This is from the website of the ILS, an accredited German distance learning institution.

The ILS has been mandated by the German Ministry of Foreign Affairs to provide distance learning to German pupils all over the world, so that they can obtain German school-leaving qualifications. This offer is geared towards German parents who, for private or professional reasons, are planning a long stay abroad and face the dilemma of how to deal with their child’s educational needs, where there is no German school nearby or such a school proves to be unsuitable for their child. The ILS’s solution – take your child’s school with you. German families overseas making use of the ILS’s services also receive financial sponsorship from the German government.

The quote is from one of the ILS’s happy clients, Angelika Schuberth, mother of Niklas and Jan : “While my children are overseas, they should receive the same education as in Germany – this is guaranteed by the ILS.”

Luckily for the Schuberth family, their children are also guaranteed the opportunity of receiving an education in their own language by the fact that no country in the world would prevent them, as expatriates, from doing this. No country, that is, except for their own home country, Germany.

The only guarantees for a foreign family living temporarily in Germany and trying to help their children receive a distance education, seem to be harassment, fines, possible jail sentences and threats of having their children removed by the Jugendamt. Take this statement by a father, whose son attended an English-medium state school in Berlin. (The parents were both academics with temporary positions at a university there). He says : The main problem with the German school was, the denial of our multicultural background. We removed our older child from school because of the unfair treatment received at school: refusal and derision of his vegetarian diet, derision of his parent’s accent in English, disrespect for the family’s non-confessional background, and refusal to court of any form of parental collaboration in view of a gradual adaptation of the child to the new environment. This caused recurrent nightmares, increasing anxiety and fear in the child.
We have been defined by the Jugendamt as people troubling the public order and they threatened to take our children away. Social services tried to enter our home alleging that we neglected our children. They questioned our neighbors and collected or manipulated evidence against us. We produced attestation of school attendance abroad but we were defined as unreliable and unconvincing. We were fined and some legal proceeding was also started against us. We arrived at the point of having to defend ourselves daily from aggression by the Jugendamt. We left the country overnight.

By the way, the education law of Berlin states : The school authorities can exempt a child from compulsory attendance for a particular reason.

15 of the 16 German states have similar exclusion clauses in their compulsory schooling laws. In practice, such clauses are only applied in cases where a child lives in a circus family, is too ill to attend school or for a young person who has achieved celebrity status and has a demanding pop music or acting career. Although the German government recognises the benefit of distance. education for Germans living abroad enough to sponsor it, this is not regarded as a convincing reason to allow an exemption for foreigners living temporarily in Germany.

We are not asking anyone here or in the European Commission to interfere with German law or the German school system. As I have stated, there are numerous opportunities for the German authorities to generously allow the exceptions that already exist in German law. The fact that celebrities who have a thriving pop music or acting career are granted such exceptions without a second glance whilst families such as ours and others whose children have very real educational needs that are not met within the German school system are subjected to draconian measures demonstrates the malicious intent behind such treatment.

The school authorities, in reply to our plea, have stated that “the state makes use of its mandate to educate and has the right to set its own educational goals.” The purpose of this so-called Erziehungsauftrag is to bring up children to be good, tolerant and responsible citizens. According to the court judgements on which this statement is based, this is only possible through physical presence in a school. One wonders then, why, the German Foreign Service supports distance education for German children overseas, if these children are thereby being deprived of the school attendance which is deemed necessary for their future? My plea to you is to help the German government rectify this gross hypocrisy and to recognise that freedom of choice in education is a fundamental human right. Why does the German government feel the need to force mobile Europeans who are only there for a short time to participate in their coercive educational monopoly.

The first time German law actively prohibited home education was in the "reichsschulpflichtgesetz" of 1938 under the Nazis where coercive measures "zwangsmassnahmen" were introduced and were subsequently included in postwar education laws in Germany. Why are the German states still clinging to enforcement of the measures whose original intent is clear. Why are the Germans still rigidly adhering to an element of their totalitarian past in letter and spirit.  

The March 2000 Lisbon Council set the goal of turning Europe into “the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world by 2010”, emphasising the need for more and better trained researchers throughout the European Research Area – a true internal market for science and knowledge1. These researchers and other highly skilled professionals whose jobs require frequent moves want to bring their families with them and they want to be sure that their children can receive a stable education not subject to the arbitrary whims of narrow-minded bureaucrats in one European country. If there is no school in their language nearby, or the fees are unaffordable for them or their gifted or special needs child does not fit into this one and only school, then they should be accorded equal treatment with Niklas and Jan and with those teen celebrities who se needs are no more important than theirs.

