraska blogs (US-NE), 01/25/2012
• 15:56

  Trust Nebraska Families and Restore Recognition of Excused Absences

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  The hundreds of members of the Nebraska Family Forum represent political opinions that span the spectrum. The specifically partisan views expressed by the writer of this piece do not represent the views of the whole group.
  
  Dear Governor Heineman,
  It was my pleasure and privilege to live in Nebraska for seven wonderful years. I was raised the daughter of an Air Force officer, so I had never lived in one location for more than four years. After my husband graduated from his MBA program, we happily chose to settle our family in Omaha; and if you add the two years I spent at Offutt as a toddler, I’ve spent more than a quarter of my life (a vast plurality!) in Nebraska. I love Nebraska!
  But this past July, my husband was extended a job offer he’d always dreamed of, and we chose to move to pursue that dream. A few months before he was approached with the job offer, however, I became aware of - and concerned about - Nebraska’s new truancy law. Along with my friend, Stephanie, I initiated the movement to revise the new truancy law, and co-founded the Nebraska Family Forum.
  I was homeschooling when this law came to my attention last year (and in the years when my children attended public school they never missed more than 8 or 9 days in a year at the most) so you might think I had no reason to worry about this law. But even though it wasn’t a present danger for my own family, I saw great reason for concern.
  As an active Republican and Conservative - and a big fan of yours – I have been puzzled by your support for this law. I wondered if you were motivated by a desire to put pressure on school districts to deal seriously with truancy, supporting it out of concern for the kids who are failing because they skip school, or struggle to get to school; the kids who could have a better chance to succeed if supported by one of the many wonderful mentoring programs available in Nebraska communities. I thought perhaps you’d been motivated by the hope of earning federal dollars for improving attendance outcomes.
  But based on your letters to concerned parents, I’m led to understand that you feel that kids ought to be in school every day, without exception; and that in order to ensure parents aren’t making what the government deems to be bad choices about the role of attendance in their children’s education, the government is justified in giving the legal system authority to investigate families for missing school, even when a school has already documented good reasons for every one of those absences.
  I wonder if you realize that this law permits government intervention with a student’s family because he has a chronic personal illness,  or for competing at high levels in club athletics, or for spending time with a mom with terminal cancer, or for serving a two-week mission trip to Africa. I’m puzzled by your acceptance of this model, which attempts to achieve a set of equal outcomes (everyone passes and graduates) by forcing equal inputs (everyone is in his seat for T minus 19 or fewer days.)
  Do you realize that many of the families this law is forcing into court – or into the prescribed attendance pattern to avoid court – already have good students? Do you realize that kids who have always kept up and done well in school, while achieving great things in extracurricular programs, are being pressured to quit these extracurriculars in an attempt to achieve perfect attendance? They are being threatened with investigation by law enforcement for participating in life-enhancing activities. Do you realize that mothers who used to keep their kids home with a head cold or a stomachache, are now sending those kids to school sick - against their better judgment, and fully knowing their kids are spreading illness, but feeling unable to choose otherwise?
  Children who participate and excel in club sports are now at risk of government intervention. They’ve never struggled in school, and they’re at no risk of becoming delinquents; in some cases, it’s their athletic participation that motivates them to get good grades. But this law threatens their families with all sorts of government interference.
  Children whose parents work in summer-heavy industries, and therefore vacation during the school year, are coming under the oversight of government authorities, because their parents can’t take a vacation during the summer break period due to work demands. These kids aren’t struggling in school, they’re at no risk of becoming delinquents; but this law allows them to be treated as such.
  Children whose parents attend a work conference in an exciting city cannot travel with them, and get the incomparable education that comes from experiencing a place first-hand. These kids aren’t struggling in school and aren’t at risk of becoming delinquents; in fact, they are made to suffer from what I would contend is an impediment to their education, precisely because of this law.
  Children whose parents return from military service in Iraq or Afghanistan, either on leave or at the conclusion of their tour of duty, must severely limit the number of days they take off school to spend time with their mother or father. These children are not struggling in school and aren’t at risk of becoming delinquents. But they are forced to attend school, rather than spend time with their mother or father who has been gone for years defending our freedom – and who may never come home again – if they want to avoid being referred to law enforcement. Can you see the tragic irony?
  Children with illness are being prosecuted, threatened with being placed on probation, even threatened with removal from their homes. While last year’s LB 463 contained a provision that requires the school districts to have a policy on how to handle cases in which excessive absences are due to documented illness, it did nothing to actually protect these children.
  We were informed by Dr. Lutz that in Millard, it is up to the superintendent how to handle those cases, and many sick children are still being referred to law enforcement. It’s apparent that Millard is not the only district where this is happening, as a girl from rural Nebraska who has hydrocephaly, and the complications that come with it, is being targeted by law enforcement. The parents of another girl with the same condition – this time in the metro area – are being threatened by CPS with removal of their child.
  Can you understand at least a little about the fear and anxiety that mothers are feeling now when their children get simple illnesses, because every day they choose to keep them home is another day closer to law enforcement peering into their lives? Can you understand the growing feelings of mistrust toward the state government – inspired by this law – among good, hardworking Nebraska citizens?
  When I hear of your continued support of the new law, I feel I’m watching a betrayal of conservative principles; although, I expect, an unwitting betrayal.
  As a Conservative, I value the rights of individuals, and recognize that certain basic rights can only be sacrificed at great cost to society. Support for this truancy law demonstrates the opposite of those values. It demonstrates an embrace of what I would call collectivist thinking.
  When collectivists look at the world, they see numbers, not people. They justify ignoring the basic rights of individuals to achieve a great collective goal – in this case, better numbers for school attendance statistics. To them, if a few people have to suffer, it’s worth the collective achievement.
  But a believer in the overriding power and good of freedom understands that while you may be able to force a great collective outcome through the power of the state, it is not worth the injury to fundamental human rights; to the good, innocent people involved; nor to the fabric of society. This law epitomizes the subjugation of basic individual rights to the aims of the collective state. Nebraska certainly can improve its attendance statistics with this law – we’ve already seen that this is happening – but at what cost?
  At what cost? Governor Heineman, isn’t it possible to improve school attendance rates among kids who are skipping and struggling in school, without subjecting good people to government interference in their families?
  The fear of such interference is painfully real, even among the best of parents. In our modern times, so many of us parent scared: scared of making mistakes – or doing something with our children that another person simply disagrees with – that will get us "turned in" to CPS. And this law in its current form creates yet another way to "fail" in the eyes of the state, and have our homes invaded.  The threat of government investigation is heightened in a state where kids are removed from their homes at the second highest rate in the nation, and have already been removed because of this very law.
  Achieving excellent school attendance rates is good, but trusting the goodwill and common sense of the people is greater. And when you have to sacrifice the latter to achieve the former, the achievement surely comes at too great a cost.
  To stay true to the promise of this country – the promise of freedom to pursue happiness; and to stay true to the purpose of good government – to maintain an orderly society through law, while protecting individual rights and liberties; this law must be amended to recognize the difference between excused and unexcused absences.
  We’ve passed a law that allows people whose children have had nothing but excused absences to be referred to law enforcement! Surely, you can see the injustice in this situation?
  And in the process, we’ve communicated to the average Nebraska parent that the state no longer trusts his judgment, if he chooses to use the public schools.
  You know that the vast majority of parents are good parents. They only take their children out of school for carefully-considered reasons. In my case, I’ve only done it for illness, for my sister’s wedding, to allow my children to spend time with a newborn sibling, or to attend a Governor’s Proclamation Signing ceremony at the Capitol with a non-profit in which I was active. Two years ago, the law had no problem with these choices; but under the new law, I would take a risk in doing these things.
  Such an atmosphere of fear is oppressive. I don’t know a single stay-at-home mom who hasn’t sent her child to school sick this year when she otherwise would have kept him home. One of those mothers sent her son to school sick with the stomach flu, and waited for him to throw up in class so the school could see he was sick and send him home. But even then, when the school required he be sent home, the absence counts toward government investigation!
  I know of people who have cancelled important and educational family trips. Plenty of state and local authorities have made it clear that they think no child can learn if they’re on a family trip. But American families have been raising successful students while taking a family trip during the school year for decades.
  Is it really right to interfere with these good families with good students now, all of a sudden? Now? Just because the zeitgeist is pushing in that direction? A direction in which “society” is deemed better at deciding what’s best for an individual child, rather than the parents of that child? Do you really want a state where good parents base their decisions on fear of what the government can do to them and to their children?
  Governor, I’m pleading with you to push for common sense in the law, and not leave good Nebraskans at the mercy of lawyers, judges and superintendents. Some of them will exercise common sense, but some won’t.  In a well-ordered free society, people can rely on the law itself to protect their rights; they don’t have to rely on the subjective mercy of legal authorities, which is what you’ve asked Nebraskans to settle for with this law.
  Senator Fulton’s bill, LB 1165, amends the truancy law to restore the classic definition of truancy, which is to be “absent without permission.” This would communicate to Nebraska parents that you trust their judgment and common sense at least as much as that of legal authorities. But at the same time, it would allow the education and legal systems to intervene much sooner in the cases of kids who are actually truant.
  In short, it would allow the truly helpful aspects of this new law to take effect even sooner in the cases of kids skipping school; it would still improve attendance among those students whose failure in school is almost directly linked to their absences. And it would return legal protection to the students whose parents are always in contact with their schools in regard to their absences, whose children never miss an unexcused day of school in their lives, because their parents are conscientiously involved in what’s going on.
  Sen. Fulton’s bill is not a cure-all for parents who want their authority honored by Nebraska law again. It requires parents to be involved in the crafting of attendance policy at their local district level to get what they want.
  But it returns state law to a position in which students and their families are protected from government scrutiny when their absences are excused by school authorities. There is no such protection in the law as it currently stands – nor in Senator Ashford’s proposed amendment, LB 933 – as all students come under government scrutiny when they hit 20 days, no matter the reason. Furthermore, all students who’ve missed any school whatsoever are constantly under threat of legal interference, by virtue of the provision which allows a County Attorney to get involved at any point after a child misses one day of school.
  In fact, there is a case in which a boy who has missed only two excused days this year (after having a rough year with a lot of absences last year) has been made a state ward. In another case, a girl who missed a lot of school last year – although less than 20 days – when her mother was struggling with brain cancer, has been referred to law enforcement for missing seven excused days this year.
  These situations are not consistent with life in a free society. The paradigm shift in the attitude of the state toward parents is deeply troubling.
  There are none among us who don’t fully agree that school attendance is important. It is! But we don’t agree with this law, because we don’t agree that government is the best decider of when non-attendance is in the best interest of a child, nor that government is properly used to investigate the families of students whose parents maintain contact with a school in regard to their children’s absences.
  There is a scene in Robert Bolt’s classic play, “A Man For All Seasons”, in which Sir Thomas More vigorously explains to his would-be son-in-law, the vital importance of honoring established law in protecting the personal political safety of every individual. It proceeds thus:
  William Roper: So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!
  
  Sir Thomas More: Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?
  
  William Roper: Yes, I'd cut down every law in England to do that!
  
  Sir Thomas More: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man's laws, not God's! And if you cut them down, and you're just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake!
  Governor, if we are willing to "cut a great road through the law" – both the natural law and U.S. Constitutional law, which recognize parents as holding a fundamental right to make decisions about the well-being of their children, free from government oversight and investigation – in order to get after “the devil” (bad parents, however that may be defined; and the definition keeps expanding) we will soon find that the social situation for children and families only gets worse.
  Governor Heineman, please recognize the great affront which this law is to both natural law and Constitutional law, as well as to common sense. Please study Senator Fulton’s bill, and send a message to Nebraska parents that you trust them, and that you will protect them and their families while working to reduce real truancy, by supporting this bill.
  Sincerely, 
  Autumn F. Cook
  
  More... »
  
  
• 13:32

  Community Voices: Honesty

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  Honesty said on: December 28, 2011, 1:41 am
  
  This law intimidates and discredits parents and children. In order to achieve a "uniform standard of measurement" it assumes all parents are being dishonest. Niether Doctor's notes nor Court orders will stop investigation. The law requires that the County Attorney approve of all absences or the child will face prosecution. That is wrong. It is not okay for parents to have to "get permission" from a County Attorney or the Superintendent to make a decision that is intuitive to the parent. It is my hope that school districts, state government and the courts will recognize and prize the value of honest parents making decisions in the best interest of their children. It is my hope that this law will be amended to recognize "excused" absences and the natural right of parents to direct the rearing of their children.
  If parents want help from the state in enforcing attendance, the state could provide help in as few as 5 absences unexcused per the parent. But in exchange for the stringent number of "unexcused absences," the parent should be given total control to define what is excused and not excused. Schools and the state have to trust the HONESTY of the parents or we have no rule of Law.
  
  Read more: [journalstar.com]
  
  More... »
  
  
• 13:15

  Community Voices: Cindyl

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  cindyl said on: December 27, 2011, 10:47 am
  
  My grand daughter missed 20 days of school last year. She had a doctor's note for each time. She has a hole in her heart and she is very prone to infections. She had surgery x 8 and another one next year. We had to go to court in fear they would take her away.
  
  My daughter is a single mother and does not have a lot of money, but got a lawyer she did not want to lose her daughter. We went to court three times, the first two time the judge came out and put off case for the next month. We spent all of 4 minutes each time. The third time We got to court and were told that the case was dropped. What a waste of money! There were 3 lawyers there two of whick tax payers paid for, two CPS there and lawyer for the state and the judge. What alot of money spent for nothing.
  
  It is not a bad law but I think the law should be changed to not include students with doctor's notes for illness. My daughters are not sending thier children to school sick because of this law and more and more children will pick up illness at school.
  
  Read more: [journalstar.com]
  
  More... »
  
  
• 13:11

  Community Voices: MommaGoat

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  MommaGoat said on: December 27, 2011, 10:52 am
  
  I used to follow the illness guidelines to a T (since they make sense medically), until I started getting those three page letters. I still don't send the kids to school with a fever, but do send them back before they are 24 hours fever free. The first one I got was when my daughter had influenza B and then 6 days later got the H1N1 flu, she missed 10 days in one month. I just got another set for my son, one of the days he missed was the day before Thanksgiving and I sent a note but he gave it to his teachers, so he was "unexcused".
  
  I called the registrar office and told them about the note, that we were traveling out of state, etc. The registrar said the note had to go to her. In the end she marked him truant for all classes because he didn't give the note to HER, even though I called. I am still trying to get that changed to parent approved absence.
  
  My son is planning a military career and he doesn't want that truancy on his record. I don't know if it is just SWH, or if they are all control freaks - not even letting a parent excuse a kid for the day before Thanksgiving!
  
  Read more: [journalstar.com]
  
  More... »
  
  
• 13:07

  Community Voices: Scott J

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  Scott J said on: December 27, 2011, 12:09 pm
  
  Some people want to draw a correlation between a kindergartner missing school and adults missing work. I appreciate that employer's hold adults to certain standards of attendance, adults have the ability to suck it up and go to work. Do you really think that the standard for a 40 year old equates fully to the standard for a 5 year old?
  
  The biggest issue hear is that their is not any "excused" absence. The process gets started and agency's spend tax dollars for "excessive" absences even if there is a doctor's note for each day missed. I guess bureaucrats know better than doctors who is healthy enough to go to school.
  
  I can keep my kid home to get healthy or have him sick and not learning for a longer period of time. Being a parent actually makes you responsible for both the Health and education of your child.
  
  I highly doubt that my kinder-gardener will be spending the day playing video games and smoking if I keep her home sick. My child missed 5 days for legitimate medical conditions with doctor's notes. (H1N1 and broken arm) I received a letter regarding these excessive absences.
  
