babble: Back to School on $720 plus a month

FAQ | Forum Home

»	babble » walking the talk » labour and consumption » Back to School on $720 plus a month

Email this thread to someone!

Author

Topic: Back to School on $720 plus a month

Trisha
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 387

posted 06 September 2002 10:33 PM

My local newspaper has just outlined a major flaw in our education system which may identify why some children are drop-outs. A 17-year-old has been denied the right to go to school because his mother, who is is guardian no longer lives in Ontario. She lives in B.C. as of about two years ago and the young man chose to move back here and live with friends as he was having difficulty there. He wants to return to school, but the government won't let him unless he can pay $720 a month plus all the expenses that other children have to pay. This amount will not be required once he turns 18, according to the newspaper report. Do you see something wrong with this?

First, the boy's father lives in Ontario and is paying school taxes, even if he has no other children in school. Second, Ontario's Education Act requires students under the age of 18 to have a legal guardian living in the province. To do this, the parent's permission must be attained. This procedure is expensive and will probably not even get into court until after the boy turns 18 in February. Third, a lot of people are paying school taxes who don't even have children. What does this money support?

The boy's grandmother, a local woman, has paid the first $720, hoping something can be resolved before next month's installment is due. If anyone has any information that would help us to bring this discrepancy to the government's attention properly, please provide it. Our local MPP, Lynn McLeod is getting involved.

From: Thunder Bay, Ontario | Registered: Apr 2001 | IP: Logged

skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 07 September 2002 03:46 PM

Because I am one of those childless people who has always HAPPILY paid education taxes, these stories make me furious. There is a deeply deeply ignorant and anti-democratic assumption implicit in the rhetoric of one education minister after another -- that only parents have an interest in the education of the children of the province (parents are "stakeholders," or even "consumers," or "clients").

Parents are citizens. So am I. This kid is welcome to my $720 -- but that's obviously not the solution to this kind of outrage. Getting rid of this government would be a better start.

From: gone | Registered: May 2001 | IP: Logged

Slick Willy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 184

posted 07 September 2002 04:11 PM

quote:
A 17-year-old has been denied the right to go to school because his mother, who is is guardian no longer lives in Ontario.

Not sure about that Board but the TDSB has an exception that if the child is 16 or older and emancipated then they are entitled to enroll and attend school just as any other child is. As well they are entitled to a form of student welfare to help with the finances.

Something smells odd about that story as it flys in the face of the right to a minimum level of education regardless of finacial status and based on age.

From: Hog Heaven | Registered: Apr 2001 | IP: Logged

DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 07 September 2002 04:20 PM

Since when have Mike Harris and Ernie Eves and their gang of idiots ever been interested in a 100-year-old compact of universally guaranteeing every child a K-12 education?

If they had their way we'd be right back in the 17th century when only rich people could afford to send their kids to school and the rest of us were supposed to just be content with not knowing how to read anything unless taught by our parents.

From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001 | IP: Logged

Trisha
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 387

posted 08 September 2002 04:00 AM

The story has been checked by some very knowledgable people and is true. The father is not supporting him, so that doesn't help. Our MPP looked into it.

From: Thunder Bay, Ontario | Registered: Apr 2001 | IP: Logged

Slick Willy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 184

posted 08 September 2002 02:13 PM

quote:
The father is not supporting him, so that doesn't help.

Any idea why that is? The father is still obligated. Is this kid attending school while this gets sorted or has he been sidelined?

From: Hog Heaven | Registered: Apr 2001 | IP: Logged

Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 08 September 2002 02:42 PM

I would be interested in hearing the "official" explanation for this, as I was under the impression that children who live on their own after 16 years of age are eligible for welfare. I can see the point of saying that a child's guardians must be living in the province in order for the child to attend school IN that province, but when the child doesn't actually HAVE guardians, I can't see why they wouldn't be considered independent. I've known several people in Kingston who went on "student welfare" when they were 16 due to intolerable home lives.

I wonder this - is the mother legally not the child's guardian? It's one thing to say that she's not acting as his guardian, but if legally she still is (for instance, if she's still getting child support payments from the ex-husband, or is getting mother's allowance from BC with the child declared as her dependent) then that might be the reason.

It could just be stupid bureaucratic red tape, but I've often found that you don't get all the facts from a newspaper article on something like this. I would have to hear the other side of the story before writing to my MPP about it.

From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001 | IP: Logged

audra trower williams
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2

posted 08 September 2002 03:50 PM

I dunno why this is in "rabble reactions", so I'm moving it to "earning and spending".

From: And I'm a look you in the eye for every bar of the chorus | Registered: Apr 2001 | IP: Logged

Trisha
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 387

posted 08 September 2002 05:43 PM

Lynn McLeod, our MPP, is looking into this. There likely is more, I don't know anyone personally involved to find out any more. He must be being supported somehow, as he's living with a friend's family.

From: Thunder Bay, Ontario | Registered: Apr 2001 | IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time

Hop To: