Supreme Court sides with government on term-time holidays

[Mulledwine1]

www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2016-0155-judgment.pdf

www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2016-0155-press-summary.pdf

AIBU to get the popcorn out for the discussion of why this is/is not a great judgment?

Tinsel

I think you are being deliberately obtuse. Something can be nice to have without being a necessity. Holidays abroad/away from home fall into that category IMO. I think we are lucky to be able to afford to go away (but often holiday in the UK), as having a holiday is a nice thing to do and we enjoy it. That is why we go.

But as the are not a necessity, if I could not afford a holiday during the school break then I would not take DC out of school in order to do so. Quite straightforward, I think.

Holidays in the UK are just as expensive and unaffordable for many during the holidays.

I think they are a necessity. They bring families together, destress hardworking families, give children life experiences and aspirations, they show children life beyond their small world, they can reverse depression, they educate and can often enable children to
make sense of parts of the curriculum.....

The very families who need them the most are often those not able to afford holiday prices.

jacks since your family doesn't go without holidays you're hardly qualified to tell others that not having a holiday shouldn't be a problem for them.

If you'ld had no family holidays for a couple of years you may reconsider

I do think its pretty hard to swallow on this thread the number of people who think fines and bans on holidays in term time are a good idea when :

a) they send their children to private school so it doesn't apply to them,.
b) they live in Scotland N Ireland and Wales so it doesn't apply to them

Of course you can hold an opinion on it, not a problem, but do you really "get" what the issue is if you are completely unaffected by it?

I think bans on term time holidays are fine, if people could be trusted to be sensible about them the situation would have stayed the same.

Its prats like the guy who brought the case you want to blame and no one else. His daughters had approved time off for a week earlier in the year, and he wanted to take them out again for a holiday to Disney.

That's a disingenuous way to present that, because we are talking about the % of absences down to school holidays.

What? But you were the one that stated reduction of % of holidays being reduced as a % of overall absences being reduced not me!

There are about 8 million students so yes 0.0016 of that large amount is going to be quite a large amount. But it's still only 0.0016% however you present it.

I do no consider that a significant or dramatic decrease in absence. If you do then great - carry on thinking that fines make a big difference to absences. I disagree.

*I think bans on term time holidays are fine, if people could be trusted to be sensible about them the situation would have stayed the same.

Its prats like the guy who brought the case you want to blame and no one else. His daughters had approved time off for a week earlier in the year, and he wanted to take them out again for a holiday to Disney.*

And you are perfectly entitled to your opinion even if facts don't back that opinion up.

And they can afford holiday prices anyway.

It's all very well saying you wouldn't take your kids out when you are clearly wealthy( able to afford private fees and holiday prices)and don't long to give your child experiences.The benefits for children and families are huge,who wouldn't want to give that to their children.

I think it makes a difference, in fact so does the Head, as do other head teachers in the area ( we do work together you know).

The overall fact is, that if you want this changed then your going to have to change OFSTED criteria too, not just this law. There would also have to be strict criteria that parents would agree to prior to joining.

Oh bugger that doesn't work does it, because everyone thinks the rules should be bent for them..

Danny - do you fall into one of the two groups I mentioned above. I know you are a school governor but are all of your kids / were all of your kids at state school and do you live in England? just wondering if this is why you have the contrary view despite some excellent points made by jellyfrizz and others.

The majority were sensible,the stats back that up.

No stop being obtuse danny. I have stated many many times that I think that there is a better rule than this. you could go with 100% attendance for the past 12 rolling months gets you time off, you could go with 95% you could go with a fixed 1 week off per year of anything. just so long as I and others could have SOME ability to take term time holidays that's all I am asking for. that's all almost 100% of people want.

you cant legislate for the piss takers. only of course this government has. working on this basis, why not ban any alcohol when driving and not have a limit? or get rid of police cautions because an offence is an offence after all.

State school.

In London.

I think there are some points made yes, I don't think they are good enough regarding absences and term time holidays.

You think they are excellent because they confirm your bias.

Anyway, I'm done. This is a waste of time. I'm going to go enjoy my holiday time holiday abroad.

