OMG - The Government is to Interfere with Home Ed kids.

[interflora]

Have just received an email from a Home Ed group stating that the Government are going to try Muddling about home educated children, by assuming that all home educated kids fall into the categories of Missing Education due to:

• convicted child
• children have drug addict parents
• children are vulnerable etc.

OMG I hate to imagine what the outcome will be if they go ahead with these plans?

Would the law be changed forcing all children to attend school?
Or would all home educated children and parents be regularly checked by the authorities?

The latter I have no problem with but the former doesn't bear thinking about.

I cannot imagine that the government will get away with it, we shouldn't let them.

I may not agree with what people do, but I will fight for their right to do it, and I believe in it being ultimately a parent's right to choose how the raise their child, be that creationism, home educating, veganism, only wearing handmade organic clothes, keeping horses, and all the other things I consider a little mad but perfectly harmless.

They need to Back Off and stop trying to micromanage every aspect of our lives.

You consider keeping horses to be harmless??? Have you not read ANY Dick Francis novels?!

will you be able to give your kids a a chocolate biscuit at break ??? hmmm

these are important things!

I don't believe the government have any intention of removing the right to Home Educate - my understanding is that this move has been brought in to deal with those children who are being denied any education at all - and after working with kids in care for over ten years - believe me there are many.
Unfortunately it does seem like a sledgehammer to crack a nut.

I don't think they could change the law to make all children go to school without some very big changes to legislation. However, I think it will no longer be possible for HE families to stay "under the radar" as some currently do - if the children have never been registered in a state school then the LA may not have any information about them, but this effort to track down children who are known to exist but are not in school will higlight HE families in this category.

So far, I believe the legislation only allows them to be added to the list with the fact that they are HE, and there should not then be any further action, unless SS have pre-existing concerns of course.

Once the government have an accurate number of how many children are HE, I suspect there may be some moves to greater "checking" of what they are doing, and the law may be changed to give LAs more authority to seek "evidence" about the education which is being provided.

It is more than just finding children who have not been registered as home educated unfortunately.
From the 'Freedom for Children to Grow' website:

'The most glaring difference between the current guidance and the new proposals is that home educated children can be categorised as "vulnerable". A further possibility is that local authorities will take the guidance to mean that it is they who decide whether or not home education is "suitable"'

Given the attitude of many LA's this will be disastrous for many.
I urge all home educators to make a response of some sort.
It's okay for me, my youngest child was 16 last Friday, but I will be responding as I am passionate that my grandchildren have the chance to enjoy the freedom to be home educated, in the way my children have.

Much more background information, a walkthrough and ten minute response ideas can be found here:
EO's Freedom to Grow 'Walk through a response'

Message For JULIE julienoshoes

Julie, do you know what the law states with regard to flexi-schooling?

Given what the government propose to do now, I was wondering if it might be an idea to send the children to school say 2 days a week(os as little as possible? half an hour would suit us fine on just one day a week!!!)ha ha, so that they are actually on the school's register?

Sorry to ask you, but you have vast experience with home educating, an inspiration to us all.

thanks.

I hadn't read through the document (not actually relevant to me up here ) but I see what you mean about some of the changes.

Things like "6.35. In order to discharge their duties in relation to children not receiving an education, local authorities should make inquiries with parents about whether their home educated children are receiving a suitable education." are a definite change of emphasis.

They're clearly trying to increase their authority to "monitor" whether HE children are getting a suitable education.

Interestingly, up here in Scotland they already take that attitude - the guidelines up here say that they have the responsibility to act if the child is not getting a suitable education, and that the council should therefore gather information about the education provided in order to assure themselves that there isn't a problem. Which is a different emphasis from the current guidelines in England where they are only meant to look for information if they have reason to believe there is a problem.

I suspect the next step would be the other difference up here - you need to get consent from the council to withdraw a child from state school in order to home educate them, and in order to get consent you have to give them information about how you are going to provide the education and they have to be Ok with your plans.

It's just too damn depressing once again to go through what exactly is wrong with these guidelines! I sent my response in a couple of weeks ago and it is posted here

I very much like the email which is doing the rounds at the moment:

Begin forwarded message:

Children Missing Education consultation. ..

