Educational Welfare Officer on my doorstep FFS!

[PrimroseHall]

I am fucking furious

She didn't even use the entry system downstairs to announce herself, just came right up to my front door and knocked on the glass.

She introduced herself by name, which I recognised from the meeting with the Head on Friday. I said that I hadn't received her letter notifying me that she would be coming and she said that she was just here to deliver a pack. I said thank you and held out my hand to take it and she took a step towards my door as if to come in. I told her that I wasn't in the habit of letting strangers into my home without prior arrangement (thank you for that advice Kaytee ) and she stood there awkwardly before telling me that she would discuss it right here on the doorstep if she had to

She then went into lots of detail about what I HAD to do to satisfy the LA that I was providing a full time education for my son. Apparantly I'll be having 'Tom' visit me every 6 weeks to 6 months to check that I am providing an education that is deemed appropriate by education laws, including a full curriculum and some kind of regular group activity for DS with other children of his age.

When she had finished I told her that like any sensible person, I had made myself fully aware of my legal duties as a HE parent and that I didn't have to do any of the things she had told me. I suggested to her that I could fulfil my legal duty to provide information on DS's education in many ways, not limited to letting 'Tom' have access to my child. I told her that this included writing a report, meeting without my child in a public place, meeting without my child at my home or meeting with my child in my home or a public place.

She interrupted me to tell me that Tom didn't work for the LA (so what?) and that he would only want to visit to check that we were providing a full curriculum. She gave the example that DS might be doing everything except reading and so in that case Tom would ask DS how many books he'd read in the period of time since his last visit and details about them to make sure he wasn't fibbing . I sarcastically suggested that Tom would be better off visiting DS's old primary school and checking on the students there because for some odd reason my son had managed to get to the middle of year 2 without being able to read. I also reminded her that the education I provide has to be suitable to my child's age, ability and aptitude and it is not the duty of the LA to assess him.

There was loads more but I can't remember it all. At the end of her visit I asked her why she had sprung her visit on us rather than requesting a visit by telephone or letter. She just gave me excuses about her schedule not allowing definite appts. at first but slipped up after that, when I told her that it was a rather antagonistic way of approaching a first meeting with a parent that they should want to establish a good relationship with. She said (in confidential tones) that some parents just don't want their children to be known to the LA (how extraordinary!) and some mums find it easier to have their children off school and don't provide any education at all so they can do domestic tasks or work. I told her that I thought it was just as feasible for a parent to send their child to school and still expect them to do unreasonable domestic tasks or work, and that I thought it was quite an odd assumption to make of all people that choose to HE as the vast majority do so because they are passionate about education.

Well that's my rant out of the way. I'm considering writing a letter to this woman's boss complaining. Well not complaining really, more pointing out that I was offended that I was being treated as if I was under suspicion for taking my child out of school. The really stupid thing is that I was far more prepared to accept home visits before todays event. Now I don't want anything more than absolutely necessary to do with the LA as I see todays visit as underhanded and bullyish.

omg are they checking just cause you HE? that's mad.

Sounds like you handled it very well.

In my experience of EWOs 95% of their work is dealing with families and children who are not in school due to negative reasons eg avoidance, truanting, neglect and similar. Very few visits are to parents appropriately HEing.

Until she meets you she has no way of knowing which category you fall into. You could have just given her the benefit of the doubt, she's probably just doing her job.

Thanks both of you.

SEA I would have welcomed her in if she'd have made an appt.. It's turning up with the expectation of comong into my home and telling me lies about the law that I seriously object to.

I thought I handled it pretty well too, until I glanced in the mirror after she'd left and noticed a disgusting blob of mango chutney on my shirt left over from lunch . I kind of went to pieces after that...

Why couldn't she have made an appt. then Sidge?

