Petition - on home education

[spanglechick]

Amongst the proposals his report recommends are.... that children should be visited several times a year by staff from the local authority who will have automatic right of entry to the childs home and that ( yes thought IS right on this) children will be 'interviwed' by a staff member ALONE with no respresentation( even criminals have more rights) allowed unless the Local authority decide the child has difficulty communicating, when someone who is not the childs parent will be allowed to be present ( someone of the LA staffs choosing)
The child will also be made to 'perform/demonstrate' their learning ( persumably be questioned by the staff about various topics or they will carry out testing) - even ofsted dont ask individual children to do that.

The report proposes that the child be asked whether they like their education, whether they feel safe at home,presumably the child will also be asked whether they would like to go to school.... the staff will then be able to decide on the basis of their visit whether the parent will be 'allowed' to carry on home educating. There is also a clause allowing the LA staff to decide 'on safeguarding grounds or any other grounds for concern' not to allow parents to continue home educating. This could eventually then lead to children being taken into care if they refuse to attend school ( many are home educated because they have had an awful time at school) The key thing is that children who are at school dont get asked these questions about their school, whether they feel safe, whether they are being educated well... even when they arent nothing at all is done for them. a huge number of children leave school with barely any education- even if they attend!

some points of accuracy. Ofsted do indeed ask children to demonstrate their learning, and every school must ahve a student voice mechanism (school council etc) who are then one of the groups of students (others are selected at random) who they meet with and ask exactly the sorts of questions you've mentioned about what they think of their education.

I'm not anti-homeschooling, and I don't doubt the LAs are a nightmare to deal with, but I don't fundamentally think it's a bad thing to have someone talk to the kids without an adult there. Lots and lots of abuse is told about at school. I don't believe that homeschooling parents are any more likely to abuse, but when they do, where is the comparable safe outlet for the kid to tell? Isn't it a fair safeguard that the kid has access to a trusted adult regularly without the potential abuser being present?

 

[LilMissHissyFit]

So in the space of 3 paragraphs it's gone from 'report' to 'govt plans' to virutally enacted legislation.

What stage is it actually at? What grounds are they to suspect that the reccs of this report (and bear in mind as a piece of legislation it'll have to go through green & white paper and committee stages before being brought to parliament for a vote, and it wasn't in the Queen's speech) will be taken into account more than any of the others?

It WAS in the queens speech. Its being put through at a VERY fast rate, being rushed through prior to the election
Its being enacted as part of the 'children and families bill' and no, it hasnt been through the usual white and green paper stages yet but a select comittee enquiry was given too little time to hear the evidence which the home education community wished to present ( one morning was set for it)

The home ed community are lobbying their MP's at present about the bill
The Tories are introducing an early day motion objecting to the plans

 

[LilMissHissyFit]

some points of accuracy. Ofsted do indeed ask children to demonstrate their learning, and every school must ahve a student voice mechanism (school council etc) who are then one of the groups of students (others are selected at random) who they meet with and ask exactly the sorts of questions you've mentioned about what they think of their education.

I'm not anti-homeschooling, and I don't doubt the LAs are a nightmare to deal with, but I don't fundamentally think it's a bad thing to have someone talk to the kids without an adult there. Lots and lots of abuse is told about at school. I don't believe that homeschooling parents are any more likely to abuse, but when they do, where is the comparable safe outlet for the kid to tell? Isn't it a fair safeguard that the kid has access to a trusted adult regularly without the potential abuser being present?

Children are NOT interviewed alone by Ofsted inspectors... Thats not the same as school council reporting as a general group about how they think a school is performing...
They are NOT asked to tell an inspector what they have been learning, they are not asked by inspectors whether they feel safe or feel safe in school, they are not asked whether they are safe at home.... and neither should they!!!!

The safeguard you suggest ISNT in place and isnt being proposed.
Its also a fundamental infringement of a parents home and right to take responsibility for their education.
If parents decide to delegate that responsibility to a school thats their right- the school and the state should demonstrate to the parents ( who still have a legal responsibility for the childs education) that they are doing a good job ( Hence oftsted inspectors etc

Children who are home educated are entirely their parents responsibility- they are not the property of the state and it isnt reasonable for the state to dictate what children are taught if they are not in a school for which they have responsibility so long as the child is being educated according to the law.

