All children should be home-schooled

However, there are still some practical flaws with home-schooling, even if a voucher system similar to the one you mentioned was implemented. Quite simply, the cost for the government to manage and fund such a program would be astronomical. When considering a perfect family, in the context of home-schooling capabilities, you mention parents not constrained by either their educational level or finance. You also mention two parents, both of which would have to be mentally and physically healthy, with one capable of finding a sustainable job, capable of meeting the needs of two to three dependants while the other parent has the capabilities to stay home and educate their children. However, families like these are a minority group. Let me give you an example. There is a very large percentile of families in countries such as America, Australia and Canada where both of the parents are first-generation foreign migrants. As you would expect, both parents would usually face language barriers and cultural barriers. You also haven't considered a large number of families supported by only one parent. The reality is, the majority of families fail to check all of the required boxes to allow for effective home-schooling (in comparison to the current choice of education), therefore, requiring aid and support from your suggested voucher system. Usually, this would have the be in the form of a private tutor. If the government were to subsidise a private tutor for every disadvantaged family, you can only imagine the cost. National economies would also face considerable damage as many healthy, working tax-payers are all of a sudden resigning their jobs to stay home. Additionally, I would like to address your implication that home-schooling leads to better, more functional members of society. I would like to point out once again that we are not in a utopia, there are a huge number of families in Western societies in which parents are in fact a bad influence on their children. Home-schooling would only increase the bad influence from bad parents onto their child(ren) and defeat the point of education - which is to provide an 'opportunity' to grow and improve upon previous generations. Ultimately, I do agree with your statement that the early years of the child are his/her most formative years. However, I strongly disagree that familial bonds are 'the smallest and most crucial thread in society. ' I do not wish to sound heartless, however, society is run on the bonds formed between people of the same interests and intellects. For example, medical researchers do not work with their family to conduct investigations, they work with other like-minded people who have also dedicated their time and intelligence to similar subjects. They have to be capable of cooperating with a wide range of personalities and opinions in the public, from their fellow medical researchers to their investors to their managers and whatnot. The main point is, one of the main things children learn in primary school is how to appropriately socially interact. They learn how to work with each other, share knowledge, take care of public/shared property and so on. School is undoubtedly a slightly dulled down, simpler version of our society. Every afternoon, these children will return home to their parents and spend time with them. There are also weekends and holidays for family bonding time. Children understand that they have familial support, however, they also learn not to rely on it and learn crucial societal skills. This is the logic I stand by and personally, I see no need for a new educational system to be introduced. I look forward to your rebuttal.