to think home ed families are going to have to accept more oversight?

Or men who are known to be abusive bastards could have everything chopped off and not let them near kids. Never mind women have children with these monsters.
And women who stand and let their children abused should get life imprisonment.
Personally this case would make me want hanging to return for such beasts. That poor girl with the iron burn alone is enough.

i can’t even tell what’s sarcasm anymore!

It would be much more effective to have greater monitoring of babies - Health Visitors could be made a mandatory service and all babies under 1 could be examined at home every week.

The money for those registered as EHE (elective home education) is being saved on a school place and would need to be diverted to this so no extra cost.

That money is already being spent on other things though, so the oversight will need funding and you can guarantee it'll be done on the cheap.

It would need to be the loo local authority. They already have to do this for children taken out of special school for home schooling. To be fair the focus is more on whether they can meet the child's educational needs (obviously quite complex for a special school child) but it does mean that there is an opportunity for context and the alert professionals to concerns.
Some sort of general outreach worker would be helpful both to 'check in' but also as a support and for signposting for parents. The money for those registered as EHE (elective home education) is being saved on a school place and would need to be diverted to this so no extra cost.

My point is the power and wherewithal is already in place for child protection to jump in when a family withdraws a child from school.

Don't think there was any substance from the school for them to involve SS in our case it was just their reaction to our withdrawal. SS didn't bother coming after the police visit.

@Luddite26 I am not saying it was true, but the allegation must have been more than you are HE.

It happened to me when I put the letter in removing year 8 child to home ed. The police turned up 6pm Sunday evening as school were concerned.
I do not know what the neglect was child had 100% attendance always clean etc.
The school reported to SS for taking out to home ed. My point is this does happen already.
So why didn't it happen with Sarah Sharif.
Why weren't the dots joined.

Social services and police do not visit HE families unless a concern was raised directly with them. The fact that police checked whether there was food in the fridge, sounds like there was an accusation of neglect.
People do care about teenage boys, but the threshold for SS involvement is higher because of age. For example leaving a baby alone in the house for 2 days is very serious, leaving a teenage boy alone in the house for 2 days is poor parenting, but not as serious.

As i said earlier - that never happened in 3 years - i strongly suspect because he was a teenager boy nobody cares about them one they arent cute little ones.

But still they should have knocked the door at least once

And for what it's worth systems are in place for welfare checks. As a home educator I have been visited by education welfare, officers, social services and one school even sent the police for a house check which is all fine - there was food in the fridge kids were all bathed in clean pjs bedrooms had beds toys etc.
We have visits from the LA to check and go on many courses run by the LA some people choose not to.
The fact is a poor child was abused and the authorities should have acted in their capacity and they didn't they failed her and it is fuck all to do with home education.

I'm sorry to read your post @Gherkintastic
People who judge have no idea what living with poor MH is like or looking after a child in that state. And schools can be so hostile.

The country's education system is a mess. It's not fit for purpose. The National Curriculum is so out of date it's a waste of time. But instead of trying to do anything they're blaming home educators who many are just at the end of their tether with the whole broken system.

@@Gherkintastic
I do completely understand, but you would not be the target audience. Its been proposed several times and not got off the ground but the jist is it would be focused on children whove been abused and cases still on the radar. I would no doubt be one of those in theory, my ex made allegations and I was subjected to a section 7 but the matter was closed so I would be able to HE.
There are very clear cases where the resources would be used

They’ve just said on the news that new legislation is being brought in for children living in unsafe homes.

I think this is the way forward.

You can’t assume that people who HE abuse their kids with no evidence BUT children who have already been flagged won’t be allowed to HE

Well the fact she was known to Children's Services for abuse was a pretty big clue. And it is the same time after time.

Schools off roll all the time. My daughter was off rolled. Not noticed the school getting in trouble. The council were complicit with it.

This thread is going round in circles a bit as new posters appear and make the same vague points over and over without having read the thread.

Could anyone advocating for enhanced oversight of home educators outline what they mean by enhanced oversight? Is this a social worker visiting our homes? How would this work? Social services are so stretched they couldn't offer oversight to Sara Sherif even through they knew her father was violent and had previously hurt his children, it would seem a bad use of their limited resources, I can't see this happening.

Would be carrying out this oversight? Who's going to do it? What is their training? Will they care about my extremely mentally ill daughter? I mean my the school didn't, it was secondary school that caused her to become so anxious she had constant nausea, chest and stomach pain. She started having daily and nightly meltdowns, that is thrashing about while screaming for 1-2 hours. Panic attacks in school, the intrusive thoughts which became paranoid delusions, a suicide attempt. The staff at school DID NOT CARE. All they cared about was her attendance record. So forgive me if i'm worried this HE overseer also won't care and will order her back to school (it is quite tricky educating such a mentally ill child) and she'll go back to being as extremely distressed as she was the first time.

CortieTat has said she believes people like me have an 'I'm alright jack' attitude, well we're far from alright, I'd call it an 'I'm extremely worried about my very vulnerable daughter' attitude.

I'm not against increased oversight in principal, but I'm worried about what it'll look like in practice. I'm scared about what it'll mean for my daughter. I have seen how appallingly state employees are willing to treat children.

Not just you.

In case above that I summarised, the abuser was a teacher. That wouldn't work either.

That’s how it’s supposed to work. Using a conviction against someone is absolutely only meant to happen when it’s relevant to the role.

but what happens if someone doesn't pass the DBS due to a misdemeanour years ago?

I thought there is no "pass" or "fail". A DBS check just returns details of the applicants criminal history in order for hiring managers to make an informed decision.

So someone with a shoplifting conviction (for example) isn't necessarily going to be refused a job working with children.

Thank you, had a quick read.
As I understand, siblings were EHE by their mum, all was well. Then she dies and estranged dad took over. He worked as a teacher.
Kids still attended clubs regularly and nothing strange was spotted, although they thought he might need support. Kids were seen by GP.
Then HA got involved with fraud, he was cleared but fraud officer followed internal procedures, checked with relatives and EHE, who said they were unregistered. Referral was debated but ultimately decided to wait until annual EHE check in a few months times. Then EHE said provision was fine and case was closed. Review was due in 15 months.
Hope I got the bits right.

They were known to services by my calculation for about a year or more. They were identified but again, no one pressed the trigger. If after HO raised alarm, and thought kids were at harm, why didn't they place a SS referral?

should we make people wear badges to identify their situation
Tom, 38, 2children, catholic, smoker, 5 units a week.

Nothing to hide nothing to fear right ?

DBS are are requirement for certain work or volunteering roles. Last time I checked society doesn't DBS parents before they take children home (maybe they should - but what happens if someone doesn't pass the DBS die to a misdemeanor years ago? What happens to these children then? Or maybe we should be forced contraception until we get approval to reproduce?

Or maybe we just put for social services to be adequately financed so that they can do their job properly and not leave children like Sara in a known high risk situation?

Something wrong with the link. Sorry.
Wiffin, Jane and Unnamed safeguarding children partnership (2021) Child safeguarding practice review: siblings from Family H. [S.l.]: NSPCC on behalf of an unnamed safeguarding children partnership.
Easiest thing appears to be to get onto their case review page and search for reports by Jane Wiffin.
https://learning.nspcc.org.uk/services/library-information-service