Children who are home educated do actually spend an awful lot of time in the community and able to tell all sorts of people if there are things which worry them( GP , community groups, brownies, scouts etc)

. IF there is suspicion a child isnt being looked after then children can be interviewed by social services... that safeguard is already in place and the laws are already there for social services to intervene.
Education and welfare are different issues there is already a mechanism in place which isnt being used in terms of education and education is used as a cover for 'safeguarding' when there isnt any need for these far reaching and invasive proposals

I would be more than happy if someone said "we want to come and check what you are doing, can we meet at the library etc ( my son isnt happy with ANYONE in his house he doesnt know) and Id be more than happy to provide social services with details of the childs activities ( because hes far from hidden) if they wanted to.

Most parents just want to get on with educating their chidlren without this interference and the ability to teach them according to the law.

 

[kyser_soze]

It WAS in the queens speech. Its being put through at a VERY fast rate, being rushed through prior to the election
Its being enacted as part of the 'children and families bill' and no, it hasnt been through the usual white and green paper stages yet but a select comittee enquiry was given too little time to hear the evidence which the home education community wished to present ( one morning was set for it)

The home ed community are lobbying their MP's at present about the bill
The Tories are introducing an early day motion objecting to the plans

I concede all these points (altho the Tories are lobbying against it as part of wider lobbying against the bill), but quite simply the inspection regime you're talking about can't happen because it violates Section 8 of the EHRA - even if this becomes law in it's present state, it'll be impossible to enforce because it breaches EU law.

Children who are home educated are entirely their parents responsibility- they are not the property of the state and it isnt reasonable for the state to dictate what children are taught if they are not in a school for which they have responsibility so long as the child is being educated according to the law.

Well actually no, the welfare of minors is partially the reponsibility of the State, and has been for a long time.

Has anyone got a link to the actual Bill, cos I can't access the DCSF or Commons archives to find it (having said that I can't access any govt websites for some reason...)

All the stuff about rights, tho, is wrong. There are no 'fundamental rights' about how children are educated, and the role (or not) of the State in that in the EHRA or English Common Law.

 

[LilMissHissyFit]

The welfare of the child may be of interest to the state and they have a responsibility to intervene where there are concerns ( this is not in dispute, never has been amongst home educators)

However the education of children- ALL children, not just those at school, is the responsibility of parents

Its set out clearly in section 7 of the education act 1996
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/ACTS/acts1996/ukpga_19960056_en_1

It says that parents must cause their child to recieve an education which is full time and suitable to their age, ability and apitite and any special needs they may have
Either by attendance at school OR OTHERWISE

This page details alot of the relevant information you would need to learn all about the way this pricess had been carried out- the government wrote to Graham badman and said that they intended to implement all the recommendations in his report BEFORE the consultation into the report was even completed
http://www.freedomforchildrentogrow.org/heconsult.htm

so we as home educators were being asked for freedback which was essentially going to be entirely ignored ( the consultation closed only a matter of a few weeks ago, select comittee swiftly followed with intentionally less time than was needed allocated to the discussion/evidence gathering
and local authorities views were overly represented at every stage. There was very little evidence for the demands made in the report for these measures.What evidence was presented did not stand up to scrutiny- Badman himself submitted very little evidence in his report, it was in essence his personal views on home education and as a result wholesale changes to lawe will be made- on the say so of ONE person- who was not at any stage independent.The evidence Badman was given my academics he ignored and treated with disdain, even attempting to tell researchers that their findings were different from those that were printed in their research!! ( paula rothermel PhD has written about this on various home education websites)

The Badman was tasked with reporting on home education in MAY he published his report on 11th june( 6 weeks to do an in depth independent review of the national state of home education???? ) and we are now at the stage of legislation in november!

 

[ViolentPanda]

Thank you....

No problem.

What thought hasnt detailed here which should be pointed out- is the background to this petition...and the government agenda which seems to being pushed into areas of family life which may well affect us all at some point

and Ill try in brief to fill you in, only PLEASE Im having a real hard time in my own life at the mo, so could do without all the "Home educators are abusive nasty fuckwits or abusive types" bullshit which is trotted out here. ts innacurate, untrue and most of the people who trott it out dont have the first clue about home ed

And don't want to, because facts don't give them the same glow that tabloidesque fantasies do.

