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?

why are you so defensive? If you've done nothing wrong why would you object to a nice friendly visit a couple of times a year where your children share some work they've done and have a little chit chat with an interested adult?

Because they might get someone like bruffin or other ignorant judgemental posters who know very little about HE but have strenuous opinions anyway.

This happens.

Didn't a poor boy starve to death, whilst teachers did nothing

PissedOff, Listen children moan about everything - oh no my mean parents made me do a degree and now I want to do another one instead - fuck off you ungrateful brat springs immediately to mind no matter how it was educated

Do you HE?

There are no safeguarding policies for the situation I've described. Again, how are authorities supposed to even suspect an abuse situation exists (if there are no red flags and the family aren't known to SS), without regular HE monitoring?

There are, but it's been explained so many times on here the words are starting to lose all meaning. I'm just going to start referring you back to read previous posts.

I actually have a child in school as well so my eldest accompanies me to her school for drop off and pick ups, he is known there.

He sees a GP, Dentist, Optician, SALT regularly.

He has a judo instructor who used to work in pupil referral units and has a long term education background.

He goes indoor climbing and has a professional instructor there.

He plays football once a week and has a professional coach there.

Obviously there are many other home ed children doing these activities.

It's just untrue to say that generally HE children are less visible.

A GP visit with the parent present for most of the visit but a chance to talk to an adult (that isn't pre-approved by their parents) without a parent present can be just the chance that's needed for a child that's abused - so just a short while without the parent present, for every child not just home educated ones. I have been made to leave the room for part of the time during my child's check ups since she turned 3 (they get one every year here, not compulsory as far as I know but as home education is rare and school age check ups are done at school most children get them done).

A GP visit with the parent present for most of the visit but a chance to talk to an adult (that isn't pre-approved by their parents) without a parent present can be just the chance that's needed for a child that's abused - so just a short while without the parent present, for every child not just home educated ones.

When they require this for all children, regardless of whether they attend school or home educate, then absolutely fine. But the implication that this is needed for home ed children only is akin to an accusation of abuse. And I say that even as someone who was abused.

I do not IB it would be my idea of hell ☺️

Oh definitely for all children, I think far too many schooled children slip through the cracks too so need that extra protection plus with the childhood obesity problem and things like that, children need to hear health advice from a professional without their parents negating it.

So now we're back to the numbers game.

I feel sorry for you if you think kids being abused and dying only matter if it's in large numbers.

Personally I think even one child dying needlessly due to lack of monitoring is a tragedy, and I don't know why people are fighting so vociferously against something so quick and simply that could save that child's life.

All other kids get monitored, why should HE kids be the exception?

I still want to know what are we going to do about all the non verbal babies and toddlers and other under fives who aren't in school and whose parents don't see the health visitor - a stance often recommended and supported on MN?

Natsku - that's very sensible. Where are you?
Nickki - we are not talking about people like you? Do you know how many children in this country don't go to a regular school? Do you know how many of them aren't HE'd in the way that your DC are?

Sorry a rogue question mark appeared there!

I'm in Finland Charley

I think regular check ups should be compulsory for the under fives too nicki they aren't compulsory where I live but there's a general attitude of trusting the authorities here so I think most children attend their check ups, and if they didn't it would probably spark concerns - I know I got called when I missed one check up when DD was a toddler.

Ah sensible Finland!

We used to have check ups when we were kids. No doubt cut due to funding but I use me to hate it as a kid, very intrusive being stripped down to your undies in front of a stranger.

Was going to add I agree that this should be for all kids. When I was a child in the 70s and 80s doctors went to schools to check hearing vision etc, and would also check for any signs of ill- treatment or neglect.
I don't think that happens at all in the UK anymore?

My kids are all at school and they have no health check ups. Only vaccines which I / they can opt out of .

Am I missing out ? Are my kids at risk ?

What if they are being abused and no one knows?

Some people here have touching but misplaced faith in both social services and schools. And a very odd idea about what HE means for most children .

