Parents vexed by denial of options for distance learning
Judge cites testimony that benefits of in-person teaching `far outweigh' risks
Politimi Karounis has been home-schooling her two elementary school-age children since September, when she decided to keep them home instead of risking exposing them to COVID-19.
It's been expensive and exhausting, she says, but “100 per cent” worth it to avoid worrying about one of them contracting the virus.
But Karounis also knows opting to home-school is not feasible for most parents.
It's why she was one of the plaintiffs behind a bid to have Quebec forced to provide distance learning options to all families during the pandemic.
A day after a judge rejected the request on Monday, Karounis said her thoughts were with the “thousands of parents” who've gone through the school year wondering each day whether their kids are safe at school.
“I'm disappointed,” Karounis said on Tuesday. “Mostly for all the parents who have had to struggle with the choice of either home-schooling without any help or taking the risk of sending their kids in every morning.”
Filed in August, the legal challenge contended Quebec essentially forcing parents to send their children back to school, despite COVID -19 concerns, violated their charter rights.
The parents argued that in the context of a pandemic, choosing whether or not to send their children to school s their right given the impact it could have on their families' health and well being.
They also argued all families should have access to remote learning options, not only those that met the requirements for the needed medical exemptions established by the government.
But in a 50 page decision rendered Monday, Quebec Superior Court Justice Chantal Chatelain ruled in favour of the government.
The judge cited testimony from several doctors and experts that argued the benefits of teaching as many children as possible in person “far outweigh” the risks to which they're exposed by attending school.
Though school attendance does “involve some risk,” Chatelain ruled, the government has put in place health measures in schools that “meet the highest standards.”
Those who can't receive a medical exemption also have the “reasonable option” of home-schooling, Chatelain ruled.
In an interview Tuesday, Julius Grey, the lawyer behind the challenge, said he will be meeting with the parents involved this week and deciding in coming days whether or not to appeal the decision.
“I found the judgment was disappointing because it didn't deal with the fundamental issue of individual autonomy, which is what I thought Section 7 of the Charter is about,” Grey said.
For Sarah Gibson, one of the parents behind the challenge, the decision misses the point behind one of their main arguments: that though it may sound like parents have options at the moment, it isn't really the case.
“The medical exemption and home-schooling sound great on paper, but they are not working well,” Gibson said.
She said the parents provided several examples in court of families who couldn't get an exemption, while others with similar medical concerns could.
There were also cases of school boards rejecting granted exemptions, she said, or doctors who wanted to grant them but said their hands were tied by the guidelines set by the government.
“It not only feels like a loss,” Gibson said of the ruling, “but it also feels a bit distorted to me, which is frustrating.”
In an email response, a spokesperson for Quebec's education department welcomed the ruling, saying it confirms Quebec's backto-school plan is legally valid.
“We understand that some parents may still have concerns,” Bryan St-louis wrote. “We want to reassure them: Everything has been put in place to ensure their health and safety.”