Choose Your Location
|
![]() |
SAN FRANCISCO (Map, News) - Last school year, more than 5,400 San Francisco public school students missed more than 10 days of class — no phone calls, no notes. They were simply no-shows.
It is a chronic problem plaguing the school district, and San Francisco District Attorney Kamala Harris is taking a hard line with parents whose children repeatedly fail to show up to school.
Harris said she is prepared to prosecute parents whose children, especially those at the elementary level, have more than 10 unexcused absences in a school year. Hundreds of children fall into that category, and Harris said she could begin prosecuting parents as early as next year.
“This is not an idle threat,” Harris said Monday. “We’re actually very serious in terms of the likelihood of prosecuting a parent.”
Under state law, a parent of a chronically truant student can be charged with contributing to the delinquency of a minor, a misdemeanor that carries a sentence of up to one year in jail and a fine of $2,500.
School officials say the number of truant elementary school students is particularly alarming: In 2006-07, nearly 600 kindergarten through fourth-grade students missed more than 20 days of class, said Keith Choy, who oversees the district’s Stay in School Coalition.
“That’s not the kids’ fault at that point,” Choy said.
Many parents of elementary children cite a lack of transportation and child care, as well as family crises as reasons for truancy. At the secondary level, students say they are bored with class or too far behind to attend, district spokeswoman Gentle Blythe said.
Talk of criminally charging parents of truant children has been ongoing in San Francisco for a couple of years. While other counties conduct “truancy sweeps” in which dozens of parents are arrested each year, San Francisco has long taken a softer approach to the issue by offering a series of programs to persistently truant students.
However, Harris and school officials said prosecutions could come in the near future as the number of habitually truant children has remained above 5,000 for the last three years, even with the implementation of new stay-in-school programs.
In 2006-07, there were 5,417 students — about 10 percent of the district’s total population of 55,000 students — considered habitual and chronic no-shows. It is a decrease from 5,494 students in 2005-06 and 5,628 students in 2004-05.
In 2003, a civil grand jury report criticized the district for not doing enough to keep kids from cutting class. District attorneys from Harris’ office have been holding meetings with parents of truant children over the last couple of years to discuss the importance of attending school.
About 40 families were involved in the program at Sanchez Elementary School, in The City’s Castro district, last year. As a result, the school’s average daily attendance has increased by 1 percent.
By the numbers
55,000 Students enrolled in SFUSD
20 Days a student has to miss to be considered chronically truant
5,417 Students in 2006-07 considered chronically or habitually truant
5,494 Students in 2005-06 considered chronically or habitually truant
5,628 Students in 2004-05 considered chronically or habitually truant
$10 million Amount district has lost in state revenues for attendance as a result of truant students
- Source: SFUSD, District Attorney’s Office
Voice your opinion and vote in our poll at examiNation SF: How do you feel about prosecuting parents whose schoolchildren are chronically truant?



Comments from Examiner Readers
4:16 PM MST on Tue., Sep. 16, 2008 re: "Truant kids’ parents may pay"
Report as inappropriate
1:57 PM MST on Wed., Feb. 6, 2008
re: "Truant kids’ parents may pay"
Report as inappropriate
7:11 PM MST on Sat., Nov. 3, 2007
re: "Truant kids’ parents may pay"
Report as inappropriate
5:44 PM MST on Tue., Oct. 16, 2007
re: "Truant kids’ parents may pay"
Report as inappropriate
4:52 PM MST on Tue., Oct. 16, 2007
re: "Truant kids’ parents may pay"
Report as inappropriate
1:01 PM MST on Tue., Oct. 16, 2007
re: "Truant kids’ parents may pay"
Report as inappropriate
12:55 PM MST on Tue., Oct. 16, 2007
re: "Truant kids’ parents may pay"
Report as inappropriate
9:58 AM MST on Tue., Oct. 16, 2007
re: "Truant kids’ parents may pay"
Report as inappropriate
8:43 AM MST on Tue., Oct. 16, 2007
re: "Truant kids’ parents may pay"
Report as inappropriate
7:11 AM MST on Tue., Oct. 16, 2007
re: "Truant kids’ parents may pay"
Report as inappropriate
Examiner Reader said:
I believe at the elementary level and middle school level, yes parents should be held accountable unless there is some sort of tradgedy or family crisis, but once a child reaches the highschool level and will not go to school, I believe the child should be held accountable, and punish them with consequences for not attending. Especially if the parent has made every attempt to get to stay in school.
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
I think that this is great thing.because kids should be in school all the time.
62 agree | 53 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
How about the responsibility of schools? A relative drove her daughter to her high school every day. The girl entered from the fron door and just exited through the back door with a group of friends. There was a string of substitute teachers and these students had gotten into the bad habit of just not showing up to class. The parents pleaded with the school for help but the school offered no solutions.
109 agree | 105 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Kids: victims of abuse by bad parents said:
There are so many bad parents. Parents that allow their kids to smoke weed and play hooky from school should be thrown in jail. Who knows what damage parents are doing to their kids. They're kids for cripes sakes! Parents are adults and have a responsibility! They should know better! Kids should not be victims of a bad career because their parents were too busy smoking crack to get off their behinds and do some good parenting. I feel sorry for the kids. Jail the horrible parents!
135 agree | 113 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Gretchen said:
Polisehed415 -- Read the article; specifically, the third sentence. It's talking about 10 or more unexcused absenses. Just give your daughter a note to take to school when she returns and the absense will be an excused absense, not an unexcused absense. Good grief!
146 agree | 103 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Polisehed415 said:
This is absurd. Parents should not go to jail because their children miss school. The government and Kamula Harris are overstepping their bounds. Often times children are sick but due to economic situations and high medical costs it is not possible to take child to doctor. My daughter was not feeling well today and stayed home. She was not sick enough to warrent a 150 dollar visit to the hospital but was sick. This threat of going to jail if one keeps their child home is really too much and Ms. Harris needs to just concentrate on the more hardened criminal elements instead of all of the fluff she is coming up with. I agree that parents need to be held accountable for their children but this is really too much. My daughter is NOT playing hooky today and does not feel well...so I should go directly to jail? NOT! Ms. Harris needs to look at the reality of this and focus on getting people that are committing REAL CRIMES! I will keep my daughter home if ill and not a crime!
135 agree | 104 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Gretchen said:
Sounds like a fine idea to me. Parents should be held accountable for the behavior of their children, and we as a society have an obligation to ensure that all children attend school. I'm not sure that some parents can afford the $2,500 fine, but maybe there could be a way for the family to "work it off" by doing community service such as painting graffiti or something. The key is to instill in both the children and the parents the knowledge that school is not optional: it is mandatory; and if students do not attend there will be consequences for them and their families. I also think there should be truancy officers who patrol the streets and take into custody and child who is playing hooky. Let's get behind this and start providing the "tough love" needed to keep our children in school. Learning to respect the law while young will help keep them out of trouble when they get older.
144 agree | 87 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
San Francisco has the worst public school system in the nation. It has been like this since I attended SF schools in the 1970's. It has only gotten worse. Taxpayers should vote not to give any more money to the SFUSD because they waste the money on conferences in Hawaii, workshops that have no value, etc. The money should go to the children but instead the SFUSD has found ways to spend it and steal it from the children.
135 agree | 112 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
djqfi said:
That's all well and good, but how about prosecuting real criminals, Ms. Harris?
143 agree | 119 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Maybe there parents work for Muni said:
Where else would they learn that kind of work ethic? No note, no phone call, no show - definitely sounds like Muni parents to me.
150 agree | 99 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree