To be scared about unauthorised absence?

[lakeful]

We currently live abroad but will be moving back to England in the next year, have two DCs who are in primary school. I sometimes have to do foreign travel with my job my DH (who is self-employed and very flexible) and DCs have occasionally come with me. I'm talking a period of maybe 4 weeks in total over the past two years. Where we live now, schools do encourage attendance but things are more relaxed than in England and there has not been any problem with me taking them out of school. I have been reading up on the English system and am a bit alarmed! Would I really have to get a Head Teacher's permission to take my own children abroad? Would I really be fined if I did this without their "authorisation"? And is it possible that they authorise children to miss school for reasons such as mine?

jelly No, I don't think it would because the FPN was issued for 'unauthorised' absence. It's not the authorisation, or not, that has been challenged by Mr Platt. He has argued (successfully) that despite removing his DD for an unauthorised holiday, he is still ensuring that she attends regularly.

HT of private schools are permitted by their boards to authorise absence that HT of state schools are not permitted to by the Government. If an absence is authorised by a HT, it cannot be considered when a DCs attendance record is reviewed by EWOs.

So how is this even remotely fair then? If you can afford to pay - either for private education or the fines - then you can take a holiday whenever you want for as long as you want.

why aren't more people annoyed by this?

we are just too accepting and shoulder shrugging when it comes to the "haves" keep on having and the have nots being kept in their place.

so, if all schools are made academies this then removes the holidays in term time fiasco because the heads become independent in the same way as independent school heads are doesn't it?

The discretion that Pretty talks about is the discretion of state school Heads to refer pupils who take these unauthorised holidays for a fine. At the moment not all of them seem to do this but if the law is clarified to change that, they may have to.

Yes. At the moment HTs of state schools can use their discretion whether or not to issue an FPN for an unauthorised absence - irrespective of what the school policy or the LA policy says.
Some LAs may choose to issue a find directly even if the HT hasn't, but usually the HTs opinion will be considered as the HT knows more about specific circumstances.

In that regard, Mr Platt may have scored a bit of an own goal for all parents, because the outcome of the High Court action may well result in less judgement being used by HTs. It certainly explains why the LA was willing to spend reserves on the High Court action.

The fact that Mr Platts DCs have had further school absence is also significant - because even if the first FPN he was issued with is deemed unlawful because his DD 'was attending regularly' - it's going to be harder to argue that she has attended regularly given her further holiday absences for which another FPN has been issued.

if all schools are made academies this then removes the holidays in term time fiasco because the heads become independent in the same way as independent school heads are doesn't it?

No, sadly not.

The deciding factor appears to be where the money comes from.
Academies are still funded by the Government - as far as I know, the HTs are subject to the same regulations about authorising absence as LA and church school HTs are.

But, it's not a free-for-all at private schools. Most have attendance trigger points written into the contracts. Some will not only refuse permission for holidays, but will penalise students either financially or in other ways if they fail to attend. 100% attendance attracts discounts for some schools.
Yes, private school HTs are legally permitted authorise absence but I'm not convinced many are permitted to do so under the rules of the School Board.

So if parents at private schools take the mick with time off, they won't get fined but could end up being told to look for a new school (which is arguably a lot worse than a risk of being fined £240)

I've just been looking at Roedeans policies.
Absence will only be granted in exceptional circumstances and absence without permission can result in suspension or exclusion.

As I have said before don't really care if students have term time holidays as long as it doesn't cause me extra work.

Unlike the students in yr 10 who I am now having to go in for a day over Easter holidays for, this is so they can finish off controlled assessments due to two weeks term time holidays in the spring term. Unauthorised but still has an impact.

If I had my way I would just let them miss the time and hand in the work they can produce in the time they have but due to progress targets we are under pressure so I have to give up my holiday time and time with my own children.

noodle this is the fault of your looney-tunes system though.

In my daughter's lycée if a student took time off and then flunked a test because they hadn't bothered to catch up in their own time, the only person who would be held responsible would be the student him/herself.

I believe that children should attend school regularly. That they should be in school on time and ready to learn every day.

I also believe that it should be my choice as a parent to enforce this. Being fined for taking my child out of school is wrong. Even though I never have and probably never will. The state telling me what to do with my children and when I can do it boils my piss.

OP, some parents have refused to pay the fine and are challenging the subsequent court action on the grounds that we only have to ensure our children regularly attend school and aren't having too much time off. I suspect that you'd fall foul of this though if you plan to take your children away a lot.

I'm with you though. Children learn by experiencing the things you describe. Would far rather my child was learning about life in a developing country than the role of a subordinating conjunctive. But that's another rant...

I don't agree with the system either OP, seems wrong to me. And of course means that any parent who can not take annual leave during school holidays, can never have a family holiday. But yes, it is like that here.

mistigirl it is not just the system that puts the pressure on its the parents as well who don't seem to understand some of their actions have consequences.

Parents who think teachers are their to serve them and do as they insist - yes I may be biased but after a term of a lot of parents blaming me for things their children haven't done - like homework, prep for exam work, as they choose not to do the work set.

Yes it comes from the system as well but a lot of parents are also to blame. No one ever seems to blame the student these days for failing - no responsibility given to them at all. Drives me crazy.

Not all schools in England issue a fine. My two are at two different schools and neither have fined parents for the odd day or week holiday. It's persistent absence that us the concern.

Unlike the students in yr 10 who I am now having to go in for a day over Easter holidays for, this is so they can finish off controlled assessments due to two weeks term time holidays in the spring term. Unauthorised but still has an impact.

A couple of my UK friends' children are going into school today. None of them had any unauthorised term-time holidays yet the schools thought it was appropriate to take them on skiing holidays earlier in the year during term-time. No wonder parents are confused.

Well, if I exercise 9 days in every 10 I certainly would say I exercise "regularly" . I hope that the law gets interpreted in a more reasonable way. Even if I work out on all but 10% of the term time school days it'd be considered to be happening "regularly".

Someone point this out earlier on the thread - while families who educate privately don't get fined, the powerful don't care; they don't suffer and don't have any incentive to push changes in policy. How many MPs do you think have DC in the state sector? And how many lobbyists, high-powered industrialists, movers and shakers?

There's something so offensive about the result here: we, the great unwashed, aren't trusted. The assumption is that we'll take the piss unless fines are in place, that we won't provide educational experiences (instead we'll drink on the beach on the Costa Brava, I suppose, or go to all-inclusive resorts to eat chips). Apparently the state is best placed to decide all this for us. But if we choose to privately educate, we're "the right kind of people", for whom fines are unnecessary.

Why do we put up with it?

afussyphase I have no idea why we put up with it.

noodle I am sorry that you are in over the holiday helping someone catch up. that isn't fair either. its all about rights and responsibilities the two have to go hand in hand. if people want the right to go on holiday then they and their dc's must take the responsibility to catch up missed work, revision, tests etc. what a shame that you cannot charge the parents of your year 10 pupil for the out of hours time you are spending.