Letter from School Health Service - wwyd?

[noodle6]

I received a letter from the School Health Service. I'm not quite sure how to respond but clearly the LA had informed the Health Services (or the other way round?). Only my eldest DD is "known" so far - I withdrew her from school 2 years ago, and I now have another DD who turned 5 last Sept so I am guessing they are writing that because of my younger DD. This is so stupid because we have been using the GP services for any queries and health-related matters for the 2 years we have been home educating. We have had no need for any further meet-ups with health staff. Why would anything need to change now??

The letter, which is sent from a neighbouring Children's Centre which we never used, says :

"I am a Child Health Practitioner working within the Integrated Children's Team, working with children aged 0 - 19 years. I understand that your child/children is/are being homeschooled.

I would like to visit you and your child/ren at home on 09/07/12 at 14:00.

This will be an opportunity to discuss our service, offer any screenings and provide support with any health-related issues.

If this appointment is inconvenient I would be grateful if you could contact mee on the above telephone number so I can arrange a more suitable time.

Kind regards

Yours sincerely

XXXXXXX
Child Health Practitioner

(signed) XXXXXX - Assistant Practitioner"

How should I respond? I think I'd better respond in writing. I just need some ideas. Should I say "Thank you for your offer, but we have been using the GP's services for support in health-related issues and are very happy to continue as such. I do not see the need for any additional health-related services."?? Or is there a better way to put it?

Any suggestions or thoughts about this appreciated. TIA.

Chances are very few parents at all would ring noodle, as happens with a lot of things like this. I used to do research and we would take the same approach - send an appointment and ask the person to change it if it was inconvenient. Bear in mind this was research where the participants were very very keen and yet if we went the other way and asked them to make an appointment or even offered a choice of dates, we wasted a lot of time and money and made far far fewer visits. Offering an appointment and asking the recipient to change is the most effective and cost efficient way to do it as the uptake is far higher that way.

I presume the midwife visited you IShall?

I don't think that just because some parents are happy with it, the ones who are not have to endure it too
Because some people who are unhappy with the system may well have less than pure motives for disliking the "policing" you are so offended by, and it's this that the system is designed to highlight.

It's about safeguarding children, if yours don't need it, terrific, but others very probably do.
You don't have to like it.

twice I think, once at 4 days, once at 10 days to sign me off (had a CS). Optional weighing clinics which I didn't bother with, then nothing till the 2 year check.

The way Cailan sees this is totally different to the OP. And Me. Because Cailan comes from an abusive childhood. That colours her judgement. she sees the checks as good. Because I come from a loving environment, I see it as a bit intrusive.
And I question the view that all people work for the 'childs best interests'. Really? I have met many and heard of 100's more when that wasn't the case. Surely you are not so naieve to really beleive that?

Crikey some of you need to pick the knickers out of your arses.

A school nurse is RESPONSIBLE for the health and wellbeing of the children on her caseload, and that includes all school aged children in her catchment area whether at school or EOTAS.

In order to fulfil her professional responsibilities she would like to visit you to ensure that your children's health needs are being met. Whilst she probably has numerous qualifications I doubt she is psychic and won't actually know that someone's HE children are having their health needs met until she meets them and their parent(s).

The reason she would like to come to your home is for convenience I imagine; your children aren't in a school so she can't meet you there. She has nothing to do with your local GP surgery/health centre/hospital so can't meet you there. Most Child Health Teams are located centrally in admin buildings and may not have provision or facilities to meet you there. Appointments are often premade to avoid telephone tennis and as it says in the letter, if inconvenient please call to rearrange.

When I was a school nurse I didn't give a shiny shite if you home edded or not, I just wanted to ensure I gave all the children on my caseload equal access and opportunity to the health provision available.

I wouldn't be happy for the dietician to check the fridge IShall because that is a much much higher level of intrusion than currently exists. I will be very happy to have the reception teacher come to my house and visit when my DS starts school and I will be happy to go to teachers' evenings and chat the teacher throughout his school career. I will be happy for his behaviour to be observed and questions raised if anything seems amiss. Because that is for his benefit. His diet will be policed to a certain extent, in the sense that he won't be allowed certain things in his lunch. That is fine by me.

I don't think parents should be allowed to withdraw children from school and then never have contact with the systems that are in place to protect them because that will increase the number of children whose abusive situations are missed. And that is not a good result in my eyes.

I don't quite understand what you're saying here Oblomov - "I question the view that all people work for the 'childs best interests'. Really? I have met many and heard of 100's more when that wasn't the case. Surely you are not so naieve to really beleive that?" - can you clarify?

