To think that having to have a DBS check to home educate is unfair.

[Grimed]

Baroness Garden is intending all homeschool parents to be DBS checked. I don't think this is fair. What makes Homeschool parents more likely to be abusive? Surely regular checks from the local LA should be enough? If the education system is failing so many children perhaps that is what's needs examining not parents. What's next? All pregnant women get DBS checked?

The issue I have here is it shouldn’t automatically be a concern if a child doesn’t go somewhere anyway - what’s with this assumption that parents are abusive until proven otherwise? I remember getting a snotty letter from my GP once demanding to know why my daughter missed an appointment - she was in hospital at the time, with something life threatening, and I was furious that I was basically being asked to justify where my own children were, especially when she was seriously unwell at the time. Why are we assuming parental incompetence?

The vast majority of parents are doing what’s best for their kids. Why is the assumption otherwise, especially when the parent takes a different path to the mainstream?

I'm sorry your kid had to be in hospital and I can imagine it was stressful getting a letter like that then.

But it's right they do follow up - a sudden missed appointment, the same with suddenly missing a day of school etc without explanation can be a sign of a problem eg parent keeping kid away from adults who'd notice bruises etc.

We've been followed up - got a letter from the public health team asking where DD was as she wasn't registered in school. It was reassuring to know she couldn't fall thru the cracks and it was a quick phone call to let them know she was at school in a different county. The same when we relocated - school we left needed the details of the new school so she couldn't just disappear.

Ditto what @JemimaPuddlegoose just said but also

The DBS check would add nothing except serve as a financial barrier to home education

DBS checks for volunteers are free. www.gov.uk/government/publications/disclosure-application-process-for-volunteers/disclosure-application-process-for-volunteers

I would suggest, however, that even if they weren't free, if you can't afford a one off £40 for a DBS check then you have no hope of affording the textbooks, exam fees and other costs involved in home education.

I’ve not seen anyone answer the question about whether parents of pre schoolers should face the same regulations

Seeing as children under the age of 1 have the highest homicide rate (28 per million) and child homicides are most commonly perpetrated by the parent or step parent (source: learning.nspcc.org.uk/media/1652/statistics-briefing-child-deaths-abuse-neglect.pdf ) then clearly there are some gaps in the safeguarding provision.

Of course, we don't know how many of those would have had a relevant criminal history that would have been flagged on a DBS check, and how many would be 'first time offenders' (as with the recent Leiland Corkill case).

I don't, however, think people should be able to opt out of health visitor services, seeing as they do perform a vital safeguarding function.

I know of home ed kids who don't go to the docs since they have a homeopathic lifestyle. They are NOT abused. So no, the assumption that if they don't follow the social norm then there is abuse involved is not true.

Depending on the medical issue at hand, that could easily be medical neglect, and it could ultimately be fatal.

Tripping over in the park and applying some arnica to the bruises? Honey and lemon for a sore throat? All absolutely fine.

But some children have medical issues that can range from needing antibiotics for an infection that could easily turn into sepsis, through to developing something like leukaemia (the signs of which can be really quite non-specific). Imagine wasting time with homeopathy when others would have taken their child to a doctor who would have spotted the signs of leukaemia.

And that's before we get onto the crackpots who like to treat things with black salve or drinking their own urine.

I’m going to take the absence of a smoking gun Home Ed invisible child case in the media

There absolutely is a smoking gun HE invisible child case in the media: Dylan Seabridge. He had never been to school, was registered at a GP and dentist but had never been seen by them. He died of scurvy, otherwise known as vitamin C deficiency.

www.theguardian.com/society/2016/jan/22/concerns-raised-about-boy-who-died-of-scurvy-a-year-before-his-death-leaked-report

Of course, the vast majority of child abuse cases aren't reported in the media (for good reasons - mainly the child's privacy).

But this is an anonymised case from Wales of severe sexual abuse and the child literally never being allowed out of the house, to the extent she'd never seen a cat or dog, and nor did she know what Christmas was
www.walesonline.co.uk/news/couple-who-locked-child-away-15020159.amp
www.itv.com/news/wales/2018-04-27/man-who-raped-daughters-and-kept-one-as-a-slave-jailed-for-life

Of course if parents had made a concerted effort to conceal a child from the authorities from the start (refusing ante-natal care, freebirthing, failing to register the birth and so on) and that child eventually dies... they could bury them in the back garden and no one would know they were missing because no one knew they existed in the first place.

As for LAs overstepping, there are many who make demands which aren't within the law (demanding copies of work etc) and then threaten SAOs if you don't comply.

I genuinely don't understand why you would be so resistant to photocopying your child's work, even if it isn't required by law?

I would suggest, however, that even if they weren't free, if you can't afford a one off £40 for a DBS check then you have no hope of affording the textbooks, exam fees and other costs involved in home education.

