School refusing to provide translator

@ZippedTop they do call themselves expats in ME. Not just Brits.
"I am x expat". I see it used all the time even when they are job searching, etc. Again, I think it goes with the change of use of "migrant" - temporary immigrant.

This would be my expectation if I moved to another country - with or without children.

All European countries do provide translation and many others outside the EU

'Most Brits' do not , as adults, attend years of language classes. 'Most Brits' take little notice of language clsses whilst at school because they find them dull and irrelevent.

But that's exactly my point. Most Brits don't bother to learn another language ever. They think the world speaks English. If, later in life, they go off to live in Benidorm, they live in ex-pat colonies where they go toBritish bars, cafes, shops.They go for the weather and isolate themselves, on the whole, to their small group.

However, younger people with children who went to live in another country would find themselves learning the language because they would mix, work, shop, their children would learn it. They'd make a life there. I'm not saying they'd be fluent but they'd learn enough to get by- as would most younger people who came to the UK to start a life.

This is a cultural/control issue.

If the parents were putting the needs of the kids first, then they would learn the language.

Why is the needs of the child the priority when talking about schools. What about the parents responsibility to put the kids needs first?

Surely if the parents can’t promise the kids basic needs, that needs looking at itself.

Exactly! This would drive me to pick up my phrasebook and get stuck in (as many Europeans would). I sense there are other cultural norms here that aren’t being discussed as they are sensitive. I have no real interest in delving into them, but this notion that the UK should foot translation bills is highly flawed. I wouldn’t expect to have a translator laid on for me in another country, so why would the reverse be true? Would that mean that other countries refusing me a translator are also racist? Hmmmmm.

It used to be "migrant" if you were moving around to find jobs or just temporarily, however, that is now used bit differently... So many use "expat" nowadays (not just British). I think it also depends on country of residemce on how it's used.
Immigrant is permanent move with intention to stay as far as I was taught, but that may have changed too now.

Tbf I have never thought of the retirees as "immigrants" because I always thought it was a temporary move for some years only with the plan to return back to native country later. Hence the use of expat rather than emigrant.

I am glad that I work in a country which has interpreting services in the NHS. There is no way I could provide good clinical care to many patients in London without them. And there is no way I would use a family
member when talking about some of the more sensitive issues around self-harm, sexual abuse etc.

Regardless of what other countries do, I could not be without this service. in healthcare, it’s vital. Without decent targeted medical treatment, this group could place a bigger ‘burden’ on the NHS long-term. Ideally yes, everyone would speak passable English. But it’s not achievable for many.

Just this week I saw a man who needed an interpreter. He has been here for three years after escaping horrific torture in Iran. He came here in his late fifties, and whilst he can say please and thank you etc, it’s unrealistic that he will become fluent in English any time soon. I still want him to receive good care.

It's not about being reasonable. It's about funding.

I'm shaking my head in disbelief at most of these comments. If you voted for austerity, then you chose this. And not just once, but in election after election. If you have sat back while the opposition has been in chaos and navel-gazing while all of the debate about everything has happened in the austerity party, then you chose this. School officials cannot even provide safe buildings let alone extra services.

There's no sense of responsibility in the UK. People literally chose the chaos we're dealing with now and yet so many commenters are blaming other things. No, this is about voters' decisions and gullibility.

It’s easy for everyone to get whirled up, but essentially the schools remit is to the teach the students. If the school is 80% of children from a specific country, I would expect from the 80% of parents you could find 1, that’s right just one parent, who could sign up to translate for all others, this could be easily managed by a whatsapp group, so have the non-English speakers updated in this way instead of letters/meetings. I think it would be interesting for the OP to ask the headteacher for his reasons, rather than siting exclusion, xenophobia or racism, surely this will be budget-related?

I live in another European country and I can assure you they never provide a translator....you take a friend or bring your own translator. That goes for everything including doctors and court cases.

Why are these parents not being able to integrate? Learning the basic of the local language is the minimum. Providing translators is wrong. It will only perpetuate this situation.

Are we expected to received people in this situation in huge numbers? I suspect yes and it will not end up well.

To live in this country and not speak English is ridiculous and unfair on your family and everyone else, so I think it's a reasonable measure. Also, what jobs can they do for their own well being to get them out and also to contribute towards society. Personally, I'd want to speak/understand some/all of another country's language if I moved abroad as I'd want to understand what was going on around me, make friends.

My lovely friend came here for an arranged marriage, she didn't speak any English. Her husband helped her (his English was limited as he'd come from a different country) and four years later she could manage, some things she didn't quite understand but she was able to ask. It can be done. Moving forward they both totally understand and speak English.

I often see the ‘temporary’ term being used. Many poor workers from the Indian subcontinent go to the middle east for a few years to earn money for their families. They are treated appallingly, exploited, made to work for a pittance in the heat, and then when they finally manage to get their passports back they return to their country of origin in India, Bangladesh etc. Of course they are never called ex-pats.

