Can group rights justify the denial of education to children? The Amish in the United States as a case study

Abstract

Multiculturalism gives preference to group rights over individual rights. This may challenge democratic values. This paper focuses on the Amish denial of education from their adolescents. Criticizing Wisconsin v. Yoder (Wisconsin v. Yoder 406 U.S. 205 (1972)), the paper analyses the power of the Amish community over its members. The main questions are: Is it reasonable to deny the Amish adolescents’ standard American education? What are the limits of state interference in norms of illiberal communities who invoke separatism as a mechanism of cultural and religious preservation?

Child Education Rights Versus Parental Preferences: A Paradox Between United Nations Conventions and Alternative Schooling Methods

“…Some groups argue additionally that UN conventions are an affront to national sovereignty (Cohen-Almagor, 2021; McClain, 2009). Given the focus in the U.S. on negative rights or freedom rights (e.g., freedom from arbitrary detention; freedom of religion) rather than positive rights or welfare rights (e.g., right to healthcare), many conservatives reject the CRC’s mandates that governments help ensure the economic and social well-being of children (Witte & Browning, 2012).…”

“…The court agreed with the plaintiff that secondary education could be harmful to the Amish community’s way of life and that Amish children do not need to be prepared to function in wider society because they live in an insular and self-sufficient religious community. Although Amish students sometimes attend public schools, many Amish youth are educated from age six to age 14 in one-room schoolhouses for their community in which there are no computers and little science instruction and by teachers with no formal training (Cohen-Almagor, 2021). Even those in public schools have curricula designed for them that are different from what non-Amish children receive because when they do attend public schools, their local schools are predominantly composed of Amish children (Cohen-Almagor, 2021).…”

“…Although Amish students sometimes attend public schools, many Amish youth are educated from age six to age 14 in one-room schoolhouses for their community in which there are no computers and little science instruction and by teachers with no formal training (Cohen-Almagor, 2021). Even those in public schools have curricula designed for them that are different from what non-Amish children receive because when they do attend public schools, their local schools are predominantly composed of Amish children (Cohen-Almagor, 2021). Thus, the Supreme Court ruling in Wisconsin v. Yoder does not stand up in terms of the CRC, particularly Article 28:3 about “facilitating access to scientific and technical knowledge and modern teaching methods” and Article 29: 1 about helping children reach their “fullest potential.” Nor does it account for the fact that while the majority of Amish youth do return to the community and become Amish adults after an allowed trial of secular life called “rumspringa,” a small percentage choose to leave the community forever.…”

“…When Amish children leave the eighth grade, they often join their parents in learning the vocational skills needed to contribute to the Amish community. Cohen-Almagor (2021) concurs that the limited curriculum puts Amish children at a disadvantage should they choose to leave the community and join the wider society because the skills these children receive are limited to the Amish way of life. Raley (2011) adds an additional point about how the work landscape has changed for many Amish people who no longer exclusively farm: “Amish workers today are not the ‘sturdy yeomen’ that the Yoder Court described but rather are interdependent Americans who need an education to thrive in the contemporary economy” (p. 697).…”

“…Thus, while many view education as a temporary matter in which we could give absolute control to the parents, ultimately, if the state does not enforce minimum standards for children, such as schooling through age 16 for everyone, or protect children whose learning may be seriously impaired by homeschooling or subpar religious school, such as the yeshivas discussed below, in the long run, children will likely be deprived of their rights to self-determination and economic potential. As Cohen-Almagor (2021) questions, “Amish adults are entitled to restrict their own self-development if so they choose in the spirit of maintaining tradition and culture. But are they also entitled to limit the self-development of their children?” (p. 172).…”