  If this is a High School issue than apply the law to High School Kids. The law as it is written treats 5 year olds the same as 18 year olds. Common sense would dictate that if all your arguments in support of the law deal with Truant High School kids, then High School Kids should be the focus of your new policy not all kids.
  
  Read more: [journalstar.com]
  
  More... »
  
  
• 13:03

  Community Voices: Bojo

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  bojo said on: December 27, 2011, 11:14 am
  
  I hate this law. I understand what it's purpose is, but there needs to be some kind of middle for some students. I myself have a daughter that has a very weak immune system and gets very sick very easily, when she's sick she sees the doctor every time and always comes home with new meds.
  
  Her system does not accept a bunch of the meds on the market. Even though she goes to the doctor and gets a note excusing her from school she and I still have to deal with this truancy law. Im sorry, but if they are sick enough to go to the doctor and the doctor verifies they are sick and not faking that should NOT be counted against the child!
  
  Read more: [journalstar.com]
  
  More... »
  
  
• 12:46

  Community Voices: Nebraskaheat

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  nebraskaheat said on: December 26, 2011, 11:00 pm
  
  I hate this law. I have 2 children in school right now. One missed one day all last year. The other missed 13. And 5 in one quarter which prompted a notification from the County attorney. Absolutely a joke. My son has a terribble immune system. Always had. I have to work night shifts and my wife day shifts because we had used up our sick days and vacation days picking him up from daycare because he had gotten sick. The same thing happened when he started school. But now the school system and the people
  
  monitoring this think we're just not caring enough about getting him to school? Yeah, never mind he has a sibling that lives with him/us and goes to the same school and almost NEVER misses a day. Nope, it must be we just don't care about this certain child's education is all.
  
  I love the hypocrites preaching responsibility. I have a daughter who just won the President's award for physical fitness, has never received anything less than an A since kindergarten, and is a volunteer in her Junior high's "antibullying" program.
  
  Yet I'm also an irresponsible "grown child" myself who doesn't care enough about my child's education and that's why I'm complaining, because my son has asthma and every cold that your "normal" kid deals with in stride, turns into bronchitis and my son is on a nebulizer taking albuterol and needing treatments and rest for 2 or 3 days.
  
  So irresponsible of me I know. To take a 3rd shift job to be there when my kid is sick, as opposed to just knocking on the State's door for them to cover my medical and provide food stamps. Instead I do the right thing, we work our tails off to make it, and I still have to deal with a County Attorney questioning my parenting and demanding written explanations as if I should have to answer to him.
  
  
  Read more: [journalstar.com]
  
  More... »
  
  
• 12:43

  Community Voices: Heyyah

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  Heyyah said on: December 26, 2011, 11:11 pm
  
  Where is the law charging parents who neglect their children by sending them to school sick because their parent does not want to take time off work to stay home with them, thus exposing their child's germs to other children who eventually get sick too, and whose parents, that stay home with their sick child, receive the three page truancy letter explaining how it is unfair to teachers, other parents, the student, the tax payers, etc. for your sick child to be absent from school for a week. When I went to school, there was probably 1 kid in the whole school that got perfect attendance.
  
  Read more: [journalstar.com]
  
  More... »
  
  
• 12:42

  Community Voices: Gabaway

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  Gabaway said on: December 26, 2011, 11:44 pm
  There needs to be room for grey areas in this law. My daughter attends a local parochial school and up until this year we have never been made to feel bad about absences. This year we have a new teacher and she is extremely strict about it. I take my daughter's education very seriously (for crying out loud I choose to PAY to send her to school) and take great offense when I am called out on her missing a day. I am her parent and I will decide if she is too sick to attend. To imagine being sent to court or attacked by the County Attorney's Office is a horrid thought. I understand there are cases where this is warranted but it seems too many are getting caught up that do not deserve it and that is not right!
  Read more:  [journalstar.com]
  
  More... »
  
  
• 12:22

  Community Voices: Charbonneau

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  Charbonneau said on: December 30, 2011, 7:34 am
  
  I can speak on this law from personal experience. This law forced me to drop out of high school to avoid being put in a foster home. I missed more then 20days of high school my freshman year. The combination of nee surgery and a poor family(lack of transportation). Caused me to miss so many days. I became award of the state. Still I never had any CPS worker offer to take me to school. This law combined with the automatic failure policy schools have contributed to me dropping out. What's the point of attending class when your an automatic fail. In some cases I had an A but was auto fail.
  
  It's time for the rights to be returned to the parent. This notion that the state government knows best is an infringement upon Liberty. We need to get these bureaucratic laws out of our schools and out of personal lives. Why should a parent be in fear of the government? What if these laws actually do the opposite of what they were intended to do? What happened to our rights? The right to say when our child will be attending school and when they won't. Nebraska you need to wake up. CPS has been child harvesting to get more federal money. It's only the poor who's children get taken away. Look into it. What does that tell you? The rich have lawyers to protect there rights. To me that is not equal justice. What does a higher income have to do with being a parent?
  
  Read more: [journalstar.com]
  
  More... »
  
  
• 12:07

  The Spivack Story

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  I have grave concerns over this truancy law, as well as many other issues we are having in our legislature these days. My biggest concern over this particular law is that parents, the guardians, protectors, and advocates of our children, are being scrutinized and punished.
  
  If my children are in the "HAL" program, they have good grades and are able to pass into the next grade with flying colors, but have more than 20 absences, what exactly is the problem? 
  My elementary children are ADHD and have a very difficult time falling asleep even with medicinal help. Their doctor and I have been working diligently for 3 years for a solution to this problem. However, the fact remains that if they have difficulty falling asleep, they have a bigger problem trying to get up in the morning. 
  That being the case, with the new 15 minute earlier start time, makes it nearly impossible for my children to make it to school on time. Guess what, every time they are late, that time gets tacked onto the 20 days for absenteeism, in smaller increments. If this law becomes a problem for me personally, I will have to look at the possibility of home schooling my children! 
  I am of the opinion that EVERY government official works for me, not against me. That is, For the people, By the people...I pay your salary, I voted to put you into office. I can vote you out and I will. For those of us who care about our children in every aspect of their lives, medical, emotional, and educational, this law stinks! It needs to either be repealed or at the very least reworked!
  
  Marcie Spivack
  Millard Public Schools
  Omaha, NE
  
  More... »
  
  
• 09:28

  Persuade Your School Board to Support the Fulton Bill

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  Crystal Young, an NFF team leader, went to her school board Monday evening in Gretna and educated them about the goals of the Nebraska Family Forum, and  about why Nebraska’s “truancy” law is broken and needs to be fixed. She said, “The board is pretty laid back and ignorant of most of the stories associated with this law.” She read to them a short synopsis of the stories that illustrate the personal impact this law has had on many families, and the NFF mission statement from 'NFF: Memorandum of Understanding.' She then provided them an overview of the three bills that have been introduced to address the problems.
  
  She encouraged the Board to support Fulton's bill, LB 1165 - to return power to local districts, give parents the power to work with their district school boards to set acceptable attendance policies which protect families from government intrusion, and still define truancy and give districts power to expose educational neglect. She believes they understood her arguments for the Fulton bill.
  
  My feeling is that we need to have one person take the 5 minutes at the beginning of every School Board meeting in every district in the state to encourage them to support the Fulton Bill. Most school boards are unaware of the full scope of the issues surrounding the law, and would appreciate being provided clear and easy-to-read documents that provide clarification.
  
  The team leaders of the NFF are very busy working for a victory on the Fulton bill in the Judiciary Committee, and there is much to be done. We need the support of all parents across the state who are concerned about the effects of this law now and in the future. Please arrange your schedules so that you can attend your school board meeting, add your efforts to Crystal's, and increase our chances of fixing this law in the best possible way for every Nebraska family.
  
  Here are the documents I recommend that you provide to your school boards:
  
  Three legislative bills in 2012 seek to solve problems with the 2010 law:
  
  [www.nebraskafamilyforum.org]
  
  Sen. Fulton Introduces Bill to Restore Local Control Over School Attendance
  
  [www.nebraskafamilyforum.org]
  
  Memorandum of Understanding to Amend Nebraska’s Truancy Law
  
  [www.nebraskafamilyforum.org]
  
  More... »
  
  
• Nebraska blogs (US-NE), 01/19/2012
• 12:47

  Sen. Fulton Introduces Bill to Restore Local Control Over School Attendance

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  Today, Sen. Tony Fulton of Lincoln introduced LB 1165, which will address the negative effects of the 2010 attendance law. If successful, the amendment will restore the distinction between excused and unexcused absences, ensuring that students with excused absences never find themselves referred to law enforcement for “truancy”.
  
  This proposed change is not an attempt to go back to the days when school districts and county law enforcement were, in many cases, failing to intervene early enough to help “at-risk” youth. Instead, the amendment seeks to preserve the original intent of the law - to reduce habitual truancy that sometimes causes academic failure and delinquency - while protecting students whose absences are excused. The proposed amendment would significantly tighten the threshold that allows county-level agencies to intervene by defining as truant a student who is absent five days in one quarter, or ten days in one year, when such absences are “not excused to the satisfaction of district policy” by their parents. The statute is in harmony with the definition of truancy from the US Department of Justice, which is to be absent without permission.
  
  This bill would return local authority over truancy to local school districts, and the families in their community. Together with elected school boards and school administrators, parents can craft common sense attendance policy that will define what types of absences will be excused. These locally-crafted policies can better serve the unique needs of each particular district.
  
  Nebraska's original mandatory attendance law designated this power to local districts decades ago, but the 2010 law removed local district control over referral of students to law enforcement, and gave that authority to the state, which is now requiring all districts to file a report on a student who has missed 20 days, whether the district had excused those absences or not. In this way, school district policy became nearly pointless, as children whose absences were excused under school district policy still found themselves in court.
  
  Parents have long relied on rational and reasonable school district attendance policy, and the common sense discretion of school administrators, and for the most part parents across the state would agree that there were no problems to speak of with their district's attendance policies prior to 2010. For the most part, parents have enjoyed a positive and cooperative relationship with their building principals, who retained the most discretion over whether or not to excuse an absence. For generations, school authorities have honored the authority of parents and their role in excusing their children from school based on their own best judgment.
  
  Unfortunately, many parents have become increasingly concerned with the policy changes made by their school districts in the wake of the 2010 law. What used to seem very simple - excusing your child from school - has become an intimidating, anxiety-causing process, as the attitude of school administrators has hardened and they insist on documentation for nearly all absences, and count even worthy family travel as unexcused. Some districts have taken the law as a challenge to crack down hard on non-attendance in any form. In Millard Public Schools, for example, the district administrators and School Board have gone well beyond what the law requires by removing any discretion principals used to have in excusing students for educational, personal, or other legitimate reasons. In addition, they have specifically prohibited reasons for absence that used to be commonplace.
  
  While the Nebraska Family Forum seeks to restore local control to the state truancy statute, on the tried and true principle that government closest to the people governs best, many parents have legitimate concerns that their elected school boards will not roll back these changes. The proposed amendment only works to restore respect for parental authority if parents hold school administrators accountable, and require that they respect parental authority.
  
  One thing is certain: school boards are elected, they work for the people who elect them, and district policies cannot go into effect until school boards vote for them. School board politics are democracy at work. Under LB 1165, a parent can work to ensure his judgment is honored in the process which sets local attendance policy. This process is designed to work on consensus between elected school boards, administrators, and parents.
  
  If local control is not restored, then a parent’s only hope is that the unelected school district bureaucrats and the county attorney will exercise common sense. Local school boards are the appropriate body in which to address the definition of legitimate absences, set attendance policy, and establish the boundaries between a parent’s authority and a school district’s responsibility.
  
  Should parents be concerned about the level of power that the mandatory attendance law places in the hands of school districts? It’s a good question. If parents aren’t actively involved in the politics of their school district, then they certainly should be. For the few parents who have tried to affect the policy-making in their school districts - to no effect - they may be familiar with the sentiments of a former Millard mom, Autumn Cook, who addressed some comments to school board member Mike Kennedy on the Millard Parent Society Facebook page. She said, “I have the impression that School Board members exert very little influence over the superintendent. It seems that the School Board just rubber stamps whatever comes out of his administration, with only surface questions asked and no real opposition to any ideas whatsoever. If the staff says it’s good, it must be; they're the experts.”
  
  This sentiment is widespread among parents in our state, who are becoming more familiar with the process. It was particularly disturbing to Millard parents who fought hard to get changes to the expansion of the truancy law in 2011, before it was passed. Cook passionately censured her school board - which continued to tell parents to talk to the Legislature, because the new policies were its fault - with these words, “We spent a LOT of time talking to our representatives about this over-reaching law. We traveled to the Capitol in a snowstorm to express our concerns about the expansion of the law in 2011. We held sustained dialogue with our own senators about the issue. We brought our kids down to the Capitol to share stories of what the original law did, and spent the better part of an hour working out an arrangement with the sponsor of the bill that would protect us from outrageous invasion of our families. But that rested on one thing - you! We counted on our local attendance policies being applied, not on having them wiped out and overhauled to put teeth into this threat. We counted on our school boards to have minds of their own, to be able to see the terrifying, unintended consequences of this monstrosity and say, ‘We'll trust the good parents who have raised the good students who have given us our distinguished reputation and leave our attendance policy as is, thank you very much!’”
  
  To be fair, it is hard to expect school boards to be accountable to parents when so few parents voice their opinions to their school boards, whether those opinions are positive or negative. Parents must be informed, active, and vocal in holding their school boards accountable for the policies under which they live. We elect them to protect our interests, but if their constituents do not in large numbers communicate their expectations, we shouldn’t be surprised when they don’t meet them.
  
  Sen. Fulton’s amendment is an opportunity to put government back in its proper order. It is a strong, clear state truancy statute that designates appropriate control over attendance policy to school districts, and the communities who fund and govern them. It allows authorities to reach at-risk students much earlier than they could under the old statute, by requiring students with unexcused absences to be referred to law enforcement much sooner. It ensures that children with excused absences - including kids who are sick, spending quality time with a deployed parent, visiting a sick relative, traveling with family, and pusuing athletic and educational excellence - will not be punished under the law.
  
