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?

Lots of people have dbs checks for a wide variety of things, I don't see the big deal. Unless someone has something to hide of course

But DBS checks show up ALL convictions. Not just those for violent or sexual crime.

Then the local LA should visit homes and raise concerns that way surely? What does a DBS achieve? You have to be caught for anything to crop up. It doesn't demonstrate if your child attends groups or socialises or show whether you the parent can teach.

Anyway all DBS checks show is that you haven't been caught yet. It's a stupid idea.

There was a panic after the Soham murders which fortunately was reined in again by the Coalition government (about the only thing they did right) but not enough.

If the authorities want to come and visit my children and do a welfare check that's fine by me. I don't know what a DBS will achieve. It just feels like a 'cover our arses' idea really. What are the 'acceptable' crimes and what aren't? Would the same parents be able to keep their kids if they send them to school? It's an odd idea.

I've thought about it for far longer and its not an infringement on any such thing. You're basically saying " I want the right to keep my child away from sources of support and assistance and I want never to be checked on or have anyone know if I have convictions that may be relevant".

How is it an infringement on your family life? It isn't

In my private life I like to dismember, boil and eat people. I'm very pleased the state appreciates they have no right to stop me. Because it's my private life.

A dbs check doesn’t monitor a child welfare though.

I think this is a fantastic idea tbh. My sister in law used to be a teacher and she said a large proportion of her class were being physically abused at home by family members. School was literally the only place they went to, and the teachers therefore were the only ones who could flag it with social services.
Take that away and leave them at home being homeschooled, these kids are in horrendous conditions 😓

Its odd how some are against dbs checks but wouldn't mind visits from the LA. I know which I'd find more intrusive, although a visit would have to be scheduled and so wouldn't really tell them much anyway, just as a dbs only does at the time it was requested.

Home schoolers are not abusive. Some abusive parents will home school their children to avoid scrutiny.

This is what Baroness whatnot is trying to reduce. I'm not sure a DBS check would achieve much however because your average abusive parent probably doesn't have a criminal conviction.

We need to find a way to keep these children safe though.

@orwellwasright - that's fine. As long as you send your children to school you'll have no time alone with them to put them at risk. Sorted!

It does seem strange and I’d like to hear in full what their ideas, plans and reasons are, are any past crimes acceptable? Surely social services are already aware of those families with history of sexual offences and terrorism? I live in one of the strictest LAs for checking on home educators, we are asked to show every year that we are providing a full, varied education with opportunities for socialising and that our children are progressing. I can certainly see the need to make sure no children are left vulnerable and uneducated but I also wonder about the potential for overreach and misuse of power (as I said though, my experience is with a council who already keep a very close eye on us, so perhaps I just am unaware of councils who don’t do anything with home educators?)

That would be great if children were able to advocate for, and look after, themselves. They can't, though, so the state has an obligation to maintain at least an oversight to try to ensure they're safe and cared for.

I can't believe anyone really thinks that people should just be allowed to produce offspring and then do as they please with them.

That’s how abuse goes unnoticed or ignored.

there is a place for outside agencies to work with families to provide a suitable level of monitoring but without being intrusive into family life. If a family engages regularly with medical services and home Ed groups then only minimal monitoring beyond that should be needed. If a family aren’t engaging with anyone then that may require more

Ok then get ALL parents DBS checked.

As a pp poster said presumably this means everyone should be DBS checked before they're allowed to have children, because there are 4 long years before children enter the school system, are you telling me an abusive parent waits until the child reaches school age before abusing their child, it's ridiculous.

Because you are asking people to submit to a check to do something in their own home with their own family. It's a level of surveillance that before now, didn't exist. And it has been achieved without any wider discussions and conversations about whether we want to live in a society that's okay with that.

The answer may well be yes but don't pretend this isn't new and doesn't encroach on family life.

Anyway, my dc go to school, so I'm not saying any such thing about myself and my own children - I know it astounds posters on MN that people can have a point of view that doesn't relate to their own vested interest, but here we are.

@Sirzy I agree. If a family aren't 'seen' then absolutely a reason for authorities to check in on the child. This seems a much more sensible approach.

Why? Children in school are safeguarded by other means. Children not in school can be kept away from anyone who might help them, if that's what the parents want. Of course not all homeschooling parents are motivated that way, but some are, more than the good ones would imagine. How do we protect those children if the state isn't allowed any access?

It's bonkers if it's the child's own parent...Maybe all new parents should be DBS checked?

Surely then will open door to parents needing a valid DBS to host playmates..!

I can totally see why the vast majority of people who are making a choice to homeschool might feel upset and frustrated with this. However, schools are often the ‘first line of defence’ for safeguarding so you have to ask yourself if it’s worth the inconvenience to yourself if you choose to homeschool in order to safeguard other children. If you think about it like that I would like to think that the people who choose to genuinely homeschool are the type of people who think carefully about children’s best interests and therefore would be able to see this as a necessary evil to keep other children safe and not as a personal attack against them.

A system to ensure that all children are 'seen' regularly to ensure their wellbeing? (Be it a regular home education group, another activity, doctors/dentisys/specialist medical service, or failing those a specific visit). Great idea.

A DBS check which just shows prior convictions and not what might actually be happening... dont quite get the point.

What about sahps of babies and toddlers, should they be made subject to dbs checks given they are not under the watchful eye of paid safeguarders?

DBS should be a non negotiable condition, no question and actually very obvious!!

I don't think the checks are about preventing abuse, more about identifying those who are at risk.

So yes, there's a possibility of harm on a playdate, but it's not on the same level as a child who's been removed from school and is in the care of their potential abuser 24/7, potentially never seeing anyone and with no possibility of anyone raising any concerns.

No system will be failsafe, but does that the we shouldn't try to protect our most vulnerable?