Now the government decided they werent happy with the status quo and comissioned another 'independent' review of education which was carried out in a very short timescale by one person- a man called Graham Badman who is on the payroll of the DSCF, he is also connected at various levels with the governments education peopl e( He runs a consultancy business etc) His report cannot be described in any way as independent. His findings are not impartial.
Home educators spent a long time discussing different educational approaches with him, providing him with evidence both from them and academics ( indeed many academics are extremely alarmed by his stance)
If you visit the link Ive cited above... alot of it is there, usefiul links etc
amongst the questions he asked a leading academic was whether she believed that all mothers that home educate suffer from 'munchausens by proxy' ( he is not a doctor,she is an educational psychologist not a psychistrist) and there is NO evidence whatsoever to suggest children on families that are home educated are likely to have a mother who has munchaussens, quite the opposite, in most families the families just want to get on with their lives, only visit the GP the same as the rest of us do etc- its interesting no mention of Families was made nor fathers- she ( an phd qualified person) was utterly appalled. he also then misrepresented her research to her- wouldnt be corrected....The outcome of his report was being reported on a home education group as 'fait acomplit' before he had even submitted his plans properly or written up his report- it was later found that the poster was his daughter who works for somerset council in the special needs dept AND in the employ of his consultancy company!!! ( independent? impartial?? confidential?? hardly)


Amongst the proposals his report recommends are.... that children should be visited several times a year by staff from the local authority who will have automatic right of entry to the childs home and that ( yes thought IS right on this) children will be 'interviwed' by a staff member ALONE with no respresentation( even criminals have more rights) allowed unless the Local authority decide the child has difficulty communicating, when someone who is not the childs parent will be allowed to be present ( someone of the LA staffs choosing)

The point here is that, recommendation or not, in order to either give right of entry or allow unsupervised nterview with a minor, you'd have to alter the basis of long-established law, with no precedent for doing so, to make this legally permissible. The implications for allowing this would be so resounding for the criminal justice system, and for civil liberties, that I can't see it happening, not when it could be used against "the great and good" as easily as against us plebs.

The child will also be made to 'perform/demonstrate' their learning ( persumably be questioned by the staff about various topics or they will carry out testing) - even ofsted dont ask individual children to do that.

This would be supremely pointless, given the vast differential between the "performing abilities" of children of the same age, so it's probably an idea put forward in order to sabotage the wishes of those who choose to home-educate, rather than anything aimed at helping the child.

Of course, if we look at the pattern of legislation in fields such as health, education and legal matters over the last 20 years, a common theme that emerges is penalisation for behaviours that sit outside the norm: the state can't manage you quite so easily if you're able to avoid some of the main forms of control.

The report proposes that the child be asked whether they like their education, whether they feel safe at home,presumably the child will also be asked whether they would like to go to school.... the staff will then be able to decide on the basis of their visit whether the parent will be 'allowed' to carry on home educating.

Not really very bright, basing major decisions on the subjective views of a single person, and doing so via an innately biased (and possibly coercive) route.

There is also a clause allowing the LA staff to decide 'on safeguarding grounds or any other grounds for concern' not to allow parents to continue home educating. This could eventually then lead to children being taken into care if they refuse to attend school ( many are home educated because they have had an awful time at school) The key thing is that children who are at school dont get asked these questions about their school, whether they feel safe, whether they are being educated well... even when they arent nothing at all is done for them. a huge number of children leave school with barely any education- even if they attend!

All of this would of course be fine if the staff were neutral, and we're backed by the sort of financial and analytical resources that allowed the best interests of the child to be the only factor of account in any assessment. As always, though, this will reduce to being about what is convenient for the LEA, and what would appear (judging by the ongoing farago over statementing) to be convenient is an easy life for the bureaucrats and minimal expenditure for the local authority.

These allows state agencies an awful lot of power over families to dictate what happens to children and when the state are not educating these children and provide no support or financial help whatsoever basically alot of home educators ( and I am one) believe that we dont need more regulation, what is needed is for the present law to be understood and implemented properly. There is no need for a stranger to enter the childrens home and interview 80,000+ children alone without legal representation ( what a minefield!)

The governments plans only affect people in england at present but respresent a vast erosion of civil liberties. No longer will someone who has committed no crime or be suspected of one be allowed to say "No sorry, you cant come into my house without a warrant from the jucicial system" ( as is the present

There is a very real risk that allowing this to be passed through parliament will then extend to a right of entry without a warant or no legal reason into any home where there is a child, on checking on chidlren during school holidays or on children who have not reached the age of 5?


There are already systems in place for social services to check on children if they are at risk of harm and there is already a perfectly good system for parents to inform the education authorities of their provision

Didn't you know? Multi-disciplinary systems of action are the new black!

