Other formats

    Adobe Portable Document Format file (facsimile images)   TEI XML file   ePub eBook file  

Connect

    mail icontwitter iconBlogspot iconrss icon

The Pamphlet Collection of Sir Robert Stout: Volume 83

The Responsibility of Educating Children Rests Primarily Upon the Parents, not Upon the State

The Responsibility of Educating Children Rests Primarily Upon the Parents, not Upon the State.

1 Tim. v. 8.—"But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel."

Sir,—The duty of caring for a child rests primarily upon its parents or guardians.

The State recognizes this duty of the relations, as regards feeding and clothing, as being for the good of the community, for from the intimate knowledge of the wants, from the sense of the responsibility of the care of the child, those most nearly related to the child are the most likely persons to discharge their duty efficiently of nourishing and clothing the child.

If the child be insufficiently nourished or clothed, it is likely to grow up diseased or stunted, and therefore not so useful a member of society as if better cared for.

This fact is recognized by the State, and if a parent is found to be absolutely neglecting a child, the State compels the parent to contribute to its support, and, if it is still neglected, the State then takes the child into its own care, for its own protection, in order that the child may be enabled if possible to become a useful citizen—but this is only where a child is grossly neglected—where parents are discharging their duty of clothing and feeding their children well, the State leaves them alone, considering that they are more likely to discharge that duty efficiently and economically, and to bring up the children as good and useful citizens than if it interfered. If they are not discharging their duty faithfully, the State does not immediately relieve them of that responsibility, which they wilfully incurred, of the care of their children, but it puts pressure upon them to call their attention to their duty and responsibility, and to make them discharge it if possible,—and it is only as a last resort, that the State takes upon itself the charge of the children. All will allow that this is as it should be, for, if the State were to undertake the care of all the children in the country, to feed them and clothe them, and relieved every parent of all responsibility in the matter, the duty would not be nearly so well performed as it is where natural affection is allowed to have its full sway, and the State could not bear the enormous cost, which would be incurred, having to pay sufficient persons to take charge of all the children in the country.

page 76

It is the duty of every parent to care for the bringing up of his children up to maturity, in order to make them good and useful men and women, and their minds want nourishing and feeding and their ideas clothing, just as much as their bodies do, and the responsibility of educating his children in the knowledge of God and in secular instruction rests primarily upon the parent.

Even savage nations recognize this duty, and they instruct the memories of their children in the traditions of their tribes, and train their bodies in active exercises and practising the bow and spear, or else the parents place them under the instruction of some person qualified to teach them; but for the State to undertake the education of the minds of the children of a country as a whole, is undermining the moral sense of responsibility of parents, by relieving them of the duty, and all trouble in connection with it as much as possible, and is undertaking to itself a duty which it cannot perform efficiently or economically.

What the State ought to do is this : To see that every parent recognizes and discharges the duty of educating his children, just as much as of clothing or feeding them, and if he fail to feel his responsibility, or reglect to discharge it, then the State should step in, and compel him to do so, for the well-being of the community; and, if the State is convinced that it is necessary, then, as a last resort, it must take the child out of the parent's hands and send it where it will be educated.

Let the State watch over the education of its youth, let it say to parents you have incurred the responsibility of bringing children into the world, and you must discharge the duty which you have incurred towards the State, as well as to the child, of bringing that child up in such a manner that it will become a good citizen. You may send them to what school you like, but whatever school it is, it must satisfy the requirements of the State as to its construction, that it is properly built, so that the health of children attending it shall not be injuriously affected by attending it,—you may have what schoolmaster you like to teach your children, but in order that the State may be satisfied that the children have a competent teacher, he must pass a State examination, and have a certificate of efficiency,—you may instruct your children in what you like, for as you have the responsibility of educating your children, it rests with you to decide what your children shall learn; but, for the good of the community, we must be satisfied that the children are being properly educated, and the children will be periodically examined by persons appointed by the State, to see whether the children are getting a sufficient education.

Teach the children what you like, but certain hours must be given to certain subjects, and religious instruction must be given at a stated time, so that all whose parents do not wish them to be present can absent themselves.

But in every district there must be sufficient school accommo- page 77 dation for all the children of a school age in the district that may wish to attend, so that they shall be able to do so.

Subject to the just demands of the State that the education given to the children shall be sufficient, and come up to a certain standard, the parents shall have, as they ought to have, the control as to the education which shall be given, and shall decide upon what, or how much, instruction shall be given to their children, and whether they are to receive religious instruction or not, during school.

The State should interfere as little as possible with the rights and responsibilities of parents, beyond protecting the interests of the children, in seeing that they get a sufficient education under favourable conditions of health, and I think that the present estimate of the State in New Zealand as to what constitutes a sufficient education is a wildly exaggerated one, and one that is neither practical nor economical.

The State should call attention to, and insist upon, and so strengthen, the moral responsibility of parents to secure education for their own children, and place facilities in their way to enable them to do so, and not weaken or destroy this sense of responsibility, by taking the care of the children's education absolutely out of the hands of those with whom it ought to rest, educating them in many instances above their needs for their position in life, and even for their own advantage and the State's, at a greater cost than the country can afford, and not allowing the parents to have any say as to the manner in which their own offspring shall be educated.