Article 149 of the Treaty of the European Union states that, whilst respecting the responsibility of the Member States for their own education systems, the Community can take action by developing exchanges of information and experience on issues common to the education systems of the member states. In this spirit, I request the EU Parliament and the EU Commission to act on their responsibility by encouraging Germany to enter into dialogue with those seeking educational alternatives and to look at the experiences of the rest of Europe, which has not collapsed into anarchy, just because a handful of people choose alternatives to outmoded conventional schooling for their children.

He who would do good to another must do it in Minute Particulars: general Good is the plea of the scoundrel, hypocrite, and flatterer,….
William Blake

When we applied to the school authority of the state of Niedersachsen for such an exemption for our children (which is possible under law), it was turned down. They stated that “the examples of other children who have come to Germany from other countries illustrate that a successful integration into the German school system would have taken place.” The big picture is totally ignored by the authorities – the fact that we were only temporarily in Germany was meaningless to them. In their justification, they went on to say that, “…A person is regarded as being resident in Niedersachsen and subject to compulsory schooling when he or she has resided here for more than five days, even if he or she does not intend to remain here permanently. This applies regardless of the person’s nationality. The lawmakers have ordered compulsory schooling even for only a short stay in Niedersachsen.”

As far as the second part of that statement is concerned, that the State has the right to set its own educational goals, it makes me wonder why the state tolerates international schools and schools run by the British and US military, in whose educational goals the German government has absolutely no say. German parents who have the financial means are sending their children to these schools in droves, as well as to boarding schools in other European countries. These children are being brought up in a radically different cultural environment, with a different curriculum to that of the German state schools and accredited private schools.

When we first made the decision to enable our children to learn through the medium of home education it was because we felt that this is the best way to help our family to stay together. We knew, that with four children, the fees of international schools were beyond our reach and we were comfortable in the knowledge that we are providing our children with an individualised mode of education that gives each of them the time to explore their own interests and to interact with local people in the country where we happen to be living.

From http://www.odl-liaison.org/pages.php?PN=policy-paper_2004

 3. Summary and Recommendations for Action

In view of the previous considerations, the European ODL Liaison Committee urges European institutions to consider the following:

1. Re-establish the policy momentum for the eLearning Initiative, but with two adaptations: make sure that the new discourse is more based on societal-economic demand and more coherent, linking eLearning closely to the lifelong learning agenda. Try seriously to achieve coordination of resources and actions in the field, to the benefit of effective use of public resources and higher impact and visibility of the implemented actions. Accept intervention of “other” resources and policy concerns to support eLearning - even though that may cost something in terms of autonomy and administrative procedures - because the public benefit will easily justify the procedural complications.

2. Both lifelong learning and eLearning are too important and pervasive in the knowledge society to be the exclusive competence of educational authorities who are used to manage school and higher education systems originally created to serve or accompany the industrial society by providing initial education.
   At present institutional competencies should be re-aggregated, at European as well as at national and regional levels, to guarantee coordination and coherence of action in the field.

---

 1 http://ec.europa.eu/research/press/2004/pr0206en.cfm

Thursday, 17th July 2008

 A petition on a ban on home schooling, hosted by Kathy Sinnott, MEP for Ireland South, was discussed in the European Parliament Petitions Committee this morning. Catherina Groeneveld, the petitioner and an Irish citizen married to a South African, travelled to Brussels to present her petition to the Petitions Committee and Commission.

Catherina and her family moved to Germany temporarily because of her husband’s job. She chose for linguistic and other reasons to home-school her children while in Germany. She was surprised to find that not only was home schooling illegal, home schoolers were subject to persistent harassment by local authorities.

Catherina lodged a petition with the Petitions Committee in 2007 making the case that Germany’s education policy contradicts the freedom of workers within the EU. She as an Irish citizen has a constituted right to educate her children and Germany’s refusal to accommodate her makes it hard for her family to work in Germany. This is in clear contradiction to the EU’s mobility of workers. In her presentation, the petitioner pointed out that foreigners who home school their children are subject to harassment, fines, jail sentences, removal of their children by the Jugendamt (children’s courts) and criminalisation. 15 out of the 16 German States allow exemptions but only to circus children and young people who have music careers. These exemptions do not extend to foreigners. Such families who wish to home school their children are subjected to draconian measures. Catherina points out that if her family were German citizens living in Ireland, they would be encouraged by the German authorities who would offer her the national curriculum to teach her children at home. The petitioner asked the Petitions Committee to help the German Government rectify this hypocrisy.

