New Hampshire Homeschooling Coalition

This past legislative session, bills in both the House and Senate were enacted which amended RSA 193:1 regarding school attendance by pupils. At their core, the bills raised the mandatory education age from 16 to 18 and repealed the statutory authority of students between the ages of 16 and 18 to request outright termination of their education. Although an inadvertent glitch moved the effective date for the increase in the mandatory age to September 15, 2007, the change will still allow students between 16 and 18 to request termination of their education under the existing procedures until July 1, 2009.

The Department understands that this situation may cause some confusion for local school districts. However, it is the Department’s position that until July 1, 2009, the effective date of the bulk of the amendments to RSA 193:1, students between the ages of 16 and 18 may continue to request termination of their education under the authority of RSA 193:1, IV. The Department also contends that until July 1, 2009 school districts may proceed with those requests as they have done in the past and grant the requests when the requirements of subsection IV are satisfied. Local school districts should also be aware of their ability pursuant to RSA 193:5 to make a recommendation to the Commissioner of the Department of Education that a child be exempted from school attendance, if a given situation warrants such action.

The Department hopes this clarifies any confusion regarding this matter.

Therefore, New Hampshire homeschoolers do not have to send letters of notification or prepare evaluations for students who are over age 16. Starting on July 1, 2009, we will have to notify and provide evaluations to participating agencies for students under age 18.

The Effects of HB87 on home education in New Hampshire

by Chris Hamilton

SB18, which removes the ability of parents to withdraw their children from school after age 16, was signed into law by Governor Lynch on 6/26/07. It does not become effective until 7/1/09, which gives districts time to put the necessary programs in place. HB87, which also amends the compulsory attendance law to allow parents to send their children to out-of-state schools, later passed the legislature, but because it did so while SB18 was unsigned, if it had been sent to the governor as written it would have nullified some of the changes enacted by SB18. The Senate Enrolled Bills Committee, which inspects bills for inconsistencies before they are sent to the governor, therefore proposed amending HB87 to incorporate some of the changes made by SB18, eliminating that problem. The intent of the amendment was to put the changes brought about by the original HB87 into Section 1, and make it effective 60 days after passage, and put the fusion of HB87 and SB18 into Sections 2-4, make them contingent on passage of SB18, and make them effective 7/1/09, to be compatible with SB18. This amendment was brought to the Senate floor by the committee, adopted by the Senate, there was concurrence by the House, and the Governor signed the bill on 7/23/07.

Unfortunately, there was a drafting error in the amendment to HB87, and the language of Section 1 also makes compulsory attendance to age 18 universal effective 9/15/07. However, the changes outside of RSA 193:1 enacted by SB18 don't become effective until 7/1/09. There is therefore a period of two years when parents are required to send their children to school until age 18, but they are not given the option of choosing an alternative learning plan, nor more importantly, to create a home education program under RSA 193-A, since the change to raise the upper age to 18 in RSA 193-A does not take effect until 7/1/09. In addition, although parents are required to comply with the compulsory attendance law until the child reaches age 18, districts will not be empowered to enforce the law beyond age 16 until 7/1/09.

The end result is that, although a parent's right to homeschool is guaranteed by the US Constitution (Wisconsin vs. Yoder and other cases), there is no definition in NH statute or rules as to how to do it after age 16, and no ability for a district to enforce the law should a parent choose not to comply after the child turns 16. This oversight could leave about 400 homeschoolers in limbo for two academic years. According to newspaper articles in the Nashua Telegraph, Manchester Union Leader, and Foster's Daily Democrat, state officials have no desire to enforce this requirement until 7/1/09, as it was not the intent of the law. However, it is not the DOE that is charged with enforcement of this law, it is the local districts, and any police officer or DCYF social worker could initiate charges against a parent who failed to comply with the law. As of this time, the NH School Boards Association has not made any recommendation to its members on how to proceed.

On 9/5/07, there was an attempt in the Senate to suspend the rules and introduce a bill to enact the original intent of HB87. The vote was 14-10 along party lines (all Democrats voted for it, all Republicans voted against it), and the rules suspension, which requires a 2/3 majority, did not succeed. Republicans want to deal with this in January to allow adequate debate on any proposed solutions. If you want action taken sooner, you could contact Republican Senators and request that they change their votes and allow suspension of the rules to deal with this problem now.

New Hampshire Homeschooling Coalition, PO Box 2224,
Concord, NH 03302, (603) 437-3547