I am not staunchly pro- or con- either public schools or homeschooling. Actually I guess you could say I am pro-both. It's the parents' decision, and the right choice often depends on the circumstances. Some public schools are excellent, while others are just awful. I lucked out; I went to some highly reputable public schools (Dad was in the military, and we moved a lot) and came out of what I look back upon now as an excellent education program. But other public schools wouldn't have given that to me, and homeschooling would have been the preferrable alternative.

However, whether homeschooled or public schooled, it is the parents' responsibility, period, to instill in their kids a sense of values. My parents did that, which is why when I was around kids that could have taught me how to do drugs, how to lose one's virginity, how to skip class, and so forth, I did not participate. Sure, I got into my share of trouble, but every kid does, no matter what schooling program they're in, and the important things are that I didn't screw myself up with anything unfixable, was properly punished, properly shown the consequences of my actions, and learned from the experience.

Yes, parents have opportunities to teach kids social skills without the aid of public schools, because they can place their children in alternate social situations.

On the other hand, are they also going to learn how to resist peer pressure?

Peer pressure is a powerful force, and not necessarily just with kids and teens. It's a shame that life must be so, but sooner or later everybody grows up and realizes that there are bad things in life in amongst the good. And that's not necessarily going to be an easy experience, no matter what the age.

I don't have the answer, just the facts that beg the question. Public schooled kids are going to be exposed to everything you describe and more, but it doesn't mean they'll succumb to it. Homeschooled kids probably aren't going to be exposed to very much of what you describe, so they are simultaneously less likely to succumb AND less likely to learn how to cope with it. As kids, that is. They'll face the same situation later.

Is it better to learn how to cope with the darker side of humanity, how to resist peer pressure, how to have the strength to adhere to one's moral character, when you are a teenager or when you're an adult? Kids and teens are more adaptable. It is easier for them to learn facts and skills and adapt to the world. Adults have a level of maturity and rationality that kids and teens haven't yet achieved. So when should resisting peer pressure be taught? I can make a convincing case for a wide range of times, but the real answer probably involves some portion of this kind of teaching spread across many years, and precisely how depends on the individual.

Although I was raised in public schools, I did lead a moderately sheltered childhood. I didn't see R-rated movies, barring mild exceptions, until I was 17, and even then I didn't much because it wasn't something my parents encouraged or did much themselves. (So I do not paint the wrong picture, my parents aren't staunchly against "R-rated Movies" as a wholesale class; "Braveheart" is a favorite movie of my father's -- the violence is historical fact -- while I'm sure both my parents would rather gouge their eyes out with a spoon than grin and giggle at "Scary Movie.") Because my social life in public school was pretty much limited to classes and lunch hour and occasional visits with single friends (I'd visit a friend's house or something but I never ever ever went to a party), I was exposed to all the things you mention but not in an overbearing atmosphere. I learned how to be true to my chosen moral character, which was not significantly different from the one my parents taught and set for me as an example.

It was my first year in college when the shock of how messed up people can get hit home. I have pretty interesting war stories, but I can't tell them here. Suffice it to say that I survived arguably better than I did in high school, but the shock hit harder. I'm not sure how easy it would have been to cope had I led I *more* sheltered life beforehand.

Around me, I'm seen people fall victim to both extremes. The kids that screw themselves up early on in high school are conspicuous stories to most people. On the other extreme, I've seen kids grow up leading lives sheltered in the extreme, and the moment they go off to college, realize they suddenly lack parental guidance while had never learned how to cope with peer pressure, to moderate their actions, to make their own choices, and to deal with strongly negative influences -- well, they just don't know what to do with it all, and they snap. A lot of those kids mess themselves up just as bad, only they do it when they're 19 instead of when they're 14.

Parents of homeschooled kids need to be careful not to shelter their children too much. They need to make sure their children ARE exposed to situations that test their strength of character, (obviously *after* instilling them with a sense of values and talking about recognizing negative influences and coping with peer pressure). Parents of public schooled kids need to be careful not to allow their children to be exposed to greater situations than they can handle.

The myth of homeschool is that it protects their children against the evils of the outside world. Temporarily, maybe, but it'll catch up with them, and they have to learn how to deal with it before it happens.

The myth of public school is that it puts childrens' education out of the hands of the parents. No. Even kids in public school need to learn from their parents first.