The Petitions Committee have been paying close attention to this petition and both the Committee and the Commission congratulated the petitioner on an impressive presentation. The Commission have decided to open a dialogue to put this issue on the agenda of their regular meetings with Germany. The Petitions Committee is already embarking on a report of abuses by the Jugendamt towards non-German parents and has decided to include this aspect in the report. German law, unlike Ireland, identifies the State as the principle authority responsible for a child’s rights not his or her parents. Germany has the highest rate of children taken into care from their parents by the State in the EU.

Kathy Sinnott, Vice President of the Petitions Committee, stated "This petition brings into question workers’ mobility. One of the guarantees of the internal market is the freedom of movement of workers in the EU. There is an increasing awareness that workers have families and that flexibility to meet their needs should be part of employment law. However, Germany’s approach to home schooling compromises this and forces families to choose between a job and the best interests of the children. The need for family friendly employment policies must be recognised throughout the EU. We need to have flexibility in the education of children temporarily resident because of work. There is also an issue around the attitude to non-German families in the German children’s courts. I hope the dialogue between the Commission and the German State will resolve this discriminatory situation."

For further information, questions or comments, please contact Kathy on:

Brussels office: +32 228 47692 

Cork office: +353 21 4888 793

Email: kathy.sinnott@europarl.europa.eu

Website: www.kathysinnott.ie

Petition no. 477/2007 by Catherina Groeneveld

Source: Netzwerk Bildungsfreiheit

In Freedom Learning Is Better

70 Years of compulsory school attendance are enough  -  this relic has outlived its usefulness.
 

When the national socialistic leadership under Adolf Hitler and Reichsminister Dr. Rust signed the Reichsschulgesetz (Reich/Imperial School Legislation) in Berchtesgaden on July 6, 1938, they could not have imagined that the essential components of this law would remain in force even 70 years later. With the downfall of the so-called ‘Thousand Year Reich’ most of the laws and ordinances from that timeframe disappeared.  But the unique German compulsory school attendance law in effect across all Europe which empowered the state to lead children to school with the help of the police and even by force if necessary; that law remained unchanged. The school policymakers of most of the German federal states incorporated this paragraph almost word-for-word into their legislation.

The 6th of July 1938 represents an historic break, up to that day non-school and alternative educational methods were possible and were practiced, even if to modest levels.  Although compulsory school attendance was introduced in Prussia in 1717, one could still find the words in the Reichsverfassung, the Imperial Constitution, of March 28, 1849 that:  "schooling in the home is not subject to any constraints."  The existing compulsory education had always been interpreted up to 1938 in the sense of an ‘obligation for instruction’ and allowed for exceptions. The majority of democratically constituted states in the world therefore do not require any compulsory school attendance, but practice an ‘obligation for instruction’ leaving room for a multitude of alternatives as to how children learn today,

The inherently violent Compulsory School Attendance laws have lead to such incomprehensible outgrowths that in 2007 the 15 year old daughter of an exemplary family from the city of Erlangen was forcibly compelled to enter a psychiatric clinic under a very large police presence and Youth Services action. Her crime:  she was receiving individual instruction and nurturing in the home, instead of continuing to visit the public school, where the learning environment provided increasing difficulties.

The Dudek family, an academic family from Archfeld in Hesse, will soon have to pay for their preference for a free educational form by serving terms of imprisonment.  Their eldest son learned so well at home that he was able to pass his Realschulabschluss (secondary school final examinations) at the top of the class with a grade of 1.1, but the spirit of the Reichsschulpflichtgesetzes  (Reich/Imperial School Legislation) demands its tribute in the form of a prison sentence of 3 months each for the father and the mother.

Other free-learning families are emigrating from Germany and leaving their familiar environments, but are looking forward to their newly-won freedom in our neighboring European states.

The fact that an atmosphere of compulsion and pressure cannot provide a lasting, successful learning experience is not under dispute by subject matter experts in the field.  The fact that German educational politicians insist on physical presence in a school building under all circumstances, although learning in other locations and under other circumstances is frequently at least equally as good, if not more successful, is neither comprehensible nor up-to-date.

