To disagree with home ed

Children need protecting whether they are being home ed'd or not. In the awful cases that come out where parents home ed, the children were known to be at risk and the state did not intervene as they should have. While being less visible to the state is a vulnerability, home ed children are not at more risk of harm than those in school. There is no need to systematically monitor them to put them on the same footing as children in school.

Children who are home educated are less visible to the state. But they are also less at risk of state harm. Pulling the state into their lives more than they currently are, increases the ability of the state to harm them through institutional failure, pressure to conform to state mandated processes or outcomes and increased stress on the family.

The most common reason cited by parents for pulling their children out of school to home ed is that schools are damaging their children. There is no good reason to think that the state will suddenly be better at meeting their needs once they are out of school.

The thing is, a lot of parents just aren't great and don't always have their children best interests at heart. They make bad choices, and their children end up paying the price. Sadly, those are often the only parents people seem to focus on, everywhere. It doesn't matter what kind of school or education they get when the parents are bad. No child living with bad parents is safe, whether they go to a physical school or an online one. It’s wild how everyone keeps bashing home education like it’s some kind of abuse hotspot just because they’re not out in the public eye. Honestly, why does anyone care if you can’t see them specifically? Meanwhile, we ignore the fact that children in regular schools are dealing with abuse and bullying every day and still not getting help, even though it’s right there in front of everyone’s face. Let’s be real: if a child got bad parents, they’re not safe no matter where they learn.

Just a friendly reminder to keep things positive. Do your own research, meet new people, and don’t let fake news, stereotypes, or bad stories stop you from learning and exploring.

I’ve got friends who are coding from home as software engineers, all while home educating their teens. They’ve been rocking this setup for years! They use private online schools that feel totally like regular school but digital, plus they bring in private tutors for extra support. The trick is they all respect each other’s space, so parents don’t hover in the same room while the children study. They even have a whole room dedicated as a classroom, decked out with PCs, laptops, and books, while the parents work from their own home offices. The children still get plenty of social time through outdoor groups and activities, so their lives are super social and active. Everyone’s loving it—it’s structured, disciplined, and professional, in the best way possible. The children don’t have any special needs and have personalities that make this setup a perfect fit. Basically, they chose this life so the whole family could be together more.

The groups my two go to are structured

Forest school caters to the whole age range - toddlers messing about in the mud kitchen, older kids learning to identify species, set up nest cams, build fires, in between age children fitting in with nature crafts and popping into each group depending on their attention span

Gymnastics - where the little ones play structured games and the older ones are having instruction from the tutor

Equine place - where children are learning horse care, foraging, equine body language under the owner with actual talks and doing, and the children expected to listen

Home ed trips with guides showing us around places, handing out worksheets and giving talks where the children listen and respond

Just as a few examples.

If local home ed groups are not groups with a purpose and are instead just a coffee meet up then I can see where that becomes an issue. But then any parent can plan a home ed group or meetup, just create the type of group or activity that you want your children to be part of and others will turn up. Dont go to the wishy washy ones if thats not your thing.

I wish people/the system cared enough to protect my child when they were in school but they didn't

It so interesting how people would gladly throw vulnerable children in school under a bus to allow a better educational outcome for jon sen pupils but are up in arms about protection for home Education.

It just shows you haven't had to experience the reality of how bad the system can be

I completely disagree with you.
No one is throwing home Ed under the bus.
No one is trying to get votes.
The fact you can say ‘stick their nose in’ to HE illustrates pretty perfectly this attitude of isolationism and knowing better. But maybe there are people out there who think they know better but actually mean harm and do harm. (And we know that there are)

There is a need to protect all children not just those in schools. Children ARE vulnerable when they are rendered less visible to society and we should protect them.

Exactly they have no money so how are you expecting the new rules to have any positive impact. It's just sound bites to get votes by throwing home Ed under the bus. It will not aid a single child sadly

When money is so tight that the LA can not fulfill it legal responsibilities in education I question how they can spread their remit to effectively support outside of education

What this means is that the will further reduce the support i. Education to stick their nose into home Ed and cause more problems their

Which means that this has no benefit for any child I. School or home Ed but will cause damage

If the aim is to damage kids in schools, kids in home Ed and not safeguard children at risk of harm then that's possible but if the aim is to protect and enhance then that is highly unlikely to be the result sadly

And they literally don’t have the money to do everything you think they should be doing.
It often falls on individual teachers to try their best, many of whom spend their own money on food, stationary, sanitary goods - I even know one who has helped source mattresses after a vulnerable family were rehomed.

This binary blame game is so unhelpful.

Maybe one shouldn’t preclude the other

LAs get bugger all resources for schools and social services and don’t have much involvement in many. The primary problems are money and central government- set things like testing and the Michael Gove rote learning curriculum.

Maybe they should focus some energy in not neglecting the children in their schools

How can you ever trust a LA who will ignore the needs of children they are responsible for in their own schools - how could we ever expect them to safeguard and protect other children in the LA of they can't even give basic protection within their school system

I agree governments should address the longstanding under resourcing of social services, schools and services for DC with additional needs. Which are shocking issues, rarely reported, and not a priority for most voters. Repeatedly mentioned in public enquiries after horrific cases where children were failed and murdered.

Much, much cheaper to do legislation.

Not familiar with the new legislation about services and obligations of local authorities for DC with additional needs, but being cynical imagine it’s to save money on services, and make it even harder for DC (via parents) to get access to the very limited services via legal action.

