To think home schooling should be better monitored?

[Mollymoo78]

One of my FB friends from my toddler group days has announced on FB that she's home schooling her four year old. She was always very very attached to him and never had a moment away from him ie a night out. She breast fed him well into his fourth year and carried him in a sling when he got tired. I guess what I'm saying is that I'm genuinely wondering if her decision to home school has more to do with her being reluctant to let him go.

Her comments on FB are "well I have no precise plans as to what I'm going to do but they learn through play at this age anyway so it doesn't matter". I just felt quite uncomfortable reading that. It all sounds very vague. My dd has started school recently and loves it - the socialisation with her peers and older children, the physical activity, getting independence and rewards for her achievements. She's playing yes but she's also being taught to read and write. But what if this boy isn't given these things - who is going to be checking up on the education he's being given?

I don't mean to put a downer on homeschooling - I've no doubt it's the perfect option for those whose children don't gel with school but shouldn't you at least try school first? Am I wrong to question this in my mind?

That was my comment, not Ginger's.

Whatever is your name. Am full on peeing myself here

The risks of being a serial name changer. Apologies

Thank you NerrSnerr , I rarely feel like my voice is heard on threads like these (I understand there are high emotions all around). Just, thanks.

That's alright.

" I'm not required to outline my child's education to randoms on the internet or the general public."

Nobody has asked you to. I'm pleased to read that you give regular reports to the LA. You then say you're not answerable to me, but you know the LA represents the people of the local authority don't you?

I'm not a fan of homeschooling, but I know that in America they have very good support systems for it. Especially as they've been doing it for a long time.

It may be fine up to a certain age in primary school ... maybe year 3, but once in secondary school it requires a level of skill, ability and knowledge to teach your children.

I'd like to think anyone embarking on it has a certain level of education and intellect themselves, because otherwise it would be a bit of a disaster.

BF till 4 years old is unecessary as well .... IMO. Her choice , but it's I think it's crazy.

In the situation the op describes, HE does sound like an odd choice, but at that age I don't think it would be harmful. Many parents teach their dc to read and write, and they can easily meet other children to be socialised.

GingerIvy you keep mentioning children's contact with medical professionals as a means of monitoring and safeguarding bit where y falls down is that lots abd lots of children (possibly the majority) don't see their gp regularly at all. Not because their parents are neglectful bit because try don't need to. Aside from routine vaccinations and 10 minutes a year for a dentist checkup I bet my mum can count on one hand how many times me and my siblings needed to see a doctor.

I have no problem with home ed by the way, just think the monitoring by medical professionals is just not the case.

Gwenhwyfar As I never said "Fucking hell, I hope not," I'm really not clear what you're referring to. Of course I hope my children work, and I also hope they have a good job/career so they can support themselves. I suspect you've confused someone else's response as mine.

Whatever is your name

Am full on peeing myself here.
You are not alone in that.

Geraniumred - good question. I don't know.

When I asked for help for my son I was told that I had to get him into school first before they would even assess him for help. I explained that I had taken him out of school where he had been for many years and that school was making him worse. They wouldn't even talk to me.

They kept saying that if he wasn't "in the system" there was nothign anyone could do.

Sorry, Ginger. That was Trifle. Can Trifle explain why she doesn't want her children to be anybody's work colleagues?

So does the LA have any legal responsibility toward home educated children?

No. This was emphasised to me repeatedly as they joyfully did all the admin to remove my troublesome child from their remit.

We reluctantly made the decision to home educate ds2 a year or so ago.

We would almost definitely fail any tick box educational monitoring system because we do not do formal education with him.

In our opinion though he has made good progress - aggressive incidents have vastly diminished and his mental health is slowly improving. He even occasionally has a bath! I begin to have a hope that he may live independently as an adult again.

Keeping him in school may have got him more GCSE results (although given his demand avoidance I doubt it) but GCSE's do not do you a lot of good in prison or if you have been sectioned.

I am also constantly amazed by how much self-directed learning he has absorbed. Following an exam syllabus definitely not but he puts my historical knowledge to shame and is rapidly catching up on scientific topics too.

I am quite happy for somebody to knock on my door and check he is alive (in truth he is still under CAMHS so is not completely under the radar). I would not be happy for him to be pressurised back to school because he is not doing a formal education.