It is time to implement the unambiguous declarations of UN-Special Commissioner Vernor Munoz de Villalobos who stated during his visit to Germany that "education cannot be reduced to simple attendance at a school  . . . Alternatives such as distance learning and  "homeschooling" are possible options which may come into consideration under certain circumstances . . ."

After these 70 years the Netzwerk Bildungsfreiheit (Network on Educational Freedom) calls for the complete elimination of Germany Compulsory School Attendance, and calls for establishment of a legislative basis to make possible diverse school-based and non-school educational paths, which may compete with one another and thereby enrich both sides. We view freedom and diversity instead of state monopolies as the best way out of the German educational malaise.  Chancellor Merkel’s motto "Dare to be more Free" should finally also apply to the area of education.

The "Netzwerk Bildungsfreiheit"  (Network on Educational Freedom) is an affiliation of organizations, parent initiatives, and individuals across Germany who are concerned about the right of free access to education, for a free choice and free structuring of the individual personal educational path, with the assistance of public as well as private initiative resources.

Netzwerk Bildungsfreiheit e.V. Nürnberg – Board of Trustees and executive Board

Source: Netzwerk Bildungsfreiheit, Germany

From Germany: a press release concerning Homeschooling

Homeschooling is a criminal offense, comparable to a trucker who repeatedly gets behind the wheel drunk. At least this is the opinion of Chief Judge Becker, who has sentenced the Dudek family to three (3) months imprisonment without parole.

With this verdict the judge maintains the ignoble tradition begun on July 6, 1938 with the signing of the Reichsschulgesetz (Reich/Imperial School Legislation) by Adolf Hitler and Reichsminister Rust.  This tradition reached its high point in 2007 with the deplorable decision of the German Federal Supreme Court to legitimize revocation of parental custody rights for Homeschooling.
 
These verdicts have their origins in a common spirit of political despotism, as has twice been gleefully celebrated during the infamous period of the German dictatorship. The justifications offered for such harsh measures against families providing education in the home always present the same old stereotypes, but cannot stand up under any serious legal examination from the bench.
 
To say that ‘the community has a justifiable interest’ to ‘counteract the establishment of religious or other parallel societies motivated by a worldview, and to integrate minorities in this area’  is not a legal justification, but is actually a purely political declaration.  The politicization of the judiciary is a well known hallmark of dictatorship.  This is completely incompatible with a constitutional state.  Also, this leaves aside the point that no verifiable evidence has been found to show that Homeschooling in any country in the world has ever lead to a parallel society. In many large German societies such parallel societies thrive in spite of existing compulsory education. (more…)

Source: HSLDA

A new situation representing the plight of homeschoolers in Germany is developing in the state of Hesse.

The Dudeks, a homeschooling family of eight, were tried, convicted and fined 900 euros (about $1,200) in May for not sending their children to school. Hessian law allows for an exception to compulsory school attendance in “compelling cases.” But, as a matter of practice, homeschooling is not tolerated.

Following the trial, state prosecutor Herwig Mueller told Mr. Dudek that he needn’t worry about the fine. “You won’t have to pay it,” said Mr. Mueller, “because I am going to send you and your wife to jail.”

Additionally, the local Youth Welfare Office in Hesse filed a case against the family in the local Family Court. But at a July 3 hearing, a judge ruled the Dudeks could keep custody of their six children.

In the neighboring state of Bavaria, similar authorities in January took Melissa Busekros from her family under an escort of 15 police officers. In Zitau, the Brause family was forced to flee Germany after the Family Court in their state took custody of their children because they were homeschooling. Other families have fled under similar pressure—just because they were homeschooling.

More of the story…

Source: The Washington Times

We brought attention to the difficult climate for home-schooling in Germany in this column in March 2007. We shared the trials and tribulations of the Busekros family, whose 15-year-old daughter was forcibly removed from their home because she was being home-schooled. Melissa was placed in the psychiatric wing of a Bavarian clinic and was deemed to be suffering from "school-phobia."

There is good news to report on behalf of the Busekros family. When she turned 16, Melissa walked away from the clinic and returned home. Bavarian officials did not consent to her leaving, but because she had reached the age where she could not be compelled to attend school daily, they could not force her to stay.

The bad news is that the situation for home-schooling families has not improved in Germany and may be even worse. One of our Home School Legal Defense Association staff attorneys just returned from a two-week assessment of the home-schooling climate in Germany.