Bloody Hell Primrose!
Well done for standing your ground there. I am furious! I would have NO further verbal "dealings" with anyone from now on, unless it is writing. Phone/email me if you want to chat further. I know people who will be able to support you with this.
This is outrageous treatment and I would also definitely complain in writing.
God, I need a fag now

Maybe she could have done, but then maybe most of the parents she works with would have buggered off out or not answered the door! Maybe she wanted an element of surprise?

I don't know, I'm just trying to see it from another perspective.

I understand that your feathers were ruffled (mind would have been too) but I suspect it is A Good Thing generally for LAs to check that children who are being withdrawn from school are being properly looked after.

Obviously the vast majority of HE parents are very committed, while children who attend school can be mistreated too. But still, worth checking parents who withdraw children are doing it for the right reasons.

Remember that case of the foster carer who abused a whole group of kids until they were adults? She'd taken them out of school and apparently no-one had ever checked that they were OK.

Their perspective is that they want to bully people into having visits/inspections which they are not legally entitled to demand.
I refuse visits because we are fairly autonomous. Strange, so-called experts sitting in my living room, testing and assessing our life-style choice does not appeal to me (or the kids).
These LAs are acting ultra vires and I hate the way they are jumping on new HomeEdders lately.

Plenty of officials had access to those kids and ignored their complaints Edam. It was a welfare issue, not an educational one.

I understand what both you and Sidge are saying and I do recognise that it's a good thing that no child is lost.

It's the approach that pisses me off...and the lies about my legal duties.

Kayteee, thank you. I gave up smoking on Monday and I could murder one now.

Edam, that's not quite true. They were known to SS but had not been believed

I am totally for kids being cared for and would be ok if SS turned up on my doorstep but NOT to let LA check up on how we choose to educate. Different thing altogether imo.

I like my freedom (such that is left of it these days) and I don't believe the state is responsible for my kids...I am.

Sorry that sounds like you mentioning a cigarette has made me want one. I meant that I too wanted a cigarette to calm me down.

Oh God, sorry Primrose!
If you can manage not to have one after that experience you're a better man than I am

Well done Primrose. I'm not surprised you're furious to have someone turn up unannounced expecting to be let into your house, specially when they then tell untruths about what you are required to do to keep them happy. Good thing you know your rights!

Sidge - Primrose has been to meetings with the school to let them know about the reasons for her decision. Unless they have not passed that on to the LEA, there is no reason for the LEA to think there is a problem. It's completely different from someone not sending their child to school without any explanation.

Go Primrose, Go Primrose!!!!

It sounds like you did brilliantly. And set a very good example of how to stand up to a bully

And yes, in the Eunice Spry case, the family were well known to both LA officials and SS. It wasn't that they needed more checking up on, it's that the powers-that-be needed to be slightly less abjectly crap at their jobs, using their existing legal powers.

In my Dad's borough they always check without appointment because they have been criticised for not doing so. And it seems to cover all children who are deregistered for whatever reason. I bet it can be intrusive though but there are reasons behind it. The most worrying example that came to light was of a young teenage girl sent abroad to be married but also they have found children acting as f/t carers or even working.

You sound as though you had the situation well in hand though

lol@ ommmward!

Primrose Hall? Bet it felt like Primrose HELL for that gormless twit of a woman!

Don't know the story but well done on not being pushed about by 'authority'!

Way to go Primrose!
I'm proud of you!

You had completed all that was legally required of you (and more!)
You had written your deregistration letter and you had a meeting with the Head.
She had no reason to suppose you were not going to provide an education!
The EWO was not doing her job-she was acting Ultra Vires-beyond the law and yes you should definitely be writing to complain about this.

I wouldn't blame you at all if you were to choose to have only written contact with your LA after this, it is enough to make any law abiding parent feel shaken up!

Aah, thanks you lot. It's good to have this board to come on and rant and in return get support.

I do understand why some posters think it's a good thing that each and every child is accounted for, and having sadly witnessed a child living in an abusive, neglectful home I'm actually all for it.