Every district should be made to support its own schools, which should be called upon to provide sufficient accommodation for all the children in that district. Parents who send their children to those schools should contribute their quota in the shape of fees towards the cost of the education of their children.

Grants-in-aid for building schools and maintenance, should be made by the State, either by results,—that is to say in proportion to the number of children who pass certain standards of efficiency fixed by the State,—or, as a capitation allowance, in proportion to the average attendance at the school,—or, on the £ for £ system of contributing so much from the State exchequer in proportion to the amount contributed by the district.

But every district ought to be obliged to support its own schools in the same way in which it supports its churches, charitable institutions, hospitals, &c.

Whatever deficiency there might be after adding together the fees and Government Grant at the end of the year, could be made up by a local rate upon the district, and a direct taxation of this kind would quickly bring the attention of the whole community to bear upon the question of education, so that superfluities, either in expense or in excessive education, would be pruned down to the real requirements and most profitable system as regards the State.

page 78

Where people have to pay directly, either by fees or local rates, for education, they take a more active interest in the efficiency of the school that they contribute to support than where they do not, and they are more particular about economy in the management of a school, whose working they can watch, when they feel the pressure of a direct call for money.

Being directly taxed for their own school they feel a right to have a voice in the matter, if they see that the school is not so economically managed as it might be, for they see where their own pockets can be spared.

The active interest thus created is good in an economical aspect for the school, and as a matter of fact the parents are more anxious to get their money's worth out of their children's schooling which they pay for directly, than if they pay for it by indirect taxation : hence they feel an interest in seeing that the children attend regularly and punctually, and learn their lessons when at home.

Besides it is obvious that when Education Boards have the spending of money, which is raised by Colonial taxation, and do not feel the healthy pressure of having to raise the money required for the schools under their direction, they lose a direct inducement to economy. However difficult it may be to raise the revenue required for Education, that difficulty does not fall upon the shoulders of those who have to spend it, and whilst they see the requirements of education on one hand, they do not feel the pressure of having to raise the money for those requirements, and so lose the force of a great moral pressure at their back which would enable them to resist successfully the importunities of the various schools for their separate requirements, which are not always absolutely necessary, thought they may be desirable.

The expense of providing education for their children should fall primarily and directly upon the parents of the children and not upon the State through the medium of Education Boards.

Parents with proper self-respect, would take a pleasure and a pride in providing for their children, and would not forfeit their rights by allowing them to be taken from them, and educated through no care or trouble of their own in a manner in which they have directly little or no voice. It is bad policy, it tends to create a feeling of carelessness and irresponsibility in parents as to the education of their own children, and to lessen the interest taken in educational matters. Parents are satisfied to have the trouble of looking out for a school and having to watch over it, taken off their hands, and they are foolishly weak enough to permit their children to be compulsorily taken out of their hands and educated on a system with the regulation of which, as fixed by statute, they have directly no voice.

If a district is rated for its own school, and the Committee of Management are chosen out of the ratepayers, far more interest will be taken in the school in that district, and it will be more economically managed than at present.

page 79

If any person brings children into the world whom he is too poor to educate, and whom he is obliged to hand over to others that they may be educated at all, he has clearly not entered into the responsibility of bringing children into the world, and he is not entitled to dictate how his children should be educated.

The State would then take them out of his hands and educate them as it thought best, and if he throws the whole burden of educating his children off his own shoulders on to the State, he could not complain even if his children were not brought up exactly as he wished. As soon as he is in a position to contribute to the education of his own children, as he ought to be before he incurs the responsibility of having them, and there are very few indeed who are not in this position, then he would have as a right a voice in their education, but so long as he forfeits this right by handing his children over to others to educate, he cannot claim to regulate the system on which they are educated.

But where parents and a district contribute directly to, and support the schools for the education of their children, those parents and that district have a right, and a responsibility, which they ought to claim, and to exercise, as to the instruction which shall be given to their children; and if they agree that their children shall be educated on a religious basis, and also that they shall have religious instruction given to them at certain times, subject to State restrictions, they have a right to do so, and a Government is taking on itself a serious responsibility which weakens the sense of responsibility of parents by forbidding them to have any voice directly in deciding how their children shall be taught, and disregards their just claim to have facilities given them, whereby they can obtain for their children the plain system of education which they wish, or of having some voice in deciding in their own district whether, if the majority of parents in the district wish it, religious instruction shall or shall not be given in the State schools of that district.

Government should rather call upon parents to educate their own children, and see that they do so, giving them facilities for doing so, and supervising, inspecting, and satisfying themselves that the children are getting a sufficient education, but they should interfere as little as possible with the rights and responsibilities of parents.

And Parents should recognize the responsibilities which they have incurred in having children, and discharge their responsibility faithfully, not only in securing a secular education for their children, but in securing education on a religious basis, and in seeing that the souls and the moral sense of their children are attended to and cultivated, as well as their intellectual capacity, and remember that the wisest of men has told us, that the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom, and to depart from evil is understanding.—

I am, &c.,

Prophetes.