Here is a clear case of a parent being given control over a child's health care. I do not agree with parents in this case, but I agree that a parent has the right to make these decisions. Yes, sometimes parents make a bad choice. (So do schools, btw). Your desire to remove that choice is where I have the problem. You, again, are not believing in choice.
I'm not sure how this buttresses your argument bbauska.
You've got caring parents, who, blinded by their faith to the advantages offered by medical science, made a decision that ended their child's life. That might be legal in Minnesota but its hard to figure how this was the best decision for the childs welfare. Or why it supports your argument that "parents know best".
And it might serve both Fate and you to read what I wrote.
Here's what I wrote.
That doesn't stop them from advocating for their children. Weighing options provided and considering the advice before making a decision.
Does this not clearly indicate that the parents "make a choice"?
The difference is that parents should make an informed choice, with the assistance and application of the expert information available.
I think few parents are expert in education. And although they care greatly for their children, may not understand their choices completely.
Just as those who choose to ignore the advice of expert medical science can kill their children, poorly informed parents might make choices that are unhelpful to their childrens schooling.
They still get to make choices...
Do you think that everyone needs to go to the nearest government run health care center, or should they get to choose who sees their child? You are saying with YOUR analogy that everyone should go to the nearest provider, mandated by the government.
Where I live everyone chooses their medical provider. Neither the government, nor private insurance providers have any say on who they see. They just don't worry about the cost. Since paying their taxes have provided them freedom from worrying about the cost of the care. (Its free.)
Since you know so much about education (allegedly), what is the magic bullet for poor-performing schools
I advocate for following the example of over performing school systems. Finland provides arguably the best example of a system that produces excellent results.Almost all children there go to public schools, and the schools are all funded equally, and staffed with superior teachers. All well paid well qualified professionals.
Since the 1980s, the main driver of Finnish education policy has been the idea that every child should have exactly the same opportunity to learn, regardless of family background, income, or geographic location. Education has been seen first and foremost not as a way to produce star performers, but as an instrument to even out social inequality.
In the Finnish view, as Sahlberg describes it, this means that schools should be healthy, safe environments for children. This starts with the basics. Finland offers all pupils free school meals, easy access to health care, psychological counseling, and individualized student guidance.
https://www.theatlantic.com/national/ar ... ss/250564/
This notion may seem difficult for an American to digest, but it's true. Only a small number of independent schools exist in Finland, and even they are all publicly financed. None is allowed to charge tuition fees. There are no private universities, either. This means that practically every person in Finland attends public school, whether for pre-K or a Ph.D.