Does this seem overwhelming?
No time to read lengthy consultation papers?
Feeling despondent about outcomes for Home Educators if this
guidance
comes into force?

Then just say "No"

Whether or not the guidance goes through unchanged is largely down
to
statistics, so it's really, really important to have weight of
numbers
of responses that are opposed to the guidance.

If you don't have time to do anything else just click on www.dcsf.gov.uk/consultations/conRespond.cfm?consultationId=1569
and answer "No" to every question and leave the comments fields
blank.

Your response will carry just as much weight as a detailed,
thoughtful,
heart-felt response.

So please just say "No" today.

BWs
Louisa

*If you choose to write a short comment at the end here are some themes
you might want to choose from -

1. The guidance will override the EHE guidelines issued last year
2. The proposals will fundamentally alter the relationship between LAs and HEers from the respectful partnership recommended by the DCFS to one that is adversarial
3. Under these new proposals home educated children can be categorised as "vulnerable"
4. Local authorities will or may interpret the guidance to mean that they must decide whether or not home education is "suitable" either once or as an ongoing process

For me personally (the quoting has stopped now ) the key elements to complain about are

: the fact that the proposed changes are discriminatory (not just against Home Educators but also against gypsy/roma/traveller children, children of immigrants, children of muslim families where the State suspects they might be wanting their daughters to be forced into marriage... there's a whole list of children deemed to be at particular risk which wouldn't be out of place in a Daily Mail opinion piece)
: the fact that the proposed changes massively shift responsbility for making sure every child in the country is provided with a "suitable" education away from the parents (where the responsibility rests in current law) to the State. And that's fine, as long as they are ready for row upon row of people suing the LAs when schools failed to teach them to read and write, for example, or when they were bullied, or when schools otherwise failed in their duty of care.
: it contravenes European Human Rights legislation (summarised as: the right to private family life unless there's good reason for the State to think something awful is going on in the home - Home Educators will all lose that right bam)

and NB I don't think abusers should be able to hide behind "we're home educators". And nor can they as things stand. That's what the various pieces of welfare legislation already exist for. There's nothing stopping the state pursuing and prosecuting suspected child abusers as things stand, assuming they are able to use their existing legal powers properly.

It doesn't have to be just home educators who respond to the consultation. Others who think this is just a step too far in State Control can Just Say No as well!

Thank OWAU I was just coming back to post that!

I think if you don't have time for 10 mins to read through and respond, (and after all we are all busy home educating our children1) then please do 'just say no!'

interflora
I'll go look more at flexi schooling when i get home-dd2 is playing a live gig in Manchester tonight, so I have to up and dash off up there now (we are in Worcs) to watch and to bring her home tonight for a sailing course assessment tomorrow!

Each to their own, but we would personally never look at Flexi schooling-that would be the worst of both worlds for us and give the schools too much influence over the freedom to educate in the way we choose. Unless the children themselves had chosen it, then by definition it wouldn't be an autonomous home based education-which is what has worked so fantastically for us.
Living life, having fun and getting an education along the way-that's what I'll be responding to maintain the freedom to do.

Hi Julie no shoes, thanks for your reply,

Flexi-schooling is definitely not on our list of priorities either.

I was thinking maybe we could deter the authorities from interfering by flexi-schooling so at least they are registered at a school?

I wonder what happens to parents who home educate their children as part of their religion? Take the Duggar family for example, they, I believe, are 'Quiverfull Evangelical' or whatever its called, and that religion states that their - entire brood - of children will have to be educated at home.

If that swings the odds in their favour, maybe we should all follow suit!

I, perhaps naively, don't believe these guidelines are aimed at the overwhelming amount of families who are doing a good job.
I think they are aimed at the poor buggers who I work with who no one cares about.
Surely someone should be keeping an eye on them and what they are supposedly learning.

Problem is, Litchick, it doesn't actually matter so much who the guidance is aimed at - the question is, what powers does it confer to the State which the State did not have before, or what powers will unsympathetic State Officials interpret it as conferring to them? And those powers are large and a huge threat to our freedom to educate and raise our children according to our own values rather than the values of the State.