The definition you give, is much narrower. A specific term to describe a short sponsored and paid period of time to work in a foreign country. Which is fine. The issue is that it’s used now for any British person who goes to a foreign country to stay there and find a job. Just like any other economic immigrant. Yet they get called ex-pats, which irritates me hugely.

thanks for your reply.

Right, that will be why after years of language lessons several times a week most Brits struggle to ask about the weather in the language they have learned whilst on holiday.

Yes this true sadly and the crux of the issue but people don't want to say it because RACISM.
All sorts of excuses PTSD, SEN blah2 but really this is an issue too.

Yes apols, it does depend on what context you use but at work for example (large MNC) an 'expat package' is usually when the company wants to relocate someone on a temp basis. Of course, they could choose to stay on permanently but that's beyond the contract.
People who want to move of their own volition are 'immigrants'.
Say, for example staff in the India office who apply for a UK job and have been accepted. The company won't pay for anything other than visa, airfare and a temp place to stay. On an expat package the entire move would be managed, schools etc sorted.
Certainly I myself am not from the UK and worked with people from everywhere who have moved around a lot and it's always been understood what the difference between an immigrant and expat was.
But having Googled it some places agree with me, others say an expat is someone who lives outside their country of origin, so I guess my explanation was contextual.
The whole 'expat vs immigrant' debate makes no sense to me because in my circles of internationally mobile people the difference is very clear.

A year is quite enough time to learn some basic English. The issue is that in many communities,(more so muslim and pakistani) women, in particular, live in very insular ways as a means of controlling them. Men don't want them to mix and learn English and possibly be influenced by our freedoms as women or to behave the way they perceive English women behave. The men can often speak English but choose not to.

Can the parents be sent on an English course at the local authorities cost? If this is how complicated parents evenings are - I’m wondering how fluidly the teachers can teach? Or do they teach in another language? To suit the children in the area?

Overall, if my child went to school in say Italy or France, I would see it as my responsibility to have enough language to converse with teachers over school matters and also would assume that the classes/learning would take place in French/Italian too.

Please let’s not hear the word racism mentioned. Speaking the language of the country you live should be a basic requirement of settling as an economic migrant.

I agrée with you that it doesn’t feel very inclusive and it doesn’t help most disadvantaged children. The parents will just not engage with the school most likely. I see it in our school that some parents never know what’s happening and are just a bit disengaged. It’s the kids who suffer, while their friends come to clubs and events, these kids don’t. So it’s not actually helping. I agrée it’s the kids who have to be put at the centre of this.

You don't have to be sent by company with flashy package to be an expat.
Yes, it's usually move on temporary basis rather than very long term or permanent move, but the term is being used by others (non brits) for the latter sometimes too.
Actually now I think about it. Do the retirees return to UK when they get "too old" or do they usually die and bury in the country they retired to? I always considered them non permanent tjinkimg they return eventually

Also @MaudGonneOutForAFag I don't see why if the 'community' is sheltering people they can't translate for them. When there's a big group of people from a similar background at least a couple can speak English, why can't they translate? Why does someone have to pay 'official' translators?

As an immigrant myself, I agree with you.
I do think it’s in everyone’s best interest to make an initial investment in language services for recent arrivals, i.e. spend some tax money on free / low cost language courses and translation services.
But the effort and engagement needs to come from both sides, not just from the host country.

But what's your solution @MaudGonneOutForAFag . Schools are underfunded. If they're covering for illegals they're certainly not going to get any extra translation money are they?
Also I love this 'British vs immigrants' debate. Immigrants through legal channels contribute a lot to this country in terms of tax getting less in return (we have to pay a NHS fee and can't claim benefits for a start). We take a dim of view of other people needing handholding and more money. If they are refugees etc they should be in a language program but if they're illegal then that's not a problem I want my tax money to solve.
As immigrants even it's not ourselves certainly our parents and grandparents have struggled with few resources so we take a dim view of other people needing spoon feeding. It seems that people in the same conditions in other countries make it, but the moment they migrate to a 'rich' country like the UK expect everything to be done for them.

I agree with you - pupil premium is there to help with the needs of these pupils and 1.5k on language services is a small amount from the 300k which is meant to be for their benefit, not just top up the overall pot.

Once a week lessons in English, even if accessible to the parents, won't touch the sides of fluency in a year and as pp says - google translate was built to translate into English and is pretty poor in many other languages.

I'm guessing with that level of premium in inner London its a high degree of the poorest immigrants, a fair few of who will have come in circumstances of persecution rather than being economic migrants with connections established in the country. They are less likely to be getting exposure to English at work and socially. PPs are underestimating the challenges which face low status and poorer migrants in accessing language support for learning.

If the head is targeting these families both in terms of withdrawing language support (which is their special need) and hardlining on attendance are they actually just trying to reduce the minority/struggling intake to massage up the league tables results?

I'm laughing at all the posters saying they should learn English and its rude to live in a country without learning the local language.
The Brits are infamous for travelling the world imposing their own language on countries and living in their little expat enclaves which operate like little Britain but with servants. Its rank hypocrisy.