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?

sedona but children in a class of 30 will be falling behind all over the place anyway! Because children learn at different speeds in different ways.

The idea you can keep a class of 30 together and achieve the same learning outcomes for all across the board is batshit.

When has this ever happened? Children returning for missing time at school, be it illness or holiday, have always been left to pick up what they missed as best they can

But when those children can't take the next step or are failing, their teachers are expected to differentiate for them and provide exam catch up etc. It also takes up time in the classroom, where students will be given a piece of work and will be trying to explain to the teacher that they can't do it because they missed a vital element of learning. They may not know what they missed and will therefore need this explained as well. The child will obviously not see this 'their fault' (which it isn't) and will expect more help than others. With 30 children, if they all take a small amount of time out every year, this definitely adds up.

A couple of weeks in Florida is not extenuating circumstances

Exactly!

It's a good decision, and probably also goes a wee bit of the way towards protecting those young girls who are flown "home" for a holiday and forced into marriage or to undergo FGM.

Correct decision.

This guy who has brought the case really grinds my gears. He bleats on about "near perfect attendance" which is bollocks - his child had 90% attendance which is equivalent to a half day absence every week. My child's latest report has an attendance rate of 99.64% which is what I'd class as "near perfect".

Holidays abroad are not a "right". Nobody is entitled to a holiday overseas. Part of having kids is accepting that during the years they're at school, it'll cost more.

Confess to not having RTFT, but I have a number of problems with this whole discussion.

1. It seems to centre around extended family holidays. I have been told by the HT at our primary school that the school has a real problem with random absenteeism, and that this system is NOT helping to address that.
2. I know many many MANY parents - well-educated monied middleclass types and otherwise, who blatantly lie about where their child is simply to extend a family weekend/half term holiday away time. This here pisses me off.

3.and actually - another final point. I do not share the education=the silver bullet that will solve all your child's life problems forever- mentality that seems to pervade all decisions around attendance in this country. A child is MUCH MUCH more than the quality of their education. And I say this as someone who has suffered an extremely poor education. I defy anyone who knows me personally, to tell me that my lack of good education is responsible for any social/emotional/mental/whatever problems. This fundamentally pisses me off too. And I am fed up with lectures on the importance of education when my children spent the equivalent time we could've been away last year, doing sod all actual learning and mostly faffing about being taught (badly) seasonal dittys, having class parties, and attending assembly after assembly after assembly. I do not lie about my children's absence; I do not take allow them endless random sick days at home. And we have had some serious medical issues here. My child's welfare remains my responsibility. I am their parent- I will give an account to them of my decisions around all aspects of their life. I will not allow over reaching state institutions to usurp my role in my child's life

Why should poor people get to go on holiday anyway

My family live abroad (I'm furrin). Couldn't afford to go in the holidays and it wouldn't be great for the kids because of dangerous weather. I'd love for someone to tell me that meeting family they'd otherwise never know is less important than the three times tables. If that's true we should emirate home education as clearly the only way a child can get an education is tied to a desk

We literally couldn't have afforded to holiday in term time back in the day. And it was a caravan in Wales. Dh worked away all week and it was our only time together as a family. Both graduated with good degrees.

Seems to me this is an attack on the working classes as it's fine for the rich they can afford the high season prices or send their kids to private school so get longer holidays.

It will impact on armed forces families, and police too as they can't always choose their holidays to coincide with school holidays.

Poor decision. Schools should be tackling pesistant offenders.

f it is my responsibility to provide a suitable education, then why can't I determine that is 90% school and 10% HE?

You can, but you have to set up a formal flexi schooling arrangement with the school.

Tinfoil love not everyone can afford to go abroad you know and holidays in term time in this country are too pricey for lots of people.

It's a good decision, and probably also goes a wee bit of the way towards protecting those young girls who are flown "home" for a holiday and forced into marriage or to undergo FGM.

Decided not to mutilate my daughter's genitals because the fares were extortionate in August!
-said no one ever

Fly think there's been 1 prosecution for FGM in this country in 10 years. Don't think this will make one jot of difference there unfortunately.

No, but it might just draw attention to the fact that a vulnerable child is being taken out of school. It makes it more visable surely?

Morphene

Favourite line: "You are not the final arbiter of what's right for your child."

If this is the case, then how come home schooling is allowed?

The judge meant in this situation, as explained by her comments afterwards.