Sadly, home-school families continue to be aggressively pursued by school authorities and youth welfare officials. In addition, home-schoolers in Germany have more cause to be concerned than in the past because of action by the federal parliament that has made it easier to take children from home-schooling parents. Under the old law, government officials had to show that the child was in danger because of abuse by the parents. All that is required under the new law is that the child’s welfare is in danger, a vague requirement that is undefined by the current law. Although the law has not been signed by the federal president, he is expected to do so at any time.

Liebe Freunde der Bildungsfreiheit,

der Bundesverband Natürlich Lernen www.bvnl.de hat eine Kampagne gestartet, mit der endlich auch deutsches Recht an die Forderungen der UN (Kinderrechtskonvention, Menschenrechtsbeauftragter Munoz) und das europäische Niveau angepasst werden soll. Der bvnl ist dabei auf tatkräftige Unterstützung von uns allen angewiesen. Bitte meldet euch bei der unten angegebenen Adresse, wenn ihr das Anliegen uterstützen wollt.

Herzliche Grüße
Dagmar Neubronner

Freiheit und Vielfalt der Bildungswege
Für ein Menschenrecht auf  Bildung
Aufruf zu öffentlicher Diskussion 

Seit 2008 ist Deutschland das einzige Land in der Europäischen Union, das an einer Schulpflicht mit Anwesenheitszwang festhält, die durch Bußgelder, Beugehaft, Polizeigewalt und Entzug des Sorgerechts durchgesetzt werden kann und auch häufig wird – wenn die Familien nicht rechtzeitig auswandern. Konträr dazu empfehlen und fördern deutsche Behörden gleichzeitig aktiv den Hausunterricht für Deutsche im Ausland.

Überall sonst in Europa bedeutet der Begriff Schulpflicht eine Bildungs- oder Unterrichtspflicht, d.?h. dass das Selbstbestimmungsrecht bei der Bildungsvermittlung auf unterschiedliche Weise wahrgenommen werden darf. Genau das fordern wir für Deutschland: ein Bildungssystem, das die uneingeschränkte Wahl zwischen staatlichen und privaten Bildungsangeboten, häuslichem Unterricht oder „auf andere Weise“ (Zitat aus dem englischen Gesetz) garantiert.

Beispiel Dänemark: Wenn mindestens zwölf Familien ihre Kinder gemeinsam unterrichten wollen, trägt der Staat die Personalkosten für die Lehrkräfte und gewährt Zuschüsse zu den Sachkosten.

Beispiel Österreich: Schulpflicht kann durch häuslichen Unterricht erfüllt werden, wenn dies vor Beginn des Schuljahres beim Bezirksschulrat angezeigt wird.

Beispiel Niederlande: 70 Prozent aller Schulen werden privat geführt und voll vom Staat finanziert.

Beispiel Großbritannien: Die Eltern tragen die Verantwortung für die Bildung ihrer Kinder. Die Bildungspflicht kann durch Schulbesuch erfüllt werden oder „auf andere Weise“. Das Leben ohne Schule fällt in letztere Kategorie. Es ist keine Genehmigung notwendig.

Beispiele aus dem Ausland zeigen, dass nicht schulgebundene Bildung häufig zu besseren Leistungen führt als der deutsche Schulzwang. Auch die europäische Verfassung sieht eine Bildungspflicht vor, insofern ist es nur noch eine Frage der Zeit, bis der Schulanwesenheitszwang auch in Deutschland abgeschafft werden wird. Der Bundesverband Natürlich Lernen! e.V. möchte das beschleunigen.
 

Bildungsfreiheit ist ein Menschenrecht

Die Schulpflicht ist unserer Auffassung nach durch das Grundgesetz nicht gedeckt. Dort wird nur die Aufsicht des Staates über das gesamte Schulwesen festgeschrieben. Der Artikel 7 GG sagt: „(1) Das gesamte Schulwesen steht unter der Aufsicht des Staates“, und das bedeutet nicht die Pflicht, eine Schule zu besuchen. Schulpflicht wird – in unbewusster Tradition der Gesetzgebung des Dritten Reichs – erst durch Schulgesetze der Länder eingeführt.

