To think this mother is right. Holiday in term time.

[derxa]

Normally I think children should not be taken out of school for holidays but this mother may have a point.
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3559089/Mother-four-fined-60-truancy-taking-youngest-daughter-term-time-holiday-Government-free-meant-children-s-Easter-breaks-different-times.html

Good sad face as well

And the government has every right to fine people for whatever it wants to fine them for, providing it doesn't breach their human rights.

that's where we differ. Human rights are narrowly defined, so I don't want my government coming anywhere near human rights violations. That's not where I draw the line, and certainly shouldn't be our test for a decent government that works for the people.

Governments everywhere (including here) have the "right" to do all sorts of draconian things. I wish more people would stand up to them.

But Permanentlyexhausted, the fine is based on this law:

Education Act 1996
Section 444

*444 Offence: failure to secure regular attendance at school of registered pupil.

(1)If a child of compulsory school age who is a registered pupil at a school fails to attend regularly at the school, his parent is guilty of an offence.*

So if your child is not attending 'regularly' then it is (and always was, even before the fines came in) an offence.

Yes it is technically illegal because of the requirement to send your child to school regularly. Hence the fine rather than tax.

Governments everywhere (including here) have the "right" to do all sorts of draconian things. I wish more people would stand up to them.

Couldn't agree more.

And it depends what you understand by "attend regularly" doesn't it?

My DC have certainly attended school regularly, but I did take DD out for a week in reception when DH was working away and spent an extra week holidaying with grandparents. DS was a pre-schooler at the time. More recently they've both had the odd day as extension of half-terms to attend some youth residential events.

Fortunately all absences have been agreed by school, the earlier one probably wouldn't be now.
It was good to spend some extra time with DGM with the DC especially as sadly my MIL died a couple of years later, fairly suddenly from cancer.

I think it's wrong that discretion on authorised absence has been removed from headteachers and fines routinely imposed.
Most parents have their children's best interests at heart and know what they're doing.

Oh, how strange, you got a random flower pic there
No idea how that happened!

Still, I think it improves the post
Could represent learning from nature outside the classroom?
And from your mother - I learnt most of my early flowers from mine

And it depends what you understand by "attend regularly" doesn't it?

Yes exactly, so the fines must be potentially contestable if your child has otherwise good attendance (and they have been). But generally people aren't going to engage a lawyer for the sake of 60 quid.

Note how there is no distinction in the law between state and independent schools.

If state school parents are being fined, then parents with children at independent schools taking the same holidays should also be fined if the fine is about upholding the law.

The various education acts state a minimum number of days/learning hours schools can be open for.

Many private schools do the minimum number where as state schools are obliged to provide the full 190 days per academic year.

Now as some private schools will do longer hours, eg. have "prep" which is supervised study etc, they can justify the holiday, so its not the same.

I'm talking about holiday during term time lurked.
The law is not equally applied.

I think you'll that private schools have extremely low levels of absence due to holidays, when you pay for your childs schooling and they get 8-9 weeks in the summer, 3 weeks at xmas, 3 weeks at easter, 2 week half terms etc, you have enough holidays.

Also, I'm fairly sure as they are insepcted differently that they aren't held to the same criteria as state schools.

Which means the law, regulated through fining, is not being applied fairly.
It's like not giving speeding fines to people driving expensive cars.

No, because there is no law to say you cannot speed on privately owned land whereas the education law says that if your child is registered at school they should attend 'regularly'.

Now, if you're going to invent a stupid fining system to enforce this that doesn't even work it should be done fairly.

Also, I'm fairly sure as they are insepcted differently that they aren't held to the same criteria as state schools.

why? if near 100% school attendance is so important, and kids who miss fall behind , why doesn't apply to private school kids? that there is great evidence that this is all ridiculous.

And I'll assume you are just guessing about private school attendance. And if it is better, my guess is that once you strip out the state school attendees who are habitually late, which is the group the council should be focussing on, you'll get similar numbers.

there is no law to say you cannot speed on privately owned land

I think there is a law, no?

I don't think it worth taking your child out of an independent school during term time. You are still paying the fees anyway.
I don't understand the holiday obsession either, but that is just me. The government needs to have a fine policy in place for those who will really abuse the system. It isn't for the occasional absence.

You can assume what you like, but I know that private schools don't have the same attendence issues that state ones do, they are also not held responsible for attendence in the same way. As PP have said, the super long holidays mean that it is very rare that they get requests for in term holidays.

BTW attendence has been found to be extremely closely linked to academic performance, which again schools are held accountable by the government and parents for.

Essentially you seem to want it all one way, you want your child to be state educated, you want the schools to be accountable for their results and for everyone elses attendence (hence you carping on about what schools "should be doing" when you evdiently know naff all about what they do actually do), but you want carte blanche to do what you like.

It doesn't work like that. The rules are there to discourage term time holidays outside of one offs and other things.

BTW attendence has been found to be extremely closely linked to academic performance, which again schools are held accountable by the government and parents for.

Not true. Only persistent absence makes a difference.

*there is no law to say you cannot speed on privately owned land

I think there is a law, no?*

No, the Road Traffic Act applies to roads and a road is defined as 'any highway and any other road to which the public have access'.

You can assume what you like, but I know that private schools don't have the same attendence issues that state ones do, they are also not held responsible for attendence in the same way.

perhaps you could share how you have this knowledge. a link to some stats would really help us with a clearer picture on this question. Also, that doesn't address the point of habitual absence causing much of the absences.

Also, that doesn't address the question of WHY private schools aren't held to the same rules. The answer is obvious and unpleasant of course, but no one will state it.

BTW attendence has been found to be extremely closely linked to academic performance, which again schools are held accountable by the government and parents for.

first I am dubious of those results (I have seen them). Second, it still doesn't justify fines. If you decide a hit holiday is worth it for a minor hit in academic performance in your child, that should be your choice and you shouldn't be hassled by the government over it.

Essentially you seem to want it all one way, you want your child to be state educated, you want the schools to be accountable for their results and for everyone elses attendence (hence you carping on about what schools "should be doing" when you evdiently know naff all about what they do actually do), but you want carte blanche to do what you like.

don't tell me what I want. I know what I want and I have seen it work in many other places. It works just fine to focus on the trouble and not punish everyone. I myself do not work in primary education but I have close family members who do.

And yes, I don't want carte blanche with regards to MY OWN CHILD.

Sorry Jelly your wrong there about attendence.

"In schools with an average absence of 7.5 days or fewer per pupil per year, 90% of pupils gain five or more good GCSEs. This drops to 31.3% in schools with an average absence of more than 20 days per pupil"

schoolleaders.thekeysupport.com/pupils-and-parents/absence-and-attendance/strategies-for-managing-attendance/linking-attendance-to-exam-results-secondary/

No, the Road Traffic Act applies to roads and a road is defined as 'any highway and any other road to which the public have access'.

yes. the public has access to a lot of private roads. anyway, that appears to be what googling says.

But chilli private roads aren't necessarily private land are they? I live on a private road but it's not private land.