Mother guilty of starving daughter to death:(

[TheLeftFelanji]

How does this happen...and go unnoticed by the community?

www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article7040747.ece

It is a very easy thing to do for the good of all IMO. I accept that I am a minority of one. My friend's education inspector doesn't impose anything but will give advice but only if asked.

He is a lovely man and very supportive of HE, and yet he still gets abuse and people speaking to him through the letter box! They never bother to find out that he is on their side!

I dont understand the fuss, in that article it says she was visited by education social workers what needed to happen was for them to be seen by social workers and mental health specialists.

I have had the police enter my home to check the safety of my children with no paperwork, warrant etc. (had a thread at the time i dont want to revive tbh) because they had been told they were in danger

So they prob could have done something, but the SS dept werent in a good place at the time.

I feel really sorry for the deputy head who had tried and failed to look after her.

i can totally understand why HE parents would not wish to have to register. it wouldn't appeal to me to have someone check up on me.

however, if i HE my children and was asked to register i would, simply because i have nothing to hide and if it meant it made it harder for abusers/neglectors to continue then that is definitely a step worth taking.

these two were able to get away with so much more than they would if their children had been visited by an education officer.

i am not going to comment on whether he was to blame or not in this case - i know nothing about it. what does interest me is the little girls real father, i remember at the time of the childs death, and now that the case has gone to court he is quite vocal about how social services have let this happen/are to blame. undoubtedly ss have made mistakes here but what about the father himself? why had he not seen the child for 6 months? if he knew the school and others had concerns why did he do nothing? i dont think that ss are blameless in this but i do think the father needs to take a look at hiself on this too.

I just think it is a step worth taking too Booyhoo-only because it leaves no hiding place for the abuser. The school wasn't happy when she deregistered and I expect their concerns would have got through eventually, but sadly she didn't have the time on her side. If a child who deregistered could be seen early on it would be helped. It is such a small thing to do for those who are making a good job of it.

I agree Nancy that the father was at fault. Where was he? It was his job to protect them, not bleat about SS not being there.

The proposed changes wouldn't have saved her, though, pisces.

They may save someone else. Parents would know that they had to let someone in-not that they could tell them to go away through the letter box-and be allowed to do so!

nancy75 - I think the dad was abroad?

What would save a lot of children's lives is if we all had to have a license to be a parent. A full CRB check and have inspectors come round yearly - probably two or three times per year in the first two years as that's when most children are abused and killed by their parents. We ought to have to apply to be able to care for our own children at home and if we're not up to scratch (based on some arbitrary rules set out by an ignoramus and possibly enacted by someone who is totally ignorant of differing parenting styles), we should have our right to parent taken away from us, and our children taken into care...or maybe have a full time 'guard'...or something.

FFS! There is not one case when a child who has been abused and there has been a flimsy connection with home education, where the proposed guidelines would have made a difference.

Sorry but this idea that forcing everyone to accept random inspections by the authorities is the way to save children is utter bullshit, and a further step in a really bad direction - in the last 10 years the Government has been busy demolishing the fundamental principles of English law, that we are all innocent until proven guilty, and encouraging one moral panic after another (peedafils, foreign wierdos, terrorists, people who like porn, and now HE-ers) in order to persuade everyone that the State owns them, the State is always right, and anyone who resents being treated like a feral idiot who has to be controlled in every aspect of his/her life *must be a criminal.
Better training and more funding for over-stressed social services is a far more productive idea than giving already over-stressed and often badly-trained officials more and more powers that they are not competent to use.

Thank goodness! The voice of reason!

Piscesmoon keeps making me think I'm mad for resenting the idea that I need to be approved to give my children the education I feel is best for them!

"Better training and more funding for over-stressed social services is a far more productive idea than giving already over-stressed and often badly-trained officials more and more powers that they are not competent to use."

i totally agree with you on this, however if these people arent allowed access to see the children it will do no good at all to provide more funding and better training. perhaps it is a change in legislation regarding ss rather than HE that needs to happen.

It is for the sake of your children! I expect you are wonderful and doing a great job but why not sing it from the roof tops? It is unfortunate that hiding behind those who are doing a fantastic job are the abusers who can stay hidden. I would prefer to be open and leave no hiding place. I would only do it if it was best for my children so anyone could come and see.
CRB checks and the rest is scaremongering! My friend has one man, the same for the last 3 yrs. He has lunch, a pleasant chat and goes- and comes back next year. She has been HEing for the last 12yrs or so and had different people-all perfectly friendly. Now that they are older he has been able to give her information on FE courses etc, all very useful. She has an open house, the children are used to talking to people. She wouldn't give them the example of talking to a person through the letterbox!!It is rude if nothing else. People treat you the way you treat them-if you are hostile you are off to a bad start in the first place.
Anyway-as I said I am in the minority of one so will leave. My last word is why is it all deadly secret? As in I'm giving my DCs a wonderful education but I refuse to show you!!
The sad case isn't about HE anyway-it is just unfortunate that DCs can fall through the system. Anything that keeps everyone in view has to be for the common good IMO.

