Page 18 | AIBU to tell you it is not illegal to take your child out of school to go on holiday

redstrawberry10 · 19/10/2015 00:27

Yeah but it's easier to fine generally compliant parents than sort out the real issues. By stopping term time holidays you increase attendance overall, it doesn't help the children whose attendance is generally poor however.

exactly. Theatre.

Only specialist appoinments (which of course includes specialist dentists, opthamology) should be during school time and even then most parents try to get them during holiday as much as possible (rarely possible with most specialists but always worth trying!)

this is how twisted and insane this attendance compliance has become. Really? Is a few hours in primary school more important than a medical appointment? If you ask me, THAT'S real negligence.

jellyfrizz · 19/10/2015 06:56

Red, the results published by the government show that results are worse after what, 10 years? I'd have thought that's enough evidence to not risk the education of all children by forcing academies through.

You seem to know a lot about academies, where does the money from fines for absences go when academies are involved?

SouthAmericanCuisine · 19/10/2015 07:40

jelly Responsiblity for issuing fines legally lies with the LA in all cases. The law allows LAs to delegate that responsibility to HT if they wish - all HT, irrespective of the status of the school. Most LAs have done so.

But, the HT is issuing the fine on behalf of the LA, if it is paid, the money goes to the LA (and is ring-fenced so can only be spent on certain things, just like the income from other FPNs) and if the fine isnt paid, it is the LA who takes action to enforce it.

jellyfrizz · 19/10/2015 08:36

As quite a few people have said, fining people who take their children on a weeks holiday doesn't address the real issues of truancy and actual damaging non-attendance - wherever the money goes. It's just an easy way to make the data look better.

I'd like policies in schools to be based on what affects children's learning rather than making figures look better.

SouthAmericanCuisine · 19/10/2015 08:58

Id like policies in schools to be based on what affects children's learning rather than making figures look better.

The government believes that DCs learn best when they attend school as frequently as possible and are only absent for exceptional circumstances.

Not everyone agrees with it, but that is why policy is currently the way it is. Its not some arbitrary bean counting - the principle behind the policy is to maximise children's learning.

jellyfrizz · 19/10/2015 09:09

I've just done some research into this as this whole academisation being forced on our children seems so badly thought out.

Academies aren't even 'cheaper' than LA school, they get the same amount per child plus the amount that used to go to the LA. That's not including the millions that have been spent bailing out academies who haven't been able to manage their budget.
I really can't see any benefits of academy schools at all. And the fact that in some cases they are 'forced' is just wrong. I'm so pissed off with this being forced on us all when the results clearly show that academies perform worse overall.

SouthAmericanCuisine · 19/10/2015 09:45

jelly what is it about the Academisation agenda that you particularly disagree with, compared to other changes that have not proven to be beneficial?

Are you as angry about the abolition of the selective education system, for instance? Or changes to examination and assessment formats? What about the changes to admissions?

The Education system is a political tool. Not one party has ever proposed removing it from political control, as far as I am aware. and that means that it can be 'controlled' through legislation.

When was the last time you heard a driver arguing that they weren't going to pay their speeding fine because they disagree with the Governments reasons for having speed limits? Or a licensee arguing that they won't pay the fine for selling alcohol to under 18s because they think the Government is being 'big brother' by preventing young people from drinking?

jellyfrizz · 19/10/2015 10:04

So it's ok to just go along with changes that have proven to be non beneficial? I don't agree. Which is why I'm speaking up.

Education is far too important to be messed with in this way.

Why would anyone want to implement a system that has been shown to give worse results for children?

I don't agree that it should just be 'because the government says so'.
The majority of people did not vote for the government.

jellyfrizz · 19/10/2015 10:05

And yes, I'm angry about other changes to education but we were talking about acedemisation.

jellyfrizz · 19/10/2015 10:06

And fines. Attempting to stick to point of thread

redstrawberry10 · 19/10/2015 10:30

Not everyone agrees with it, but that is why policy is currently the way it is. Its not some arbitrary bean counting - the principle behind the policy is to maximise children's learning.

no it's not. The principle behind the policy is to do the easiest thing that makes it look like you have children's welfare in mind. Getting ordinarily compliant parents to do a little extra is what this policy does.

That also doesn't justify the government overstepping it's boundaries. it's certainly part of it's role to facilitate an environment and implement policies that promote children's learning. it's not it's role to force parents to comply, especially when the discussion is about trying to get parents to conform to policy 100% of the time, when they do so 98% of the time.

The really difficult thing to do would be to deal with those kids who have no support at home. Of course, this policy does zero to address that.

SouthAmericanCuisine · 19/10/2015 12:25

so why do so many parents pay the fines, then?

