Probable fine for low attendance after genuine illness.

[Quietlife333]

So,
Cut a long story short youngest ds of three has managed to catch every bug going since September this year. This is not usual for him, he is otherwise well normally but has had tummy bug with the runs, serious throat bug with temperatures, vomiting bug and a really bad cold with tummy pain. His attendance was just above 90%
School reported us to welfare officer who said it’s fine I can see he has been genuinely ill. Also that attendance is going in the right direction now but next time you must provide evidence.
So DS was absent again for two days after picking up another bug at school very bad cold running nose bleary eyes tummy pain sneezing and coughing.
Our G.P will not provide evidence to be given to schools to account for children’s absence as policy.
I’m pretty sure we will be fined. But there is not a lot I can do other than send a sick child into school to avoid a fine. Which I’m not allowed to do by school policy.
Has anybody else been in this situation and how did it pan out? Frankly if they fine us I’m planning to recoup the costs by opting out of paying for any school trips. Until I cover the cost of the fine. I don’t think it’s fair to penalise parents for keeping genuinely sick kids home from school and while I don’t want to do this I don’t see anyway around it.

[Hollowvictory]

Glad it turned out as I said on page 1

[youarenotkiddingme]

Good for you not letting it lie.

"Error" I love how they still manage to make themselves look innocent when you know exactly what they were doing and so do they!

[Quietlife333]

No they replied to my letter to say they had recorded dc’s absence as unauthorised “in error” and has now amended it to sick after I sent them the legislation which clearly says schools must mark as sick children they know to be sick.

[Hollowvictory]

Op did you actually get fined?

[Quietlife333]

Milicentbystander72-
Sorry your daughter has been ill a lot hope she is feeling a bit better for the last part of term. It really is ridiculous when schools put parents to all this trouble and stress taking man hours and money from the school to do it. They have very tight budgets and the idea that the majority of children with low attendance is a safeguarding concern is just an expensive nonsense to me.
From what I have read schools should not ask for medical proof unnecessarily and that’s the thing. A bit of common sense approach to this would save a lot of time and money for schools and stress for children. The case you mention of the child with a heart condition just shows how disgraceful things are getting I would think that she is being discriminated against. Also from what the department for education say schools need to have reason to disbelieve before they ask for proof;

“Guidance for maintained schools, academies, independent schools and local authorities by the Department for Education states;”

“Code I: Illness (not medical or dental appointments)
Schools should advise parents to notify them on the first day the child is unable to attend due to illness. Schools should authorise absences due to illness unless they have genuine cause for concern about the veracity of an illness. If the authenticity of illness is in doubt, schools can request parents to provide medical evidence to support illness. Schools can record the absence as unauthorised if not satisfied of the authenticity of the illness but should advise parents of their intention. Schools are advised not to request medical evidence unnecessarily. Medical evidence can take the form of prescriptions, appointment cards, etc. rather than doctors’ notes.”
However-
“BMA supporting pupils with medical conditions at school;
Examinations and sickness certificates

It should be noted that GPs do not provide sick notes for school children. When children are absent from school owing to illness, schools may request a letter from a parent or guardian,”

So for a day or two at home you won’t get a letter anyway. Nor should you have to. What ever happened to medical privacy?

It seems like some schools have just decided that any absence is dodgy and parents are not be trusted and so must prove the opposite. That now seems to be policy. I have to say this has completely alienated us as parents from the school. This mass treatment of parents as if they are lying about illness is really bad policy if they want to keep parents and children on side.
Good luck in your new role.

[Milicentbystander72]

Well done for not taking this lying down OP.

I'm a newly appointed School Link Governor for dcs Secondary School. My link role is Attendance, Behaviour, Exclusions and Bullying. I'm only just settling into the role.

The irony is that my own dd (who had between 98-100% attendance up until this year) is currently on 92%. Like your DS she had had a catalogue of illnesses and health issues. The only way I've managed to justify it with the School Welfare Officer is because she has hospital appointments and I have paperwork for this. On top of the health issues she has caught every bug going. With a Strep B throat infection and Labyrinthitis last Autumn the GP told her to take the week off. Of course there's no 'evidence' for this.

Soon I will be challenging our school on how they gather their data on Attendance and whether they have a different/plan to have a different method of identifying and recording information on illness. It's tricky, but I think some schools need to think about it.

My best friend's teenager had a series heart condition where she needs regular hospital appts and suffers with low immunity and migraine. She still gets attendance warnings and isn't often allowed in certain school trips because of a blanket requirement of a certain level of attendance. It's just not good enough as school policy. It causes untold stress on both pupils and parents.

[Quietlife333]

Well school changed the mark to illness. After a second letter detailing the legislation and pointing out that they had agreed they knew he was genuinely ill. They did say dc had been marked unauthorised in error.

[youarenotkiddingme]

It was horrendous sauv. Total conspiracy and the reason i didn't challenge it all was because of the lies and bullying of me. Ultimately I wanted my ds in school, he wanted to be in school - and I had to focus on that.
The old school use to say things like "we really don't want ds to leave" yet sat in my house repeating "you need to name a school" when I said I was still wanting answers and written confirmation of my questions before I'd commit.
I wasn't even allowed to look at new schools as that's not how MM work.
Well no - maybe not. But then MM are for children who's behaviour is bad and a chance for a fresh start. Not for kids who've had a MH crisis after having a knife pulled on them in class to save face with the shithole academy and LA who've failed to follow their own policies - let alone the law!

