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.

Genuine question noodle - why don't you want them to come to your house?

As far as I can work out from this thread, the only check possibly being offered is a hearing test. DS had a hearing problem picked up in his test at school, so he was referred to a children's health clinic where another nurse carried out the same hearing test but in more clinical conditions.

It would seem sensible that if a child has not had the school hearing test, then rather than a health professional use up time and money trooping around to your house for one hearing test, which may require a return visit anyway, it would be more sensible just to go to a clinic, which your GP could advise you on.

If somebody is going to go around to the houses of home educated children to see if they are being abused, then I don't see why that should be a school nurse if the child's medical needs are being met by the GP etc. While school nurses, like teachers, TAs and out of school club workers can watch out for signs of abuse, it isn't their primary role. So if they are not there carrying out their primary role, checking for abuse isn't in itself a reason to turn up.

Perhaps somebody whose job is primarily about child protection should turn up, but it seems unjustifiable to me that only home educated children have a home visit for child protection reasons when they are at no greater risk than any other child.

CailinDana It's unfortunate that you were abused as a child. I can see why you feel that every child needs to be checked up on. However from your attitude you are already assuming that all HEors should be automatically checked up upon with home visits, simply because they HE, because the HE could be a possible cover-up for abuse, but you don't have the facts to back it up - I did ask for specific instances of cases where kids have been officially registered or known as "HE" but were the subjects of abuse. You have not provided any instances of that.

You don't seem to trust the healthcare network nor the general public to report any instances of abuse. You seem to think nobody can be trusted. That says a lot about the reason why you insist on regular home visits with every HE family.

Is it worth the extra expenditure though? There are far more schooled children than there are HE children, and there are far more abused children who are in state schools than HE kids. I personally would rather the extra expenditure go into employing more teachers and better-trained staff at schools to spot signs of abuse and help mitigate problems as they occur in school. If that happened with my DD1 then I may not have had to HE in the first place.

And by the way CailinDana, with your line of reasoning, then supposedly nobody should be trusted. Not even the healthcare staff or the teachers. Why should they? Just because they have CRBs and qualifications in place?

Your home is your children's educaton environment, why can't the homeschool school nurse visit you there? Have you had this visit before? Do you know exactly what services are being offered? Sorry, but as others have intimated on here, it does sound like you have something to hide or are being defensive about this.

I would just have the meeting, tell them what you have told us all here - you don't want their services and be done....

I think some sort of advice/monitoring easy to access should be available to all parents whether via schools or specialist HE teams. What is on offer should be the same throughout the country though, as can be seen from and HV thread on here what is on offer from them differs so much throughout the country and from what has been said here its the same for HE families.

op - arranging to meet at the surgery instead sounds a good option to allow you to discuss things with them and find out exactly what their purpose is. I can understand not wanting them in the house, I hate the few HV visits we have had here because it makes you automatically feel judged.

CailinDana It's unfortunate that you were abused as a child

I get the point you are trying to make, but I've got to say that is a pretty awful way to put it. Comes across as dismissive and condescending (which I am sure was not your intention).

When we home educated, the home was only part of the DCs education environment, and I knew some families who spent very little time at home. Following that reasoning, perhaps the health checks could be carried out at the library, or in the park, or up a mountain?

I' surprised that so many of you get hearing checks via the school nurse. My kids have had a weight check twice (I could have withdrawn them, but they are skinny kids). My daughter had her HPV, my son had a tetanus booster. Otherwise the school medical service has done nothing for my kids.

That is why this letter sounds very intrusive to me. And the fact that having a child with certain behaviours which mean I know that one thing the professionals are looking at when they meet with me is what we as a family are like.

I would be mildly irritated if somebody was coming to my house to 'tell' me about services. Why can't they just tell the OP in the letter what the services are and then if she requires them the nurse can come around. It just sounds like the initial visit will be a waste of time.

I find it annoying that school nurses take over at 5 anyway. I have wanted to talk to a health visitor about a 13 year old, and of course I can't. The school nurse isn't interested if it isn't about school, in my experience. It would be far more sensible for both home education and kids in school if health visitors went on until 16 and ran an after school clinic between 3.30 and 5 pm.

CailinDana wrote:
I am actually incredulous at some of the attitudes on this thread. What if the parent rarely takes the child to the GP? And doesn't inflict enough damage to warrant a hospital visit? Should the child continue to suffer so that parents like you can preserve your privacy?

who's going to report the abuse if no one checks up on the child?

Not knowing your situation, I am wary of upsetting you. It is reported that almost no children report abuse while they are of compulsory school age. Many abused children (even severely abused children) do not have their abuse recognised at school. In fact, school often compounds the abuse (for example, by punishing a starving child who steals food from other children).

In the Eunice Spry case (where the children had been removed from school), the abusive parent sought out unnecessary medical care after a car accident and still the abuse did not come to light until a teenager escaped for the third time and managed to tell someone who would listen (on the previous occasions, she was simply returned to the home by the police).

