Yet another government review of Home Education

[AMumInScotland]

government review

They're just going to keep on at this. We have 4 weeks to respond!

Not read through it yet myself properly, but according to another forum the questions are:

1. Do you think the current system for safeguarding children who are

educated at home is adequate? Please let us know why you think that.

1. Do you think that home educated children are able to achieve the

following five Every Child Matters outcomes? Please let us know why you think that.

1. Do you think that Government and local authorities have an obligation

to ensure that all children in this country are able to achieve the five outcomes? If you answered yes, how do you think Government should ensure this?. If you answered no, why do you think that?

1. Do you think there should be any changes made to the current system

for supporting home educating families? If you answered yes, what should they be? If you answered no, why do you think that?

1. Do you think there should be any changes made to the current system

for monitoring home educating families? If you answered yes, what should they be? If you answered no, why do you think that?

1. Some people have expressed concern that home education could be used

as a cover for child abuse, forced marriage, domestic servitude or other forms of child neglect. What do you think Government should do to ensure this does not happen?

Yes Lalalenny, the most important consideration is that I and my husband are able to raise our children as we choose.

Everything and everyone is most certainly and absolutely secondary to that.

That goes for determining the type of birth the child undergoes, feeding, vaccinations route, weaning and yes education.

There are already guidlelines in place for LA's to refer to.

If there are welfare issues (which you seem to be referring to) then the referral required needs to go to SS rather than the LA.

Am I in favour of the changes?
That's a mixed bag tbh.
I do definitely see a risk to some children where HE is used as a cover. I have come across cases myself and know they are not in a vacuum ( though they may be more prevelent in certain communities ). Sad though it is, some parents will seek to abuse their children and will claim to HE in order to exclude them from prying eyes. This is, as some have said, a welfare issue. However the current law does not adequately safeguard some children.
Many HEers do not agree with that I know. But all the child care lawyers I know accept it.
As for monitoring HEers to ensure an adequate education is being received - this is a completely seperate matter. The courts have confirmed time and again that it will not interfere in what parents teach their children nor will it expect proof of teaching as one could expect in a school. This reflects the fact that many HEers simply let learning take place. And take place it does.
How then does the LA distinguish between those children whose parents simply claim to HE and do bugger all?
Common sense and experience. A home with no books or a computor is not likely to be very conducive. A child who does no outside activities and meets no other HE children may start alrm bells ringing. However this reliant upon the lEA having access to HE kids which I know is a bugbear in itself.

Clearly you only intend to support each other in upholding your shared point of view and are unwilling to consider, or see as unfortunate but unavoidable, that this means some children will be failed.

Yes. I think that's it, AMIS, thanks.

Did your DS find it easy to get used to? I think he went to school before?

Litchick, your responses are very balanced but few on here want to engage with you. It is a very closed shop here. I am disappointed. I have not posted before but was moved to add something to this debate from my own experience. I feel that no one here really cares about a genuine problem that definately does go on and is only interested in maintaining their own right to do what they choose.

Children are failed in schools like this all of the time!

Litchick I actually do agree with almost all you have had to say on this matter.

It's a question of balancing the rights and freedoms of individuals against the 'potential' harm to a very small minority.

Thousands of people have died for the freedoms and rights that we enjoy today. We should not give them away so freely lest they died in vain.

HE does not suit all children just as school does not suit all children, but we must have the choice to raise our children as we see fit.
Plenty may not agree with the way we do things, that is their opinion, but we must still retain the right, in a democratic society, to do so.

I personally know of many HE parents who reserve the right to educate their children according to the literal interpretation of the Bible/Koran.
I personally don't agree with this, as an Atheist, but that does mean they don't have the right to do so.

LALALENNY - there is a frustrating refusal to listen to the other side of the debate from some quarters which does come across as fairly heartless.
Anyone who raises an example of a problem is swept aside as if that child didn't matter.
I'm alright Jack, springs to mind.
I may be wrong, but this actually stems from a defensiveness towards HE rather than any malice. HEers cherish their freedoms and vociferously defend them.
However, my main concern is that the refusal to engage with even the idea that there may be a problem will play right into the government's hands.
'Aha' the minister of education will say, 'these people won't even listen, how can they educate their kids? Let's impose a checklist and a curiculum on them.'