[ASauvignonADay]

And hope he is getting on better now? Sounds incredibly stressful

[ASauvignonADay]

@youarenotkiddingme I probably wouldn't - I maybe would have at the time in principle, but it's unlikely to be ever looked at again, I'd probably want to shut the door on it IYKWIM. I am pretty sure they shouldn't have coded as educated off site (a B code?) if he was just sent work home - but I don't want to say for definite without checking!

[youarenotkiddingme]

Sauv is there much point in me challenging ds unauthorised day? This was back in 2016 and after I spoke to inclusion I got an email saying he'd be marked as 'educated off site' from the following day. Although I'm not sure that's correct as they just emailed work?!
He then started a new school in the sept on a managed move, tribunal ordered assessment for EHCP which the then issued and the managed move school accepted him after 12 weeks (extended trial which I think was a tactic from them as it went over tribunal date and of course they took a child with severe MH issues who they were told was fine and Mum makes it up!). He's been there since Sept 2016.

If it matters for ds future then I'm happy to challenge it but I'm not sure at this point it's worth it? Thanks for all your help btw. You are helping explain things well to is here.

[ASauvignonADay]

In our area a tier of social services has literally been removed and been handed to schools and other universal services to hold. We're trying to do that AND keep a school running and keep parents happy and keep ofsted happy and make sure kids get good grades (which poor attendance impacts). It's all pretty impossible.

[Quietlife333]

Yep I agree.

[ASauvignonADay]

That's because social services are in a crisis too! The whole system is a mess tbh

[Quietlife333]

“This isn't about whether attendance is or is t high enough. It's about the fact that parents making choices about their children isn't deemed acceptable and actually the HT has the final say about whether a child should be in school or not.”

I agree with this- I have heard about this in so many other situations. Schools seem to be morphing into social services but not in name. I would also say that perhaps this kind of thing is exactly why G.P’s make a point of not getting involved in school dispute as far as possible. The actual middle man of social services seems to be missing in action.

I would have to say if the head in my case is trying to be fair he is mistaken. Because he says he understands and agrees my child was genuinely ill. He can only ask for proof if he has reason to dispute that. He doesn’t have a reason and he stated he agrees the child was ill.

[ASauvignonADay]

Like I said before, I agree it's not a perfect system, but what is the answer?

Send your children to school. If they are too unwell to attend, you make a judgement. Accept that if they have a high level of absence, school needs to check the validity. Provide evidence where you have it (which you should anyway for dentist, orthodontist, hospital appts). Try your best to make appts out of school hours or at least don't take them out all day. If your child has an ongoing issue, surely you would seek medical advice? (Eg. Regular headaches, bad periods, catching more colds/bugs than you'd expect). Then you can share this info/evidence with the school. Then there is no issue.

[ASauvignonADay]

@Quietlife333 but that's open to interpretation anyway (the bit on whether there is doubt about whether it's genuine)

Re your post about GPs - the onus is still on their parent.

[ASauvignonADay]

@youarenotkiddingme
Point A - I understand the head's reasoning here, he is sticking to their policy, but he could have changed it to authorised. Hard to say as I wasn't in that meeting. Is it unfair to believe some parents on just their word but not others? Hence I think he is trying to be fair?
Point B - I agree with you. That absolutely should have been authorised and I'd challenge it.

[Quietlife333]

This is part of the post I found on what G.P’s are Contracted to do.

[Quietlife333]

Sauvignon- it seems though when you look at the legal wording that parents should only be asked for supporting medical proof when there is a genuine doubt over the veracity do the illness- basically if you think the child or parent is lying. Also I will try and attach the guidance for G.P.s. They are basically told not to provide. They aren’t contracted to do this.

[youarenotkiddingme]

Sauv agree there are some who don't. But what we are struggling to get our heads around is

A) why a HT unauthorised an absence when he accepts a kid is ill - just because he can and
B) in my case when evidence was provided that child was absent due to GP appointment they can still not authorise it because they don't believe the child has the problem the child took them to the GP for. Even though his notes back it up and a referral to another agency was made by the GP.

This isn't about whether attendance is or is t high enough. It's about the fact that parents making choices about their children isn't deemed acceptable and actually the HT has the final say about whether a child should be in school or not.

[ASauvignonADay]

Depends how you look at it and how you define "most". I just looked at some of our data and only 30% of parents had been contacted for a meeting regarding attendance (the point at which you'd start asking for supporting evidence). So in that sense, most parents are trusted to make those judgements.
Some there's been no need to have much contact again after an initial meeting as either attendance improved, or they provide evidence (not always - we're not expecting parents to drag children to the GP unnecessarily but if there are that many absences that it seems unusual, we do) so there's no challenge.
Some just do not engage and we do not feel a lot of the absence is genuine for various reasons. These are the cases that end up in court.

[DancingbytheRiver]

Ask the GP for a copy of the log of the visits of your DC in the las 12-18 monthsZ you are entitled to see what they have on record. That should be proof enough to the school?

[Quietlife333]

I really can’t spell this morning.

[Quietlife333]

I am a good parent.most people are. We know when our child is unwell enough with a virus or heavy cold. Temperature the runs or vomiting. We know if our child needs to see a doctor and we know the massively over crowded and underfunded local surgery does not need the likes of us calling for appointment cards and appointments for coughs because they are dealing with serious issues that actually need their attention. We are fully able to decide if our children should go to school and this is what really angers people. We are doing the right things and yet we are treated like the minority of bad parents who for whatever reason do not do the right thing. Protecting the minority with such a blunt instrument will always cause offfence.