It's all well and good saying that 'there are 13 weeks of holiday in the academic year so plenty of time to go away without missing school' but the holiday companies completely take advantage and the price difference can be ridiculous!
I completely agree that there should be a cap - 10 school days was the norm when I was at school but 5 would be enough. My mother would take us out of school for 1 week of the year because it was simply not affordable to go away with 5 kids in school holidays. When Each of us came to GCSE and a-level years then we did not go away. I believe some important bits of our 'education' came from these family holidays (which were in the uk but away from home, nothing fancy, usually a caravan park) and each one of us has respectable, well paying jobs. My sister even has a very successful business of her own. Yes there are 'cheaper' options but these are still impacted by peak periods and schools don't consider factors such as younger siblings - I.e. Camping is cheaper but not really viable if there is a young baby in the family.
My opinion is that, although I see the initial reasoning in the legislature, it widens the gap between the haves and the have nots and at times forces families to share very personal information in order to justify taking their children out of school rather than allowing parents to use own judgement.

Tinsel

When DD was young we did not have holidays away from home, because I was having to work during the university breaks. You make quite big assumptions. As to "de-stressing" and "spending family time" we managed this without having to be abroad. I am not saying there is no value in foreign holidays, obviously there is (although the value does depend on what the holiday involves) but they are not an absolute necessity.

When I was young we did not have holidays away until we were teenagers, except for going to visit my grandparents. We managed and I don't feel especially deprived. It was just the way things were and we had lots of good times. That is my experience.

Who says only going abroad is valuable?

A caravan in Cornwall during the holidays is out of the price range for many.

I think it makes a difference, in fact so does the Head, as do other head teachers in the area ( we do work together you know).

Right-o. Doesn't change the official stats though does it?

Danny ....Anyway, I'm done. This is a waste of time. I'm going to go enjoy my holiday time holiday abroad

Oh this has absolutely made me laugh out loud.

This is you saying "not only can I actually take a holiday in school holidays, I can afford to go abroad"

steady on with that empathy. I hope to goodness that you don't find yourself in the position that many others of us are in. or maybe if you do you will turn up this thread and re-read.

Actually the stats show that 13,000 fewer children were taken out on holiday. So lets me conservative and say the average holiday length is 5 days, then that's 65,000 school days less.

Just because you'd rather it was presented in % terms, because it confirms your bias, doesn't make it right.

Danny - I thought you were done! just want to be a little bit more goady before your fun in the sun eh? Nice!

Actually the stats show that 13,000 fewer children were taken out on holiday.

How about a source for this to start with? Or if you've extrapolated it some working.

Ahh empathy, that thing mummy which you have shown none of during this entire conversation you just want it your way. Many of us have actually said yes its inconvenient.

Lots of us have empathised with people who find it difficult, you have shown nothing in the other direction.

jellyfrizz shes gone - on her lovely foreign holiday in school holidays because she is just that little bit better than us and we don't know anything. she is after all a school governor and we all know how much more they know about teaching than teachers.

I have always been in favour of a compromise. always. but you want it both ways. you say any time off is damaging but that doesn't include music lessons, exams, sports etc.

the problem is that as a governor you have started believing the shit that the government are feeding you.

when confronted with other evidence you just wont see it or believe it. you aren't a teacher, Jellyfrizz is. you aren't restricted to holidays in term time. you can afford to go abroad.

I can absolutely empathise with the parents who are fed up with absenteeism. I am fed up with it - and by that I mean the kid who is late every day. the kids who are learning 3 instruments in school and keep coming in and out from those lessons. the kids who go off abroad for 3 months of the year and say its because their imaginary friend excepts it of them. I am fed up that the govt are using this as a smokescreen to stop them having to deal with the persistent offenders. the ones who need the most and in depth support.

You have shown me and others nil empathy. its either change your job or go private. Like I could do either. Have a lovely holiday.

Late to the party on this but what really angers me is the sweeping statements I have seen from MPs on this "headteachers know their children best" FUCK RIGHT OFF. My headteacher didn't even know my name. Pretty sure my DD's doesn't either.

I find the whole thing very patronising and ill informed. There is no value placed on family life (which our government allegedly values) and the benefits spending time together can have. Like many me and DH work away a lot, some weeks one of us barely get to see the kids. I work in events and taking time off in school hols is v difficult. We are not all teachers with a 6 week holiday. No one wants the best for my kids education more than me and I am quite capable of judging if she can afford time off or not.

It also angers me that on voting day the council can close the school building on a whim to use as a polling station so I have to take a day off and that's ok!(despite being the biggest land owners in the county and having numerous other choices) it's one rule for those in power and everyone else just has to suck it up. The whole thing just pisses me off as if you couldn't tell. Mix of nanny state taking away parental rights and hitting the middle classes because it works well for the press in one go. Glad to see the lib dems and the greens ready to catch the political hot potato.