If it's such an unpopular piece of legislation, why is it that precedent and caselaw has not been set? Why do the majority of parents who take their kids out of school for family holidays just cough up when the FPN arrives?
Surely, if it was such an Infridgement on parental rights, then pressure groups would be providing legal support to parents, like Mr Platt, to challenge the fine?
As it is, most parents seem to accept that if they do the crime they pay the fine.

redstrawberry10 · 19/10/2015 12:42

Surely, if it was such an Infridgement on parental rights, then pressure groups would be providing legal support to parents, like Mr Platt, to challenge the fine?

clearly, many people don't see it as a huge violation of personal rights (as seen from this thread). Furthermore, in the grand scheme of things, it's far from jail time, and it doesn't affect a huge number of people. There is a lot of legislation like that, but that doesn't make them right.

jellyfrizz · 19/10/2015 13:01

People pay because it's easier than fighting them. Most people with children have enough going on in their lives.

And people are fighting them, like the man who this thread is about.

But I know that I wouldn't fancy my chances against the people who pay the judges wages and I think many people would feel the same.

NickiFury · 19/10/2015 13:09

Because people just do what they're told for an easy life and because they're scared.

I oppose this legislation and fines 100% but I would pay the £60 immediately. I am a lone parent of two kids with autism. I can't risk a bigger fine or possible jail time (who can?!) I wouldn't even be able to find childcare for an afternoon in court.

So, yeah. That's why.

LovelyFriend · 19/10/2015 13:54

There is a FB group - Parent's Want A Say - www.facebook.com/parentswantasay?fref=ts

They are fighting/campaigning/lobbying against these fines and other issues relevant to parents, families and the education authorities. They are quite a good source of info. They are also into supporting parents and are looking for "test" cases to get behind.

It's not been relevant to me yet but I will be taking by DC out of school at some point to visit NZ family. Like NickiFury I will probably just factory any nfine into the cost of the trip - though I'd like to think I wouldn't pay, I just don't need the grief and as a SP feel fairly unsupported as it is.

SouthAmericanCuisine · 19/10/2015 15:46

I know that I wouldn't fancy my chances against the people who pay the judges wages

The cases so far have all been heard by magistrates - who are unpaid.
My understanding is that it would only go in front of a judge if the LA appealed the Magistrates ruling.

jellyfrizz · 19/10/2015 16:12

Why do you care so much about people being fined South?

And you know what I mean, the court system is paid for by the government.

NickiFury · 19/10/2015 16:42

I notice that when you have no argument you often pick up on some small perceived inaccuracy from a poster in order to continue reiterating your argument South. Just wanted to let you know it's very obvious.

StrawberryTeaLeaf · 19/10/2015 16:45

@ Nicki. It's true. It does jump out

jellyfrizz · 19/10/2015 16:54

I call Conservative Party PR lackey - education & women wing. Do you work for Nicky Morgan South?

NickiFury · 19/10/2015 16:57

Or otherwise known as "cheap shots"

SouthAmericanCuisine · 19/10/2015 17:07

We were doing so well and not getting personal, let's not spoil it now. This thread kept me same over two days of mind numbingly boring trade show exhibiting, but Ive been travelling today so haven't been able to reply as comprehensively as I might have liked!

My issue always has, and always will be, those parents, like Mr Platt, who assert that "they know best" and therefore, insist that the rules don't apply to them. I think it creates a waste of time and resources that could be better spent on the education of DCs. In my opinion, everyone knows the rules, so why not just follow them, even if we don't like them very much.

The support he has received on this thread suggested to me that his action is something that other parents not only agree with, but would do themselves. A significant level of civil disobedience hasn't been seen in the uk since the Poll Tax and I thought the posts on this thread indicated that is what people wanted to achieve.

I was wrong. For all the rhetoric and criticism of the system, most people have said that they'd go along with it if they did get fined.

Which means that the policy has worked from the Governments perspective. Each fine acts as a deterrent to others; some parents will change their mind about taking their kids out of school when they hear that another parent has paid a fine.
Attendance at school is improving - which in itself proves the FPN system works. It's just a shame that people like Mr Platt siphon energy and attention from the important issues.

SouthAmericanCuisine · 19/10/2015 17:11

I call Conservative Party PR lackey - education & women wing. Do you work for Nicky Morgan South?

Blimey, jelly, really? I'm flattered that my posts give the impression I'm somehow "part of the PR system" - nope, just a very small cog in the machine, trying my best to work within the system rather than fight it, Ive not got the energy to do both!

NickiFury · 19/10/2015 17:14

I think it's been explained exhaustively why some families can't "just follow the rules". As always these threads just turn into ground hog day don't they?