His FB post is ridiculous. Your child is a minute late for school so you're a criminal. Ffs.

It all ties in with those horrible 100% attendance awards too.

The parents that don't give a damn whether their child is at school or not still don't give a damn even with tempting treats of bouncy castles or trips to playgrounds. They don't care if their cheap jolly to Spain costs them a bit extra in fines.

The parents who do care, who send their kids in and keep them off when they're sick just to see them punished for it, or really can't afford to go see family, have a cheap caravan holiday during the holiday, then can't go in term time because they can't afford The fine as well, are the ones penalised again. And again and again.

I hate it. And I don't even take term time holidays.

The government are running our kids into the ground with stress over 100% attendance, SATs, all A* s at GCSEs, only GCSEs count towards anything in life, scrap vocational courses etc. It's all part of the same insidious plan to undermine parents and give the state total say over children's lives.

It's a difficult one. I will admit to having taken my dcs out of school to go to Disneyworld - simply because it was cheaper. And we have had random duvet days/sunny days over the years.

But... I agree with a pp saying that what used to be unusual (I remember the admiring oohs and aaahs when one girl at my primary school went off to Spain during the summer term) came to be seen as a right. At the dcs' primary school the word went round that everyone was entitled to two weeks' off school. This wasn't even true but everyone believed it and booked time away accordingly. It ended up with less than half the class being there for the last two weeks of term one year and at that point there was a complete clamp down. In fact ds's piano exam was declared unauthorised!

I also wonder what the situation is with families who remove their dcs for weeks, nay, months on end for trips to family abroad. Are they subject to the same rules and penalties?

At a primary school near us, which had many families taking their children out for extended periods,the school ruled across the board that term time absence would result in being deregistered. Regardless if it was a one-off holiday of a life time or extended time with family. That was some years ago before this was introduced, and seems extraordinarily harsh. The fine and unauthorised absence mark isn't a huge deterrent.

I'm glad all the sheep welcoming this judgement have been successfully brainwashed into agreeing that the state has more of a say in how your children are raised than you do.

Good lesson for the kids too, showing how little control we have over our own lives. Hopefully they'll all grow up to be good unquestioning worker drones too now.

The sheer hypocrisy shown by some schools over this is incredible and simply makes a total lie of the judgement that has just been handed down. My son's school took about 5% of two school years off on a weeks ski trip, during term time (the ones who could afford £800 that is) while the rest had to do a normal week at school. No mention there about 'every day counts' or 'the cost to them and other pupils of missing a week of school'. This is a state school, just to confirm.

Also, a couple of weeks off for religious or cultural reasons is fine - bugger the "cost" to my child who isn't religious and doesn't have relatives living abroad.

As for those saying that if you don't like it, you can always homeschool. The government is gradually making that harder and harder as well by making it next to impossible, and extremely expensive, to find somewhere for home-educated children to take GCSEs. Lots of schools that used to allow independant candidates now refuse because either the admin is too great or they worry about school results tables.

This just shows it isn't the harm to yours or other kids in taking time away from school - it's about control and who, as Jon Platt says, is the final arbiter about how your children are raised. Now we can be quite sure it isn't parents.

I think the problem is with this is that EVERYONE views their own case as exceptional. If the school makes exception for everyone then it can end up with massive problems.

If it really was just one family in one school every couple of years it wouldn't have need legislation would it?

theres also a massive problem with a fine for doing this, which is that people will just pay it.

This is actually my only problem with this. Those who can afford it can just opt to pay a fine and still make a nice saving on the cost of their holiday. Therefore the only people who are obliged to observe the law are those for whom an additional £60 or multiple thereof would make it unaffordable.

If the purpose of the law is to increase attendance at school it shouldn't just apply to those who can't afford to flout it should it?

Blimey, that Platt guy is full of himself, isn't he?

Indeed Ferdinand

I couldn't agree more northern.

Just saw that man on the BBC news - what an arse. Carrying on the fight. Just pay the fucking fine and get on with your life. His poor wife and children.

I'm glad all the sheep welcoming this judgement have been successfully brainwashed into agreeing that the state has more of a say in how your children are raised than you do.

Why are you glad?

AnnPerkins - I think you have just very succinctly explained one of my biggest concerns with this law. If you are rich enough, you can pay for the law to turn a blind law to your child's absence.