  More... »
  
  
• 09:37

  Three legislative bills in 2012 seek to solve problems with the 2010 law

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  Sen. Brad Ashford Introduced LB 933
  
  *Sen. Ashford's bill changes the process by which children who have accrued 20 absences are investigated by the county attorney, and the location of the first meeting with parents after school administrators, in collaboration with the County Attorney, have decided what action to take. It does not change the fact that children who miss twenty days (even if those days are excused via school district policy) will have their "case" reviewed (investigated) by the county attorney.
  If the child is absent more than twenty days per year or the hourly equivalent, the attendance officer shall file a report school district shall review the case with the county attorney of the county in which such person resides, and they shall determine if any further action is necessary to get the child to attend school regularly. If the school district and the county attorney determine that further action is necessary to address the child’s attendance, there shall be a meeting between the parents of the child, the school, and the county attorney or his or her designee at a location determined by the school. The county attorney may file a complaint against a person violating section 79-201 before the judge of the county court of the county in which such person resides charging such person with violation of section 79-201 or may file a petition under the Nebraska Juvenile Code alleging the person violating section 79-201 is a juvenile described in subdivision (3)(a) or (3)(b) of section 43-247. Nothing in this section shall preclude a county attorney from being involved at any stage in the process to address excessive absenteeism.
  Sen. Abbie Cornett Introduced LB 917
  
  *Sen. Cornett's bill exempts absences due to documented illness, or deployment activities of a military parent, from both school level/district level interventions, and review/investigation by the county attorney. It carves out special protections for these two groups of kids, but does not address the many other legitimate reasons that kids miss school, which prior to the 2010 law where covered under school district's policies.
  All school districts shall have a written policy on excessive absenteeism developed in collaboration with the county attorney of the county in which the principal office of the school district is located. The policy shall include a provision indicating how the school district and the county attorney will handle cases in which excessive absences are due to documented illness that makes attendance impossible or impracticable not include absences due to documented illness or absences related to deployment activities as provided in Article V, Section E, of the Interstate Compact on Educational Opportunity for Military Children, and the policy shall state the number of absences or the hourly equivalent upon the occurrence of which the school shall render all services in its power to compel such child to attend some public, private, denominational, or parochial school, which the person having control of the child shall designate, in an attempt to address the problem of excessive absenteeism. The number of absences in the policy shall not exceed five days per quarter or the hourly equivalent. School Except as otherwise provided in this section, school districts may use excused and unexcused absences for purposes of the policy. Such services shall include, but need not be limited to…
  If the child is absent more than twenty days per year or the hourly equivalent, excluding absences due to documented illness, other excused absences as defined by the school district's written policy on absenteeism required by this section, or absences related to deployment activities as provided in Article V, Section E, of the Interstate Compact on Educational Opportunity for Military Children, the attendance officer shall file a report with the county attorney of the county in which such person resides. The county attorney may file a complaint against a person violating section 79-201 before the judge of the county court of the county in which such person resides charging such person with violation of section 79-201 or may file a petition under the Nebraska Juvenile Code alleging the person violating section 79-201 is a juvenile described in subdivision (3)(a) or (3)(b) of section 43-247. Nothing in this section shall preclude a county attorney from being involved at any stage in the process to address excessive absenteeism.
  Sen. Tony Fulton Introduced LB 1165
  
  *Sen. Fulton's bill separately defines "excessive absenteeism" and "truant", restoring the traditional definition of "truancy": to miss school without permission. It leaves school districts to address excessive absenteeism through the many tools at their disposal, while tightening the threshold for the kids who miss school without being excused to the satisfaction of school district policy. In this way, it provides for earlier intervention with "truants," but prevents children with absences that are excused under their district policies from having any dealings with law enforcement. Sen. Fulton's amendment is the only amendment that restores full local control and school governance, and gives parents an accessible democratic avenue to address inadequacies in their school district attendance policy that may unfairly classify their child as a "truant" under the law.
  In very rare cases, when school authorities determines that the parents are willfully and continually thwarting the education of their children by excusing their children from school for illegitimate reasons, the school has the ability to report such parents to HHS for "educational neglect".
  All school districts shall have a written policy on excessive absenteeism developed in collaboration with the county attorney of the county in which the principal office of the school district is located. The policy shall include a provision indicating how the school district and the county attorney will handle cases in which excessive absences are due to documented illness that makes attendance impossible or impracticable, and the policy shall state the number of absences or the hourly equivalent upon the occurrence of which the school shall render all services in its power to compel such child to attend some public, private, denominational, or parochial school, which the person having control of the child shall designate, in an attempt to address the problem of excessive absenteeism. The number of absences in the policy shall not exceed five days per quarter or the hourly equivalent. School districts may use excused and unexcused absences for purposes of the policy. Such services shall include, but need not be limited to…
  If a child is truant, the school districts shall provide written notice to the parent, guardian, or custodian of the child. If the a child is absent more than twenty days per year or the hourly equivalent habitually truant and absent more than five days in one quarter or ten days per year or the hourly equivalent, the school district shall review the case with the county attorney of the county in which such person resides, and they shall determine if any further action is necessary to get the child to attend school regularly. If the school district and the county attorney determine that further action is necessary to address the child’s attendance, there shall be a meeting between the parents of the child, the school, and the county attorney or his or her designee at a location determined by the school. the attendance officer shall file a report with the county attorney of the county in which such person resides. The county attorney may file a complaint against a person violating section 79-201 before the judge of the county court of the county in which such person resides charging such person with violation of section 79-201 or may file a petition under the Nebraska Juvenile Code alleging the person violating section 79-201 is a juvenile described in subdivision (3)(a) or (3)(b) of section 43-247. Nothing in this section shall preclude a county attorney from being involved at any stage in the process to address excessive absenteeism.
  For purposes of this section, (a) excessive absenteeism means excused or unexcused absences from school in excess of the number of days or hourly equivalent stated in the school district policy and (b) truant means not excused to the satisfaction of district policy by the parent, guardian, or other person having control of the child.
  
  More... »
  
  
• Nebraska blogs (US-NE), 01/18/2012
• 08:19

  Open Letter to Governor Heineman: Return to the Traditional Definition of Truancy

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  
  Dear Governor Heineman,
  I have been a tremendous supporter of your politicalendeavors for many years.  I have beenfortunate enough to work on committees you chaired or formed.  I have followed your political career withgreat enthusiasm.  I have voted continuouslyfor you and your administration at all levels. I believe you have always had the best interest of Nebraska in mind.
  That is why, with a heavy heart, I am writing this letter toexpress my deepest and most heartfelt outrage regarding your initial andcontinued support of the new truancy laws. For a conservative, republican governor to rewrite the definition oftruancy, and in the most fundamental way strip away the rights of parents,leaves me speechless.  
  This law is an intrusion on the most basic parental rightsand does nothing to help children with attendance issues.  Throwing families into the legal system is traumaticto the children and strains the family. This is an individual school issue and should be handled at the (individual)school level.  
  In the Omahaarea alone, hundreds of thousands of dollars are being spent to administer thisprogram.  This money could be betterutilized at the individual school level to assist children and parents who havereal truancy issues.  Children that haveloving and caring parents that are making parental decisions to keep theirchildren out of class are decisions made by the family, not by government.  Also, the strain and added burden this placeson Nebraska’scourt and child welfare system is an outrage and total mismanagement of taxpayer money.
  Please reconsider your position on this law and return thetraditional definition of truancy to the law’s language and return to yourconservative, republican roots to give parental rights back to theparents.  Please stay true to yourconservative values and keep government regulation and the judicial system outof our schools and our homes.  
  Sincerely,
  ReginaMiller
  
  More... »
  
  
• Nebraska blogs (US-NE), 01/17/2012
• 21:50

  HSLDA: Homeschool Families Face Criminal Charges

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  
  Homeschool Families Face Criminal Charges
  
  New truancy enforcement laws have sparked criminal charges against several homeschool families in Nebraska. A Dawson County Sheriff’s deputy actually threatened to remove one family’s children unless they enrolled them in public school.
  
  The family had recently moved from another state to Nebraska. Believing that Nebraska regulations permitted them to select their own school year without regard to the public school calendar, they had not filed their exemption paperwork.
  
  HSLDA Staff Attorney Michael Donnelly called the deputy, and he agreed that it would be inappropriate to remove the children under the circumstances. However, the county prosecutor was unwilling to drop criminal charges, and the family received a formal summons to appear in court. HSLDA is working with local counsel Amber Ackerson to represent the family. So far, other contacts from homeschool families have been resolved without court appearances.
  
  The new laws, which passed in 2010, have received significant media attention and criticism. The law shifts responsibility for making decisions about school absences from schools to the legal system. School districts must now report to their county attorney if a student misses more than 20 days of school in an academic year—even if some of those absences were excused.
  
  The Omaha World Herald reports parental opposition.
  
  “At what point are families no longer free to govern themselves?” asked Stephanie Morgan, a Millard parent and leader of the Nebraska Family Policy forum. “I don’t think [the government] should be intervening so often and so readily.”
  
  Critics often cite an increase in government intervention in cases where children have been unable to attend school due to chronic illnesses. State Senator Tony Fulton reportedly said that the law should be amended because, “We are criminalizing good parents to get after bad parents.” HSLDA agrees with Senator Fulton that parents—not the state—are in the best position to determine what is in the best interests of their children.
  
  These situations show how a law that was not intended to affect homeschoolers can nevertheless affect them. Thus, it is essential that vigilance be exercised and that homeschoolers are prepared to defend themselves both in the legislature and in court.
  
  More... »
  
  
• 08:53

  The Noelle Family: Exceptional Athlete...Exceptional Student

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  I am a teacher's daughter and was raised with education being very important to my family. I still believe education is very important. A love of education runs in my family. I am a preschool teacher my sister is a teacher, and another sister is a principal. I believe it is important to attend school regularly. However, I do not agree with how far they have taken this truancy law.
  
  I have a middle school child who has ADHD but does well in school. Her success in school can be attributed to many things; early childhood intervention, excellent teachers, love and support at home, and her love of sports. Not just any sport but gymnastics. Her sport. As anyone who is familiar with ADHD in children knows they are stimulant seekers and if you want them to achieve success you need to keep them stimulated. We found that with gymnastics, but unfortunately for us, Nebraska cannot afford gymnastics in their schools so we have to be in a club.
  
  The point I am getting at is my daughter strives for honor roll grades because she does not want to miss gymnastics. For us gymnastics is not just a couple hours a week it is 20 hours a week with competitions as far as Texas. For my daughter this could mean a college scholarship. She is also in band and she is extremely busy.
  
  I just don’t understand why absences related to my daughter’s band competitions, doctors visits (she is required to go every 3 months because of ADHD or she cannot get her medicine), and sick days all count toward the 20 days allowed under the law when these absences are excused. To further complicate our particular situation she misses school for gymnastics. We are careful with these absences because we have to travel. We try to leave as late as we can but it is difficult in winter weather.
  
  It makes no sense to me that her participation in gymnastics is considered unexcused however if she went to a track meet it would be excused. WHY, because Nebraska CAN afford track as a sport? (Not that it matters much since they all count toward possible legal action against my family).
  
  This is frustrating because I believe I am being an advocate for my daughter. We will not let her go to gymnastics if her grades drop so therefore she keeps her grades up because she wants to go to practice. It’s a win win. However, last year I came dangerously close to being handed over to the county attorney with band competitions, gymnastics competitions and traveling, and sick days (including a broken toe). Everyone knows it is difficult to go to the doctor afterschool to get these doctor appointments done. Explain to me how 20 days in a 180 day school year (10%) is enough for children like my daughter?
  
  More... »
  
  
• Nebraska blogs (US-NE), 01/13/2012
• 01:57

  Senator Ashford's Amendment: Opens a Dialog with Parents

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  Early this week, Senator Brad Ashford introduced LB 933, an amendment to Nebraska’s school attendance law that he believes will go a long way to addressing the negative consequences of the law. While I see this as a good faith gesture and the beginning of what could be a positive dialogue with parents, the amendment falls short of addressing the primary concerns that have arisen.
  
  Nebraska’s intense focus on school attendance as a strategy to decrease juvenile delinquency and educational failure was well-intentioned, but has a faulty foundation. It operates on a fundamental mistrust of parents and principals, who in the past were primarily responsible for excusing children from school and exempting them from being classified as “truants”: status offenders under the mandatory school attendance law.
  
  A key provision of the law passed in 2010 was the removal of any distinction for excused absences. Instead, schools are now required to file a report with the county attorney when a student reached a total of 20 days of absence. This was based on a belief that, since young children who miss 20 days of school do so almost entirely with excuse from a parent, there absolutely must be county attorney review to verify that students who are reported sick by their parents were actually ill.
  
  Though Ashford’s amendment changes the location of the county level review, it does not change the fact that the county attorney is brought into every case at 20 days, regardless of the reason for the absences. Even with Ashford’s amendment, the law would continue to exclude parents from the process that determines if “further action” is needed, and only after the county attorney and Superintendent have determined what is “necessary” are the parents of the child brought in.
  
  The law contains no constraints on school and state authorities, and provides broad prosecutorial power that allows school administrators to bring the county attorney in at “any stage in the process to address excessive absenteeism.” This broad power, added to the law in 2010, has been used to “intervene” legally in cases where students have missed only a small number of days. In one case, a student at Bellevue high school had missed only 7 days when the count attorney was brought into their case and they were required to go to court. In another case in Lincoln, school administrators brought the county attorney into the “process to address excessive absenteeism” when a middle school boy had missed only two days of school this year (both of which were excused).
  
  In both cases, the justification used was that the student had a “pattern of problematic absenteeism”. The Bellevue high student had missed 16 days in the previous year, due to a difficult family year in which her mother suffered from cancer. The Lincoln student had missed just over 20 days the year before (days also excused by school authorities per school district policy). These missed days were the only “offense” these students had committed. They were both good students and were not previously involved in the juvenile justice system in anyway. The measures taken against these children without having been charged with any crime were intolerable to their parents, as they would be to any reasonable person.
  
  Ashford’s amendment would do nothing to prevent these types of government intrusions into families' lives. The Nebraska Family Forum is asking the Legislature to restore the distinction between excused and unexcused absences, and to limit the access county attorneys have to children who are excused under school district policy. Law enforcement and school authorities should not be given a free hand over parents based on nothing more than the personal discretion of Superintendents and Prosecutors.
  
  If truancy is limited to unexcused absences, and unexcused absences are defined in district policy - established through the consensus of parents, elected school boards, and school authorities - then no one gets a “free hand”. County attorneys, school authorities, and parents are held equally accountable to those policies. These limits on state authority and accountability for parents are essential to a cooperative and respectful relationship between parents and schools. It’s imperative that the state honor the judgment of parents as they exercise their rights, obligations, and responsibilities to raise, manage, direct, and educate their children.
  
  Governor Heineman has been a steady supporter of the 2010 law, and supports the review of all cases at 20 days by the county attorney as essential to reaching the objectives of the law. Some parents have begun to wonder if the Governor shares this mistrust of parents that is so evident among other state officials. He clearly believes that too many parents can’t be trusted to make wise decisions related to school attendance, and indicated this in his comments to the World Herald. He said that the 2,500 “truants” in K-3 (less than 1%) indicated that parents are being irresponsible and “not taking their kids to school”.
  
  Ashford has argued that because these children miss too many excused days of school and could be “at-risk” because of poor parenting, there must be “some review” of every case at 20 days. The assumption is that if the county attorney is not given this avenue to intervene, these children cannot be helped. The truth is there are a wide variety of ways that these children can be helped without county attorney “review”. The law provides school districts with extensive tools for intervention in these cases. Schools are empowered by the law to investigate the causes for excessive non-attendance. They can call parents to meetings; provide educational evaluations and counseling, and pair families with community resources that may help address the causes of non-attendance.
  
  If parents fail to make a good faith effort to ensure that the child receives an appropriate education, to meet with school authorities to discuss attendance issues, or fail to prevent their child from being absent without a valid excuse, school districts have the authority to bring the county attorney into the case on the grounds of educational neglect. It seems counterintuitive to hand such broad powers over families' lives to law enforcement and state officials because a very small percentage of children may have their education continually thwarted by their own parents.
  
  Governor Heineman has asked parents to trust the “good old Nebraska common sense” of state officials as they implement the plans and policies that have been derived from the 2010 law. The Nebraska Family Forum is asking the Governor and members of the Judiciary committee to trust the common sense of parents and local governance. We are asking that common sense be demonstrated in the drafting of our laws, as well as in the implementation of them. If we can't trust public officials' common sense to protect us when those laws are passed, how can we expect their common sense to protect us when they're implemented?
  
  We are asking legislators to rectify the truancy statute, and not allow Nebraska law to drop a vast net of state authority over parents, impeding our ability to provide our children with a well-rounded education and ensure their proper nurture and development.
  