Wir sind der Meinung, dass so grundgesetzlich garantierte Rechte des Kindes verletzt werden wie beispielsweise die Unantastbarkeit der Würde des Menschen (Art. 1), die freie Entfaltung der Persönlichkeit (Art. 2), aber auch das Recht der Eltern zur Erziehung ihrer Kinder und das Verbot der Trennung von Eltern und Kindern gegen deren Willen (beides Artikel 6) sowie das Verbot der Zwangsarbeit (Art. 12). Ebenso scheint die Schulpflicht ein Verstoß gegen das Wohl des Kindes, gegen das Antidiskriminierungsgesetz (aufgrund des Alters zur Schulpflicht gezwungen) und gegen die UN-Kinderrechtskonvention zu sein (Artikels 28 sagt: „make primary education compulsory and available free to all“: Grundbildung soll verpflichtend und für alle und frei zugänglich sein).

Mit unserer Gesetzesinitiative wollen wir Zwang und Gewalt auf dem Gebiet der Bildung ebenso dauerhaft ächten wie es auf anderen Gebieten bereits geschehen ist, beispielsweise der Wahl des Lebenspartners, der Religion, der Meinungsfreiheit, der Ernährung, der freien Wahl des Wohnsitzes und vielen anderen mehr.

Mit unserer Gesetzesinitiative „Neugestaltung des Artikels 7, GG“ wenden wir uns an Jugendliche und Eltern, an Experten aus Wissenschaft, Pädagogik, Psychologie, Soziologie, Politik, Wirtschaft, Recht, Medizin etc. sowie an alle engagierten Bürgerinnen und Bürger in Deutschland. Wir laden alle Menschen ein, sich gemeinsam mit uns an der Verbreiterung dieser Debatte zu beteiligen. Wir wünschen uns eine Bildung, die über den Aspekt der wirtschaftlichen Verwertbarkeit weit hinausgeht, und setzen uns daher für ein grundgesetzliches Recht auf Bildung ein.
 

Neufassung des Artikel 7 GG

Mit der Gesetzesinitiative und ihrem Vorschlag zur Neufassung des Artikels 7 GG beziehen wir uns auf die Petition für Freiheit und Selbstbestimmung im Bildungswesen von Johannes Heimrath von 1991. Sie ist mit ihren fünf Forderungen zur Bildungsfreiheit heute aktueller denn je. Die Neufassung des Artikels 7, GG, soll im Rahmen einer breiten öffentlichen Debatte auf diesen Forderungen aufbauen.

Forderung 1

(1) Alle Menschen haben das Recht auf Bildung nach ihrem Willen.

Forderung 2

(1) Eltern oder andere verantwortliche Begleiter  haben die Pflicht, Kindern die Wahrneh- mung von Bildungsangeboten, insbesondere von Unterricht zu ermöglichen, und zwar entweder zu Hause, in privaten oder öffentlichen Einrichtungen oder auf andere Weise.

(2) Bei der Wahl von Bildungsform und Bildungsstätte haben Eltern oder andere verantwortliche Begleiter den Willen des Kindes zu achten.

Forderung 3

(1) Bildungsangebote, auch in Form von Schulen, kann jede natürliche oder als gemeinnützig anerkannte juristische Person, welche die Grundrechte und Gesetze achtet, gleichberechtigt neben den staatlichen Angeboten unterbreiten.

(2) Der Staat darf im Bereich schulischer und außerschulischer Bildung Eltern oder andere verantwortliche Begleiter nicht verpflichten, unter Verletzung ihres Gewissens und ihrer rechtmäßigen Wahl die Kinder in staatliche Schulen oder irgendeinen besonderen, vom Staat vorgeschriebenen Schultypus zu schicken.

Forderung 4

(1) Alle Menschen haben das gleiche Recht auf staatliche Förderung ihrer Bildung und Ausbildung. Das bedeutet auf Seiten des Staates:

(2) Jedem Menschen wird ein finanzieller Grundbetrag für seine Bildung garantiert.

(3) Die öffentliche Finanzierung von Bildung ist in ihrer Höhe so zu bemessen, dass sie den uneingeschränkten Zugang zu Bildung ermöglicht.

Forderung 5

(1) Die Bildungsinhalte bleiben Gegenstand der Diskussion in der gesamten Gesellschaft und dürfen nicht vom Staat vorgeschrieben werden.

(2) Aufgabe der Bürger bleibt jedoch, darüber zu wachen, dass das Recht auf freie Bildung von jedem Menschen, insbesondere von Kindern, uneingeschränkt und selbstbestimmt wahrgenommen werden kann.

