Our Grand Children are victims of;

"Protect the "system" at all costs. The "system" is the only ultimate sacred cow - not any particular law or constitution, but only "the system." Because, ultimately, it is the system which makes certain that the individuals functioning within it - from judges to lawyers, to prosecutors, to politicians, to businessmen - have their places and positions, and opportunities and pecking order, and future."

In 1696, England first used the legal principle of parens patriae, which gave the royal crown care of "charities, infants, idiots, and lunatics returned to the chancery." This principal of parens patriae has been identified as the statutory basis for U.S. governmental intervention in families' child rearing practices.

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
Preamble of the original "organic" Constitution

"We hold these truths to be self-evident. That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness."
Excerpted from the Declaration of Independence of the original thirteen united states of America, July 4, 1776


Showing posts with label Will Estrada. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Will Estrada. Show all posts

Sunday, September 15, 2013

WND EXCLUSIVE. Federal database to include your children? Regulations creating repository for 'every public school student's personal information'

The federal government is laying the foundation for a national database that could include all of the personal details of every student in every public school in every state, warns a report by the leading homeschool advocacy group.

The report, compiled by Will Estrada and Katie Tipton of the Home School Legal Defense Association, points out that a “slew of new federal incentives and federally funded data models have spurred states to monitor students’ early years, performance in college, and success in the workforce by following ‘individuals systematically and efficiently across state lines.’”

The authors “believe that this expansion of state databases is laying the foundation for a national database filled with personal student data.”

The report notes that the U.S. Department of Education is banned by law from creating a national data system, but under the Obama administration, new regulations have opened the door.

Under the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, or FERPA, parents were promised they could access their children’s personally identifiable information collected by schools. But the schools were banned from sharing the details with third parties.

The law explains that personally identifiable information includes names of family members, address, Social Security number, date and place of birth, disciplinary record and biometric record.

The new report says, however, the Department of Education has reshaped FERPA through regulations so that “any government or private entity that the department says is evaluating an education program has access to students’ personally identifiable information.”

Postsecondary institutes and workforce education programs can also be given the data.

While the change has prompted a still-unresolved lawsuit from the Electronic Privacy Information Center, the framework of a national database slowly is slowly being implemented, the report says.

The Home School Legal Defense Association has long opposed the creation of a national database.

“We believe that it would threaten the privacy of students, be susceptible to abuse by government officials or business interests, and jeopardize student safety,”  the report says. “We believe that detailed data systems are not necessary to educate young people. Education should not be an Orwellian attempt to track students from preschool through assimilation into the workforce.”

The report points out that guidelines for building state longitudinal data systems that can collect and link personally identifiable information across state lines have been released by task forces funded by both the Department of Education and special interest groups

Many of the recommendations were compiled in the National Education Data Model, a project funded by the Department of Education and overseen by the Council for Chief State School Officers, one of the organizations that created Common Core.

Already, 18 states and many local education agencies are building databases, the report says, and other states are using similar database models.

“Concentrating data collection around a few models means that states are getting closer and closer to keeping the same data and using the some interoperable technology to store it,” HSLDA reports.

The report says 46 states now have databases that can track students from preschool through the workforce.

Several other federal programs also are pushing the creation of databases, including Race to the Top, which was to allocate $4.35 billion to schools that make “certain changes” in their policies, including the adoption of the Common Core initiative, which seeks to standardize curricula nationally.

“Every state that agrees to the Common Core in order to receive RTTT funding also commits ‘to design, develop, and implement statewide P-20 (preschool through workforce) longitudinal data systems’ that can be used in part or in whole by other states,” the report says.

HSLDA warns that the “heavy involvement of the federal government in enticing states to create databases of student-specific data that are linked between states is creating a de facto centralized database.”

“Before our eyes a ‘national database’ is being created in which every public school student’s personal information and academic history will be stored,” the report says.

The authors of Common Core, the report notes, “have been heavily involved in developing data models and overseeing data collection.”

The impact might someday be measured in lost dreams and evaporated opportunities, the report suggests.

“A crucial part of the responsibility of parents is protecting the privacy of their children. This enables parents not only to guard their children’s physical safety, but also to nurture their individuality and secure opportunities for them to pursue their dreams apart from government interference,” the report says.