  More... »
  
  
• Nebraska blogs (US-NE), 01/12/2012
• 18:04

  Nebraska Family Forum: Memorandum of Understanding to Amend Nebraska’s Truancy Law

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  
  Free Petition by iPetitions.com var _gaq = _gaq || []; _gaq.push(['_setAccount', 'UA-307455-4']); _gaq.push(['_setDomainName', 'ipetitions.com']); _gaq.push(['_setAllowHash', 'false']); _gaq.push(['_setAllowLinker', true]); _gaq.push(['_trackPageview']); (function() { var ga = document.createElement('script'); ga.type = 'text/javascript'; ga.async = true; ga.src = ('https:' == document.location.protocol ? 'https://ssl' : 'http://www') + '.google-analytics.com/ga.js'; var s = document.getElementsByTagName('script')[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(ga, s);})();
  Mission:
  
  It is the Mission of the Nebraska Family Forum (NFF) to amend Nebraska’s school attendance law and restore the classic definition of truancy. In so doing, we will restore the cooperative and respectful relationship between school authorities and parents, preserve a family-centered community, and provide a well-rounded education for our kids.
  
  Guiding Principles:
  
  We believe the family is the single most important element to a child’s ability to learn and be successful in school and life. For this reason, it’s imperative that the state honor the authority of parents as they exercise their rights, obligations, and responsibilities to raise, manage, direct, and educate their children.
  
  We believe that the right of parents to raise their children without undue government interference is a fundamental liberty that has long been protected by the Constitution of the United States and honored by local governments. We believe parents exercise this right when they excuse their child from school based on their own best judgment.
  
  We believe that it is essential to the cooperative and respectful relationship between school authorities and the parents and children they serve, that authorities honor a parent’s authority to discern when an absence from school is in the best interest of his or her child.
  
  We believe that the fundamental right of a parent does not cease to exist simply because a parent may fail to be a model parent. Parents often struggle to meet the needs of their children, but this is not in itself sufficient cause for government intrusion into family life.
  
  We believe that Nebraska’s truancy law systematically undermines parental authority, and will lead to an increase in the long-neglected social problems that often lead to habitual truancy and failure in school.
  
  We believe that flexibility in education, stimulating curriculum, quality teachers, and innovative education reforms can successfully deal with many of the issues that cause truancy -- even in the face of indifferent or ineffective parenting.
  
  We believe that there is no perfect solution to address all the fallible human conditions that exist in family life and that may lead to habitual truancy and failure in school. We warn that governments who seek to micro-manage the everyday choices of parents in pursuit prescribed outcomes, will do great harm to the integrity of the family and by extension, the well-being of children and society as a whole.
  
  
  More... »
  
  
• 17:42

  The Facebook Effect: Dawn

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  My mother became very ill while visiting my sister in NY and was hospitalized with seizures of unknown causes. I had to relieve my sister. I made the decision to take my son as his father works 12-hour shifts and I have no other family here in NE. Though my son is on the honor roll and up until then had NO history of absences I still had to deal with this aggravation. My fear is that if my mother becomes ill again and I have to go to her home in the Caribbean, the Millard school district policy is that they will no longer give you the work to take with you, but pressure the child to make up the work plus keep up upon return. So I have to choose between my only parent and my only child.
  
  More... »
  
  
• 17:40

  The Facebook Effect: Crystal

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  On a positive note, our children came out of school this afternoon to celebrate a family birthday. I talked in advance with the Attendance Vice President, the children requested their assignments a day ahead of time, and turned any work due in before leaving school. I told the complete truth about where and why we would be missing school. The Attendance officer appreciated our honesty, the fact that parents were aware of all the subjects being missed and parents were planning to have missed work done before leaving. Nevertheless he will count it as an unexcused absence. So be it. 
  My children are not behind in any subjects and are good students. Responsible parenting requires that parents do what is necessary for students to do their best academically. Many educators realize that means parents need to take children out of the classroom. The family bonding and emotional security yield far greater dividends than just keeping a seat warm at school. Parents need to give the "I care" time because children naturally want to please their parents and do their best. No Child Left Behind and Race to the Top have done more destroy good education than render any aid to our children.
  
  More... »
  
  
• 17:39

  The Facebook Effect: Liz

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  I'm a single mom whose son gets great grades, and stays out of trouble. My son has missed days this year for reasons out of my control. In one case a student burst his eardrum while playing the "clap" game, so he missed a few days. The school has done nothing about this "clap" game! Then he got injured due to a teachers carelessness - leaving wood on the floor! He severely sprained his ankle and is in a cast and on crutches.These absence shouldn't count since it happened on their watch! This was not his doing. Everyday that should be excused is one day closer to him hitting the magic 20 days. Then what? I'm so scared I could be entangled with juvenile court and HHS. I'm a single mom doing her best! I have a wonderful son! I am terrified that I could lose my greatest gift! My son. I just don't understand. Why should these kinds of absences count as "truant" behavior?
  
  More... »
  
  
• 17:36

  The Facebook Effect: Dawn

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  My daughter, who is an A+/A student, just had a Petition filed against her by the Sarpy County Attorney for missing 5 days this year (after missing 20 last year). Now I have to take her to court next month, which means more school missed for her and work for me. Doesn't that defeat the purpose? This law is absolutely ridiculous! There has to be a better way to go after the children who are truly truant!! I haven't heard from her court-appointed attorney, nor has she answered my email or phone call.
  
  Dawn, your frustration with the process is shared by many who are currently experiencing the same thing. The law has sorted thousands through the system and the court appointed attorneys are swamped, even more than usual, which makes them pretty useless. Another parent I talked to a few days ago said they are on their 6th court date, their public defender has nothing, and they have spent countless hours and money compiling all their records and information to defend themselves.
  
  More... »
  
  
• 15:33

  The Facebook Effect: Anne Schlenz Slingwine

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  I will begin homeschooling my youngest daughter in Jan. because of this law. The decision to homeschool our youngest is a personal one and we will still have one in the high school who has mixed feelings on homeschooling hence I will not pull her. I am taking a chance that with 6 absences she wont be sick. I feel this law was poorly thought out and continue to write to Gov Heinemann about the implications of it and educate everyone I know on exactly what they can do when they become entrapped in the nightmare that so many have experienced. I will be downtown at the board meeting later this month and I am hoping and saying many prayers that we have support on the board . I have lived in Nebraska most of my life, except for my military service and I always thought Ne had a top rated educational system. In my eyes it has deteriorated so much that I feel if we don't stop and get it back on track then it will be lost . What a shame for all the kids in the state. And what's really sad is that all these kids pay the price because our elected officials who are in office to serve US are too busy chasing federal dollars to worry about what's right for the children and the state.
  
  More... »
  
  
• 15:31

  The Facebook Effect: Melanie Williams-Smotherman

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  One of our kitties is very sick and likely will not live many more days, in spite of our efforts. My daughter -  a nearly straight-A student - wanted to spend some time with her kitty before she dies. That means she will be missing school tomorrow, bringing her to 8 days missed: 5 days for her volunteer service trip to Haiti, 2 days from illness, and tomorrow. We'll see how the rest of the year goes, but I find it intriguing (and I'm appalled) that we should even have to consider the short-sighted arrogance of Nebraska officials who think they know better about the well-being of my children. Correction - ... of Nebraska officials who are putting forward a false pretense of caring about the well-being of our children, but who are really attempting to standardize not only our children's education, but our family life - under the law - for their own benefit.
  
  More... »
  
  
• 14:35

  The Facebook Effect: Gina Miller

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  Gina
  
  So did you all see this story about these AMAZING young people who have been invited to dance in the Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade. These ladies will be representing Omaha and Nebraska. Only the top dancers and top dance studios in the entire country are invited to participate . I am sure the Governor is proud of them representing our state so well.
  
  With that said, you will see during the video, that it is a requirement for the girls to be there a week early. They left yesterday and will be there through next weekend, THUS MISSING BEING IN SCHOOL! Better tell them not to go and to turn down this opportunity of a lifetime since they will not be "learning" since they are not physically IN school. Case Closed!
  Kori
  THIS is exactly the biggest reason that I am a member of this group! I had many of these kinds of experiences as a student and I want my own children to have the same kind of experiences. I hate the idea that I might have to tell my children "no" to a once in a lifetime opportunity just because the state thinks it's more important that my child be sitting in a sit, staring at a whiteboard.
  
  More... »
  
  
• 14:29

  The Facebook Effect: Brenda Vosik

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  Brenda
  
  I contacted my son's school to make arrangements to pick him up 15 minutes early tomorrow for an orthodontist appointment. His last hour is a study hall so he would not be missing class, just the last 15 minutes of study hall. I was informed by the secretary that unless I brought a note from the orthodontist to prove my son was there, he would be counted absent and unexcused. Apparently my word isn't good enough and the school is assuming I will be helping my kid join a gang, spray graffiti and generally create havoc between 3:00 and 3:15 tomorrow afternoon.
  
  Crystal
  If the schools do not respect parental authority, then why should children respect parental authority. If children do not respect parental authority then why should they respect the rule of law? If the law then becomes unsustainable, aren't we less than a generation from total tyranny, and chaos. The irony is that this law was written to keep youth away from lawless activities? I'm joining your "gang" Brenda. And I'm not going to lie. I will take the children out to play with our family for a birthday party. It is important enough for Dad to take off work. It is important enough to miss 2 hours of school. Emotional bonds and psychological well being weigh far more in making successful adults than academic instruction.
  
  More... »
  
  
• 14:26

  The Facebook Effect: Dawn Ballosingh

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  Last Spring, the state required all of the staff that works in my department across the state to attend a mandatory meeting. One of the staff is a single mother with no family here. So in order for her to keep her job, she had to drive her children to Minnesota (where the nearest family member lives) the Friday before, drive back to Kearney attend the training for the first three days of the work week and then drive back to MN to pick up her children. In total her children lost 6 1/2 days of school and now she has to deal with the social workers who are investigating her as to how long she leaves her children unattended from when school is out to when she gets home from work (and she has one day a week that she has to work until 7:00 p.m.). Unfortunately for her she does not have the resources and is trying to be as compliant as possible.
  
  More... »
  
  
• 14:24

  The Facebook Effect: Melissa Oehm-Brandquist

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  This is straight from the elementary school nurse for my youngest child's school in Millard. Hmm...are we sending out kids to school sick now because of truancy fears?? See what this nonsense is causing!! The current strain of respiratory flu going around is taking an average of two full weeks to fully recover-not that you can't attend school, but the cough just lingers and kids generally don't cover their cough.
  
  NOTE FROM THE NURSE: If your child is ill, please keep him/her out of school. Sending a sick child to school helps to spread the illness to others. Also, if your child vomits during the night, please do not send him/her to school in the morning.
  
  In addition, children must be fever free WITHOUT the aid of medication (ie Tylenol, Ibuprofen, etc) to be allowed back into school.
  
  ALWAYS remember to wash hands often during cold and flu season, especially after coughing, sneezing, or blowing your nose. Can't find a tissue? Sneeze or cough into your elbow instead of your hands. For more information on colds and flu, go to www.webmd.com/cold-and-flu/ss/slideshow-cold-or-flu
  
  More... »
  
  
• 14:22

  The Facebook Effect: Angela Llewellyn Stevens

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  Angela Llewellyn Stevens
  My oldest daughter will be graduating from Marine Recruit Training next year. Family Day & Graduation are an important event in our family. We plan to take BOTH our girls out of school for three days to fly to South Carolina to attend this important event. I could care less what our elected officials, bureaucrats, and public schools have to say about it. I don't need an excuse or anyone's permission to make these types of decisions. "I" am the parent.
  
  Furthermore, not all illnesses require a doctor's note or office visit. This particular topic came up at the beginning of the year when I had to take my girls to the doctor. I was encouraged to obtain a doctor's note. I was actually pretty peeved that the school wasn't going to take my word for it. After all...we are supposed to be working together. At that moment, after doing some digging, I realized they weren't going to work with me at all. It doesn't matter how many doctor's notes you have the County Attorney can still see you in court. How preposterous!!!!
  
  
  I am a stay-at-home MOM, CEO and in charge of MY family and I don't have to answer to them! This is the United States of America. If it wasn't for me choosing to enroll MY kids in their schools they wouldn't have a JOB. It's no wonder more and more parents are choosing to home school their kids. They have the FREEDOM of CHOICE and can run their home school any way that they see fit. Nebraska has made a HUGE error with this truancy law. The more I think about it the more disgusted I am by it.
  
  More... »
  
  
• 14:19

  The Facebook Effect: Amy Dorenkamp Ellefson

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  When we were looking for schools for our kids last year, the parochial schools were not concerned about the law or any reporting required by it. The public school administrators were very honest about their concerns. One administrator told us that our kids were not welcome in that district if they were going to miss a significant number of days to participate in a national theater production tour. She stated, in writing, that the absences could negatively impact standardized test results and therefore were unacceptable.
  
  More... »
  
  
• 14:12

  The Facebook Effect: Jamie Kay Costello

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  Recently I was able to directly visit with a medical physician, also a RN. I ask point blank what they thought of this new truancy law. To the best of my knowledge, unable to quote word for word answers, this was the reply.
  Answer: If government/state/teachers/county attorneys/school officials etc. want to step up and deny a child of any age an excused absence from school do to sickness then they should be prepared when this law results in a huge lawsuit against the schools/state/even the governor and whoever else when an issue arises such as: 
  Do to the fact parents are being forced to send their child/children to school even though they are ill, because of the truancy law, enforcement is endangering not only the sick child but other children and school professionals. There are highly contagious diseases/sickness that are air born and will spread quickly and these children are being forced to go to school sick because the law has put fear into parents. It is insanity! Sever medical conditions could result and will result eventually endangering the health/well being of a child. 
  Those that put this law in effect did so without any common sense what so ever when they stipulated no medical excuse would be excused. I should add that the medical portion is only one huge flaw in this truancy law there are other big factors pertaining to this truancy law that will eventually be challenged. Not only are parents angered by this law there are many of us in the medical profession that are also.
  I did not ask permission to use publically the medical professionals name therefore will not do so. And again the above answer is not a quote as I can’t remember the exact wording of the reply, but to the best of my knowledge was the given reply.
  
  More... »
  
  
• Nebraska blogs (US-NE), 01/10/2012
• 18:24

  Proposed Changes to Nebraska's School Attendance Law - Two Bills Introduced

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  Two bills dealing with Nebraska's school attendance law were introduced in the Unicameral today.
  
  LB 933, by Senator Brad Ashford, seeks to prevent children with legitimate reasons for being absent from being referred to the county attorney. It does so by establishing a process under which the school district and county attorney meet to determine whether a student who has missed 20 days requires further attention. If so, the county attorney then meets with the parents and the school to determine what further action might be required.
  
  This process is based on a program in Grand Island which has improved school attendance there.
  
  LB 917, by Senator Abbie Cornett, seeks to exempt from referral to law enforcement two groups of students: those with documented illness, and children of military parents who fit under the provisions of the Interstate Compact on Educational Opportunity for Military Children. It would not protect students with other legitimate reasons to be absent from school.
  
  These bills represent a recognition among lawmakers that the law in its current state is sweeping up kids who are not "at-risk," and we are happy to see them. However, the Nebraska Family Forum feels that these bills do not sufficiently protect children and families from undue government oversight and interference. We will discuss our reasons for this position in a later article.
  
  More... »
  
  
• Nebraska blogs (US-NE), 01/06/2012
• 13:28

  Guarantee Success, and Failure is Certain

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  I was on my son’s middle school site planning team this year, and after a full day of work on setting goals and objectives, I left there with serious concerns. I believe our public education system is undergoing a total paradigm shift that will have dire consequences to our children and our nation.
  
  The problem was encapsulated for me in a conversation held during a round table breakout session in which my son’s assistant principal defended a school policy call the ZAP Program (Zeros Aren’t Permitted). The policy doesn’t allow students to miss work, and requires them to score at least a 70% (or C) on all tests and quizzes.
  
