to think home ed families are going to have to accept more oversight?

[DrZaraCarmichael]

To try to prevent more cases like Sara Sharif. Taken out of school - where teachers were raising concerns - and then apparently fell off the radar.

Yes children's services have to look long and hard at themselves but taking a child out of school, especially when there has been previous SS involvement, has to raise a whole field of red flags surely??

I can see how families who are home educating for the right reasons and who have nothing to hide will see this as intrusive and unnecessary. But something has to change, right?

Sara would have been on home ed register already though! Every child that's removed from school is notified to LA. In Surrey, the process involves 2 different teams (elective home team AND vulnerable children team) plus in this case should clearly involve SS.
If you can tell me a single child's name that was subject of serious case review, who was home ed and not already known to services, I will agree with you.
Just one is sufficient.

I will end with this poem.

I'm home educating but I'm also DBS checked for work I do.

The overriding point is very few children are actually invisible. So safeguarding can happen anywhere. But safeguarding referrals will.only be effective in a society where SS is adequately funded.

Ie the fire service

Anyone can report a fire or suspicion of fire. But if we don't have an adequately funded fire service, enough fire engines and fire personnel
Then the fire will burn unattended

Actually as an idea. Why don't we get parents to have DBS check every 6 months? Database is already there.
Also imperfect as not everything shows on it. Every new person to prove that they have nothing on record before allowed back home with baby.
People would be up in arms about it.

Sounds fair to me. Nothing to hide, nothing to fear.

(Yes, I am DBS checked. Well was recently for a job...)

Fine with that too. Would cover under 5s. Husband is Police Officer so DBS checked.
Would have picked up Sara early on.

Husband is Police Officer so DBS checked.

So was Wayne Couzens.

So? Teachers/Dr/nurses are DBS checked. That's the 'accepted protection' that they aren't abusers, isn't it?

We trust that process, don't we?

Is it just me that finds comparing with suggesting oversight for home ed families (again, as pretty much every other country in Europe does) with rounding up Jews in the Holocaust grossly offensive?

Nothing to do with Holocaust at all!
It is more of a poem about oversight by Government / over reach of Govt power.
Can be translated as..
First came for home ed and you didn't care.
Then came for step-parents and you didn't care.
Then came for you and there was no one to care.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_...

The point is when Hitler first target the Jews it was minor registration and the premise of why wouldn't you register. Nothing to hide nothing the fear.
Not suggesting that things will escalate to how the Jewish were treated by Hitler.
But removal of rights starts minor (using fear and misinformation to get the majority inside for the removal of rights of a minority) and has the potential to escalate.

Additionally, Hitler also made home ed illegal. His reasons were not positive.

Naturally, if your minority group were being blamed for something that wasn't linked to the group and instead due to the failure of the government services you may not be happy to roll over and accept blame and restriction to your rights either

Accotding to that argument any kind if government oversight at all is a slippery slope. Shall we just drop DBS checks etc altogether?
Again, why do other countries have oversight of the HE process?

Child safeguarding practice review: siblings from Family H available in the NSPCC library
https://library.nspcc.org.uk/HeritageScripts/Hapi.dll/retrieve2?SetID=80FED4C4-9373-4745-9172-5E44C1A7A410&searchterm=Home%20education&Fields=%40&Media=%23&Bool=AND&SearchPrecision=20&SortOrder=Y1&Offset=64&Direction=%2E&Dispfmt=F&Dispfmt_b=B27&Dispfmt_f=F13&DataSetName=LIVEDATA

It is a slippery slope. This is govt targeting families which quite often have been badly failed by LA. I don't think that oversight is a bad thing if applied to everyone equally and covering everyone (it doesn't cover HE, under 5, possibly traveller children, children living here only for part year etc). Are kids of middle class children with mum 'wine habit' at 4.30pm (while cooking, to relax) putting kids at risk? Certainly. Are families with a step parent putting their children at risk? Looks like it. Will they get targeted next?
I have nothing to hide, we are registered already, with more contact and paperwork I'd like, but I do it. Equally, I can see some children who has been failed and who are terrified of any 'authority figure'.

Its more than a hassle if a HE visit triggers an already traumatised child into a suicidal state. We were in that position; I saw what one visit from a school teacher did to my son and couldn't risk any more intrusion like that. Also, my responsibility is to my son, to safeguard him from those implicit in his abusive schooling. The only people we could trust at the time were medics and even then they were lousy in understanding how damaging school can be to ND children.

@AwardGiselePelicotTheNobelPeacePrize
the process in most countries abroad focuses on education quality HE families can provide, not on safeguarding.
For example, country I'm from originally.
You apply to home ed via school, For ages 7-11 yo you need to have A level equivalent. For older you need degree level or a guarantor.
Children come in/videocall for exam twice a year (or submit a portfolio, so aren't physically seen, depends which school). This is to check they are educated to school level.
Nothing to do with safeguarding.