This shows an ignorance of home education - we aren’t required to do exams, and we don’t have to use textbooks. Unschooling, child led autonomous learning are two similar philosophies that don’t tend to do written lessons. This is exactly the issue, people who don’t home ed think or expect home ed to be “school at home” when for many of us, that’s not how we want to do things. Both of those are perfectly valid educational philosophies btw.

I don't, however, think people should be able to opt out of health visitor services, seeing as they do perform a vital safeguarding function.

This is worrying - you essentially believe parents should have to prove their competence. I’ve never seen a HV for my younger children because I didn’t want to - why should I have to admit a stranger to my home, for the crime of daring to reproduce, a natural human function? It’s nanny state nonsense.

Thanks, yes it was really bad timing which obviously made it worse.

I get that, but I also think it’s gone a bit too far with parental authority almost being usurped by the system in some cases. Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty?

I was using it as shorthand for the costs involved generally in educating your child in a way that enables them to go off and achieve their ambitions in later life.

Brownies has sub fees, musical instrument lessons cost, even the local science centre charges admission (£12 / adult and £10 / child, I've just checked). Likewise materials for activities like craft and woodwork.

While there's no legal requirement for HE families to do exams, it is completely fucking irresponsible not to ensure that they sit 5 GCSEs including English and Maths. That will hamstring them for life, with everything from access to jobs to further and higher education restricted.

Unschooling - letting children learn only the things that interest them - is a recipe for children who don't like maths simply not learning maths, and having other major gaps in their knowledge too. I have no objection to letting a child choose if they want to study the Tudors or the Victorians, but some things are too important to be left to the child's own choices.

As for allowing health visitors in - it's not about you, it's about children - both yours, and the ones that are actually in danger. No one is suggesting that reproduction is a crime, only that this is one of the few ways we have to identify pre-school children with parents who really aren't coping. It's not possible to identify families where the children are being neglected without also seeing families where everything is a-ok. Sometimes in life, we have to do things we don't enjoy for the sake of others.

A former colleague of mine moved into mainstream education when she had children; she had previously worked in an educational unit attached to a major mental hospital, but this was incompatible with raising young children, as the unit never had conventional school holidays, only closing for the likes of Christmas Day. So, in this context, you can imagine that she was educating the highly exceptional cases. She was still in touch with the unit, and I went with her on a visit.
However, these extreme cases do exist. One of her little charges was discovered (I don't know how his existence eventually came to light; highly confidential) at the age of six. His very existence had been concealed up until then, and he was still in a baby cot at six years old. The staff were doing their very best to move him through many developmental stages.
On a less extreme level, children can "slip through the cracks" if the family moves about a lot, and "home education" can be a euphemism for "not actually being educated at all". If a school has a highly transient population, it can be difficult to follow up on a child who just stops turning up.
This is not to denigrate home schooling; I have a good friend who did a fine job with her son! But she was checked up on, and took no exception to it; they could see that he was thriving, and she had his best interests at heart.
The extremes I referenced are so far outside the experience of "normal" people that it is hard to imagine them, but sadly, the systems have to be in place because of them.

I get that, but I also think it’s gone a bit too far with parental authority almost being usurped by the system in some cases. Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty?

Innocent until proven guilty only works when there's an investigation and possible court case.

You, on the other hand, oppose anyone even looking to see if there's something wrong, let alone actively investigating.

There needs to be some sort of evidence to investigate. Or should we all present to the police once yearly to ensure we haven’t committed any crimes? Nothing to hide, right?

It comes down to your beliefs about civil liberties. I don’t believe I should have to sacrifice my right to privacy purely because I had a baby. My children are always out and about, they’re seen by multiple people. I shouldn’t be obliged to let a stranger into our home unless there’s evidence something is wrong.

and I went with her on a visit.
However, these extreme cases do exist. One of her little charges was discovered (I don't know how his existence eventually came to light; highly confidential) at the age of six. His very existence had been concealed up until then, and he was still in a baby cot at six years old. The staff were doing their very best to move him through many developmental stages

That is obviously an awful example of abuse. I can see why you think it's relevant to this discussion. However it's got nothing to do with home education. This child had been concealed and abused. No "home education check" would even have found him as there was no record of his existence. What "systems" do you think would have discovered the abuse earlier ?

I also question why your colleague let you come on this visit and why she shared confidential information with you.

There was a flag - your daughter missing an appointment - and you have literally objected to the GP asking why you didn't turn up, to the point of taking the question as a personal slight. I would have just apologised for missing the appointment, explained she was in hospital, privately muttered that systems should be a bit more joined up, and then moved on with my day.

Again, it's not your children people are worried about, and if no one looks no one will find evidence.

You're very focused on parental rights and privacy - what about the child's rights and safety?

Who’s children are they again - the states or mine? I shouldn’t have to justify why my own child doesn’t attend something. The NHS should be able to tell she was in hospital, rather than harassing the parents of a child who was critically ill.

So I ask again, should we all consent to a police investigation of ourselves annually? After all, if no one looks how will they find evidence of criminality?