  My concern about the policy is that it leaves no room for failure or the natural consequences that accompany it. I believe it teaches students dangerous lessons that will have serious consequences for them in the future. I told the assistant principal that when I was a kid, I knew my grades were my responsibility and if I didn’t make good grades, I met the consequences at home. My parents did not constantly supervise my time or ensure that I completed homework. They left it to me and when the report card came in, if the score was low, then I suffered the consequences.
  
  True to human nature, there was a period of time in middle school where my grades suffered as I asserted my independence and decided school wasn’t that important to me. It may surprise some people that when this attitude presents itself, it does not necessarily mean it is there to stay. By high school, I got good grades and was a responsible self-motivated teen. I learned from experience and failure that opportunities are provided but not guaranteed, and that ultimately it was my responsibility to manage my time, set goals and priorities, and take advantage of opportunities that would enrich my talents and better my life.
  
  My son’s principal responded to this example by saying that it was just a “different world” then. He said, “That kind of education is not possible today.” In education today it is “no longer the mind set to give students opportunity,” but it has become, “I’m going to make you learn it.” His words shocked me, so I repeated his words back to him. It was evident by his reaction that he hadn’t meant it to come out quite like that. But he continued to defend the policy saying, if I let a student choose for themselves whether or not they want to learn, some children will choose to throw away their educational opportunities.
  
  He expanded this reasoning by saying that in today’s world there are just far too many children who don’t have supportive and involved parents, and these kids receive their only discipline and motivation at school. In this environment schools have a greater responsibility to ensure students succeed in a more direct way. Instead of providing opportunities and then leaving it to students, aided by their parents, to take hold of these opportunities, school today must “guarantee” that their students will learn.
  
  My school district’s mission statement exemplifies this thinking. The statement says the mission of our schools “is to guarantee that each student develops the character traits and masters the knowledge and skills necessary for personal excellence and responsible citizenship…” Can schools guarantee that children will develop character and master knowledge? How is it done? It is done as my principal suggested, by taking the attitude, “I’m going to make you learn.” There has always been a certain segment of society that has believed you can guarantee a certain outcome through compulsory means. Whether or not that is true, I believe it is a dangerous way to be teaching American children. John Adams said that, “Children should be educated and instructed in the principles of freedom.” How can we instruct them in the principles of freedom through compulsion?
  
  I was invited to participate in an informal round table executive session of the Judiciary Committee of the Nebraska Unicameral that dealt with problems arising from Nebraska’s school attendance law, which has practically eliminated parental discretion over school attendance in order to compel near-perfect attendance across the board. At the meeting, Nebraska Education Commissioner Roger Breed confidently touted the success of this law even though it has caused students with excused absences to be scrutinized, harassed, and even prosecuted by attorneys and judges.
  
  He was proud that the law had caused school attendance rates to sharply rise in the first year of its implementation. He was not bothered by concerns that it is inappropriate to use fear of legal action to improve attendance overall. He said that we as a community need to “re-evaluate how often we allow children to be absent from school.” He indicated that pressure on schools to guarantee that each child reach certain proficiency leaves no leeway in school attendance. The law sets the standard that students should miss fewer than five days of school in one year. This significantly limits a student’s outside opportunities and diminishes the freedom of parents to provide avenues of excellence outside the public school classroom.
  
  Commissioner Breed’s comments reflect the reality that when schools shift their institutional focus from providing opportunity to guaranteeing success, the variety of opportunity available to students is actually diminished. He said that “it is simply a resource issue”, that the resource of teacher time and attention must be heavily focused on the mission to guarantee success, which is measured by all students reaching an acceptable level of basic proficiency. This takes precedence over other measures of excellence and achievement.
  
  This changing paradigm is moving us into an era where children are not free to pursue excellence, and largely because they are no longer free to suffer the consequences of their failure. My son’s assistant principal defended the ZAP Policy, essentially a “no failure” policy, saying that the policy ensures that students succeed. He uses the same argument Commissioner Breed uses to justify the rigid attendance law. They say these policies work because they ensure that students learn the material at a time in their young lives when, as my principal sees it, they often lack the character development necessary for success. Therefore, if schools and state governments intervene early and require learning, the student will not miss the critical material and skills ensuring they have no “holes in their knowledge” when they’ve grown into their own maturity and character.
  
  The questions I have are: how do the character traits of responsibility and self-motivation develop without experiencing failure and true life consequences? Can any lasting life lessons be learned in a controlled, sterile, forced environment? What about the “holes in their development” when they are grown?
  
  These policies are just two examples of the philosophy of education in our generation. This philosophy dismiss our children as incapable of understanding the consequences of their choices, or unable to understand the value of education at a young age. I reject this idea! If these educators and politicians are right and our children are truly devoid of discretion and judgment in their youth? Are we to force them to learn? Thomas Jefferson taught that “if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education.”
  
  Ensuring that every student is in their desk every day through government compulsion and that they never get a zero in the grade book may achieve the result of universal C-level proficiency. But at what cost? At the cost of highly motivated, self-disciplined, hard working, creative, ambitious, happy children.
  
  If we force “learning” – which in this new philosophy means completing worksheets and projects under compulsion, and successfully regurgitating information on standardized tests – we will teach children far more damaging lessons. We will teach them that they are not free. Or even worse, we will teach them that freedom is dangerous because it allows failure. We will teach them that failure is an unacceptable part of life. Therefore, freedom must also be unacceptable. This loss of freedom and failure teaches a twisted reality and confuses our children. It removes true accountability and teaches them that are not responsible for themselves because others will guarantee their success. In this climate, we raise lazy, entitled children who are unsatisfied with themselves and others and are far more likely to fail in the real world and be unable to recover from it.
  
  My son’s principal would probably dispute this assertion and point to the excellent students at their school, their academic success and maturity. To this I would say simply that the effects of these dangerous lessons are likely to be far more prevalent among children who get their only training and discipline at school. I, for one, work hard to counteract these teachings in my home. Our principal seems to believe that some portion of his students would throw away their educational opportunities if they were free to do so, and that their parents are content to let them fail. It is far more likely that some parents are simply willing to allow their children to learn in the school of life. They are comfortable with the concept that school provides opportunities, and that it is our responsibility to seize them. Granted, parents like that may be fewer today, however common they were in the past.
  
  Educators are becoming increasingly willing to strip children and parents of freedom in education to pursue a guaranteed outcome through an equality of inputs. To do this, they must have total control over students and deny parents their natural rights to direct their child’s education and form their child’s values. I don’t believe they do these things maliciously. I believe that they have good intent. But as Milton Friedman said, “There's nothing that does so much harm as good intentions.” Good intentions that view people’s freedom as the barrier to achievement of high aims are the most dangerous of all.
  
  Over the past decade, a wave of education reforms have swept the nation and are responsible for this paradigm shift that is rewriting the purpose and methods of education in our society. What school should be doing is preparing the young for continued learning later in life, by giving them the love of learning and the skills to do it. William Butler Yeats described beautifully what the purpose of education is when he said, “Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire.” These reforms are bringing our education system to a “fill the pail” paradigm, and run a very serious risk of extinguishing much of the fire which drives creativity and pursuit of unique individual achievement.
  
  Abraham Lincoln wrote, “The philosophy of the school room in one generation will be the philosophy of government in the next.” If we want to raise the next greatest generation of Americans – independent, creative, hardworking, self-reliant, disciplined, responsible, and empowered to build a strong free America – then we can no longer sit idle and allow these changes to be implemented unchallenged. We must become aware of how these “reforms” will impact our children and nation today and in the future, and fight to preserve in our public school system the qualities of education that build strong character: freedom, opportunity, and personal accountability.
  
  More... »
  
  
• Nebraska blogs (US-NE), 01/05/2012
• 15:14

  Letter to Brad Ashford

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}

  January 4, 2012
  

  
  

  Dear Senator Ashford:

  I am attaching an Op-Ed piece from the December 21^st Omaha World-Herald. The writer refers to Maddie Chambers, a 13-year-old girl who personifies the collateral damage resulting from LB 800 and LB 463. I’m sure you know Maddie’s story and you must be familiar with the many other families who are suffering as a result of this overreaching legislation.

  After Maddie’s story was aired on Omaha’s Fox 42 on December 20^th, your voice insisting that the truancy law is working followed her sweet voice pleading with authorities to just leave her alone.

  Senator Ashford, each time you insist that your legislation is not faulty, you look a little more out of touch, a little more hard-hearted, and a little more foolish.

  And now, instead of fixing this faulty law, you are blaming the school districts for the way it has been enforced, stating that they have always been responsible for discerning excused and unexcused absences, that there’s nothing in the law that changes that and therefore, the new law is working.

  That makes absolutely no sense to me. If indeed nothing has changed, then why has there been an 1180% increase in truancy filings from 2008-09 to now? Why have so many families been negatively affected? Why are school districts telling parents that they are only following the law—your law? Blaming the schools is completely illogical and we parents aren’t buying it. The school districts didn’t just suddenly, randomly, out of the blue begin sending threatening letters to sick children after five absences and start involving law enforcement after ten (or even sooner). Their actions are a direct result of the law that you wrote. Please stop blaming the schools; this one’s on you and Nebraska parents know it.

  Parents are angry--they are angry with you. Don’t make the mistake of thinking that this issue is going to fade away, that we’re going to eventually settle down and shut up, that we’ll finally get used to this new “normal”, the nanny state. If this law is not fixed to restore the true definition of truancy (absent without permission), I can guarantee you will still be hearing from angry parents the next time you try to run for elective office. You have taken away our natural rights to make decisions for our own children, and we are not going to let go of this issue until the problem is fixed. Your legislation has caused honest, law-abiding Nebraska citizens to be treated like criminals. You have thrown thousands of children, many of them sick, into the clutches of the juvenile justice system and our failed DHHS. You have forced hundreds of Nebraska families into financial hardship due to attorney fees spent to defend children whose only “crime” was illness. We will not stand for it and we will not be quiet.

  I’m sure you didn’t intend for any of this to happen. I’m sure it was not your intent to hurt ten children for every one child that has been helped, but that’s what has happened. Even according to your own website (also attached), your original intent was different from the end result. So why not just call a spade a spade and acknowledge that your plan didn’t work the way you wanted it to?

  Senator, we all make mistakes, and this time you made a big one. It’s time to step up, admit it, and fix it.

  Sincerely,
  

  
  

  Brenda Vosik

  
  
  More... »
  
  
• 11:05

  Sen. Beau McCoy to Work to Protect Home School in 2012

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  HSLDA has learned that Senator Beau McCoy is working on a bill to amend Nebraska’s recently changed truancy law that has contributed to increased truancy prosecution against homeschoolers.
  
  Sadly, it seems that public officials believe that once parents enroll their children in public school they relinquish the precious rights to direct their child's education. I am pleased that the HSLDA is defending home school rights, since it is a last buffer against complete state control over education, but it is discouraging that there are very few champions willing to protect the vast majority of parents whose kids use their tax payer funded schools.
  
  Senator McCoy was home schooled, and sees a need to protect that constituency. I hope that he is not unmoved by the plea of his public school parents (his own kids in private school) who seek his help in amending Nebraska's "truancy" law. I am concerned that his letter to parents indicated that he believes parents who use the public schools have no right under the law to excuse their children from school and that power rests solely in the hands of school authorities.
  
  While Sen. McCoy obviously believes that parents should have the right to opt out of public education, thus he protects adamantly the rights of home school parents, I fear that he does not with equal feeling advocate for parents rights in general.
  
  Please continue to write and call Sen. McCoy and work to persuade him that his public school constituency is as worthy of his time and efforts. I believe that Sen. McCoy is a good man who will act when he is convinced of the importance of this issue.
  
  More... »
  
  
• Nebraska blogs (US-NE), 01/03/2012
• 22:35

  The Myles Family: Truancy Diversion for Sick Kids?

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  Matha Myles daughter is one of those children swept up in the wide net cast by the passage of Nebraska's invasive school attendance law that is often misrepresented as a "truancy law" but has little to do with actual truancy. Last year her daughter, who is often ill, was forced into truancy diversion despite the fact that her absences were excused and documented. Their personal lives were probed and Martha and her daughter felt violated by the whole process. Her mother told me that she was appalled when the person handling her case asked her to take her daughter to a psychologist. First, because it was outrageous that they would have the authority to order her to do it, and second, because she had already done it on her own. She told the case manager this and was told she needed to take her to the psychologist they were recommending. When this happened she was done cooperating.
  Here is a recent letter from Martha about her continued concern over Nebraska's law and its impact on her family:
  My daughter has missed 10 days now this year due to doctor appointments or illness. She missed 4 of the days last week due to flu like symptoms and fever. I told her she needed to be prepared to go to school today no matter what. Her temperature was in fact still over 100 this morning, and she begged to stay home. However, as a result and only due to this legislation and law of absenteeism, did I force her to go to school sick. In fact it is THIS VERY LAW that has parents NOT doing what is in their children's best interests. We now are forced to send our kids to school sick and this just exacerbates this situation by children repeatedly getting sick or sicker and causing prolonged absences or causing other kids to now miss school. It is out of FEAR of being taken to court - the humiliation, stress, anxiety, and possible financial costs it might involve to have legal representation.
  
  Where is any of this common sense? Where is any of this in our children's best interest? How does any of this help our children learn?
  
  If it truly was about truancy - WHY was the language changed to remove this word and change it to "excessive absenteeism"? WHY when it has been shown that you are now targeting innocent families and children with illness and excused reasons for missing school - that our legislature has NOT done anything to correct this problem?
  
  What does this message tell our children? I would most certainly have let my daughter stay home when she is sick if this law was not in effect.
  
  I just have a couple of statements for your 3 statements below:
  
  1) School is important and is one of many tools for learning. School is NOT the single most important however.
  
  2) Parents are now more challenged that ever due to this Bill - it most definitely has increased our burden.
  
  3) It is interesting that now they use the word "truancy" again. However, absenteeism due to sickness, and other parentally excused absences do NOT lead to these negative behaviors. However, this very law has driven some families to allow their older children to drop out rather than be bullied by the Courts. This law itself has contributed to demoralizing and removing any motivation for students to attend and finish school, especially once they get caught up in this ridiculous process.
  
  Martha Myles
  Millard Public Schools
  Omaha, NE
  
  More... »
  
  
• 22:22

  Leishman Family: My Autistic Son

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  My son was diagnosed with autism and ADHD at age four. The doctor said he was severely retarded, would not show affection or love and have no imagination. I was devastated. I moved to be near services and brought a behavioral expert into our home 2-3 times a week for several months. He started early SPED Preschool and he was not ready for kindergarten until age 7. He was potty trained by four and a half. He saw psychiatrists and took meds and I took him to speech therapy, as he only had a few words to his vocabulary. He began stuttering when his vocabulary was bursting to get. He got lots of love and gave lots back. I kept him at a school near his child care due to ongoing morning problems relating to his inability to focus in the mornings, which made it difficult to get to school on time in the mornings. Thus, it became a part of his individual education plan (IEP). He has continued to develop, but just at a slower pace than typical.
  
  When he started high school he did much better at being on time to school, as he was very excited about starting high school. The goal for improved attendance was removed from his IEP since he seemed to have turned a corner. Over time, his former challenge to stay focused and on task in the mornings became a Goliath problem again. He is not defiant or unwilling. He has Aspergers. Planning, pushing, prodding, nagging and begging are not the fixes. I have tried all of these.
  
  I got electronic telephone calls that stated that he was tardy, but did think about it, because I knew he was late. I dropped him off, already exhausted for the day from my efforts to get him there. I got a couple of letters that spelled out the system in place, but as I had gotten them before, I did not even do more than glance at it, give a speech to my son and go on. I did not realize the laws had changed.
  
