BILL WOULD RESTRICT GOVERNMENT INFRINGEMENT ON RAISING CHILDREN

Government has a responsibility to protect children from direct harm; it does not have the right to dictate the manner in which children should be raised.

An amendment to the Missouri Constitution under consideration in the state Senate aims to affirm those ideas to ensure that parents are free to direct the upbringing and education of their children without undue government interference.

The measure, Senate Joint Resolution 33, is sponsored by Sen. David Klarich, R-Ballwin.

"I'm the father of four and have one on the way. I want to have the opportunity to bring up my kids as I see fit. I don't care how much the state says it cares; it doesn't love my kids as much as I do," Klarich said.

The resolution died in the Senate Education Committee last session on a 5-4 vote. A hearing before the Aging, Families and Mental Health Committee is scheduled for this morning.

Eight of Klarich's Senate colleagues have already signed on as cosponsors, including Sen. Peter Kinder, R-Cape Girardeau. Kinder said the amendment will be a part of the state Republican Party platform, which he is helping to draft.

If approved by both houses of the legislature, Missouri voters will decide on the amendment in November.

"I would love to have the people of the state of Missouri vote yes or no," said Klarich, who is confident it would pass by an overwhelming majority.

The amendment's language is based on two U.S. Supreme Court decisions from the 1920s that upheld the rights of citizens to conduct their own lives under the due process clause of the 14th Amendment. Both cases involved state restrictions on education.

In Meyer v. Nebraska (1923), the court by a 7-2 vote ruled unconstitutional a Nebraska law which prohibited the teaching of modern languages other than English in grades eight and lower. The case involved a parochial school teacher who used a German Bible history as a reading text.

Writing for the court, Justice James Clark McReynolds said citizens have the right to make their own decisions in a number of areas, including the matter of child upbringing and education.

The second case, Pierce v. Society of Sisters (1925), struck down an Oregon law which required children between the ages of 8 and 16 to attend public school. By a unanimous vote, the court held that while the state has an interest in requiring some type of schooling, it is solely the right of parents to determine what form that education should take.

Since these cases have never been overturned and therefore constitute "the supreme law of the land," Klarich said he sees no reason why they shouldn't also be incorporated into the state constitution. He said it will help reverse what he sees as a trend by government to involve itself in child-rearing decisions.

"It is obvious to me that we as a legislative body are not respecting parental rights in this state," Klarich said.

The most blatant example, he said, is the educational reform package passed in 1993 as Senate Bill 380. Provisions of that bill empower state education authorities to undo decisions made by locally elected school boards, and even to remove board members.

The amendment includes language which specifically exempts laws targeting child abuse or neglect.

"There have been a lot of red herrings that people who want to oppose this like to throw up, like saying this would allow child abuse," Klarich said. "Parental rights are limited. They can't endanger a child's health. They can't say a child does not want to go to school."

Government, Klarich said, should demonstrate that it has a compelling reason before interfering with family decisions.