 

[kyser_soze]

Yeah, but

a. I conceded all of the main points you make there a couple of posts ago and the various bits of Hansard that I read pretty much laid out the 'process' by which this got to be included in the CHS Act.

and

b. You're ignoring Section 9:

Pupils to be educated in accordance with parents' wishes .In exercising or performing all their respective powers and duties under the Education Acts, the Secretary of State, local education authorities and the funding authorities shall have regard to the general principle that pupils are to be educated in accordance with the wishes of their parents, so far as that is compatible with the provision of efficient instruction and training and the avoidance of unreasonable public expenditure.

The argument that's fairly easy to use in the cause of implementing the Badman Report recommendations is that the current system doesn't allow for adeqaute monitoring of education. It also leaves the door open to argue that in order for the State to do this, a system of checks is required. There is nothing in either of these paragraphs that is incompatible with the current proposals.

 

[tombowler]

I am shocked at the attitude displayed here

should all parents have an enhanced crb check to be able to look after thier own children?

Is it right that all children should be interviewed with only the interviewer present? the dangers here are massive they could be coerced into making a false statement or the interviewer could lie or even abuse the child this is madness

Is it right that people from the lea have the right to forcebly enter the home of anyone with a child just to check on its education?

Its not is it?

this is what this bill steps towards with a huge un warrented stride.

lillmisshissyfit has put such an good explination across and people say the thread should be moved to deseises? or just say i dont understand, wake up people your rights and the rights of all the children in the uk are being removed !!!

 

[Miss-Shelf]

Children who are home educated do actually spend an awful lot of time in the community and able to tell all sorts of people if there are things which worry them( GP , community groups, brownies, scouts etc)

.

I would qualify this with Many/most/the majority of children who are home educated etc

because the majority of home educated children I know of are being cared for and educated by parents in very creative and innovative and caring ways

I have, however, known at least one child who I think was really suffering from spending so much time with her mum when she was being home schooled
The family had experienced a crushing bereavment and the mum was not really coping so well and her daughter didn't have great boundaries
The mum had very fixed ideas about what state schooling provided or could provide which I thought was not necessarily true in the majority of most schooling contexts ........I thought this family might have benefited from what school and other professionals might have been able to offer them and I don't think this child had the opportunity of making her needs felt to professionals who might help - friends and aquaintances in the festival/traveller scene would have had to report a friend to the authorities and thats a hard decisions to take - she wasn't being abusive it was just that she wasn';t coping well and it impacted on her daughter.......

she wont be the only home schooled child who might not be thriving (just as many children are not thriving in school too)

I also wish that part time schooling was offered more as it might be a good solution for many families - I imagine home schooling takes a huge amount of long term commitment from a parent or parent - I wish they could take advantage of the opportunities of schools and education resources without having to commit full time....

ps: I work in early years education and care so I will be biased to an extent

 

[spanglechick]

Children are NOT interviewed alone by Ofsted inspectors... Thats not the same as school council reporting as a general group about how they think a school is performing...

well, i'm sure they'd ask homeschool kids in a group, if they were taught in that group full time (siblings).

They are NOT asked to tell an inspector what they have been learning,

you are absolutely wrong about that.

they are not asked by inspectors whether they feel safe or feel safe in school,

again, this is part of the student voice stuff. It's part of 'Every Child Matters', and ofsted do have to check on it.

they are not asked whether they are safe at home.... and neither should they!!!!

but they have daily access to the school's designated child protection officer. Something not all homeschooled kids have an equivalent access to. Out of interest, why shouldn't they be asked?

The safeguard you suggest ISNT in place and isnt being proposed.
Its also a fundamental infringement of a parents home and right to take responsibility for their education.
If parents decide to delegate that responsibility to a school thats their right- the school and the state should demonstrate to the parents ( who still have a legal responsibility for the childs education) that they are doing a good job ( Hence oftsted inspectors etc

Children who are home educated are entirely their parents responsibility- they are not the property of the state and it isnt reasonable for the state to dictate what children are taught if they are not in a school for which they have responsibility so long as the child is being educated according to the law.

like i said, i believe homeschooling to be a good thing for some families, but if a child was recieving a poor education at home, achieving key skills below their learning potential, or simply being taught incorrectly, doesn't that child have a right to be protected from that poor education? or do you believe the parents' rights to be absolute?

