Is it discriminatory to issue penalty notices for term time absence to both parents?

[minisale]

Our LEA has a policy of issuing a fine to each parent for each child if you take them out of school for 5 consecutive days. So a two parent family will receive four penalty notices of £50 each while a single parent family will receive just two for the same act. The impact of taking the two children out of school is exactly the same. Is this discriminating against two parent families and therefore is it illegal for the County Council to implement this policy? Ideas, knowledge, experiences and views gratefully received.

My friend happens to be a Welsh traveller and she told me these changes don't apply to her. Why?
Why aren't we all treated the same?

Respecting their culture. ?
Or setting them up to fail. Some councils have special traveller education units

Shouldn't it be one rule for all? I can see a lot of noses being put out by this.

Only yours ! I think prejudice against minority groups has a habit of ending badly.

My nose wouldn't be put out, it doesn't bother me.
Nobody should have special treatment at all. That's all i am saying.

One rule for all, so it's fair for all.
My mate is a traveller but she has never been on the road, she spent all of her life in a house. It makes no sense at all.

OldLadyKnowsNothing - The relevant legislation allows the NRP to be fined. However it would be hard to make a penalty notice stick if the NRP has no involvement with the child.

xylem8 - De-registering for two weeks for a holiday is rather different to home educating for 6 months. If the school decided to issue a penalty notice when you re-registered I suspect the LA and the courts would view your proposed course of action as a transparent attempt to get round the law. The school would therefore be allowed to act as if your child had remained registered at the school throughout.

Needtostopbuyingcrap - The changes apply in England so they don't apply to her if she is in Wales. If she is in England she is mistaken, although this appears to be a common belief amongst travellers. The only special provision for travellers is that a child who has no fixed abode because the parents trade or business requires them to travel from place to place can be registered at more than one school. It is therefore harder to track unauthorised absence for such pupils but not impossible. If all the schools involved agree that an absence is unauthorised a penalty notice can be issued. If your Welsh traveller friend does not actually travel she is subject to the same regulations as everyone else.

Such a cynical thing to try to do! Just pick a time to go on holiday that isn't in term time!

PRH47bridge- do you actually know anything about how the law works?

"Each person with parental responsibility for a child is committing an offence if they don't ensure they go to school."

It's my understanding that the legal requirement is to ensure your child is receiving an education, not that he or she attends school.

Tanith - Whilst it is a legal requirement to ensure your child is receiving an education that is by no means the only legal requirement. Under Section 444 of the Education Act 1996 the parent is guilty of an offence if a child of compulsory school age who is a registered pupil at a school fails to attend regularly. That is the offence for which a penalty notice is issued.

xylem8 - Yes I know quite a lot about how the law works. If the courts allowed you to get away with your proposed course of action it would mean parents could take their children out of school for as many holidays of whatever length they wanted by de-registering their child for the duration. That would defeat the purpose of the legislation. I therefore believe it is very likely the courts would take the view that de-registering a child to take a holiday and then immediately re-registering is not a genuine de-registration and should be ignored for the purposes of Section 444. The legal backing for this would be supplied by the fact that in order to de-register your child without sending them to another school you have to provide written notification that your child is receiving education otherwise than at school (Education (Pupil Registration) (England) Regulations 2006). If you gave such notification it would clearly be false as your intention is to take a holiday, not educate your child, so your child should not have been de-registered. If you did not give such notification the school should not de-register your child.

Prh47bridge: thank you for clarifying.

And thanks from me too.

why not simply holiday in the allowed dates?

like everyone else?

That is ridiculous. The fine should be per child not per parent!

Why?

Both parents are responsible for ensuring their child attends school. Both parents commit an offence if the child fails to attend regularly. You wouldn't expect the fine to be split between you if you both went shoplifting. Why should it be split between you if you both fail to ensure that your child attends school?

But what if it genuinely IS 2 weeks of education?

Then what?

I just believe it is. it might be 2 parents but its one family. you cant dissect a family as and when it suits you. if 2 people share a joint bank account and it goes overdrawn they will not get charged seperate overdraft fees. They will be charged once for each misdemeanour. there are many other examples. someone has just spotted an opportunity to squeeze more money out of families and whats more they can make themselves beyond reproach by taking the higher moral ground. my kids school dont fine and I have never taken them out for holidays anyway however I do get cheesed off with people milking every penny out of a situation just because they can!

StarlightMcKenzie - It is up to the head teacher whether or not to authorise the absence. If the head agrees it is two weeks of education they may be willing to authorise it, in which case no-one will be fined.

cloudskitchen - Going overdrawn with your bank is not an offence. The situation is governed by your contract with the bank. Unlike failing to ensure your child's attendance at school you cannot be imprisoned for it. A more accurate analogy would be a couple going shoplifting together (or insert any other minor offence of your choice). They won't get one fine to split between them. They will each get a separate fine. Nothing to do with squeezing more money out of families. Just the way the law works. And to be blunt, if the government want to squeeze more money out of families this would not be a very efficient way of doing so. After all, families can avoid paying anything by simply ensuring their child does not take unauthorised absences.

I disagree with you and your analogy. Its completely ott. We are talking about kids missing a bit of school on rare occasions to spend time with their families doing fun stuff. nothing more melodramatic than that. not stealing as you suggest, and please dont come back and say their education is being stolen and etc... I'm sure there are many parents that would laugh and being compared with shoplifters. It made me smile both times

Surely deregistering and re registering would only work if the school wasn't full? If I tried this at DD's school the place would be taken up quicker than I could blink and she'd have no place to come back to.

Does anyone have any idea what constitutes exceptional circumstances? DD has had 2 authorised days off this year, one for a funeral and one to see relatives visiting from abroad (she hasn't seen them for a year and won't see them again for another year if we hasn't seen them on that day). Would these count? What about weddings?

gintastic our school would be the same plus what a hassle...

If you're school authorised those absences they obviously felt they were good enough reasons. I can't imagine any school not authorising for a funeral.

yes, My children would lose their place, but they'd go on the top of the waiting list and it is a big school so more likely to get a leaver. In the mean time I'd just do more fun stuff with the kids while I wait.

I suppose I don't like the system because where a parent and a HT can disagree what is in the best interest of a child holistically, or even simply educationally, the HT 'wins'.

This issues is an absolute nightmare when it comes to SN as most teachers are woefully undertrained in this respect, yet few would admit this.

cloudskitchen - You may not like it but, in terms of current sentencing guidelines, persistently failing to get your child to attend school regularly is regarded as broadly equivalent to shoplifting. A first offence of shoplifting will usually attract a fine of £50-£80, similar to the £60 for non-attendance. And the penalties for repeated offences are also similar. If you don't like that take it up with your MP. But as I said you can replace shoplifting with any minor offence of your choice. The principle is the same. If you and your partner both commit an offence you will both be fined.

gintastic - It is up to the head teacher to decide what qualifies as exceptional circumstances. There are no rules.

For what it is worth (and this is a general comment, not aimed at anyone in particular) all the major political parties are in agreement on the penalties for non-attendance. Policy is driven by research that shows children who are taken out of school for an unauthorised holiday of a week or more often never catch up on the work they have missed whatever their parents believe. A child missing 17 days of school in a year can lead to achieving a grade lower at GCSE, so a C becomes a D.