I really don't give a stuff about whether anyone else HE's but I don't understand why its not OK to point out some of the disadvantages without being accused of "demonizing" people's choices.
I'm perfectly aware of the limitations of school and I can quite see that school is horrible for some children who would be better prepared for life if they were HE'd. But there's a big assumption that home educators all provide all these marvellous opportunities and they don't, my experience of He'ers is that the majority have been very good with one outstandingly awful example that I have no doubt wrecked the education of the child in question and still has an impact on her as a young adult.
Most people in the school system are very aware of poor teachers or poor schools there are endless threads about it. I never see a thread discussing the limitations of HE (maybe I'm not looking) because no-one ever seems to accept there are any.
Sport is a good example - we live in London so access to lots of stuff but under 11 its mostly football, rugby, gymnastics and tennis (there may be more girly stuff but not relevant to me so I haven't looked). I have looked for cycling as DS loves it and struggled, he'd like to play basketball but no luck there either. Hockey only at teenage years and up. At school he's just learnt to play hockey - they also play basketball, school also run an "international sports" club though don't ask me what that entails! Now I don't particularly want him to sign up to a term of hockey but its nice for him (and the rest of his class) to get a taster of it - learn the rules properly, have enough people for a team, and play for a few weeks before they move on to a different sport/activity.
As I am not anti-HE I really object to not being able to discuss the pros and cons of it without being accused of being superior. Basically Catkitson you think we should only be allowed to say "HE is just fine, it has no limitations, only school does"