Children who are home educated do actually spend an awful lot of time in the community and able to tell all sorts of people if there are things which worry them( GP , community groups, brownies, scouts etc)

all of them? and all of them get to see these people without their parents?

IF there is suspicion a child isnt being looked after then children can be interviewed by social services... that safeguard is already in place and the laws are already there for social services to intervene.
Education and welfare are different issues there is already a mechanism in place which isnt being used in terms of education and education is used as a cover for 'safeguarding' when there isnt any need for these far reaching and invasive proposals

I would be more than happy if someone said "we want to come and check what you are doing, can we meet at the library etc ( my son isnt happy with ANYONE in his house he doesnt know) and Id be more than happy to provide social services with details of the childs activities ( because hes far from hidden) if they wanted to.

Most parents just want to get on with educating their chidlren without this interference and the ability to teach them according to the law.

but what if there isn't a suspicion? often the first reason for safeguarding is something a child says to their teacher.


LMHF, because i'm questioning some of the points, doesn't mean i'm attacking you. there is probably loads of improvement that could be made to this set of proposals... but not every homeschooler is as capable or motivated as you. I might hate ofsted inspections with a passion, but i see why we have to have them: some teachers are shit and lazy.


I believe education comes in many shapes and forms - probably not enough, but there is such a thing as a bad education, and it could happen at home. I believe that a child's right to a good education trumps their parents' right to autonomy over that education.

 

[LilMissHissyFit]

Yeah, but

a. I conceded all of the main points you make there a couple of posts ago and the various bits of Hansard that I read pretty much laid out the 'process' by which this got to be included in the CHS Act.

and

b. You're ignoring Section 9:



The argument that's fairly easy to use in the cause of implementing the Badman Report recommendations is that the current system doesn't allow for adeqaute monitoring of education. It also leaves the door open to argue that in order for the State to do this, a system of checks is required. There is nothing in either of these paragraphs that is incompatible with the current proposals.

But there is alreayd a system in place which allows local authorities to make enquiries of the parents to provide evidence of the education being provided...
The law states that if parents are not fulfilling this duty and the local authority have evidence of no provision which meets the legal requirements that can issue a statutory attendance order.

There is no requirement in law to 'monitor' home education... its only because the DSCF have decided that they would like that power that they have asked Badman to enact this report

 

[kyser_soze]

OK, well here's the relevant section of the Bill, outlining the registration and reporting regime:

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmbills/008/10008.38-44.html#m01s

here're the explanatory notes:

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200910/cmbills/008/en/10008x-b.htm#index_link_37

Now, unless I'm reading this completely incorrectly, the topline is:

LAs will have to create a register of all the kids who are homeschooled. (This doesn't currently happen)
Parent's who wish to home school will have to register their kids with the LA. Each registration lasts 12 months, or part thereof.
The LA has to arrange at least one interview a year with the child and parent to ensure that the criteria for continued homeschooling registration is maintained:

This clause needs to be read with Schedule 1. This clause and Schedule 1 introduce a registration scheme for children who are being educated at home in England. Home education is lawful and at present it is largely unregulated. Where a child has never attended school, parents are not required to inform their local authority that the child is being educated at home, or to seek approval of the home education being provided. The Schedule introduces a new registration scheme to enable local authorities in England to keep track of home-educated children. In terms of enforcement of the new system, the Schedule links the home education registration scheme to the school attendance order regime.

The duty requires an authority to see a child, the parent and the place (or at least one of the places) where the education is to take place, at least once in any registration period. Where a local authority consider that someone other than the parent is primarily responsible for providing education then the local authority will be under a duty to see that other person as well, at least once in any registration period. For most home-educated children, these visits will be carried out concurrently

They also have to give at least 2 weeks written notice prior to a proposed meeting

Nothing in the bill about forced entry into homes. Nothing about mandatory CRB registration. Indeed, the actual Bill itself basically says 'You have to let your LA know you're homeschooling, they have to keep a register of this and they have to check on you at least once a year at one of the places the child is educated (say, a library), giving you 2 weeks notice of the meeting, to ensure that the child is receiving education to a certain standard'

Now, that's just a quick once-over of the bill and the notes. It's still got 2 more readings in Parliament to go through (the 2nd isn't scheduled yet), plus the committee and reporting stages, then it has to go to the lords, before the final vote is taken. Given that the 2nd reading doesn't even have a date yet, the earliest this bill can become law will be 2010 (and that assumes that it's twin-tracked in the Lords so it's passage mirrors that of the Commons), and given that the Tories are campaigning against it, and that they're likely to win next May/June, the chances of this actually coming into force are pretty slim, and even if Labour win, it'll be 2011 before LAs can even begin to implement it.

