The
Beginning:
How a once normal family became involved in the home schooling movement.
The case
Cecile Gracey was a mother and a home maker, raising her large family, active in 4-H, being a leader of the Little Women 4-H club, and directing the junior choir at St. Mary's Church.
The Motive
Cecile became motivated when she joined a group of ultra-conservatives from Canada. They reported on parents who had removed their children from school so that they could teach them at home, citing courses that they found troubling.
That fall of 1970, Cecile sought counsel from others who believed as she did, that parents should have a say in what was taught in public schools. A new Health Course had been required in all public schools for children in the 7th and 8th grade.
Seeking Counsel
Cecile turned to Dr. William Marra, a Fordham University professor of philosophy and a co-chairperson of the Interstate Council for Parental Rights. She sought his advice on how to set up an adequate schoolilng program for her children in her own home.
Then Jerry and Cecile Gracey turned to Dr. Stephen T. Stanton, former district principal of the Mexico Academy and Central Schools. He encouraged them and put them in contact with another family that had taught their children at home previously, the Tollertons.
The Graceys visited the Tollertons, who encouraged them. Grace Tollerton had good advice. "Keep a lesson plan for each subject, for each child. That's all the state requires. I don't think they will bother you. They never bothered us."
Cecile Gracey took heart, made lessons plans, and pulled her children out of school.
At Issue with the Court
Jerry and Cecile Gracey were called into the Family Court with a Neglect charge when Kathleen Gibbs, the attendance officer, reported them missing from classes.
After appearing before family court judge, Donald K Comstock, Mrs. Gracey made her plea to teach her children at home. Judge Comstock listened to her complains about the new courses for the Junior High on Health. "Send your children back to school or they will be removed," he advised.
The Removal
On Monday, October 19, 1970, social worker Mrs. Dennison came into the Gracey home, supported by another social worker and three police officers. They removed six of the children and put them in the patrol cars.
The social workers split the chidren further, sending the three oldest girls to a family in Fair Haven; the two youngest sisters to a family in Parish; and the boy to a family in West Monroe. None of the children were allowed contact with one another and were told they could not call their parents.
The three oldest immediately started a hunger strike. They did attend Red Creek Public School during that time, and made secret phone calls to their parents by using a public phone in a nearby park, calling collect.
The younger children were alone, and had no recourse to anyone.
On Friday, October 23, 1970, the appointed Law Guardian, Robert Hurlbutt, requested that the children who had been removed would be returned to their parents pending a former hearing in the court regarding the case. He cited that the children were unhappy.
Reunited
The parents drove over 80 miles retrieving their children from the separate foster homes. By this time, the Gracey Case, as it was called, had received national attention by news media.
The following are newspaper articles that the Graceys preserved. In some cases, identifying information is missing, with only a note of the date or the paper.
The Court Case and Decision
On November 13, 1970, the Graceys had their day in court. A decision was not handed down until February 3, 1971.
The 17 page Decision concludes:
"The Court finds that Respondents are certainly exercising a minimum degree of care in supplying the children with an adequte education. Additionally, there is no proof that the physical, mental or emotional condition of the chilrdren has been impaired or is in "imminent danger" of becoming impaired. Indeed from what the Court could observe, the children are bright, alert, well-mannered and exhibit a strong love and affection for their mother and father as well as each other. The Court concludes that Respondents are exercising a minimum degree of care in supplying their children with an adequate education.
The Court concludes that Patricia, Amy, Susan, Gerald, Jacqueline and Kathleen Gracey are not neglected children within the meaning of Section 1012 of the Family Court Act and the petition therefore is dismissed."
The Historical Value of This Case
Because of its National Attention, the Gracey Case was instrumental in highlighting the plight of parents seeking to educate their children. The AP sent the story across the United States, and as can be seen in the clips provided, many parents were heartened by the news. Respondents came from as far away as Canada, Mexico, France and Spain. The national news desk also brought the story to the nightly news.
Because the case was filed as a "Neglect" case, the public record is sealed, and this case will not be found in any the law books or other cases regarding Home Schooling.
The records were retrieved from the Oswego Family Court through Cecile Gracey, who signed for their release. They are shared on this site with the hope that others will know of Cecile Gracey, her bravery and her courage.