  I would like to think that if the goal of timeliness was still on his IEP, it would have made a difference in what came next, but I believe that it would not. Over spring break I received a letter from the school that said they had sent a referral to the county attorney. I called the school to question them about it and the principal was not sure who my son was. He said he would have the coordinator call the next morning and we would have a conference call. It did not happen. I called again in the afternoon, but received no reply. When I finally talked to the coordinator she told me his IEP was sent as collateral information and that I should see that in the copy they sent me. It was not in my copy, so I don't know.
  
  Now we go to court to determine if the law has been broken and if I am a negligent parent of truant delinquent. I contacted an attorney who wanted $1500 retainer and then $200 an hour. I am a single mom and just started a business. There is no way I can afford an attorney. My son has been through a great deal in his young life but he is a fantastic kid. He is in choir, a Christian youth/house group and has plans to be a youth pastor. He is an anti-smoking and anti-drug activist. He finds the kids that are alone to talk to them and include them. I have every reason to believe he can be successful.
  
  Sincerely,
  Teresa Leishman
  Lincoln Public Schools
  Lincoln, NE
  
  More... »
  
  
• Nebraska blogs (US-NE), 12/30/2011
• 23:26

  In response to Senator Beau McCoy

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  In response to Senator Beau McCoy’s counsel to constituents concerned about Nebraska’s new school attendance law.
  
  A good friend of mine whose daughter suffers from an undiagnosed ailment wrote her state representative, Senator Beau McCoy, to express her serious concerns about Nebraska’s new school attendance law, and how it could very likely cause her daughter's school attendance records to land on the county attorney’s desk. The Senator’s reply to her was seriously frustrating and in her words, “He was condescending and wrote as though I am totally misinformed on the issue.”
  
  This friend handed me the letter and suggested perhaps I reply to it in detail. I believe that Senator McCoy’s letter presents an opportunity to counter common excuses given by public officials to quell discontent among parents. He makes two primary points. First, that parents have no legitimate expectation to make judgment calls related to school attendance because of the state's mandatory attendance law. He quotes the law that says students must attend school “each day that schools are in session except when excused by school authorities”. On this foundation the Senator asserts that the law has made no significant change to attendance policy.
  
  Second, he says that the troubles parents are facing are not the fault of the legislature but of the Learning Community, which has tightened the policy. He says that if parents are unhappy with the policy they should go directly to the school board and the learning community to address their concerns. This is not only inaccurate, it is terribly frustrating to my friend. She has gone to her district to discuss her concerns, and administrators tell her that their hands are tied and they are just following state law and she should take her concerns to the legislature.
  
  To respond to Senator McCoy’s first point, that parents have no right to excuse their child from school, I would say that parents have long accepted the role their schools play in setting school attendance policy. Prior to LB 800, the majority of parents didn’t struggle to work cooperatively with their school attendance policies because schools have traditionally honored the judgment and discretion of parents in this area. The state legislature sent a clear signal with LB 800 and LB 463, that school districts should be more suspicious of parents in this process, and the shift in attitude has not gone unnoticed.
  
  2011 brought significant changes to school attendance policies. The changes particularly target parents whose children are often ill or who pull their kids from school for planned activities like extra-curricular sports and planned family travel. Parents who have complained to local school authorities are told that changes were made to bring district policy “in line” with the state law. For Senator McCoy to dismiss this reality and assert that nothing has materially changed is curious, since the number of truancy filings is up 1180% since the law passed, and parents are feeling a significant shift in attitudes of school and state authorities since the passage of the law.
  
  To respond to Senator McCoy’s second point, the changes made at the Learning Community and district level via the "Superintendents Plan to Improve School Attendance" were mandated by the state legislature under LB 463. The Plan is a creation of LB 463 and would not exist otherwise. This is one of the clear inaccuracies in Senator Beau McCoy’s letter. An exception for documented illness was not the primary reason for LB 463. Its core function was a state mandate directed at the learning community that created the GOALS Initiative.
  
  At the committee hearings on LB 463, nearly every person who spoke in favor of the law spoke of the “information sharing” powers that the law would provide to school districts and law enforcement so they intervene earlier with children they deemed to be “at-risk”. Senator Brad Ashford, during the floor debate on LB 463, proudly described his work as a "convergence of law enforcement and education." The language in LB 463 that required school districts to have a written policy in collaboration with their county attorney on how to handle "cases in which excessive absences are due to documented illness that makes attendance impossible or impracticable”, was in no way an exemption for those students for "truancy" filings. Those students with medical excuses are still referred to the county attorney, and those students still have a file created in juvenile court, even if they are not contacted further about the matter.
  
  The Superintendents Plan seeks to bring the school attendance policy of 11 school districts in line with the GOALS Initiative, its guiding principles and mission. Some of the foundational principals of this plan are highly objectionable, including a statement that school attendance is the "single most important element to the student's ability to learn and be successful in school and life." Guiding principles that place school attendance above the affectionate nurture of mother and father in the formative years as the single most important element in a child’s ability to learn and be successful in life are dangerous precedents to set.
  
  The learning community did not follow this path on their own. They are not tightening the noose on parents of their own volition. It was because of the state law that mandated and sanctioned in every way the consolidation of school attendance policy within the 11 school districts of the learning community, and the cooperation of these districts with all local and state agencies with statutory responsibility for delinquent youth. For this reason, the solution is a state solution. The solution is a simple one. It is to recognize truancy as it is recognized by the US Department of Justice - as days of unexcused absence.
  
  In Senator McCoy’s letter he says that prior to LB 800 school districts were required to notify the county attorney when 20 days were missed, but this notification was similar to the process they now follow after only ten. The change with LB 800 is that now at 20 absences schools must “file a report with the county attorney,” and students become status offenders under the law. There is no longer exemption from legal action if absences are excused by school authorities. Senator Ashford said about LB 800 that removing the distinction of “excused” absences from the law was a key provision of the reform.
  
  Judge Crnkovich, presiding judge of the Douglas County Truancy Diversion Program, gave to Millard Parents last spring a detailed description of how LB 800 amended the law relating to violation of the compulsory attendance law (79-201). Her own information states that the two primary changes to the law in 2010 was to (1) compel school districts to file with the county attorney when a student misses 20 or more days of school in one year and (2) added the line “nothing in this section shall preclude the county attorney from being involved at any stage in the process to address excessive absenteeism” (a concept that entirely replaces the word truant/truancy in the statute).
  
  The addition of this final point was referred to by many state officials, including the Judge and Dr. Lutz, MPS Superintendent, as a “needed hammer”. Making clear that the county attorney can be brought in at any stage in the process (language not in the statute prior to LB 800), this gives the GOALS Initiative - whose goal it is to “intervene” in cases before 20 days - the “hammer” they need to compel cooperation from parents in their “voluntary” program.
  
  The law did not in any way strengthen local control over attendance policy, but rather stripped both parents and school districts of their discretion. As it now stands, the districts must throw all students who miss 20 days into the county attorney's net, regardless of whether or not their absences are excused under district policy. Crnkovich asked a parent of a sick child at the Horizon High School Truancy meeting, "Who discerns who's sick and who isn't?" The implication was clear: it's not the parents; it's not the principal or school district authorities; it's lawyers and judges who discern.
  
  This is not an isolated attitude. Hall County Attorney Mark Young, who runs a “successful” truancy diversion program in Grand Island, said, “Oversight of all cases is needed to verify that students who are reported sick were actually ill." This law gives the state that oversight in ALL cases! Douglas County Attorney Don Kleine, confirmed at a special executive session of the Judiciary Committee that his office is obligated to "look into" every case.
  
  In a World Herald Article, “Nebraska goes own way on truancy laws”, Martha Stoddard wrote, “While the Nebraska absenteeism law is part of a national focus on truancy and graduation, the state's unusual approach is adding burden to the legal system.” She said, “Nebraska's law differs from most state truancy laws in two ways: While it sets a higher bar — 20 days — for legal intervention, it does not limit its scope to unexcused absences.” This is the crux of the problem!
  
  Nebraska Family Forum supports a simple amendment to the law that tightens the threshold for legal intervention to something like 5 unexcused days per quarter or 10 per year. This would provide earlier intervention than we had before the passage of LB 800, but would reduce the burden on the court system and place discretion firmly in local school district control via school district policy.
  
  Senator McCoy is right when he says that parents need to be involved in crafting local policy, and if and when we are successful in restoring the classic definition of truancy to the state statute, parents will have even greater need to work with their school boards to re-craft common sense attendance policies. Only with this change will local control be fully restored and local elected school boards empowered to set common sense policy that meets the unique needs of their local constituents.
  
  More... »
  
  
• 19:49

  Tackling the Real Problems

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  As more parents participate in the Nebraska Family Forum blog and Facebook Group, it has become evident that an unusually large proportion of families adversely affected by Nebraska's school attendance law are those whose children need specialized instruction; whose children don't fit into the rigid mold that our public education system has created for the equal training of all children. Many of the children caught up in the legal system because of changes made to Nebraska's "truancy" law are kids in special education with Individualized Education Plans, whose individual needs are ignored by the law, which makes no distinction between excused absences and unexcused absences.
  
  Equally impacted are those children who need specialized instruction on the other end of the spectrum. Anne Slingwine wrote on the NFPF Facebook group about her daughter who "was bored in school" and was not sufficiently challenged by school curriculum, especially in her daughter's subject of interest, science. Anne described her long ordeal working with the schools to get her children the "the education they deserve." I believe that  Anne makes an important observation when she says that her "daughter is not the only one, and I wonder how many kids have lost interest in science because they are bored."
  
  As the Nebraska Family Forum has discussed the circumstances of kids who don't quite fit the public school mold, it has put the spotlight on the serious defects of our current public school model. It is evident that there are far more pressing needs for fundamental education reforms rather than a short-sighted crackdown on school attendance. It is simplistic to say that "kids can't learn if they're not in school [everyday]" or "kids learn better if they're in school [everyday.]"  "Kids" are not a conglomerate block of like copies, and there are plenty of exceptions. 
  It is easy in the disconnected conversations on Facebook for people to simply say that if public school isn't working for your kid, then you should use a private or home school. But most families today have no real option other than to use their public schools for the education of their children, and to do their best to meet the needs of their kids in an increasingly rigid system. Our goal should not be to push out the kids who don't fit in, but rather to carve out a place for every child.
  Like Anne, my struggle has been in keeping my son's interest in school active because of his boredom with the curriculum. I sent him to school as a kindergartner with a voracious appetite for learning. This was the four-year-old who would ask me to tell him everything I know about China (for example), and then when I had shared my full breadth of knowledge, he’d insist on another topic.
  
  Every year I felt that school chipped away another chunk of his precious love of learning. I believe the hyper-focus at ever younger ages on reading, writing, and arithmetic with practically no enrichment in the sciences, history, and geography leave many kids bored and disinterested in school. When my son was a 2nd-grader, he came home in tears one day. With only two weeks left in the year, he was very upset when he realized that they would not finish the last chapters in their classroom science book.
  
  It was as though he endured school for the pure moments of education when he could enjoy learning new and exciting things about the world he lives in. I did as much as I could in the few short hours after school (hardly enough to make a real difference) to help ignite his love of learning, and promised him regularly that it would get better as he got older. One time in third grade he asked me when they would learn about Supernovas, and I had to answer, probably not till high school or collage. How sad!
  
  I too hope for real education reforms, reforms that will place the emphasis back on well-rounded quality teaching and classical education. Steve Jobs said the most important thing in education was “A person who incites your curiosity and feeds your curiosity.” Our public education system seems more and more to ignore the unique genius in every child, and in many ways fails our special needs children, whichever side of the standardized test they fall on. What true education should do is strive to develop in each child their innate talents and abilities through exposure to a broad classical education, recognize that a child develops through a number of basic stages at different ages, rather than putting each child in a rigid prescribed box, and a good education must always Ignite a passion for lifelong learning.
  
  NCLB, and the philosophies that preceded it, have almost completely changed the paradigm of education to one in which children are “forced” to learn only the basics required for proficiency in testing. The path our education system is on today will never be able to generate an inner enthusiasm for learning within every child because it no longer presents a natural environment for the development of curiosity, creativity, and imagination that allows motivation to arise from within. "No Child Left Behind" and like agendas do not result in closing the "achievement gap"; they result in diminishing overall achievement.
  
  "Direct instruction" may be effective at teaching skills and facts, but it is inadequate for fostering the curiosity and creativity that are more important in the long run. In a recent American Academy of Pediatric report, parents are warned of the relationship between increased depression and anxiety in children, the lack of the simple childhood pleasure of unstructured play, and "the national trend, to focus on the academic fundamentals of reading and arithmetic, spearheaded by No Child Left Behind. Compound that with extended hours in after-school programs that emphasize academics, the hours of unsupervised video gaming and constant T.V. and you have a recipe for a nation that cannot create, work, or think."
  Before Nebraska state officials demand "perfect" attendance and threaten those kids who don't fit into their box with legal action, perhaps they should ask if the public school is serving our children well when someone as successful as Steve Jobs says that his public education "came close to really beating any curiosity out of me"? I'm not a life long Nebraskan. Rather I have lived all over this country and the world, and from my perspective Nebraska is not moving to establish freedom in education, but instead is establishing a conveyor-belt-style schooling that underserves our kids. I encourage state officials to put more resources and energy into tackling the real problems that stagnate our kids education, and ignite our kids natural love of learning, which will draw them to the classroom and keep them there.
  
  More... »
  
  
• Nebraska blogs (US-NE), 12/29/2011
• 12:05

  Response from Senator Beau McCoy

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  Dear [Concerned Citizen],
  
  Thank you for contacting me regarding truancy in Nebraska.
  
  Before 2010 and the passage of LB 800, the truancy laws of Nebraska required school districts to have a written policy describing how they would notify their county attorney of truancy. By law before LB 800, school districts were required to send notification once 20 absences were reached and could make the decision to notify the county attorney after fewer absences. What LB 800 changed is the school district's ability to use or not use excused absences.
  
  This caused issues with students who were ill or had medical issues that kept them out of school. In response, Senator Ashford introduced LB 463 in 2011 to clarify school districts, in collaboration with their county attorney, must have in their written district policy how they will handle "cases in which excessive absences are due to documented illness that makes attendance impossible or impracticable."
  
  School districts are allowed to pass policies that state the school district will notify the county attorney after a child has accumulated 10 absences. This is the case with Millard Public Schools and was allowed prior to the passage of LB 800 and LB 463.
  
  All Learning Community school districts now use the same form to notify the county attorney of excessive absenteeism. On this form the school district is able to check off the recommendations that the "absences are documented illnesses that makes attendance impossible or impracticable."
  
  One misconception is that before the passage of LB 800 and LB 463, parents were allowed to excuse their child from school for any reason they chose. In 1901, Senate File No. 231 became law requiring children between the ages of seven and fourteen to attend school.
  
  In 1959, LB 492 was signed into law requiring children to attend school "each day that schools are in session except when excused by school authorities, unless such child has been graduated from high school." I recommend you speak with your school board members about your concerns as to what constitutes an excused absence, as this is not set by the state.
  
  In regards to visiting a dying grandparent, Millard Public Schools does excuse students per their district policy, due to the death or serious illness of the student's family member, which includes grandparents. If your child was not allowed to be excused due to a grandparents dying, I encourage you to speak with the school district and your school board members to correct the attendance record.
  
  Thank you again for sharing with me your concerns over Nebraska's truancy laws. I encourage you to follow the Unicameral when we reconvene for the 102nd Legislature, 2nd Session in January 2012. "The Salvation of the State is Watchfulness in the Citizen."
  