IShall if the midwife had had concerns about your home environment when she visited then she would have passed those concerns onto the HV. As it stood, she didn't have concerns and so the HV didn't visit. The system worked well for you, you were checked, no concerns raised, you were left alone till you presented for the 2 year check. Although, did you not have an 8-12 month check in your area?

I am just really shocked that people think parents should be allowed to take their children out of school and say "I'm HEing" and that the LA/NHS should say "Oh ok then, good luck" and never take any interest again. Even teachers who operate in a public environment with constant professional supervision are still inspected regularly by OFSTED to ensure they're doing the best by their children. Why should parents be allowed to do what they like, possibly to the massive detriment of their children? I have no doubt whatsoever that the vast majority of HEors are committed and excellent teachers and carers but that should never be assumed, surely?

I'm just wondering if the people who object to these sort of check believe that parents should have absolute domain over their children and never have outside checks? Because the thought of going back to that sort of situation - where abuses is pretty much accepted and ignored because it's a "private family problem" makes my blood run cold.

We don't have 12 mth or 2 year checks here. Did with ds1. By the time ds2 arrived, it was deemed not neccessary. Cost, I assume. If a parent is 'that concerned ' they can ring their HV or make an appt with their GP. Apparently.

Oblomov. I don't see Cailin's childhood being that relevant, actually.
Mine was far from abusive and I agree totally with everything she's said?
It's not rocket science, and you sounded quite dismissive there, just for the record.

noodle the hearing test done at the school uses special equipment (DD told me she had to put headphones on) but obviously is not the same as a full test done at the hospital.

The link that you posted upthread looks to me as if it is about hearing loss in older people, which is a different thing to the checks that they do for children I would imagine.

Due to the equipment I would hazard a guess that no they couldn't do it over the phone and no your GP couldn't do it.
However getting yourself referred for a "full check" at the hospital seems like overkill and a waste of precious NHS resources.

I don't understand why you won't contact them and say no thanks to a visit and I have everything covered apart from a hearing check, how can I get one of those done.

FWIW I know three women whose home life is difficult and they all get regular input from the HV. I haven't seen a HV since my DS was 8 months (10 months ago) as no concerns were raised. As far as I can see the system is working very well in this area - the women are getting great support that is helping their children, while I don't feel I need support and I'm being left to my own devices, with the knowledge that I can go and find support if I need it.

It's a screening test FGS

It's like demanding to see a consultant obstetrician to get your smear done.

Do they still carry out chiropdy checks in schools? We have a private centre in the local area and I've booked the dc in for a foot health check up, you see.

Sorry for tangent OP

DD is in recep and has had height / weight and hearing and eye test.

no feet or nits to my knowledge!

Oh yes, we take the dc for eye tests too, especially as my eldest had poor sight at quite an early age.

Is a hearing test needed? They all had the tests in infancy and no other problems detected since.

The reason that people are 9and should be0 aloowed t take their children out of school is because legally, the parent is responsible for the education of their DC. Most parents delegate that to schools (and then schools are supposed to be accountable to the parents), but some do not. Health screening, welfare checks, suitability of education checks are not compulsory legally.

I appreciate with your background, you may feel that it shouldn't be like that, but for a long time that is how it's been. Parent trumps state. Ideally we should also be living in a "everyone looks out for everyone else" way so that DCs are "kept an eye on" - back in the day your local GP knew everyone, and who was having difficulties, the vicar was involved and so on. I don't see that the demise of that should mean that the state can decide guilty till proven innocent.

They definitely need a hearing test Lyraedu, it's amazing how much a child can compensate for poor hearing that isn't obvious until it's tested. My friend's child was completely deaf in one ear but it wasn't picked up till he was at school.

add brackets where appropriate to my first line please, typing too quickly .

DD is also under care of clinic for her eyes, so they didn't actually test her at the school.

Like I said earlier,

with DD1 we never thought she had any hearing problems (was fine in test when a newborn) but she has had her assessment at school recently which came back "not able to hear the full range" and they retested her at school 2 weeks later (in case it was a cold or something interfering with her hearing) and that came back not quite right as well. And so we are waiting for an appt at the clinic at the hosp to have a proper look at her.

Just to say that hearing difficulties are not always obvious to the parents. We had no idea.

Where is the "guilty" thing coming from IShall? It's not about being "guilty" - it's about simply maintaining contact with the family to ensure the child is being treated well.

So do you think if a child is being kept at home and made to work rather than being educated, we should shrug our shoulders and say "Oh well parent trumps state"?

it's saying we don't trust you to do the right thing by yourself, we need to check you are actually doing it. And if a DC is working rather than being educated, then there are processes to deal with that, none of which are home visits for every home educator just in case they might be not educating.

Yes, we spotted dd's eyesight problems, and took her to the optician to have it checked out.
Thank you, I shall look into this further, re. the hearing test. I thought we had everything covered!