“The rise of national databases threatens these freedoms.”
=================================================

FAQ

1. What is the Common Core?

The Common Core State Standards (“the Common Core”) are two sets of K–12 academic standards that outline what students are expected to learn in English language arts and mathematics each year from kindergarten through high school. The goal of this checklist is not literacy, proficiency, or increased graduation rates but to make students “college- and career-ready.”1 The Common Core was written by the National Governors Association (NGA)—an organization of governors, their head staff members, and policy makers—and the Council of Chief State School Officials (CCSSO). States receive Race to the Top (RTTT) federal funding for committing to adopt and implement the Common Core and to collect student data from preschool through the workforce. Read the topic paper >>

2. Is the Common Core already being implemented?

3. How is the federal government involved in the Common Core?

4. Does the Common Core have a philosophical bias?

5. Does the Common Core provide for individualized education?

6. Is there any evidence that centralized education works better than decentralized education?

7. Will the Common Core impact homeschools and private schools?

8. Does the Common Core lead to a national curriculum?

9. Does it matter that testing is being aligned with the Common Core?

10. Does the Common Core include a national database?

11. Who supports the Common Core and why?

12. Who opposes the Common Core and why?



*The posts made in this blog are of our opinion only* Without Prejudice UCC 1-207

Saturday, August 10, 2013

State 'nanny' plan described as 'sinister'. Proposal might even violate human rights laws on privacy, family


WND EXCLUSIVE

State 'nanny' plan described as 'sinister'

Proposal might even violate human rights laws on privacy, family

A bill in Scotland that would assign every minor a government “nanny” with the legal authority to ensure they are raised in a government-approved manner has faced headwinds from family and homeschool organizations, and now the lawyers are lining up against it.
WND reported earlier that parents in Scotland are fighting the “anti-parent” proposal. According to the Home School Legal Defense Association, the measure would assign a government social worker, or “named person, to ‘[promote, support or safeguard the well-being" of every child from birth.
The government worker would have considerable authority to order what the child and parents must do regarding matters such as schooling, health and social activities.
It's part of an initiative that calls for "Getting it Right for Every Child."
But now the Scottish Express reports the Law Society of Scotland has warned that the plan could violate European human rights laws, and one expert described the idea as "sinister."
"The proposals could interfere with Article 8 of ECHR, the right to respect for private and family life, as there is scope for interference between the role of the 'named person' and the exercise of a parent's rights and responsibilities," said the Law Society's Morag Driscoll.
"It could be interpreted as disproportionate state interference," she said.
The nation's Schoolhouse Home Education Association said the legislation "is open to abuse and misinterpretation and many parents could fall foul of overzealous agents of the state or people who are just plain busybodies."
It was First Minister Alex Salmond who recently called the plan "sinister."
The Children and Young People Bill, the Scottish Express said, also would mean children's personal details can be recorded, stored and shared through a central database.
"The legislation would also allow children who are angry with their parents to report them to their named person, with potentially devastating consequences," the report said. "Hundreds of parents have already signed an online petition demanding the Big Brother-style proposals are ditched."
It was an unidentified spokeswoman for the Scottish government who explained the idea.
"The protection and promotion of the well-being of Scotland's children and our aim of making our nation the best place for children to grow up are at heart of the Children and Young People Bill," she said. "Our focus is on the safety and protection of children. The named person, who is likely to be a health visitor, head or deputy head teacher and will usually already know the child, will be a first point of contact if help is needed. This is formalizing what should already happen and there is evidence it is working well in many areas. We are confident it is compliant with European law."
However, the Law Society raised questions.
Driscoll said the policy aims behind the legislation "are admirable and we recognize the genuine effort to improve the lives of children and young people in Scotland."
"However, we are not convinced that this legislation achieves those aims," she said.
"We are also unclear about how this legislation will work in practice and in particular, the resources required to administer the 'named person' scheme."
WND reported that Will Estrada, director of federal relations for the HSLDA, believes the idea is an outgrowth of the general belief held by organizations such as the United Nations that government knows best for everyone.
"This is an example of why HSLDA opposes ratification of [various] U.N. treaties,” Estrada said. “The argument that these treaties are mere altruistic expressions melts away when you look at what is happening in the legislatures of countries who ratify the treaties and try to live up to their treaty obligations. A ‘named-person’ for every child and national databases? No thanks.”
When WND reported earlier on the issue, it was noted that while the number of child-abuse cases in Scotland has remained about the same over the last five years, the incidents that do occur have received more media attention.
The new bill that came as a response has been praised by Aileen Campbell, the nation’s minister for children and young people.
“This government’s vision for children and young people is clear: We want Scotland to be the best place in the world for them to grow up,” she said.
The proposal outlines that a social worker will look after and monitor the child to be certain the child’s rights are not being violated based upon the standards of the United Nations Conference on the Rights of the Child.
“A local authority is to make arrangements for the provision of a named person service in relation to each child residing in its area,” the new proposal explains.



*The posts made in this blog are of our opinion only* Without Prejudice UCC 1-207