Schools do fail children. But what I have witnessed, I feel, is a form of child abuse, which while not done out of malice has been very damaging to the child involved and has been able to carry on out of sight because it is done in the name of HE.

Often the rights of people as a whole have to take precedence over the rights of individuals to make certain choices and this is one of those situations.

Litchick,I certainly feel that HEers are defensive! They will have to engage with the idea of reform or I think you are right and it will play into the government's hands. Even talking on here I wonder whether people are hiding something, which I'm sure they're not, but if this front is presented t policy makers I can't help feeling they will not be met warmly.

would you be in favour of compulsory vaccinations?

would you be in favour of enforced weaning at 4-6 months?

would you be in favour of enforced childcare to make mums return to work when the child is one year old?

NO! these are decisions that no one else but the childs parents are able to make.

Some parents are militant in their beliefs of how to raise their children, I fully accept that, but to force all others to dance to the same beat of the drum to ensure the safety of a a tiny few is simply crazy.

No one on this thread has said that abuse would not occur in a family who exercise their right to HE.

The 'I'm all right Jack' attitude is rather ironic when they are always at pains to point out how many children are failed by schools. It seems these children do matter but those failed by HE are welfare cases and don't require the same consideration.

No I would not be supportive of any of those things.
But I would be at least prepared to listen to what someone ahd to tell me on the issue.

Astarte you are getting hysterical. I made no such claims. There need to be checks and balances in place to ensure that HE children are not victims of abuse. These do not exist at present.

Lalalenny you have admitted to knowing of a child in your extended family, being educated in a way in which you feel is inadequate.
Enter the debate all you, like but until you educate a child yourself or represent them in some capacity, no, you don't have experience.

The rights of the few never, ever outweigh the freedoms of the many.....ever.

I'm leaving this thread, because rather than 'not engaging' or 'being defensive' (my home and children are freely open to the LA) I'm becoming frustrated at people talking out of their arses about a subject they know fuck all about!

Exceptions apply to that statement and I'm sure you know who you are.

I do feel that his education is inadequate and I feel strongly that all of on here would agree with me if I explained how he spends his time. Of course I do not need to educate my own child in order to know that it is wrong for a child (teenager) to have: little physical exercise, no interaction with peers in any context,extremely limited interactionwith other adults, no independance from mother in any way, ie 24/7 together for his entire life.

I don't expect anyone thinks this a good or even adequate upbringing.

This has nothing to do with whether he will pass 8 GCSEs or not, although he has very poor literacy skills (can't comment on numeracy) but simply that his life is being curtailed so much that it borders on abuse.

I think there are some cases that you can be judgemental about lalalenny. How long has he been in that situation?

I am about to go to bed without a reply. If it has been like that for a long time (longer than anyone could possibly call
'de schooling'). I think that he is the type of DC that needs checks.

I mean checks by the LEA. It seems a very unhealthy situation and he is not getting the education that he has a right to.

Lalalenny, As Piscesmoon asks, how long has he been like this? Has he been HE all his life?

You say that the LA have been notified of his situation. What did they do?
If you know that he is really unhappy why not encourage him to speak to someone?

And if you truly think he is in an abusive situation why not notify SS yourself?

The difficulty for me is that no system of laws or guidelines is ever 100% accurate. You always have the risk of some of the "guilty" getting away with it, and some of the "innocent" being punished. All of our legal system is based on a delicate balancing act which weighs up the probabilities of both of those things, and the amount of harm caused either to the individual or to society.

So, yes there is a potential under the current guidelines for a case like lalalenny describes (though I do think more could be done in this situation even under current laws). But to get the system to a point where it would be simply impossible for this to happen, you would swing the other way and a number of children who are not being failed by their HE would be caught by the regulations and forced to return to school. These would include children who had been so failed and traumatised by the school system that there would be a high risk of suicide.

