Public school and parental involvement

Have you ever wondered why the family unit is declining, why more children are in trouble, have disfunctional marriages, can't keep jobs, and the list of the "entitlement crowd" continues to rise?

I have the priviledge to meet with representative Steven Thayn and others on occasion to share ideas on why we believe this is happening. Although we do not or will not claim to save every aspect of society, we have, however focused on what we believe will be a great benefit to strengthening the family. The interaction,flexibility and increased parental involement of their child's education will increase the productivity,boost their self esteem wanting to be more successful, and save tax payer dollars cutting down significantly on wasteful government spending.

Have you ever thought about how much liberals care for children in general? They always speak about increasing the control of government to deal with these issues. Is it truly the governments responsibility to educate and care for our children or is it the job of the parents.?

Steven writes:

Below is some information that shows how much the liberals care for their children, Pay special attention to the liberal support and whether it increases time with the family or decreases that time. I found this interesting.

I have tried to find state and federal policies that increase the time parents have to spend with their children or increases parental responsibilities. I haven’t found any yet. Let me share with you my preliminary findings. I have also indicated general support by the media or liberals in society for the specific program. Many of these programs may be worthy of support.

ICCP, which is subsidy for childcare, has liberal/ media support, decreasing parent child time or responsibility.

PRE-K, which is school for four year olds, has liberal/ media support, decreasing parent child time or responsibility.

FULL-DAY KINDERGARTEN, all day school, has liberal/media support , decreasing parent child time or responsibility.

HEAD START, early education, has liberal/media support, some decrease in parent child time or responsibility.

GREATER REGULATION OF HOME SCHOOLS, professional educators review the work of the parents, has liberal/ media suport , decreases parent child time or responsibility.

RAISE MANDATORY SCHOOL AGE FROM 16-18, has liberal/ media support, decreases parent child time or responsibility.


CHIP PROGRAM,health insurance for poor children, has liberal/media support, decreases parent child time or responsibility.

AFTER SHOOL PROGRAMS, stay late after school, has liberal/media support, decreases parent child time or responsibility.


In contrast:

HOME SCHOOL, school at home, has no support from the liberal/media, increases parent child time or responsibility.

THAYNE'S KINDERGARTEN PROGRAM, rewards parental involvement, no support from the liberal/ media, increases parent child time or responsibility.

CHARTER SCHOOL, public schools often directed by parents, no support from the liberal/media, increases parent child time or responsibility.

VOUCHERS FOR EDUCATION, allows parents to choose school of choice, has no liberal/ media support, increases parent child time or responsibility.

Steven further states:

I am developing a hypothesis that disturbs me which is government policies that decrease parent-child time together receives support while there are no policies that increase parent-child time. Maybe there is a reason why parental involvement and parental responsibility is declining. It may be an unintended consequence of well-meaning programs by the state and federal government.


[i] Federal welfare programs such as CHIP increase the role of the federal government into the role of the family. The child becomes more dependent upon the government which indirectly may lead to a weakening of the parent-child relationship. The child may come to see the government as more important than the parent.


It appears, just from the few examples given, that the liberal/ media group either do not, in fact, care for their children or are to selfish to take time from their schedules to take on the responsibility of raising that child.

Shifting the responsibility from the parent to the government is not only financial burden but added responsibility in an area that government was never to be in the first place.

Should we then remove the possibility of parents having children and give that to the government as well, cutting out the middle man?

It is the responsibility, not a liability and the tremendous blessing, not a curse, to have the priviledge of being involved with our children, we all know they grow up so quickly,why are we so quick to relenquish this time to strengthen the family while we have the opportunity?

Great Job Steven!!