I think home educating is a red herring here. The poor child was neglected by a failing SS dept run by people who would struggle with the arse/elbow location research project. (Am sure there will have been some decent SWs desperately trying to do a good job in a shit department, mind you.)

There were concerns about this child, she was on SS radar, SS could and should have seen her.

Have seen posts from home educators on MN who make very reasonable points about their child having had a terrible experience of school and being reluctant to see any official connected with 'school' (EWO) or that their child has autism and strangers walking into their home are problematic.

A friend of mine has already made a complaint to the BBC about the totally fucking spurious attempts to link this poor child's death to the ongoing campaign to demonize HE. She wasn't being educated at home. She was being kept away from school by a madwoman.
IN this case, where concerns had been repeatedly raised by the school the social services should have used the powers they have to force an entry into the house. In the case of people who are simply keeping their family lives private but showing no signs of harm to their children, state intrusion is unnecessary and wrong.

When we first started to H.E in this area we deregistered ds2 from school and began .....within 8 days we were visited by the LEA officer who came and sat with us and spoke to ds2 and ourselves- a lovely lady very nice and very informative.

A little while later we were visited again by someone new .....dh enquired as to why wed had 2 visits in such a v short space of time....turns out 1st visitor was an LEA child welfare officer,shed come to check out we had no ulterior motives etc etc.

I cannot begin to understand how this little girl slipped through the net.

According to The Times, the local safeguarding board is trying to shift the blame, claiming it wishes neighbours had alerted SS. Yeah, right. SS knew about this family. Safeguarding board more concerned with saving their own skins - after all, it is responsible for a regime where 16 children known to SS were killed.

MrsWobble, I dont think you're going far enough. What would really help is if we had some Govt guidelines for what things our DCs should be eating, and maybe some menu plans, then we can be sure that all cildren who aren't in state approved nurseries/schools can be getting the same nutritional benefits, and none of them will slip through the net without eating cauliflower cheese every Thursday.

And health visitors can pop in and have a little chat with everyone to make sure it's all going OK, because that won't add to their workload, or cost the LA any more money, and if no-one has anything to hide, then why wouldn't you want your health visitor to have a quick peek into your fridge, and check your cupboards, because it might save on little child from not eating Govt approved menus. Just because you think you know best about feeding your child is irrelevant, because "everyone else welcomes the health visitor" and why shoudn't you be shouting from the rootops about how healthy your child's diet is?

nancy75 I had wondered the same thing. The natural father apparently had moved out and the step father was a friend of his. It is very unclear what contact and responsibility, if any, he had for those kids yet he is the first to condemn the authorities but seemingly less so the perpetrators.

Now MrsWobble come on, you know better than this:

"we should have our right to parent taken away from us"

Parents don't have any rights, only children have rights.

Everything must be done in their interest and that interest will be determined by the state.

Our children are lent to us on a licence that can be revoked at any time.

I am speaking from a point of almost total ignorance about home education here so am interested to hear from those who do HE.

I realise you are obviously happy that the way you chose to educate your children is the right way, you are giving them the best education you can etc. Presumably you have some sort of experience of teaching or have some help to know what to do?

However, how do you know all Home Educating parents are also experienced enough? Is there not a possibility that some parents really have no idea what they are doing, even if they think they do, and their children are in danger of getting such a poor education that they will never gain the qualifications they may need in life?

Sorry. I may be barking up the wrong tree but I am genuinally curious about the objection to interference from educational officers.

(by the way I was home educated myself for a short while when we lived in Nigeria and I seem to have done ok. My mother was a trained teacher though).

I cried when I saw this on the tv. My dd is a similar age, and I can't bear the thought of that little girl suffering so badly with noone to help her.

I wondered about the natural father too. When he was interviewed on the tv he said something like "Every time I visited I could see she was suffering more and more, but what could I do?" Surely there must have been SOMETHING he could have done- even resorting to snatching her and getting her help

education and safeguarding are two seperate things though - currently HEdders are being harassed becasue of alleged safeguarding issues (which have never been substantiated). Teaching your child/allowing them to discover the world/every variant inbetween is a parents duty, and it's only where there is an appearance of no education taking place, does the LA aquire a duty to get involved. In law, it's no-one's business how any parent chooses to educate their child, provided that the education is suitable for the age, ability and aptitude of the child. That's basically what the issue is, that the LAs/Govt/whoever don't like that fact that parents have that right, and they can't automatically get invovled/interfere. Just becasue you or i have nothing to hide, doesn't mean we should have to open our lives up for public scrutiny