very important thing you can do to protect your family

[ommmward]

write to your MP and ask them to sign Early Day Motion 1785

Mr Ed Balls wants to give LA officials the power to enter private homes without any reason to think anything is amiss and to force children to submit to an interview on their own with LA staff. These are powers that even the police and social services don't have!!!!

He wants to do it because he is concerned that not having your child in an institutional setting (that's school now, but he could easily extend these plans to those who don't use nurseries or child minders) might be a cover for abuse. His planned legislation is a sledgehammer to crack a nut- he doesn't have evidence that HE is being used as a cover for abuse and it will cost a great deal of our tax money to have LA staff coming to do welfare checks - but he hasn't even done an impact assessment!

So please write to your MP, tell them the planned EHE legislation is disproportionate, uncosted, and has no evidentiary basis, and please would they sign the EDM 1785 or, failing that, 1784 (less good wording IMO)

If you don't HE you probably think this has nothing to do with you. But those with children not in child care are next in line for such heavy-handed state intrusion. We will support you when that time comes. Will you take 5 minures writing an email to support us HEers now?

What should I report them to social services for, ommmward? I haven't seen any abuse taking place or I would give social services a ring. I worry that the children look unhappy and that the older one doesn't treat his brother well- perhaps reflecting how he is treated himself. If I see them out and about and there is something concrete to report I will report it. They keep their kids very close though and, apart from family, who is about to notice if there is something wrong? No one. Perhaps a visit will be the start of something better for them. Or indicate that there is no reason to worry and they are clearly thriving. Who knows? Not me.

I don't think anyone is suggesting that Home Educators are guilty until proven innocent either. The Education Otherwise spokeswoman was on the Today programme talking about this and pronounced herself all in favour. She was great actually. Really measured and balanced in her views.

You obviously feel strongly about this ommmward, but I somehow doubt that ' armies of state approved busybodies' are about to materialise. This government doesn't exactly do joined-up thinking / action as far as I've noticed and there simply wouldn't be the personnel available to do this to any great extent. Let's face it, visits from Health Visitors are a rare event these days so I can't see them finding all the resources and bureaucracy needed for such a large task.

Trouble is, there just might be some children being abused right now under the cover of being home educated and I don't know and you don't know.I really don't think you're being singled out because you say you don't conform to societal norms. We all have to accept some state intervention in our lives.

I'm still not sure how muslims don't conform to societal norms.That's a bit sweeping.

Scrummy,
that EO spokeswoman is a good friend of mine and I know for sure she didn't say anything like that.

sorry, Scummy.

I have emailed my local councillors, as I feel strongly about this from the point of view that I feel we are coming closer and closer to our children being in daycare also from a very young age, and definately can see the stepping stone path that is forming. All the way along this path are the messages, 'parent's are not doing a good enough job educating and caring for their dcs', 'we officials know what is best for your dcs', 'if your child is not confirming to our institutionalised curriculums and tick boxes you are at fault', and so on. I don't like these underlying messages that we are being given.

I also object to early formailsed learning, I know that is going off the path slightly, but if your beliefs as a HE'er are not to teach formal learning to a set curriculum, will you then be deemed as a bad parent/educator? What will happen then? The idea someone could walk into your home with such power and ask your children questions alone is quite worrying in terms of what the consequences may be to innocent parents and children.

I do not currently home educate, but I would consider it for DS is we came to that stage, which we may do in the future due to his specific situation.

A child being well cared for will be on the radar anyway, they will have a GP +/or HV, will be part of a community, have neighbours and so on. It is the children not on the radar that need finding and supporting, not children being educated at home who are healthy and happy.

I also don't see how being in LA school means you are picked up on as a child in need do they have psychics in the playground? I'm sure there are just as many children school educated who are suffering at home, I know I was as a child.

Yet another reason to vote Conservative.

Exactly SammyK,

I feel especially bad for single parents who are now expected to go back to work and hand their dc over to child minders when the youngest turns 7 (I think).

It's really getting ridiculous and I agree with everything you've just said.

Campion,

You say "we all have to accept some state intervention in our lives". For arguments' sake, would you stand by that statement if, for example, the BNP were in power?

You can listen to it here, kayteee. I think both Fiona Nicholson of EO and Peter Traves of Staffordshire Children's Services are very reasonable and sensible. Fiona specifically ends by saying that this measure doesn't have to be a disaster and can be handled sensitively. She is clear that CHILDREN, not parents or local authorities ranged against each other, are the important people in the mix here. I think she is right.

I think both sides should work together to find a suitable solution.

ok, Scummy,
This was recorded, if you notice at the end, before the Graham Badman report had come out.

She was not aware, at the time of this interview, of the proposals that have come to light since.

Since the report EO has not condoned any of the recommendations that this man (who incidently knows nothing about HE, along with all the so-called experts on his panel).

The only thing I agree with you about is that she is very sensible and reasoned. Opinions have changed however as this issue has not, at the end of the day, been handled with any sensitivity whatsoever.

Pisces,

The LA and SS already have the powers to intervene and they've messed it up big time.

Why not just provide better training/funding for the existing system?

I spoke to a LA "inspector" the other day who was aghast at these recommendations. She admitted that she did not feel experienced enough to deal with potential abuse cases and would not appreciate having that added to her workload.

Exactly Kayteee-the whole thing is ill conceived-it needs to go back to 'the drawing board' and have a lot more discussion. Taking up opposing positions isn't going to get anywhere.

oh my word Pisces,

Agreement between us yet again

I think we have actually agreed more than disagreed Kayteee! I was a bit surprised to find you agreeing with me last week.

As a point of accuracy, the suggestion is that the child could be interviewed either alone, or with another trusted adult. The point is that there should be the opportunity in certain circumstances to talk to the child without the person who is providing/facilitating the education being present, not that the child should be interviewed alone.

Not saying that this is a good or a bad thing, just getting the facts straight.

Oh hello seeker,

brought your wooden spoon with you again?

would love to stay and chat but bed beckons

I'm not sure I see the relevance of your question, Kayteee.The BNP are not in power (and are most unlikely to be so) but, since we live in a democracy, we take that risk. My dislike of the government of the day doesn't entitle me to flout the rules I don't like and, if I do, I have to accept that there may be repercussions.

Fair enough, let's just hope no party gets in that tries to stamp on anything you hold dear then.

They already have

gah..you beat me to it there

Why is it 'stirring" to want factual accuracy?

I think that HE should just be be a normal educational choice. I have never understood why it has to be shrouded in secrecy. I always thought that they were all visited by the LEA, until I started reading thses threads. It doesn't crop up much in RL conversations, but when it has everyone is very surprised to find that the LEA has no right to check the quality of education.
It will come in the end, IMO, so it makes sense for the HE community to get involved from the start to make sure that it is done in a way that suits them.

Just a hought on the HE thing. MY sister does HE with her DS. He is 15 and she is not doing it well.

I would not object to hildren who are HE beng taken for regular assessment and an inspector coming to the home to help set up a good HE physical environment, check the chld has the right learnng resources etc. Just like a school.

And if people write to their MPs saying that they object to Ed Balls wanting "to force children to submit to an interview on their own with LA staff.", the MP will just write back saying "Thank you for your letter. I am happy to be able to reassure you that there is no such provision in the proposed legislation". And there you are back to square one. You are giving them a let-out by not quoting the proposals accurately and they will be able to discount all such letters. There will then be a statement saying something like "A number of concerns were raised by HE parents and other interested parties, but these were largely based in insufficient understanding of the proposals and we were able to offer reassurance and clarification where necessary."

I know these things - I used to write garbage like that for a living.