The vast, vast majority of children are raised by parents who love them. I think it’s more of a threat to children that their parents autonomy is being eroded, potentially meaning more restrictive home education, or more SAOs meaning they’d be forced to attend failing schools that are already underfunded, overcrowded and frankly, awful places for anyone to be let alone children.

DBS checks won't be very helpful but I think they should have regular checks to ensure children are actually learning and for safeguarding reasons.
Also all children (both those home educated and those in school) should have yearly medical check ups, not only to spot signs of abuse and neglect but also to help spot medical issues early, before they get more serious.

It's worrying how many people seem to believe they have complete and total ownership over their children, as though the children are not people in their own right.

They are registered at birth, they see doctors, opticians etc.

Why do people keep banging on about GPs? How often would you expect a typical able-bodied teenager to attend GP check-ups? Plenty of children and teens rarely or never seen a GP, with or without abuse. Besides do you really expect an optician to pick up on signs of abuse, or that a child will have enough time alone with their optician to feel safe disclosing abuse?

There are very few cases of children being shut indoors and never leaving the home

No one has any idea how many cases exist since there are no records. Besides no one is claiming cases like that are commonplace (though they clearly exist) but that much more lower level abuse and neglect exists. It's not just families who actively decide to de-register as a deliberate front for abuse. It's also families who are generally a bit chaotic, who decide to de-register because they can't be bothered or don't want to deal with being hassled over school attendance, and the kid is left to fend for themselves. Maybe the kid gets slapped around a bit, maybe there's no physical abuse. Kids who aren't being locked up, or raped, or severely abused. But they're clearly being neglected and abused in other ways. Kids who hang around parks and shopping centres all day. Kids who receive no education. Those kids are invisible. Those kids don't count. Those kids never end up in court or the press.

www.home-education.org.uk/articles/article-safeguarding-myth.pdf

An unpublished, non-peer reviewed article written for a website called "Educational Heretics" that has no link to any kind of official body, was created by "a team of volunteers including a barrester [sic]", and looks like it was created using Geocities Page Builder circa 1995, is hardly a reliable source.

The vast, vast majority of children are raised by parents who love them.

Yet the vast, vast majority of children who are raped, murdered, beaten, abused, starved, are victimised by their parents.

Of course children are people. But they are not wards of the state.

GPs are merely one example of where home educated children are already registered.

Here we go - “chaotic” families. So basically, prejudice against people who don’t like the typical 9-5 standard societally deemed normal lifestyle. Those are some interesting scenarios you’ve made up, but you yourself admit there’s no evidence of these - if you believe we should have to prove that isn’t happening by checks, should everyone have to be checked annually by the police to ensure they aren’t committing any crimes? What about to ensure they’re feeding their children?

The study I linked you to contains multiple sources and references, including stats from the DfE, but sure complain about the way it looks.

So let’s treat everyone as a potential criminal because a small number of people are. What a sensible approach

So let’s treat everyone as a potential criminal because a small number of people are.

Otherwise know as safeguarding 101

So you have no issue with an increasingly authoritarian approach in the name of “safeguarding” in multiple areas? I despair. You lot get the society you deserve, it’s just unfortunate for the rest of us.

The study I linked you to contains multiple sources and references, including stats from the DfE, but sure complain about the way it looks.

It's not a "study" it's a webpage written by a pro-Home Education lobby (and apparently by a "barrester").

So basically, prejudice against people who don’t like the typical 9-5 standard societally deemed normal lifestyle.

Don't be ridiculous. You're really comparing children not being fed who are left to fend for themselves and receive zero education with people who just "don't do standard 9-5 lifestyles"?

Maybe you should talk to actual Survivors, since you clearly never have.

Those are some interesting scenarios you’ve made up

Not made up. Personal experience and people I know well.

but you yourself admit there’s no evidence of these
Don't put words in my mouth. There is evidence - just not proper statistics or data, since there's such much aggression from parts of the HE community against any form of monitoring or records or anything that would generate that data.

Hmm I wonder why some HEers are so desperate for there to be no record of how many HE children are abused.

“Everything I don’t like is biased”

You’re projecting hard because of your terrible experience. Which I’m very sorry for, but you don’t have a right to demand authoritarian regulations on the rest of us just because you are in a minority of people who suffered. This is like someone who lost their legs in a surfing accident demanding swimming in the sea being banned. Hyperbolic and ridiculous.

Minimum basic monitoring is not "treating everyone like a criminal."

All teachers need DBS checks, do you think all teachers are treated like criminals?

All doctors and medical staff need DBS checks, do you think all medical staff are treated like criminals?

All actors and crew on TV shows and films that have characters played by child actors need DBS checks (many actors and crew have DBS checks as standard because otherwise they'd only be able to be easily work on productions that solely had adult characters), do you think all TV stars are treated like criminals?

Those are career choices, not looking after your own child.

“Everything I don’t like is biased”

I'm sorry, are you seriously claiming that a pro-Home Education lobbyist group named "Education Heretics" are not biased even the tiniest bit towards home education?

No, I’m saying that the sources and statistics referenced aren’t biased