Home-educated children are mostly not hidden or isolated. It is a waste of resources to make the "haystack" bigger by insisting that all home-educating parents need to be checked up on. In this country, there has to be reason to suspect an offence is being committed for social services or the police to investigate. If there is no reason for suspicion, people cannot routinely choose to check out homes (whether for stolen goods, abused children or starving animals).

ByTheWay1 It is just that there have been many cases where the LA/NHS/SW got themselves involved after they've had home visits where they made some unfair judgments on why the HE parent is not fit to HE. If the home is tidy that can be a problem, if the home is too messy it can be a problem. Their opinions can be so subjective. In fact, I shouldn't have to be made to go through with home visits. The law surrounding HEing clearly states the LA has no right to make any home visits for meetups, they can arrange a suitably neutral place of the parent's choice, or it can be done by the parent submitting a report and Education Philosophy. You don't even need to look at HE boards for this. Even on the normal chat boards, people have said they had gotten into trouble with SWs who thought their home was too messy, etc.

I would ask all posters to stop referring to my past as a way of dismissing me as I think that is extremely nasty.

I think children should have contact beyond their parents because it is a fact that the vast majority of abuse is carried out within families and the idea that a child could be withdrawn from the public life of the school and never be checked on again scares me because it is the perfect situation for abuse to be carried out. Of course the vast majority of HEors are conscientious and hardworking and would never abuse their children, but it's the few that do that need to be identified and home visits facilitate that. Why anyone would be against children being protected from abuse is totally and utterly beyond me to be honest.

Also, if you're going to insist on home checks for HE children, then what about schooled children during the holidays? Sadly a DC can starve to death in 6 weeks . Maybe we should have a system for checking up on all children in the first couple of weeks of August?

I apologise in advance if what I said to CailinDana has upsetted anyone. But is there really a better way of saying it? I'm sorry if I'm not eloquent enough.. All I wanted to put across is that I do not - as many don't either - share that same view as hers that no one should be trusted to report on instances of child abuse. Life is not perfect and there will always be someone that falls through the net with whichever system is in place. But I do understand where she was coming from in her insistence on home visits for every HE child. I just don't agree with it because I don't see it that way.

Teachers see DC every day in term time, They are more likely to spot a change in behaviour which may indicate problems. A single visit by an LA official once a year for say 20 minutes isn't going to do that. The two situations aren't comparable.

Noodle I can't see why there would seem defensive to write to them if that's what you prefer. I would probably phone or email them to let them know you had received the letter and wanted to rearrange/cancel the appt.

"I don't mind meeting up at a neutral place for assessments. I just don't like the idea of them possibly insisting on coming to my home just because I am HEing"

They want to come to your home because that is the child(ren)'s place of education. If they were in a school the school nurse would visit them at school.

Is this recently mummytime?

I am surprised that there are areas where hearing checks are not done after newborn. The service here is very stretched - we don't get a lot of the checks / services that others on MN get so I am surprised if our area is giving more than is required for anything TBH.

SDeuchars - it's not up to the child to report the abuse, it's up to the teacher to notice behaviours that indicate abuse, something that training has focused on a lot in the last few years. Some children come to school obviously starving, not washed, displaying sexualised behaviour etc and those things are picked up by teachers and reported. If a child is HE then that opportunity for problems to be noticed doesn't arise.

Noodle - no, no one is trusted. Teachers and healthcare professionals aren't allowed to be alone with a child, with good reason, regardless of CRB checks. A parent on the other hand could spend all day every day alone with a child, and do whatever they like, with no supervision and no outlet for the child to seek help.

I shall, there is always a possibility that teachers miss changes because they happen so gradually. No system is perfect.

I'm sorry if I offended, I thought I said I would feel like they were questioning my competence, if I received one. My dd hasn't accessed any health services through the school and to be honest I didn't know there were any. So I apologise for my ignorance and wouldn't want to offend anyone.

I would find it a bit annoying - fine to offer this service but they seem to have already made an appointment which you now have to go to the bother of opting out of. If they're not even going to do any health checks during this appointment, it seems quite pointless, and would feel intrusive to me.

And like the health visitor situation, a lot of parents would feel uncomfortable or worried about refusing the 'offer' in case it led to them being viewed with suspicion - it does not seem right to me that good parents are being put in that position.

I get the point about safeguarding children from abuse, but that has to be balanced against the intrusion into families' private homes and lives, especially when there has been no reason to think the children are at particular risk.

IShall, you said "Teachers see DC every day in term time, They are more likely to spot a change in behaviour which may indicate problems. A single visit by an LA official once a year for say 20 minutes isn't going to do that. The two situations aren't comparable" and I agree with you.

However, you accept yourself that the teacher plays a role in spotting abuse. If the child has no teacher outside the home, who's going to spot abuse? Surely one 20 minute visit is better than nothing at all?

Sidge Fair enough. Would they be okay if I go to their place or school wherever it is their office is at, to have the checks done? I presume it's far more trouble for them to lug their equipment around to my home than it is to keep it there and I go to them?