I teach part time and HE my 6 year old DS who goes to a private (OFSTED registered) educational setting 2 days a week while I am working (I would have preferred state flexi-schooling but the govt made that almost impossible for schools about 6 years ago)

We are active in the HE community and attend social and educational activities and are all up to date with doctor, dentist, opticians etc

BUT it disturbs me that there is no monitoring for those that have never entered the school system and that for all anyone knows he could be sitting at home watching porn and eating chocolate all day

I am unusual among the Home Edders I know in that I think there should be some form of compulsory monitoring... but I am damned if I am going to put my head above the parapet

I'll let you make of my comment what you will, Gwen.

Our lea do offer checks, within their remit. And would still be open for being reported by any other member of the public or care worker they come across. It is really very hard to be truly off grid...the majority of people give birth with the awareness of the NHS, meaning if they don't then register the birth they are chased. People register their babies in part to claim child benefit. From that point on they are on the grid.

You then say you're not answerable to me, but you know the LA represents the people of the local authority don't you?

And your point? Still not answerable to you personally or the general public.

you keep mentioning children's contact with medical professionals as a means of monitoring and safeguarding bit where y falls down is that lots abd lots of children (possibly the majority) don't see their gp regularly at all.

And lots of children go to school 5 days a week and are still abused and it's not seen. I was one of those children.

School's remit is education. SS's remit is safeguarding. Educational or medical professionals can bring up concerns to SS, as can any member of the general public if they see something they feel is a concern. I would venture to say that when you see a child being abused/killed by a parent, it's more frequently a child that is 5 and under. Often they are are still attending either nursery or school, but sometimes not. Perhaps then it would be beneficial for the government to provide more opportunities for smaller children to be seen at places like Sure Start... but oh wait... they've kind of scuppered that.....

They kept saying that if he wasn't "in the system" there was nothing anyone could do.

Yep. And yet after fighting for years within the school system, they still weren't really doing anything for him. At least with home education, he can get appropriate support and is able to do things he was unable to do in school, such as go to clubs and activities. He wasn't allowed to attend school clubs as they didn't have the support staff available. We were told "no" and then criticised for not getting him more involved in activities.

Any monitoring would be done by ex teachers who don't understand how children learn outside a formal setting. They also tend to have a bias against home education. Monitoring for educational progress doesn't really work when a child is doing gcse level math at 8 but doesn't learn to read until they realise they want to be able to read - and does this in a week at the age of seven. This scenario is typical of home educated kids who learn through what they feel interested in our realise they need to know to reach life goals. It does work (to the surprise of people who think learning is work and children should be force fed knowledge). Most of the time children are inquiring and motivated but sometimes school destroys that to the point that parents are genuinely unaware.

No one is going to tell me that my child needs Ss involvement without any reason for concern. If it's decided that children must all be evaluated for signs of abuse (rather than have learning monitored) this should be done for every child in the country because schools don't have this function -or if they do, they do it unbelievably badly. The truth is that schools are there to educate and any Ss concerns that are picked up there are coincidental. There is no screening. Teachers aren't social workers.

The media likes to report on abuse of children who are home educated but in most cases those children were already involved with SS or had the opportunity to be but were failed.

GrainOfSalt _ I did that with my DS but it is expensive.

OneinEight - glad to hear it is working for your DS.

There is another thread in AIBU about a child for whom school is not working. It seems to be making it all worse. Several people on here have talked about how they took their kids out because school was damaging the child. This really does have to be addressed.

not read the thread sorry but Eunice spry, google her, a good example of why home ed needs monitoring. Yes, kids get abused by teachers in schools but no teacher has 24/7 access to a kid as this woman did

You mean the Eunice Spry who was a foster carer? Had a high volume of foster kids moving through her house?

She was already alledgedly monitored as a result of her being a foster carer, already subject to a significantly high amount of safeguarding professionals being in and out of her house and in contact with the children she fostered. One could be forgiven for thinking that her being a foster carer (and as such having the illusion of respectability along side being percieved as a better than birth family parent) contributed much more towards her being able to continue her despicable acts

"Any monitoring would be done by ex teachers who don't understand how children learn outside a formal setting. "

There could also be lay inspectors or former home educators as inspectors.

"Still not answerable to you personally or the general public. "

So do you think you're not answerable to anyone or do you think you're answerable to your children? Children can't protect themselves so the population as a whole has to step up.

needsasock Yes, Spry is exactly the sort of case I'm talking about. Those children weren't 'lost' or under the radar. They had all the contact with SS, it. monitoring that any home schooled kids could ever have and were failed by Ss.

"I'll let you make of my comment what you will, Gwen."

To arrogant to even engage in a conversation.!