Why is compulsory education an example of family law overriding parental authority?

Compulsory education is often cited as an example of state intervention in family life because it reflects the principle of legal paternalism, where the state mandates certain actions to ensure the common good and protect the welfare of children, even when those mandates limit parental autonomy.1

While parents generally possess the fundamental liberty to direct the upbringing and education of their children, this authority is not absolute. The state maintains a legitimate interest in ensuring that children receive an education essential for good citizenship. Consequently, states may enforce compulsory attendance laws, regulate curricula, and supervise schools to ensure that nothing is taught that is "manifestly inimical to the public welfare".2

However, this authority is balanced against parental rights. As established in the landmark case Pierce v. Society of Sisters, the state cannot unreasonably interfere with a parent's right to choose between public and private education, as doing so would infringe upon the liberty of parents to direct their children's upbringing.2