  Sincerely,
  Beau McCoy
  State Senator, District 39
  
  More... »
  
  
• Nebraska blogs (US-NE), 12/27/2011
• 11:36

  The Ballosingh Family : Between family and school

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  Nebraska’s new “truancy” law has caused me a great deal of anxiety over talking my son out of school for any reason. After the legislature changed the states truancy law from a law about truancy in the classic sense to in essence a “school attendance” law, an excused absence became irrelevant.
  
  Millard school district Superintendent commented on the new “attendance law” at a school board meeting and told parents that because the law makes no distinction between the reasons for an absence that the district no longer pays deference to previously excused absences under the policy like personal illness (even without a doctor’s note), appointments, a funeral, wedding, or graduation, etc. He said, “Changes in our policies are to line up with the State law”. “Are to line up”, tells me that the law has effectively eliminated the concept of excused absences and regardless of the reason I give my school for my son’s absence it could cause me and my son to answer to a judge. 
  My stress over this law intensified when my mother became very ill while visiting my sister in New York and was hospitalized with seizures of unknown causes. My sister needed my help to care for my mother and I had to take my son with me to New York because his father works 12 hour-shift, days and I have no other family here in Nebraska. Though my son is on the honor roll and up until then had NO history of absences I was still worried. It was the things I can’t predict that concerned me. What would I do if my mother became ill again and it required more time away from school? 
  My anxiety over the trip was compounded when I found out that the Millard school district had revised their attendance policies and would not allow my son to take his work with him. The policy designed to discourage planned absences, makes it more likely that my son will fall behind in school when he misses school. Not only will my son be required to make up his work after he returns but he will have twice the work load keeping up on current work at the same time. The state law and my school district has put my family in an impossible situation where I am forced to choose between my only parent and my only child. 
  I see these senarios playing out in my friends around me and I wonder how we got to this place in Nebraska, of all places. A friend of mine was also in an impossible situation. My friend, a single mom with no family here in Nebraska (Sudanese placed resident), works for the Douglas County Health Department. When her state job required all of the staff in her department across the state to attend a three day mandatory training in Kearney, she had no choice but to drive her children to Minnesota (where her nearest family member lives) the Friday before, drive back to Kearney to attend the training for the first three days of the work week and then drive back to MN to pick up her children. In total her children lost 6 1/2 “unexcused” days of school and as a result she has been “referred” to the GOALS team. She is dealing with social workers who are investigating her. They scrutinize how long she leaves her children unattended from when school is out to when she gets home from work. Unfortunately for her she does not have the resources and is trying to be as compliant as possible. 
  How did we get to this place? Why have Nebraska lawmakers created a law that inspires school districts to go so far to “improve attendance” that they actually make it harder for kids to be responsible students when they need to be absent from school? Is it responsible for lawmakers pass a law that requires the state scrutiny of a hard working single mom doing her best for her kids simply because her kids miss some school? We are on the wrong track with this law and I hope that it’s not too late to turn it around. I risk entanglement with CPS and juvenile court when I exercise my parental authority to judge what is in the best interest of my son and family when school attendance is involved not to mention the potential it has to affect my license to practice in the state of Nebraska in my health profession. The loss of this freedom is directly linked to the law passed in Lincoln and in order to recover what I have lost it is absolutely nessisary that lawmakers restore the distinction between excused and unexcused absences. In the words of Albert Einstein, " sometimes education gets in the way of learning". 
  Dawn Ballosingh
  Millard School District
  Omaha, NE
  
  More... »
  
  
• Nebraska blogs (US-NE), 12/19/2011
• 20:56

  Letter to Gov. Dave Heineman

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}

  December 16, 2011

  
  

  Dear Gov. Heineman:

  In 2008, my children and I joined more than 400 homeschoolers who marched on the Nebraska State Capitol and demanded our rights. You supported our cause unequivocally. If I remember correctly, you even promised to veto legislation that would place further restrictions on Nebraska homeschoolers. You were a believer in a parent’s right to direct their child’s education.

  So I have been absolutely stunned that you continue to stand by LB 800 and LB 463, the invasive, overreaching, family damaging, anti-parental rights truancy legislation.

  I have heard many parents comment that this is just a sign that Nebraska is becoming more “liberal,” “progressive,” and even “Marxist.” I quickly tell them that our self-proclaimed conservative, Republican governor was behind this nanny-state legislation, aided by a Republican state senator. Parents are shocked and so am I.

  I am shocked that you continue to stand by as innocent families are judged, scrutinized, and threatened by their school districts, dragged into court and into our failed DHHS system, forced into pseudo “therapy” at their own expense and in at least one case, jailed. Families with sick children, families with Olympic-caliber athletes, families with a parent who has just returned from Iraq or Afghanistan, even a family whose child was pulled from class to perform with her school choir at the State Capitol. All families who are “truant” according to your legislation.

  Your legislation has brought down law enforcement and the juvenile justice system on all of these innocent children and parents. Your law has caused parents with sick children to spend thousands of dollars on legal representation. Your law has caused irreparable harm to hundreds of Nebraska families. Sure, maybe a few truly truant (absent without permission) students have been helped. But the collateral damage is unspeakable.

  When I placed my children back in public school this year, I did not sign over my parental rights to you, to Brad Ashford, to Roger Breed, or to the State of Nebraska. Those rights are still mine and I intend to keep them.

  THE TRUANCY LAW NEEDS TO BE CHANGED. THE TRUE DEFINITION OF TRUANCY (ABSENT WITHOUT PERMISSION) NEEDS TO BE RESTORED. A PARENT’S RIGHT—MY RIGHT-- TO EXCUSE THEIR OWN CHILD FROM SCHOOL NEEDS TO BE RESTORED.

  My family is not your guinea pig to use for the purpose of catching truant students. My family is not available to be your collateral damage. Parents are afraid, parents are bewildered, parents are sad, but mainly, parents are ANGRY. They are angry at you and we angry parents are not going away. We are not going to “get used to it,” or “adjust to a new normal.” We are not going away until you fix this law and restore our natural rights to make decisions for our own children.

  For Our Families,
  

  
  

  Brenda Vosik

  
  
  More... »
  
  
• Nebraska blogs (US-NE), 12/16/2011
• 22:41

  The Hall Family: Branded an unfit parent

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  Written by: Stephanie Morgan, Nebraska Family Forum Moderator
  
  The Hall family has finally been released from the clutches of this truancy law and now they are just trying to get back to normal life. It's important that we don't forget! Lucy's story was the reason I decided to get into this fight and never give up. I remember meeting her for the first time and talking to her about what had happened, the way her story affected me was profound. If you haven't read this one you should!!
  --------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Lucy Hall, whose daughter attends Clark Middle School in Lincoln, entered a truancy diversion program under threat of prosecution. She has lived the worst nightmare of every parent. She has been treated as an unfit parent because her honor roll student suffers from severe fall allergies that cause her to miss school often during that season. Under threat from a judge that her child could be removed from her home, she was required to entertain a social worker from Omni Behavioral Health weekly – in her home – among other demeaning, court-mandated interventions to “rehabilitate” her daughter, who is loved by her teachers and peers and has not had a behavioral issue at school in her life.
  
  Lucy was told the program would end at the conclusion of the 2010/2011 school year but instead her daughter was required to meet throughout the summer with other “truant” teens, some of which are truly troubled youth, in order that she "develop bonds with other students who suffer from excessive absenteeism."
  
  The state mandated interventions, the condescending attitudes of the social workers, lawyers, and judges, and the humiliation her daughter has suffered is intolerable. Lucy sought legal counsel because of the threatening tactics of those tasked with “helping” her daughter to recover from her excessive absenteeism. After going public with her story, which took a great deal of courage, she felt even more vulnerable and her family began discussing a move back to Missouri in order to protect themselves and their daughter.
  
  One day in the middle of this nightmare, I inquired after her well being and received these emotional words from this discouraged mother, “I have been in a sort of fog the past few days. My mind has just been swimming with so many things to say that I don’t know how to begin! I am angry.....I am sad.....I am heartbroken and really very beaten down at this point. I am discouraged at how very few people know about what is going on or even care about it…It saddens me how few are interested in standing up for what is right.”
  
  In the end, the Hall family decided to see it through and tolerate the “truancy diversion” program. In order to be released from the program and to ensure that they never again fall into the system, they have been sending their daughter to school with migraines. It is difficult for their daughter to function at school when she is sick but she is fully aware of the alternative and will do just about anything to avoid it. She continues to get good grades and hopes to be able to finish high school without incident.
  
  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  2011 Update
  By: Lucy Hall
  
  We have put up with the program and I must say thankfully we are no longer enduring the stress that this put on our family. I honestly have to say that once it was all over with I just wanted to put it behind us and go on with life but I know in doing so I would not be doing my family or anyone else for that matter any favors.
  
  My youngest son has an IEP and is struggling with more issues than I have time to list here. It's not an issue with Steven yet but the fear is very much alive and well. After my daughter was swept up in this Truancy sham last school year I am terrified that he will suffer the same fate should I let him stay home when hes not feeling well. I have anxiety attacks over the kids staying home from school now. We live in fear every day that the choice to keep them home from school could lead us into a new year of Truancy Hell. The last thing I want to bring into his already rocky education is a truancy issue. I pray they just leave us alone.
  
  Lucy HallLincoln, NE
  
  More... »
  
  
• 15:57

  Education is About Providing Opportunities

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  Today my son missed a once in a lifetime opportunity to tour a top secret government facility where his father works everyday to protect our nation and the world from threats to our freedom! He missed this special STRATCOM open house because of Nebraska's new "truancy" law that would have counted the day unexcused, something we could not risk. Yet another example of the small ways this law stifles our children's opportunities and diminishes our freedoms.
  
  This week at a special Judiciary Committee executive session, Omaha South High School Principle Cara Riggs, said it is her job to “provide opportunities for success” for her students.  Cara went on to explain that the classic definition of truancy just doesn’t work anymore. She was clear that she believes it is unacceptable for kids to miss school for any reasons other than serious illness. When questioned later by Sen. Amanda McGill about kids who miss school to participate in educational and enrichment opportunities that can only happen outside of school she said, “You're either there or you're not, people!!”
  
  Today my son was there, in school, despite the fact that in his mother and father's opinion he should have been touring SRATCOM, where his dad has worked for 8 years. In that time we have never seen his office, never walked the halls of the building where everyday hundreds of soldier and civilian government employees go to work in our city to protect the Globe from looming dangers. How many of us realize this, how many of us appreciate what they do for us? While I was there I felt sad that I had not brought my 13 year old boy, that he was missing out on a fantastic opportunity to see the incredible efforts that are made to protect his freedom everyday. I am just kicking myself, that I let my mother's judgement be supplanted by the judgement of men like State Education Commissioner Rodger Breed and Senator Brad Ashford.
  
  Sen. Ashford's own webpage defines truancy as “unexcused absences in public schools.” In his words, “One of the first signs that can predict a path of trouble for many youth is their absence from school (other than for parent-excused absences and illness).” Why then has his law made my son's parent-excused absence count as truancy? If his public statements reflect his personal beliefs then he should have absolutely no objection to restoring the true definition of truancy to the state statute and shield kids with excused absences from having dealings with county law enforcement in any way.
  
  As the law is written now, it is too risky to allow my child this type of enrichment activity during school hours. For the sake of all our kids I hope that we can agree on this basic premise, that parents have a fundamental right to direct the upbringing and education of their children and that they do not forfeit those rights upon enrollment of their child in public school. They are not required to sacrifice the well being of their children to provide educational opportunities to other children.
  
  I am not asking for public officials tasked with the protection and welfare of children to repeal the law. I am not asking society to turn a blind eye to the plight of children who are failing to receive an education. I am not asking them to scrap the coordinated efforts to provide earlier interventions in cases that will likely lead to academic failure or worse. But I am asking them to restore the true definition of truancy and place more trust in the good old Nebraska common sense of parents.
  
  I believe we can preserve parental authority, reach "at-risk" truants, protect honor roll students, protect students with health issues, and navigate the many special circumstances that exist among our youth. We can't do it perfectly, but we can make a worthwhile effort. I find myself wondering why intelligent people like Governor Heineman, Sen. Ashford, and Education Commissioner Rodger Breed can’t see that there is a simple way to correct course and still extend help to those in need without punishing the majority of hard working, play-by-the rule Nebraskans.
  
  Whatever the challenge that must be addressed, whatever the needs that must be met, we must be certain that any law has as its priority, the protection of the innocent. Whatever good is extended to those in need, whatever services are provided, the law must first protect the innocent and the freedoms of individual families or it is a bad law.
  
  More... »
  
  
• Nebraska blogs (US-NE), 12/15/2011
• 02:52

  Executive Session: The Classic Definition of Truancy Just Doesn't Work Anymore

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  I participated this afternoon in an informal round table executive session of the Judiciary committee to discuss Nebraska’s school attendance law. Brad Ashford, committee chairman, invited special guests from state and local government, and the media. I was the sole representative of parents at the table. Although I was grateful to be there, it seemed that the voices of concerned Nebraska parents may be getting lost in the halls of our government. It was evident that the “experts” in the room felt certain that they are doing what is best for our kids and that the complaints of parents are just the natural growing pains of these monumental reforms.
  
  Commissioner of Education, Rodger Breed, started the round table by giving his full support to Nebraska's “truancy law” and recommending that NO changes be made to the law for at least two more years. Breed said the law is working to improve overall school attendance in our state and circulated correlative data linking school attendance to standardized scores. Breed seemed to be using academic performance as justification to require “oversight” in all cases of school absence, excused by a parent or not.
  
  His position was in sync with Governor Heineman's, who believes it is acceptable to give the natural rights of parents to the government in order to “guarantee” that all students reach the same level of proficiency in school. It’s incredible that this idea passed without a challenge in a room filled with representatives of citizens in Nebraska. My question would have been "when did it become acceptable to put families under the jurisdiction of the county attorney to ensure that they perform well on the NeSA test?"
  
  I was surprised when Senator Ashford asked me to speak next, and because it was early in the meeting, I kept to my prepared remarks. I quoted Senator Ashford’s web page, which defines truancy as “unexcused absences in public schools.” His site further explains that “one of the first signs that can predict a path of trouble for many youth is their absence from school (other than for parent-excused absences and illness).” I told Ashford that if these were indeed his beliefs then we agree completely, and then I proposed that we restore the classic definition of truancy to the law, as well as the balance between parental rights and school responsibilities, and allow parents to work with their local schools to craft common-sense attendance policies.
  
  Dr. Kevin Riley, Gretna Superintendent and representative of the GOALS team, defended the law and the GOALS initiative in his comments. He said that very few people understand the issues with school attendance better than he does. Very few have the experience of dealing with student attendance everyday for 17 years.
  
  Dr. Riley said our 100-year-old mandatory attendance law had “gone largely ignored” until now, and I wondered what he meant by that. I wondered if he is in the faction of people who believe that under mandatory attendance laws, parents have never had the “right” to excuse their children from school for any reason, and the fact that we have traditionally honored parental excuses means we’ve been ignoring the law.
  
  Dr. Riley said that school administrators needed this law so they could “collaborate with those agencies that have statutory responsibility over the welfare of children.” He said “the law is not a heavy-handed way, but a collaborative way,” and the GOALS team is completely voluntary. He said, “If parents don’t want help, we don’t interfere.” It seems that state officials are disconnected from the sentiments of ordinary citizens who view the convergence of law enforcement and education as fraught with serious consequences for the freedoms that we rely upon to be the best parents we can be.
  