Doubt it is about ‘targeting home ed’, though, more likely that bit is seeking to reduce risk for the DC at risk.

agree its an awful thing to do

lol yourself

They’re not ‘targeting home Ed’ they’re trying to avoid children being neglected.
Its not just about SEN - there are religious, creationist, god knows what anti-vax nutcases, and as a previous poster described just ignorant people deregistering their children.
A tiny minority will abuse them, another probably less tiny minority will neglect their education.
Same for those in education.

Yes absolutely some children are failed by their LA, some children are failed by the familial adults in their lives. The LA’s are overstretched and underfunded but dumbly trusting ALL people who choose to take their children out of the system and make them less visible is a proven route to turning a blind eye to abuse.

Lol
The government bare targeting home Ed by creating a false image that home Ed children are more at risk, at the same time they are introducing legislation to make it harder to home Ed alongside other legislation making it harder for SEN children to be supported in school - despite the fact that many SEN families being forced to home Ed because the schools and LA have failed their children .

Do you see the correlation?

Protecting vulnerable children doesn’t reduce the educational opportunities for disabled and SEN children.
Oversight to protect from physical, sexual abuse and just straightforward neglect is hardly a reduction in opportunity. Why would you want such children not to be protected - no-one is saying all HE children are at risk, it’s clearly a tiny minority but still so vulnerable.

It is concerning.

I followed a homeschooling and home education group on Facebook and what I have seen and read is shocking.

Parents are being encouraged to deregister their children by others, even though they have no idea or ability on how to educate their children.

Many people deregister and then turn to the group for help with what to do next. ‘I registered my 14 year old daughter today. Where should I look for resources to teach her?’ As though everyone assumes it’s as easy as that!

People constantly state ‘there is education’ in everything. Cooking is education. Minecraft is education. Visiting a museum is education. Gardening is education. While these are true to an extent, they are being passed off by some as all that is needed to say a child is being educated.

Some parents have deregistered children who were not engaging in school only to discover they won’t engage with anything at home either.

Others claim their child will only play on Roblox and clutch at straws for reassurance that this is still education.

You're wrong on that according to the article.

‘Of the 41 children, 21 had never attended school and only 17 were known to children’s services at the time. A total of 29 were seen as being home educated, while six children appeared to be missing from education and the remaining six lacked enough information to classify.’

I think that the services should be properly funded and that they should protect children known to be at risks and not leave them in dangerous environments.

I think that the government should not be creating polices to hide failures of their services by blaming other things. I think the government should not be creating policies that further reduce educational opportunities for disabled and SEN pupils. The answer to LA failure to provide what they are legally meant to isn't changing the law to let the LA off the hook - it would be holding the LA accountable so they don't continue to break the law.

It was dismissed because the actual cases are children that were already known to social services and the risk wasn't home Ed it was that the services that should of protected them didn't do their job properly

Again, where have said this? I have at no point said that I think that every HE family should be checked frequently or even at all. In fact I have not offered any suggestions, merely asked a question. Is there something better than what currently happens - or doesn't happen as the case may be? I don't think there is anything intrinsically bad or unsafe about HE. I do think - no, I know - that a very small number of bad parents abuse it and maybe there are ways of better preventing that than we currently have? In the great scheme of things it wouldn't be at the top of my list of things that need to be tackled to improve the well being of children in this country as the numberscare indeed small, and greater benefit to more children could no doubt be achieved in other ways, but that doesn't mean it is an issue that isn't worth discussing - especially on a thread about HE on a discussion forum surely? What do you* *think could be done better to protect children whose parents deliberately remove them from school to disguise abuse, or don't you think it is an issue?

Apologies, I was asking about the several high profile cases you mentioned. I wouldn’t expect you to talk about anything you experienced at work, that must have been awful for you.

I've got relevant professional experience but as I am sure you will understand I can't give details. No deaths, and I am being deliberately vague but I worked in theatres and ICU for many years and in different places and sadly encountered more than a few abused children in different situations in that time. Of course there are always multiple factors but being "off radar" was one of them in several ill/injured/neglected children I treated over my career. They do tend to stick in your memory.

This article:
“Our analysis looks at the lives of 41 children who were subjected to horrific, and sometimes fatal, abuse while they were being electively home educated.”
It was dismissed when I posted it before because I don’t know the names and cases involved (which actually seems appropriate).

www.theguardian.com/education/article/2024/may/15/vulnerable-children-in-england-safer-at-school-than-being-educated-at-home

Don't be ridiculous

The victims should obviously be supported and the rapists should be punished. If someone is known to be a rapist they should be under monitor and steps taken to remove the chance or them raping someone

Just like if someone is at risk of abuse social services should step in to protect that child. The cases of children removed from school to be abused were children already known to social services and the risks were known to school. Their is already safeguarding in place for when this happens - but schools have to fill the box asking for concerns and social services have to do their job. In the case of Sara death this is where it failed - social services knew she was at risk, they knew the history and reports had been made by school. They left her in a dangerous environment. The process of safeguarding already exists but has to followed.

In relation to the dog example. Yes if unlimited resources people can still check dogs street by street and respond to emergencies but their isn't unlimited resources - resources are very limited so a one person can not be in two places doing two separate tasks at the same time.

This is the issue with checking in on every HE family more frequently. If you use all your resources checking in on families with no risks - you dilute the manpower to monitor the children known to be at risk. And more children like Sara fall through the cracks and that is a travesty