It's being put under automatic suspicion that I object to, especially when the authorities are acting outside of the law and outside their duties.

I should have given some background in my OP, but thought it was horrendously long as it were . My DS is on the autistic spectrum and has had extreme emotional reactions to having to attend school and partake in a full curriculum with no exceptions made for him. It was this that formed the main part of our decision to educate him at home. The Head is fully aware of the problems and did nothing to help, ditto his teacher. We removed him after careful consideration and I have responded to all communication decently and respectfully. I also resisted the urge to speak plainly about how the school had failed DS at my recent meeting with the Head, because I have no wish to cause trouble or seek apologies. I just want to be allowed to get on with caring for my child and want to be trusted (bearing in mind the school have seen DS and me almost daily since he was 3 and haven't felt it necessary to report us to SS or anything) to make the right decisions with his welfare and education in mind.

Well done, Primrose! I'm sorry you were so unlucky over this, but it sounds like you did really, really well.
I'd complain! They CANNOT act outside of the law, no matter how anyone tries to justify it. You can't act outside of a law just because you have your own agenda to fulfill. Some of these people forget that and need to be reminded. Way to go! You don't have to provide a "full curriculum" anyway.
Grrr!

Hurrah for you Primrose, you are inspiring me!

How on earth could you list all the books read between visits thats really weird

Out of interest what was in the 'pack' she gave you?

Thanks musicposy. Being told I had to provide a FULL curriculum got my back up because it's just stupid. Why does he need to specifically learn about history right now for example? I've no objection to talking about history with DS, but it's such a pain in the arse to have to document something that has occurred naturally, which is how I want DS to learn from now on. I know she was talking rubbish anyway.

Hi Yurtgirl. The 'pack' consists of a covering letter, a guidelines and procudures pamphlet and a questionnaire. When the Head told me I'd be receiving it on Friday I thought it might have something nice or useful in it...it doesn't

I'm going to need help with how I respond to this letter. According to the letter, I 'must' respond by 19 March, and 'on receipt of the completed form, an advisor from the Education Department will make arrangements to visit your home address'. Obviously I have no say in this , oh except that this appears to be contradicted in the guidelines pamphlet where it states 'Alternatively you may wish to provide the LA with a detailed written report about subjects studied, content and progress of your child and samples of work as an alternative to having a visit'. Neither of these statements accurately reflect the law, do they?

The whole thing is incredibly negative and I'm sure is designed to be daunting to read. In one part they state that when the case has been allocated to an 'Education Other Than at School Advisor' (the next step after me completing the questionnaire) it may be appropriate for them to hold discussions with Social Services. In another it states that they might share my information with the police in order to assist in preventing and detecting crime .

The questionnaire asks the obvious questions to establish who DS is and how to contact us, and then goes on to asking questions which I would need a lot longer than 2 weeks to answer:

------
Outline the way you intend to approach the child's education

Curriculum proposed. Subject area, content, resources, parents or tutor

Methods to be used - teachig and learning strategies planned, how the work is to be recorded and whether arrangements are to be made for external examinations, if appropriate

Patterns of work - timetable/diary

Visits - Arrangements made to give the child experience of interest outside of the home to include the local/wider environment

Social Contacts/Physical Activity - arrangements to be made for play, games, clubs, societies or groups

Agency contact - either statutory or voluntary

Any other information.
----

There is also a list of questions that I should be prepared to answer on the proposed visit (which won't be going ahead).

The impression they have given me is of an organisation who exist to bully people back into the system, and I don't want anything more to do with them than is legally necessary.

I feel more pissed off now than I did earlier.

Hi PrimroseHall
Which LA do you come under?

email me here and we can talk off forum and I'll try to help with this.

well done Primrose for not being bullied. I don't agree with other posters - I don't think HEing should be treated as guilty till proven innocent for neglect, so it's completely discourteous for them to doorstep you.