"Surely someone should be keeping an eye on them and what they are supposedly learning"

Yes, indeed. The legislation already exists to monitor and take action against families where there is reason to suppose an education suitable to the age, ability, aptitude and any special needs of the child is not taking place. This extends those powers and seems to put the power to decide what a suitable education is for any particular child into the hands of the State officials rather than the courts. And that's fine... as long as one's educational philosophy is consonant with whoever is the relevant official in one's LA this month.

Quote from someone on another list and forwarded with permission-explains what is happening better than I could.

'These revised statutory guidelines (note: statutory, so unlike the EHE guidelines last year, these are legally binding) have made major changes to the previous ones. Previously, it was "children missing education" and the guidelines explicitly said that did NOT include home educated children.

This version is about "children not receiving a suitable education" and INCLUDES home educators. It implies an assessment of suitability of the education, not about a child not being in any educational setting.

We don't understand who, and how, the
"suitability" of the education will be assessed, and it is pretty obvious
that those LAs who do not have a good attitude to home educators and do not
follow the EHE guidelines, will use THIS statutory guidance to prove once
and for all that they have a duty to assess how suitable our
educational provision is.'

You can read up on it on the Freedom for Children to Grow website

Very very lucid explanation of how the proposed guidance is a very bad thing from a civil liberties point of view is here

Juat a quick question- Do you think this government legislation could change the way we home-educate our children.

By this I mean I currently follow the autonomous/unschooling approach to home-ed.

I very much value my childrens personalities and individualities and I try to create an atmosphere where they are free to explore their own interests (some of you may know I have been struggling of late with this due to the joys of 1st trimester pg).

Anyway back to the point. I personally feel that it could be those people who educate their children in this manner that could face the wrath of the LEA.

My children dont read well yet but they will when they're ready. They live a pretty much unstructured lifestyle compared to school children. An dthis works well for them at the moment.

But if this new legislation comes into force could the very way we choose to home-ed our children be in danger.

Is anybody else worried that the LEA could look at your style of learning and suggest that you send your children to school because of it?

(Sorry it's not worded well, what is it with being pg and tired which means you find it hard to articulate a reasonable conversation?)

Im sure you get my point.

Yes Pinkdolly, that's a huge concern. Because unsympathetic LA staff (not saying all LA staff are unsympathetic at all, just some of them!) can easily take these guidelines as saying that it is THEIR responsibility to decide whether or not the education any particular family is providing for its children is "suitable" and, if not, things get ugly.

One difficulty is that people often come to these Elective Home Education LA posts from some sort of institutional educational experience, as teachers or similar, and so anything but the school-at-home model can be not only alien but immensely threatening to them.

Please send in your response, even if it is just to say NO NO NO NO NO NO NO all the way down the list of questions! The last I heard there were over 400 responses. I'm really hoping the home educators and other concerned groups (it's somewhat discriminatory against families of people in the armed forces who have to move around a lot - you may be surprised to learn that they also are particularly vulnerable in welfare terms... ) pull their fingers out and get the response rate saying "NO NO NO NO NO" up near 1000!

Response sent in

How do you find out how many people have resonded?

responded! obviously

Just got a confirmation email saying my response identifier is 475, can I take it that's the number of responses so far?

Thats the number of responses so far, that have gone in online.
If I understand it correctly, it doesn't include people who have responded by sending in an email or letter.

It is already the case in Bromley near London and where I live (up North).

To place my answer into context:
I wanted to home educate my children but in the end, my parents helped out financially to send my eldest to a private school.

My youngest is still at home with me and will follow his sister into private school when he is either 5 or 7.

The idea to home educate come from one of my ex-neighbours. She is an excellent mum of 4, really bright, musically gifted - she is my definition of a supermum. I really admired the way she had brought up her children, who were equally bright, articulate and well behaved and extemely sociable. However, because she chose to home educate with 4 children, those children were considered 'vulnerable'. She had already some suspicions, but they were confirmed when her health visitor come to carry out a "CAF" on her children - that is, a Common Assessment Framework questionaire to (and I quote) "to ensure the needs of these vulnerable children are met."

It is a long story which I cannot place all the details on here on the forum, but last year she left the UK. The following is a link which describe what I was about to go through, and why I gave up my dream to home educate my own children

66.102.9.104/search?q=cache:azuRPnAid2cJ:www.londonscb.gov.uk/files/resources/Bro mleyProtocolforsafeguardingchildreninHEfinal.doc+home+education+CAF&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=7