To think there should be an approval process to allow parents to HE?

[abacucat]

Children's education matters, it is incredibly important and affects the rest of their life. I think it is fine for parents to Home Educate, but I think there should be an approval process before parents can HE. This will check the parents are actually capable of doing this.

It isn’t just about academic achievement, though.

growing and developing away from your family.

Do you think this, in the degrees that require spending most of the day most of the week in a school, is a universal trait of human development or something specific to particular times and cultures?

It isn’t just about academic achievement, though.

Well, yes. Parents who home-school would be foolish to not tend to the whole child. That said, the state system, particularly the schools that conscientious parents are opting out of, are comprehensively failing their students. Reserve some pity for them.

Not sure what people meant by "flying under the radar". People whose children aren't registered aren't doing anything illegal.

Clearly different cultures at different times will have different systems. So is the point that because it hasn’t always been done, it’s “wrong”? I don’t think schools, as an establishment, are right or wrong. I learned very little at school myself. There are poor schools and poor teachers.

However when you prevent a child from attending school, no matter how well intentioned, no matter how many HE groups you attend and extra curricular activities the child goes to, it’s all still stemming from the parent. School is more than education. It’s the slow establishing of the child as his/herself. It’s also often about communities - most children attend a school local to them - about dealing with difficult situations and people.

I learned very little at school myself. There are poor schools and poor teachers.

Don't you think this is the bigger problem?

Not sure what people meant by "flying under the radar". People whose children aren't registered aren't doing anything illegal.
No they aren't doing anything illegal.
But they can avoid being looked at and they can avoid professionals who'd notice signs of neglect and/or abuse.

E.g. a child in secondary school is seen by 5-7 different members of staff a day, minimum. A primary child is with their class teacher and TAs for each day. All these staff are trained to notice signs of safeguarding issues and to raise concerns appropriately. Same for social workers, youth workers, health care professionals etc.
Often it's the triangulation of concerns that leads to something getting passed to social service.
E.g. I might pass one small concern on (the type that some people on here would love to froth about) but another colleague has passed soemthing else they noticed, and it turns out the safeguarding lead is already aware there has been violence in the house etc (which we wouldn't be told automatically). Then pieces get put together. Baby P happened because professionals seeing the family didn't ask questions and didn't flag concerns.

A child who is HE doesn't get that automatically. It's entirely possible for a child who is HE to come into contact with a safeguarding trained professional once a month.

Add into that how frothy and fuming sone on here get at the very idea of it takes a village. (E.g. 'I have concerns about my neighbours children. They are regularly screaming and I can't put my finger on it but the screaming sounds more than a child having a tantrum. When I've seen them coming in from the car, I've see the mother yanking their arms and swearing at them'. The replies will be 50% omg give them a break, maybe she is stressed and you should offer to babysit instead of making posts up, gosh OP you are so judgey I hope you're a perfect parent. Of course you shouldn't call social services. Why don't you mind your business. I think you're looking for drama by ripping this poor woman's life apart.)

It's fairly obvious how that could enable neglect and abuse to happen under the radar.

It’s not an issue of right or wrong, it’s something different individuals and different cultures and communities can legitimately do differently.

And I don’t really buy that kids can’t individuate without school, you realise that once a child is 11 or so they are the ones contacting their friends, arranging what to do with them, making plans and not their parents. They’re the ones choosing the books they read. They’re the ones deciding what activities they do and don’t want to do. Nothing about not being in school prevents that. You could just as well say school “stems from the parent” because the parent sends them to school as you could say it about scouts or whatever so I don’t really get your point.

It isn’t what is being discussed though inert Besides, it is many years since I was at school

I do think good parents should educate their children. I do not think they should remove them from school to do so.

Yes, once they are eleven or so they organise their own friendships.

But the opportunities they have had for making friends stem solely from their parents if HEd.

But the opportunities they have had for making friends stem solely from their parents if HEd.

So how is school different to scouts or other extracurricular activities in that regard?

Have to be honest I always read that argument as “I think parents are using it as a way to make sure their kids only mix with ‘naice’ children.

But let’s really consider schools and how children mix in them, because ceirtainly in my experience early exposure to diversity very quickly leads to early development of prejudices and cliques of PLU. The Asian kids won’t talk to the black and white kids. The rich kids and poor kids just don’t get each other. Everyone stays on “their” side of the playground or on “their” tables. Even the girls and boys only talk to each other in a romantic context.

I just don’t see it as the amazing melting pot of tolerance I think people want it to be and I think a more controlled and especially smaller scale exposure to diversity (where you’re not going to find other people similar to you to hide amongst) is a much better way to do it.

And it’s not like the naice parents don’t just all move into a naice catchment and avoid the issue anyway.

For one thing because Scouts isn’t five days a week for six hours or so. It’s more a weekly activity.

And also, not having the shared experience of school can make life more difficult when socialising with others, in the same way that being the ‘odd one out’ always is.

Thankfully not true in my experience die

I’m sorry if you find it rude as that is not my intention. However, I do. I can’t pretend that I don’t think children are really being denied experiences that bond them to others, that help them in later life and in essence cut them off from a shared experience the majority of their peers will go through.

Sometimes though and hopefully it’s rare , teachers see abuse that isn’t happening.
That’s why we are opting out of the school system for our youngest after horrific accusations by multiple teachers. No faith left in the system

I think I do have a clue, lady; a view that doesn’t align with yours isn’t indicative of someone not having a clue.

Sometimes though and hopefully it’s rare , teachers see abuse that isn’t happening.
That’s why we are opting out of the school system for our youngest after horrific accusations by multiple teachers.
Teachers don't make the call if something is abuse. That isn't their job. It is not their call to say something is abuse. It is not their job to investigate.

It is, however, their job (like anyone else working with children or vulnerable adults) to pass on any concerns if what they see corresponds with safeguarding training.

A girl wriggling uncomfortably and seems to have discomfort down below, it could be a UTI. It could be that she's suffered FGM. It is not my decision to make that call. It's not my job to investigate. It is my job to document that on 13th March during lesson 3, Child X ....' From that point it is not my job.

once a child is 11 or so they are the ones contacting their friends, arranging what to do with them, making plans and not their parents.

not my experience with one family. they do not let dc use technology at all and dc are not allowed to leave the house without parents. at all.

Well in this case they did. Multiple calls specifying exactly what they (wrongly) thought was happening. Child with invisible disabilities and other conditions all verified by medical professionals and multiple teachers continually making calls to ss saying it was actually munchausens by proxy. A sustained campaign
It’s one case though so not indicative of the education system as a whole but just an example of an individual reason for HE

They took it upon themselves to investigate as well. Bypassed ss initially and got a nurse in , went back themselves to previous nursery to information gather and observed us covertly. In the process currently of dealing with it but reading the ss files and others has been harrowing. Total waste of resources too on what amounts to a witch hunt
School is t always the best place. Well not in our LA that’s for definite

Haven't rtft but I'd argue that when schools are letting so many children with SN down - ignoring their needs, disciplining in a way that causes long lasting trauma, expecting children to fit in with a (crap) system that arguably only suits a few children...
Perhaps schools need to up their game and make a stand against ridiculous government targets.
My son is HE because he couldn't cope with school, in turn we couldn't cope with constant violence and meltdowns, we were all let down by a system that discriminates against children who don't fit the mould.
I'm not academic, his education is alternative to say the least, but he's happy and thriving, and is working towards a career that will suit him. Education shouldn't always have to be about keeping up with the masses.