Muslim children and dress at school

[arinita]

I volunteered on Friday at my child's school (about 50% Muslim) and actually got quite upset at how restrictive the clothes were that a lot of the girl children were sent to school dressed in. It was a really hot day and most of the Muslim girls had on a really tight headscarf, covering their chin and most of their forehead and long sleeves. About half of them also had a long shift thing that came to the floor. They looked hot and uncomfortable and weren't able to join in the other children's games as they couldn't run/climb in the clothes they had on. I asked the class teacher and she said that they couldn't enforce the uniform policy if there were religious objections. Is this true? Can't they insist on health and safety grounds? Some of these little kids just looked miserable as they were so hot and the one who was trying to climb the spiders web and kept getting caught up in her long robe about broke my heart. Is there a real religious why under 10yr old children have to be covered at all times? It seems so unfair and horrible for the children. And sexist.

agree trying to leave.

Well, personally, I think every family where both parents work long hours and are rarely available to their children teaches children that there is no value in care, family or anything that isn't rewarded with money. I don't like to see that model; obviously I'm not in a position to ban it . I'm not sure it's pertinent to this discussion, anyway ( I have just been wanting to say that to xenia for a while).

Well, we agree on xenia, at least, riven!

'Every housewife is saying to their children women are economically inactive and earn nothing and serve men. Obviously I would like to stamp out that model but I would not ban it'

Not every housewife is 'saying that'. Many, if not most, get a paid job at some point. Also, many parents do differently from what their parents did. Many a time a mum will stay home with her kids as her 'mother was always at work'. Kids see role modles all around them, working and non working. I teach my kids to value paid and unpaid work. If you teach yours that only WOH is of value, you could regret that someday if they don't have the same ideas. What if they one day say you were never around? That all their memories are with the nanny? Do you honestly never worry about that, honestly? If kids only copy their parents then why do most have different careers? What about mums like me who WOH for 1 child and SAH for the others, what is that saying?

You may like to stamp out that model but I believe more mums (in some cases dads) are staying home/wanting to stay home. I think that is good. I don't think it is wrong to say a very young child may be best with parents or loving relatives than a parent going elsewhere for hours IF there is a choice and a parent wants to stay home. Many people have a view they wish more parents stayed home or worked less. With the introduction of labour saving devices, shouldn't we be working less not more? What about both parents working part time for example?

'Just because a practice is cultural, doesn't make it right.'

great point trying to leave.

I feel same way with circumcision. Another thread though.

i only went to to non working women as an analogy. If you walk 3 paces behind your husband your children are likely to. If you are brought up in a plural marriage with 3 wives in the same house you are likely to replicate that model.

The interesting issue is always when should the law intervene and how much do we allow parents to deviate from norms.

I actually think the law should insist that all children get the same basic, secular education. You shouldn't be allowed to he like the duggars, for example, in order to shield your children from other influences.

I don't agree. I think individual freedom is very important and the fact we can home educate or else choose Eton (or summer Hill - no lessons) or the worst comp in London or a state grammar in Bucks is what we want in a liberal democracy.

Even if it means that the children are thereby denied the chance to participate in that liberal democracy?

I agree with xenia that there should be diversity of education available but I also agree that the foundation of each child's education should be a 'basic, secular education'. There shouldn't be any opt out for all children learning the 3 Rs, science, comparative religion etc.

I wear an jilbab/abaya sometimes, often with a Cardigan over, I actually generally find it more accepted than if I wear shlwar kameez as it looks like a long loose dress and more western. That said I deliberately avoid black as I agree with another poster that all in blacck tends to stand out not blend in at all in the UK.....unless you are inthe Edgeware road.....so isn't the most modest appearance for that reason.

My DD wears calf length skirts/dresses or occasionally to school

That was exactly what I meant, Grimma. I certainly didn't mean there should only be one type of school.

There is a reuiqrement for a child to get an education in English law. That can be at home. Summerhill won its case years ago (children at the boarding school did not need to attend lessons if they chose not to although most did). I think it's good to have the variety. There is a London saudi school w hich allegedly has textbooks teaching death the jews but then send you rchildre to a Christian Sunday school and they will hear all those bits in the bible about homosexuality and sin so a lot of these places are as bad as each other. What we hope is that those who come here will adopt the majority culture and plenty do - that's why girls are shipped back to Pakistan at 15 to ensure they aren't tainted.

The growth of state muslim schools will be interesting. Some of the best academic results are from a private muslim school. The Jews C of E and Catholics have had their own state schools for years. We have a local primary hindu school.

The alternative is to go the way of many countries and say no religion in free state schools at all and if parents want a religious education they teach it at home or in the synagogoe mosque or whatever or else pay for a religious school. Ther eis certainly a case to be made for that but this Govermnent wants choice in education and variety so it is not the path we are going down.

One main goal of education is to provide a common frame of reference for the nation, regardless of religion and ethnic background of individual students. State providing schools aimed at myriad ethnic/religious preferences completely undermines this goal.

Enabling each and every minority to live as if they are back in the home country of their immigrant grandfathers is all well and good in the name of tolerance, but you need to provide them with a common ground so that they can identify with each other as well as with members of their little ethnic groups.

I am not in favour of religious schools. They are divisive and suck up resources. State-provided education should be secular, although I do agree with teaching children about religion.

Independent "schools" promoting hate-speech should be shut down.

onagar Wed 05-Oct-11 09:44:39
What happens nowadays if any random parent just says "I'm not dressing my child in the school uniform"

Presumably that's okay?

well yes in a primary school it is?

I don't think there's any law regarding uniform. Just school rules which the school can interpret as necessary. SN children have, by definition, special needs and this obviously can include how they dress.

As I understand it, there is no Q'uranic reason for women, and especially young girls, to be overly covered up. Their modesty can easily be covered without going to such heavy-handed extremes.
It is a corruption of the teachings to interpret it in this way and is largely down to a more Arabian perspective and influence.