Thank you. Will read it

Germany or Sweden don't permit home education, yet their child abuse cases per 100k children are higher.
Lowest rates seen in Italy, Spain, Portugal, Slovakia - all traditional value countries. UK is also very low in rankings.
So how come countries with no permitted home education have higher rates of children deaths? Why were they not protected?

Thank you for explaining better that I did. I lived under communism, my great grandad was shot by germans in 1945, for fun.
People who haven't been under those kind of circumstances for example don't understand how difficult is to live normal life under the guise of 'you are weird, you must abuse kids' every time you go to Dr. Or your neighbours notifying SS because they don't like you/don't agree with home education.

All it means is that there is nothing on record. What about all the teachers that have abused - like that vile head teacher in Wales? What about people working in children's homes that have abused children, or the many clergy men? Police men who have raped and imprisoned (there have been at least 2 cases I know of in the last yer in terms of prosecutions). My grandad had no criminal record, didn't sop him abusing me. He had no record when he dies, as I was too ashamed and scared to report. Too afraid I would not be believed against an adult's word.

It's by no means a fail safe system, in the many, many cases where abusers have been able to cover their tracks.

Indeed. But we as a society trust that anyone covered by DBS check is safe.
It doesn't stop someone slipping through net, but gives us a false sense of comfort, doesn't it? My child is at Cubs, they are safe, bc of DBS.
It will be same way with EHE register. They are on govt database, they are safe now!

I think so. It's just the lowest level of 'security' i.e. they have never been caught doing something against the law. But even if you think how many men the police and safeguarding agencies estimate access images of child abuse every week, just makes your blood run cold.

I am very wary of any situation where my child might be alone with a potential abuser, being in a car, going on trips away. DS has SEND so is doubly vulnerable. I always remind him that he can tell us anything, no matter what someone might say, and to outline body autonomy.

I am DBS checked myself as I work with children and young people. I have nothing to hide but I am sure plenty of other do.

Such a lot of recent cases where toddlers have been involved. Sadly, it seemed few SW were persistent enough to get to see them before it was too late even if concerns were there about parental behaviour.

I wouldn't say I was against DBS checks on parents (HE or not), however I think it would often be ineffective. And in Sara's case, there was an inch think pile on notes on abuse. Comes down to money and resources to enable effective safeguarding. The lack of alternatives for children (being in care in not always a very safe place either and often poor outcomes for children). And the choices of some judges, which should be rigorously looked into to help inform current/future choices.

Have SEN kid myself.
I was just suggesting DBS for every parent as an alternative. I don't think it will bring down rates of abuse down, but might make those in favour of register happy.
Ultimately, some abuse will always be there, whatever system you have.
It also depends what is classed as it. In Scotland smack on bum is illegal. In UK it's legal as long as it doesn't leave a mark. Other countries won't cover it at all. Most of countries don't have system of 'phone SS for any concern'.
We were randomly referred to SS once bc 'father works shifts and other child didn't settle at nursery (not true I pulled him as soon as I walked in on day 1 and saw something that made me very uncomfortable).

Something wrong with the link. Sorry.
Wiffin, Jane and Unnamed safeguarding children partnership (2021) Child safeguarding practice review: siblings from Family H. [S.l.]: NSPCC on behalf of an unnamed safeguarding children partnership.
Easiest thing appears to be to get onto their case review page and search for reports by Jane Wiffin.
https://learning.nspcc.org.uk/services/library-information-service

should we make people wear badges to identify their situation
Tom, 38, 2children, catholic, smoker, 5 units a week.

Nothing to hide nothing to fear right ?

DBS are are requirement for certain work or volunteering roles. Last time I checked society doesn't DBS parents before they take children home (maybe they should - but what happens if someone doesn't pass the DBS die to a misdemeanor years ago? What happens to these children then? Or maybe we should be forced contraception until we get approval to reproduce?

Or maybe we just put for social services to be adequately financed so that they can do their job properly and not leave children like Sara in a known high risk situation?

Thank you, had a quick read.
As I understand, siblings were EHE by their mum, all was well. Then she dies and estranged dad took over. He worked as a teacher.
Kids still attended clubs regularly and nothing strange was spotted, although they thought he might need support. Kids were seen by GP.
Then HA got involved with fraud, he was cleared but fraud officer followed internal procedures, checked with relatives and EHE, who said they were unregistered. Referral was debated but ultimately decided to wait until annual EHE check in a few months times. Then EHE said provision was fine and case was closed. Review was due in 15 months.
Hope I got the bits right.

They were known to services by my calculation for about a year or more. They were identified but again, no one pressed the trigger. If after HO raised alarm, and thought kids were at harm, why didn't they place a SS referral?