UNESCO says homeschooling contravenes the rights of children
UNESCO (the United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organisation) have produced a 45 page-long document evaluating ‘homeschooling through a human rights lens.’ The author fails to conceal a distinctly anti-‘homeschooling’ agenda. The publication outlines the need for state regulation of homeschooling to preserve the ‘rights of children’, according to the UN Convention on the Rights of Children, which are apparently at risk in the case of homeschooling.
‘The UN convention on the rights of a child’ seeks to outline several ‘rights’ (all eligible countries have signed up to this convention, apart from the USA):
The right to development (article. 6); The right to be heard (art. 12); The right to freedom of expression (art. 13); The right to access to information and material from a diversity of sources (art. 17); The right to freedom from violence (art. 19); The right to health (art. 24); The right to be protected from work that interferes with the child’s education (art. 32); The right to play, recreational activities and participation in cultural and artistic life (art. 31).
The report further claims that children are under-represented in discussions about home education, suggesting that decisions are primarily driven by parents rather than by children’s voices. This framing assumes that parental authority and concern are somehow suspect—an assumption that runs counter to both human nature and the family’s foundational role in a child’s upbringing.
Another concern raised is that homeschooled children may be ‘exposed only to the values and perspectives of the immediate homeschooling environment,’ (Page 29) lacking access to diverse educational resources. This argument thinly veils an attack on families who homeschool to preserve their cultural, religious, or philosophical convictions. While it is legitimate to guard against genuinely harmful ideologies, it is deeply troubling to suggest that transmitting faith or moral principles within a family is inherently dangerous. To deny parents the right to pass on their beliefs is, in effect, to deny the role of the family altogether. And this of course is at the crux of what this paper is about. Such an argument also makes massive assumptions about the ‘neutrality’ of education that is often provided by schools.
Indeed, the author of this publication makes it clear that religion is inherently a risky business:
However, dogmatic approaches may stir up intolerance. These approaches “seek not just a single course on religion, but instead desire to have all disciplines taught through the eyes of their particular faith” (Gray, 2018). The Human Rights Committee and the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights understand that public school education is meant to provide children with religious and ethical education in a “neutral and objective way” and must offer exemptions or alternatives for instruction on a particular religion or belief. In certain circumstances, homeschooling may be a practice sensitive to fundamentalist approaches, given the fact that it may offer limited exposure to views differing from those of the family. The United Nations’ Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief, Heiner Bielefeldt, notes that “having face-to face interaction of students on a regular basis is not less important than the development of intellectual skills, because such regular interaction can promote a sense of communality that goes hand in hand with the appreciation of diversity, including diversity in questions of religion or belief” (Human Rights Council, 2010, para. 21). This reflects the principle of inclusion referred to in section 2.4, which encourages respect of all diversity. Therefore, while IHRL [International Humans Rights Law] safeguards parents’ right to ensure religious and moral education in line with their convictions, it cannot be used to infringe upon other human rights or limit their scope. (Page 29-30)
There is much to unpack here which will be of significant concern to many home educating families. Broadly, the UN considers a religious education to be of international concern, giving rise to ‘fundamentalism’ and limiting a child’s understanding of the diversity of perspectives that exist in the world. This is such a simplistic analysis that it is hard to believe that anyone believes it to be true – what people of faith do is teach their children that there is such a thing as absolute truth. This is not the same as preventing them from hearing about other perspectives.
Underlying this UNESCO publication is a troubling philosophy: that the state, rather than the family, is ultimately responsible for children’s moral and intellectual formation. The report’s call for governments to ensure that all children are “seen and heard by state officials” reflects a growing belief that parental authority must yield to state oversight. Moreover, its portrayal of religious conviction as inherently risky reveals a deep suspicion of any worldview not sanctioned by UN bureaucrats.
This is not merely a debate about homeschooling—it is a debate about who shapes the minds and hearts of the next generation. Parents must recognize what is at stake: a global movement that increasingly views the family as a potential threat rather than the cornerstone of human society.