(3) Die Rechtsaufsicht wird von staatlichen Organen ausgeübt, deren Mitglieder auf Zeit gewählt werden. Die Mitglieder sind unabhängig und nur dem Gesetz unterworfen.

Unterstützen Sie dieses Anliegen mit Ihrer Unterschrift.

Der gesellschaftliche Wandel im 20. Jahrhundert vom autoritären Obrigkeitsstaat zum freiheitlich-demokratischen Rechtsstaat hat bisher das Bildungswesen grundsätzlich ausgeklammert. Heute erleben wir, wie unsere Welt bestürzende Schäden durch das Wirken des Menschen erleidet. Dieses schädliche Verhalten rührt wesentlich aus der Tatsache her, dass der Einzelne nicht gelernt hat, sich selbstverantwortlich und bewusst als nehmenden und gebenden Teil des Ganzen zu verstehen. Ursache dafür sind auch veraltete Bildungsstrukturen, die den Menschen von der Übernahme von Verantwortung abhalten. Die grundlegende Neugestaltung des Bildungswesens könnte eine bedeutende Chance sein, die schöpferischen Kräfte der Menschen zum Wohle der ganzen Lebensgemeinschaft auf unserem Planeten zu aktivieren.

Verabschieden wir uns also von überholten und lebensfeindlichen Konzepten wie Zentralismus, Bevormundung und Fremdbestimmung. Schütteln wir die Angst vor dem mündigen Menschen ab! Geben wir dem Leben in Freiheit und Selbstbestimmung eine Chance!“ Schule muss im Sinn von ganzheitlicher Bildung neu gedacht werden. Der Staat sollte den Mut zur privaten Initiative fördern und Vertrauen in die Menschen beweisen, die diesen Staat tragen. Menschen, die sich für eine gesunde und kreative Entfaltung unserer Kinder engagieren wollen, dürfen nicht behindert oder gar kriminalisiert werden.

Die Kampagne unterstützen:

Die fünf Forderungen sollen im Lauf des Jahres 2008 durch Medien und Veranstaltungen verbreitet werden. Interessierte können der Gesetzesinitiative für Bildungsfreiheit Nachdruck verleihen, wenn sie möglichst viele Unterschriften von Unterstützern sammeln. Unterschriftslisten und weiterführende Materialien können bei der Koordinationsstelle angefordert werden, am einfachsten per Mail: info@bvnl.de.

Die Gesetzesinitiative „Freiheit und Vielfalt der Bildungswege. Das Menschenrecht auf Bildung“ ist ein freier und freiwilliger Zusammenhang von Menschen, die sich darum bemühen, die Diskriminierung von Kindern als „Mindermenschen“ im zeitgenössischen Denken, im Rechtsverständnis und in der Praxis zu beseitigen.

Die Gesetzesinitiative ist nicht institutionell, alle Tätigkeiten werden ehrenamtlich erbracht.

Sie können sich durch einen regelmäßigen finanziellen Beitrag, durch Leistungen bei Aktionen, z.?B. Versand von Infomaterial oder Organisation von Vorträgen und Workshops, durch Schaffung einer örtlichen Informationsstelle oder durch eigene politische Arbeit am Aufbau der Kampagne beteiligen.

Schreiben Sie Ihre Vorschläge, Fragen, Wünsche und Hoffnungen an die Koordinationsstelle der Gesetzesinitiative
Freiheit und Vielfalt der Bildungswege. Das Menschenrecht auf Bildung

Bundesverband Natürlich Lernen! e.V.  BVNL,   
Lange Straße 10, 17440 Klein-Jasedow,
Tel: (038374) 75256, Fax: (038374) 75223,    

info@bvnl.de,  www.bvnl.de                                                             

Das Interview wurde ausgestrahlt am Dienstag nach Ostern (nicht am Montag wie ursprünglich angekündigt) im Rahmen der Sendung Outlook zwischen 11- und 12 Uhr Deutscher Zeit .

Das Interview wird ausgestrahlt am Ostermontag im Rahmen der Sendung Outlook zwischen 11- und 12 Uhr Deutscher Zeit .

LFN Update

The interview has been broadcasted on Tuesday (not Monday as originally planned) in the program "outlook".

Under www.bbcworldservice.com/outlook you can click Tue for Tuesday. Then go to the last third of the controler in the window that will open and listen to the interview with Dagmar Neubronner and to the statement of the education authority Bremen.