There is growing tension between parents and the state over who should ultimately determine the education of children: parents or the state? Developments such as the BELA Act, the introduction of sex education, a new history curriculum and initiatives to introduce a Palestinian curriculum are contributing to this growing tension.

Since biblical times, parents have been regarded as having a divine responsibility for the education of their children. Deuteronomy 6:6–7 teaches:

“And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thine heart: and thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up.”

Parents do not, however, always fulfil this responsibility alone, but may make use of others to assist them. This is illustrated by the Latin legal term in loco parentis, meaning that others may assist with education “in the place of the parent”.

The development of in loco parentis is described in this first of three articles. A second article considers how the modern state increasingly assumed responsibilities previously exercised by parents, while a third examines how the weakening of the state affects education today.

Parents as the Original Source of Authority

In ancient Rome, the father was regarded as the head of the household. He was known as the pater familias and exercised extensive authority over the household. Education formed part of this domestic responsibility. The father could, however, delegate the education of his children to a tutor or teacher. Such a tutor acted in the place of the father. Roman law described this practice by means of the term in loco parentis.

The Gravissimum Educationis of Pope Paul VI, issued in 1965, describes the parental duty of education as follows: “Since parents have given children their life, they are bound by the most serious obligation to educate their offspring and therefore must be recognised as the primary and principal educators.” This implies that parents may choose either to educate their children themselves or to send them to a school of their choice. Catholic teaching derives this principle from natural law. It is the natural process of bringing children into the world that gives parents the right and responsibility to educate them.

A secular classical-liberal approach reaches a similar conclusion, although from a different starting point. Thinkers such as John Locke regarded parental authority as a temporary power arising from the parents’ duty to care for, educate and guide the child towards independent

reason. Parents should therefore be free either to provide their children’s education themselves or to delegate aspects of it to schools, tutors and other educators.

In English-speaking countries, the application of in loco parentis to schools was developed largely through English common law. In his Commentaries on the Laws of England (1765), William Blackstone wrote that a parent may delegate part of his parental authority to a tutor or schoolmaster. The teacher then acts in loco parentis and receives only that portion of the parent’s authority necessary to teach the child and maintain discipline. According to this approach, parents remain the original source of educational authority, while the school acquires its powers only through delegation.

The Reformed View: Parents and Teachers

The Afrikaans Reformed churches have their roots in the Calvinist Reformation. These churches traditionally advocate an educational order grounded in the Bible. This is reflected clearly in the baptismal vow, in which parents promise, “to the best of your ability, to instruct and have this child instructed.”

Although this baptismal vow places responsibility for education on parents, the word “and” may suggest that parents also have a duty to delegate certain aspects of education. This duty is justified in different ways.

One view recognises that matters such as religion and sex education are primarily the responsibility of the family. Other forms of knowledge required to function in the modern world, such as languages, mathematics and science, are sometimes regarded as value-free or neutral subjects that can be taught more effectively by subject specialists. Since parents may not possess the specialist knowledge required to teach every subject, it is considered preferable to leave the teaching of these supposedly neutral subjects to teachers with the relevant expertise, for example in public schools.

Others argue that there is no such thing as neutral education. On this view, parents should send their children to a Christian independent school associated with a church community that shares their values, particularly for subjects requiring specialist teachers.

"It takes a village" The African Approach

The proverb “it takes a village to raise a child” is often associated with Africa. It expresses the idea that raising and educating children is not solely the responsibility of their parents, but may also involve the family and wider community in ensuring that children flourish. This community typically includes the extended family, elders, neighbours and other members of the same cultural or faith community.

Two Different Views of In Loco Parentis

The different understandings of in loco parentis can broadly be divided into two categories: the parent-centred view and the collective view.
The ancient Roman, Catholic, English common-law and classical-liberal approaches are essentially similar. Parents are regarded as having the primary responsibility for, and competence in, the education of their children. These approaches can therefore be grouped together as a parent-centred understanding of in loco parentis.

The Reformed and African perspectives also regard parents as responsible for education, but do not necessarily regard them as fully capable in carrying out that responsibility. The Reformed approach emphasises the need to entrust specialised subjects to suitably qualified teachers, while the African approach views education as a responsibility too extensive to be carried by the nuclear family alone and therefore involves the wider community. These approaches can be grouped together as a more collective understanding of in loco parentis.

Then the State Entered Education

From the nineteenth century onwards, however, a third approach became increasingly influential: the modern state began to claim its own responsibility and authority over education. This has contributed to growing conflict between parents and the state over who should ultimately direct the education of children. Because different understandings of in loco parentis continue to exist, resistance to increasing state control has often remained divided and weak. The next article will explore this development further.