  As I sat there in the circle, I thought, "these are the people the governor was referring to when he said that we should trust the 'good-old Nebraska common sense of state officials.'” Some of them seem very trustworthy. My personal impression of Dr. Riley is that he is a very sincere traditional sort of guy, and I think Douglas County Attorney Don Kleine is a level-headed, genuine public servant, but not every county attorney, not every superintendent, not every judge, not every social worker is as trustworthy. When government allows this type of broad oversight into the everyday and most intimate parts of family life to assess, evaluate, scrutinize, and judge you, a flood gate of possible abuses opens us now and in the future.
  
  It is easy for Dr. Riley to say “we (superintendents) know the kids who are in trouble, the families who are struggling” and ask us to trust that he will check the right box when he turns in your referral to the county attorney, but I don’t understand why he can’t see that parents deserve his trust and respect. Children are given to their parents at birth, and their parents know their kids better than the superintendent, they know when their kids are in trouble and struggling, and they will seek help.
  
  Mark Young, Hall County Attorney, confirmed something I have written about before: that the intimidation factor in this law starts with the first letter parents receive at 5 days, warning them. He said that just sending a letter to parents telling them they're getting close to that point when they will be placed in the truancy program has improved attendance. Young also recommended that no changes be made to the law and added his voice to the growing chorus of state officials whose “common sense” says they should ignore the growing concerns of parents and the simple fixes, and instead give the law more time to be “refined in practice.” He said, “As time goes by people will become more comfortable with the process.” Which is what they're counting on, people becoming comfortable with greater government oversight of their lives. These changes are a concerted effort to shift the parenting paradigm, and in order to do so successfully, they’ve got to have some years of discomfort until people settle into the new normal. I, for one, do not want my new normal to be living in a state where I can’t take my children out of school for an important family trip, to visit an aging grandparent, or to participate in some “unsanctioned” educational opportunity that I deem worthwhile.
  

  Don Kleine

  
  Don Kleine has said that, “Our perspective is to help!” He said that the “truancy diversion” program is not punitive in nature. Don Kleine explained that the goal is to figure out what the issue is and get needed services to the kids. He said that, “we’ve even had physicians participate.” I’m glad their intent is to take a less punitive approach with truant kids, but the problem is that thousands of kids are ending up in the county court house who aren’t actually “truant!" A great number of them are absent with legitimate excuse and should never have files at “truancy triage”.
  
  Kleine provided this breakdown:
  
  

  2008/2009 Referrals	2009/2010 Referrals	2010/2011 Referrals
  239	1073	3056
  	350% Increase	185% Increase from 09/10
  		1180% Increase from 08/09

  
  24% of referrals will have no further action taken after the triage meeting33% of the youth go through diversion process8% have petitions filed in Juvenile Court29% were already involved in Juvenile Court6% were referred to other programs/counties
  I asked him after the meeting if he has a more detailed breakdown. I told him I was interested to know of the kids who went into diversion, how many had 5 or more “unexcused” absences? I believe with a more detailed breakdown of academic records and those with excused absences, you would find that our proposal to restore the classic definition of truancy at a tighter threshold would be effective in identifying those who could benefit from a diversion program, versus those who are in no need of intervention.
  
  Cara Riggs, Omaha South High School Principal, said it is her job to “provide opportunities for success.” I couldn’t agree more, but that’s not really what she meant, because she continued by talking about providing particular outcomes for her students. Outcome-based education has replaced opportunity-based education in the last two decades, and No Child Left Behind was a major catalyst for this shift. Rodger Breed alluded to this shift in his comments at the meeting. He said we need to “re-evealuate how often we allow children to be absent from school” and suggested that with greater pressures on schools today to “guarantee” that each child reaches certain proficiencies, our public school are less flexible in facilitating the unique situation of exceptional kids who seek enrichment outside the classroom. His comments reflect the reality that when schools shift their focus from providing opportunity to guaranteeing "success," the inevitable result is less freedom - less freedom to pursue excellence.
  
  Cara went on to explain that the classic definition of truancy just doesn’t work anymore, because it enables parents make excuses for their kids, and desperate parents give up. She was clear that she believes it is unacceptable for kids to miss school for reasons other than serious illness. When questioned later by Sen. Amanda McGill about kids who miss school to participate in educational and enrichment opportunities outside of school she said, “You're either there or you're not, people!!”
  
  

  Brenda Council

  Sen. Brenda Council told a story of a constituent who called her so upset because she had been referred to the county attorney, even though her daughter had excused absences for sickness. Council then investigated the case by calling the school to find out what was going on, and she learned the “other side of the story.” She said the mother had been excusing her daughter and saying she was sick when she wasn’t. The mother’s story broke down when administrators dug deeper to find that the girl was being bullied, and when she told her mother she didn’t want to go to school, the mother just called her in sick.
  
  This started an interesting discussion about the validity of “truancy stories” told to the public by parents. Kevin Riley, Gretna Superintendent, speaking of some specific case that went public (that he could not identify) said those who handle these cases know things about them, but they can’t run to the media and talk about it, because of privacy laws. He said most of the time, if people could hear both sides of the story they’d say, “OK, that makes sense!”
  
  

  Amanda McGill

  I was grateful to Sen. Amanda McGill when she redirected the discussion to touch on the concerns that some parents have voiced through the Nebraska Family Forum. Sen. McGill asked about the impact on our high-achieving kids who miss school to take part in educational travel, once in a lifetime opportunities, club sports and other sporting that is not provided as an in-school program like ice hockey, gymnastics, golf, ice skating, etc.
  
  Omaha South High Principal set the tone and response to this line of questioning by responding promptly with her own set of questions. “Why are they taking their kids on those trips while school is in? Why are they participating in sports while school is in?” It was her settled opinion that kids should not take part in these types of activities and that being in school everyday was far more important.
  
  Her sentiment was shared by the Commissioner of Education, Rodger Breed, who described how this plays out. He said what happens is a kid in Algebra II, for example, “takes a once in a lifetime trip, then he gets home and gets sick, then he starts his golf season… and he falls behind in math, because he has holes in his knowledge."
  
  I challenged this line of thinking and told Commissioner Breed that I know plenty of parents who ensure that their kids get their work, do their work while they're gone, and turn it in as soon as they return. I told him there are plenty of parents capable of overseeing their child’s education during such absences and that it was my observation that most children involved in these extracurricular activities maintain excellent grades. What I didn’t say, but wish I had, is that parents know best the capacities of their child to handle such absences, and most parents consider this when deciding whether to allow their child to participate in activities that require some missed school. My own parents would not have allowed me to continue in any extracurricular pursuit, if I could not keep my grades up at the same time.
  
  

  Rodger Breed

  Breed said that when parents allow their kids to miss school for reasons other than serious illness, like travel and extracurricular enrichment, it becomes a “resource issue.” He said teachers have limited resources, and when kids are absent it makes more work for teachers to prepare lesson plans ahead of time and then help students catch up when they return. He said it is not acceptable to devote limited resources to privileged students to travel. He said that we have to re-evaluate how often we allow kids to be gone because of limited resources to reach kids at all levels.
  
  Sen. Tyson Larsen said he’d have to get his school records out and take a look at his attendance in high school, but that it seemed to him he missed school fairly often because of his many extracurricular activities, which were not school-sanctioned activities. He told the story of a constituent who contacted him about this law who was a serious rodeo competitor and had missed school in pursuit of a national championship; as a result, this constituent had been referred to the county attorney in her rural Nebraska county. Larsen said that something like a rodeo championship is an important experience that should not be missed because of this law.
  
  Sen. Bob Krist voiced his concern for ordinary kids whose parents take their kids out occasionally to go see family members, the parents who can’t afford to send their kids off to Spain or somewhere exotic, but family travel is still important to them. He expressed his concerns for military kids who want to take time off to be with a deployed father who returns home for a visit.
  
  

  Kevin Riley

  Kevin Riley, Gretna Superintendent, said that he was sympathetic to families who take time to travel for family reasons. He said it is something he did as a father. He said he values this important aspect of family life and that his district excuses these absences (within reason) when parents communicate with the school and the children are doing well academically.
  
  Both Breed and Riley acknowledged that there is inconsistency in these policies across school districts. Breed said that the Superintendents plan and the mandate that schools have a plan in conjunction with the county attorney - key provisions in the LB 800 and LB 463 - should by design lessen the inconsistency, as school districts work together throughout the city toward a cooperative process. He said that over time we would see these discrepancies between school district policies be significantly diminished. I wondered in what direction would my district move, closer to Gretna's attendance policy, where they still honor family travel, or would Gretna move the way of MPS and OPS, and no longer excuse any travel except for weddings and funerals?
  
  When the county attorneys in the room weighed in, they agreed that if the schools excused it and if the school gave prior approval to the travel or other extracurricular absence, they would not act against that family. Rodger Breed said that in the end this was a local governance issue and that elected “school boards decide what district policy will be and that they are in control and the superintendent must follow their board policies.” He said that superintendents do what their school boards want, because they answer to the School Board for their job. I wondered what school board he was thinking of that held more power in reality than the superintendent does over these issues? In my experience with school boards, they are rubber stamps for superintendents, who drive the policy in their districts.
  
  Don Kleine said that his office would follow the recommendations of school administrators, and if the schools indicate no need for further action, then they will do nothing. I questioned Kleine to explain what “doing nothing” looks like; would students and their parents still be summoned to the court house? Kleine answered with some double speak when he said, “We are going to look into it; we’re going to ask the triage team to take a look to verify the records, but then we will do nothing.” I explained that to ordinary, everyday, law-abiding Nebraskans, this “truancy triage” process is intrusive in and of itself. They are summoned to the court house, their record scrutinized by law enforcement, and then told they can go home and the county attorney will “monitor” them. The fact that the court takes no legal action or that they escape diversion is a relief, but it does not alleviate the concern that these parents have about a law that requires kids with excused absences to have any dealings with the court.
  
  

  Brad Ashford

  Sen. Ashford closed the meeting by saying "I think we can all agree that this law is helping many children attend school more often and perform better in school, that it is getting help to kids who need it." At this point if Ashford leaves the law as it stands, he will do so with the full backing of Governor Heineman's administration and in particular the state Commissioner of Education, Rodger Breed. Ashford told Martha Stoddard of the World Herald that "he will be talking with other senators in the coming days about how to address concerns, without losing the focus on getting students to school." So contact your senator and be sure he/she represents your interest in those talks! I certainly hope that will change. I hope that the desires of parents for their kids will at least equal the opinions of “experts” at the round table today.
  
  I know that for many of you, it is seriously discouraging to hear some of these comments, but I hope that instead of feeling hopeless, you will be emboldened to be heard, more determined to work for the reasonable protection of your way of life, and for families' freedom. Now is not the time to feel defeated; this is the beginning of the process, the beginning of the battle. What we are asking Sen. Ashford and the judiciary committee to do is simple. It will not destroy their efforts to intervene earlier with “at-risk” youth, and it will not take us back to a time when truancy issues where ignored for the most vulnerable youth. Simply restoring the classic definition of truancy - which distinguishes between excused and unexcused absences - while establishing a tighter threshold for legal action, will not only protect the innocent and the rich tradition of family freedom that is cherished by Americans, but it will allow state officials to narrow their focus to those kids who are most in need of their help.
  
  More... »
  
  
• Nebraska blogs (US-NE), 12/11/2011
• 00:58

  The Chambers Family: In bed sick at school

   »  Nebraska Family Forum
  When our oldest daughter was 11 she starting having debilitating headaches and I took her to the doctor over and over again only to receive the same diagnosis, allergies that caused terrible sinus infections. Her allergies would lead to sinus problems that would in return cause horrific headaches and weakness. When she started to develop ear infections, we took her to see an ENT who was concerned. He said kids this age don't usually develop chronic ear infections. He ordered a CAT scan of her head and found what he said was the worst case he had ever seen on Nasal polyps. Surgery would need to be done immediately to remove them. After the surgery the doctor said he had stopped counting after 100 polyps. Recovery time took awhile but she was eventually back to school and feeling quite better.
  
  Unfortunately, that didn't last long. After a month or so her allergies returned in full force as well as the sinus problems. Cystic fibrosis testing was done but did not provide us with any answers. We spent the next 2 years taking her specialist after specialist. We went to ENT's, Pulmonologist, Allergist, even chiropractors. As you can imagine our daughter missed school often during these years, but the Millard schools did a fantastic job of working with us. Our daughter did well in school and we were happy with the arrangements we had made for her.
  
  School was one of her favorite things, she is involved in band, student council, numerous after school activities. When she was Healthy she was full of life throwing herself into any afterschool club she could. When she was sick she would lay in bed in a dark room all day sleeping battling her headaches. On April of 2010 we received a letter from the Sarpy county attorney saying we would need to appear in court regarding her absences.
  
  Being caught up in the juvenile court system has been a nightmare for our family, especially for our beautiful sweet daughter. Our daughter has always been a happy, sweet and shy kid but a lot of fun. The day we sat with her court appointed attorney and were told that the judge had decided to put our daughter on probation was devastating. My little girl turned to me and began to cry. She said, “Mom, what did I do wrong!”
  
  My daughter is a naturally obedient child. She wants to know that she is being good, doing the right thing. This process is breaking her. I have watched in horror as my daughter’s innocence and carefree nature has been stripped away. This has changed her personality. That they had made her feel like a criminal and she has begun to doubt herself wondering it maybe she was a bad kid.
  
  She was interviewed by a probation officer to get “her side of things” and we were made to stay in the waiting room even at our protest. We found out later that our daughter was made to urinate in a cup for a drug test during the meeting. I was enraged! We weren't even told this was going to happen. I feel violated!
  
  Some state officials have said that the schools hold most of the power, that upon their recommendation these cases are handled. I don’t believe them. My school has been nothing but concerned about what is happening to us. My principal has tried to protect us. In my experience there is nothing anyone can do once you fall into the system. It just has to play out and if your child continues to be absent it makes it harder to get out of the system.
  
  I cannot prevent my daughter’s illnesses and I cannot cure them. In an attempt to keep my daughter from having continued attendance issues, my principal is having me send her to school sick and they are keeping her in a sick room. When she is sick but has no fever she stays in her IEP's teacher's room. It is a smaller room that stays quiet most of the day. She works on her homework and takes little naps, she even eats lunch there. This way they can count her present, but she can rest. I am sick about it, why shouldn’t my sick daughter be able to be home with me in her own bed. What is wrong with this picture?
  
  We have given up everything normal and natural about our lives, we have given up our privacy. We now send our daughter to school sick to be cared for by a school nurse instead of her stay-at-home mother. We are sharing our daughter’s complete medical history with any school or state official who wants to see it. I even had my school social worker come with me to one of my daughter’s doctor’s appointments in hopes that her testimony might help us.
  
  It’s sickening to me that I feel compelled to do these things, but I just want this to end. I want my daughter to get back to the way she was before this awful law turned our lives upside down! I keep thinking that if I just cooperate they will let us go and leave us alone, but I don’t know anymore. I have very hateful feelings towards the people who wrote this law, and those who passed it, and especially those who continue to defend it.
  
  I’ve heard several state officials and lawmakers refer to the law as a “work in progress”, and one senator said that though “he acknowledged there have been problems in a few cases” he believes the positive aspects of the law outweigh those. I literally want to cry. I can’t believe that they believe that my family is an acceptable casualty in their plans, that my innocent daughter is a guinea pig in their experiment and that doesn’t bother them.
  
  The way I see it, some do-good government officials passed a law designed to take out of the hands of parents, principals, and even doctors the discretion over school attendance in an attempt to provide legal oversight in all cases with the justification of “preventing” delinquent behavior among certain groups of children. In the process they have usurped that natural rights of parents, thrown innocent children into the juvenile justice system, and disrupted the healthy and happy childhoods of children like my daughter. Their error is intolerable and unforgivable.
  
  Jennifer Chambers
  Millard School District
  Omaha, NE
  
  More... »