I had hearing and vision checks at school in the UK in the 90s

Do you know how many times I have heard "oh we don't mean you?!" with regards to this argument? I won't bore you. Yet pretty much everyone I know in the home ed community and I probably know more than average as I am in London and we have extensive home ed and activities here is home educating with similar levels of commitment as me.

I ask again what are we going to do about the under fives who according to MN never need to see health visitors?

People with problems about home ed as a whole are, in my opinion, uninformed about the reality of what it is and how people come to it and are entrenched in fear of "different". Home ed is not "different" for many people it's their every day life. I so wish people would actually spend some time within a home ed community and see exactly how slick and organised the activities, classes and workshops are and hear of and meet the children taking early GCSE's and doing OU degrees. My friends son just got his GCSE maths - age 11. He studied for only three months before he took the exam.

Do you not think that maybe people are defending it so strenuously because they maybe know something you don't?

Anyway I don't think I am going to comment on this thread again because people just keep regurgitating the same weightless arguments over and over again. I don't waste time trying to convince people in RL, I just get on with it, so I don't know why I am doing it here to be honest.

Nicky, you are doing a great job educating people.

There is a large group of children in the traveller community in home ed after primary age.This seems troubling as very often they appear to receive little in the way of education. I am not sure it is always a choice either.

Some really backwards arguments here. We don't monitor people and their parenting unless there is good reason. Parents have every right to refuse entry to their homes unless a legal compulsion (warrant) exists, as has always been the case.

We are not talking about the majority of HE kids who have loving parents who provide for their physical, emotional and social well-being. We are talking about the tiny minority who do not, and thus need extra protection. Some posters seem to think that being a minority means they are not important and their needs should be ignored. Surely part of raising children is teaching them about compassion?
Yes, many abused children are in school. But they are still subject to regular monitoring (fallible as it is) and have regular opportunity to disclose and ask for help. Even if those safeguards often fail and are problematic, they do at least exist. Severely abused HE children do not have that.

When I was a teenager I would have killed to be allowed one single minute's access to a telephone, or to be allowed to speak to a person outside my own abusive circle. ONE MINUTE would have been all it took to spare me from serious abuse. Why deny any child that? Even if it only saves one child, surely it is worth it?

There are, but it's been explained so many times on here the words are starting to lose all meaning. I'm just going to start referring you back to read previous posts.
Nope, all you've done is parrot "you need to find the info yourself, but take my word for it, it definitely exists!" (And there are a lot of statements that are not factually correct on this thread.) Sorry but if you're this obsessed with 'winning' an argument then the onus is on you to provide proof. If you want to convince me that my first hand experience is wrong, I'm going to need more than your word.

I have been made to leave the room for part of the time during my child's check ups since she turned 3 (they get one every year here, not compulsory as far as I know but as home education is rare and school age check ups are done at school most children get them done).
Exactly. We live in a society. Part of living in a society means unfortunately not having 100% freedom to do whatever you want 100% of the time. All other kids are monitored, by schools and (when young) by healthcare services. Why should HEers be the exception, and be free from any form of monitoring?

Children that do not have SEN or disabilities? Likely less GP/paed contact, but still dentist every 6 months, eye doctor every 6 months to a year, and GP undoubtedly occasionally.
Crikey, how many teenagers do you know who vigilantly make dental appointments twice a year? Are you saying SS monitors dentists, and that existing safeguarding laws state that a teenager not visiting the dentist every year should trigger a welfare check?

Eight-year-old Dylan Seabridge died of scurvy in Wales in 2011 while being home educated. There was no register of HE families and no contact with the authorities for years. Clearly it's an extreme case but I'm shocked that there appears to be no mechanism for checking up on the welfare of HE kids

How many referrals to Childrens sicial care for him were ignored? Off the top of my head at least 5 the family were also known to SS prior to the HE.

They already had everything they needed to protect him availible without monitoring yet they didn't use what was availible