It's not a question of being defensive of HE, or saying "I'm alright jack", but of deciding whether the current balance is the best possible in a very complex situation. Would changing the system to prevent some bad things from happening be an overall benefit to vulnerable children or an overall negative?

I think it would be a negative. I feel sympathy for the boy she describes, and anger that people get away with failing their children. But I would feel far more sympathy and anger if the system was altered in a way which cause even one child to commit suicide after being forced to return to school.

PS Bubble - I'm going to start up a new thread

lalalenny - so let me understand here - the LA have assessed the boys education and they feel it is adequate....SS have stated that because the LEA are happy then they have no cause for concern either.....

So basically the only person who is unhappy is you...and alledgedly the 14 year old who you cannot talk to about how he really feels because his mum is always with him and you "can't get him alone"...

I fully intend to not leave my children alone when they are 14 either - its not old enough!

Perhaps you are over analysing the situation - the professionals and the so called "experts" are content with the situation so why can't you leave it alone? Sounds to me like you are judging someone else by your own standards...there is too much of that already in this society. Just because I do not approve of how many of my friends and relatives raise their children does not give me carte blanche to tell tales to the LEA or SS or nag them til they come round to my way of doing things.

Litchick - I totally agree with you about the school thing and if I could afford to send my children to the type of school you send yours too I wouldn't be HEing - until we have more choice of state education and more options for our children then people have to accept that HE will continue to grow in popularity and HErs will continue to resist any interference in their childraising choices.

To address some of your points:

I am not the only one who is concerned and I have personally contacted SS. Everyone who knows this child is concerned.

It is perhaps difficult for you to understand just how narrow his life has been. To say, for example, that he could access his own learning, means nothing in a home with few resources. His mother is a strong presence who does not want to be apart from him and speaks for him. He has never had a chance to express his feelings, or even to develop the language necessary.

He has not had the option to make friends or not. This cannot really be said to be a choice to be alone.

While there is of course another side, and his mother would defend her actions, she has the delusion that her son has made choices to be alone, or not to read, or to hate creative activities, or sport, or finds maths boring. Yes, I have heard all these claims from her. In reality the opportunities have not been there. He does not have SN.

I am not suggesting that he should be compelled to attend school. But there needs to be a way that the LA can ensure a reasonable education, of whatever kind, is being provided. That cannot be said to be the case here. This is why I am so in favour of a review of the current guidelines to give LAs more power to do this. If parents really are unable to provide an adequate education then school would have to be an option but surely a lot could be done before that.

I am obviously talking from my own point of view but given the details as set out here do any of you honestly feel this is a good or acceptable example of HE? Is it really usual for HE children to do almost nothing except watch TV and go shopping? I am certain it is not.

lalalenny you said,
"This is why I am so in favour of a review of the current guidelines to give LAs more power to do this. If parents really are unable to provide an adequate education then school would have to be an option but surely a lot could be done before that."

Once again, (going around in circles here), LEA's already have enough powers to intervene if they believe an education is not taking place!
You say the LEA have seen the boy and are satisfied. From what you are saying of this boys situation he isnt receiving an education and it is the LEA failing in their duty to him and not using the powers they already have! Increasing their powers isnt going to make them do their jobs any better it will just widen the scope for them to "get it wrong" with even more families!

What other powers would you want them to have that you think might help this boy?

Yesterday you said
"Clearly you only intend to support each other in upholding your shared point of view and are unwilling to consider, or see as unfortunate but unavoidable, that this means some children will be failed."

It seems to me that you are the one who is unwilling to consider the children who will be failed here....
Have you considered how many more innocent children will be "failed" if LEA's are given power to interfere in the lives of every child who is HE? Many LEA's are unsympathetic to HE and already abuse their rights because they simply do not know The Law. Others because they cant envisage an "education" unless it is sat behind a school desk.
Of course we will support each other here. ...it's an HE FORUM

(Waves to Astarte!!)