However, if someone can provide me with actual documentation or guidance notes for LAs that says any of the stuff about CRB, forced entry etc (that isn't already part of existing child protection legislation), please can you show me? As it stands there seems to be something of a gulf between the claims and the actual bill itself.

 

[Corax]

I won't be signing your petition/charter for abuse. Thanks.

 

[kyser_soze]

But there is alreayd a system in place which allows local authorities to make enquiries of the parents to provide evidence of the education being provided...
The law states that if parents are not fulfilling this duty and the local authority have evidence of no provision which meets the legal requirements that can issue a statutory attendance order.

There is no requirement in law to 'monitor' home education... its only because the DSCF have decided that they would like that power that they have asked Badman to enact this report

Well if all that's the case, the only thing this changes is that there now has to be a register for kids being homeschooled, and that this needs to be checked once a year by the LA. Also, you contradict yourself - the LA already has to monitor homschooling if they are to find evidence of no provision which meets the legal requirements in order to issue the SAO, surely? I mean how else would they get this evidence?

 

[LilMissHissyFit]

Spanglechick why dont you go back and READ my posts?
There is NO plan for children to be asked anything by ofsted inspectors in groups... the plan is the local authority staff ( who are already very anti home education generally)
will have

Automatic right of entry to a home where a child is home educated - without a warrant
Automatic right to interview a child, without their parent or another trusted adult being present and asked questions about their welfare in a way which extends FAR from the remit allowed of staff at a school
Do you not agree that if you just chose a child and asked of them "do you feel safe at home, are you happy at home" you would get into some form of trouble at school- if you had absolutely no basis whatsoever to ask them, no concern at all???

Do you think all schooled chidlren should be interviewed by a stranger for a period of several hours (EIGHT hours, including planning and travel time has been mooted in the costing implications report) twice a year?

Asked to 'perform' without their parents present or another trusted adult( unless they have an identoifoied communication problem- LEA's routinely deny childrens special needs and this is likely to be severely abused by LA staff for convenience sake or to accuse parents of preventing their children being interviewed alone)

To be honest if someone was going to come into my house for say 4-5 hours twice a year( even if we were being generous with the planning and travel times required) and quiz me about aspects of my life, my work, my relationship with my parents and ask me to demonstrate and perform... Id say ANYTHING to get rid of them and Im a pretty capable adult!


Home educated children do have access to outside help and agencies, they can go to the GP, call childline, call social services themselves, just as anyone at school can
I would personally have no objections at all to having to provide the local social services dept with a list of 'other adults' who my children see regularly and the settings in which I see them... I will have to find it but EO surveyed home educated children recently and asked them to list how many different adults they saw and in what context.... many saw a HUGE variety of people... some not so many but all the respondents mentioned librarians, shop workers ( corner shop etc) people they knew as opposed to strangers leisure centre staff, home education groups, other families ( both of home ed and schjooled children)
Thats ALOT of people that children can turn to.... children in schools get abused and nobody notices, sometimes children report abuse in school ( bullying by children and staff) and nobody does a damn thing about it

can you see why when these proposals wont apply to schooled children home educating families feel so aggrived? When local authority staff can, without a warrant just come into your home? Stay for hours,'inspecting' your children and then, without court action or any checks, opportunity for evidence to be presented etc be told one one persons say so that you are substandard pr they have 'concerns' and your child is forcibly returned to school because it will be a criminal offence to home educate without a 'licence' ( and the govt are referring to this as a licencing scheme)

and european law didnt stop peoples info being held on a DNA database after committing no crime- its still being held for a number of years even AFTER a ruling that it shouldnt be as its in breach of the ECHR.. so forgive us as a minority group for not having any faith whatsoever that the government will ignore our rights and our childrens

 

[kyser_soze]

Automatic right of entry to a home where a child is home educated - without a warrant
Automatic right to interview a child, without their parent or another trusted adult being present and asked questions about their welfare in a way which extends FAR from the remit allowed of staff at a school

Where in the bill is any of this? Where is the piece of paper from the DCSF that says this? Where is the costing implementation report?

 

[LilMissHissyFit]

Well if all that's the case, the only thing this changes is that there now has to be a register for kids being homeschooled, and that this needs to be checked once a year by the LA. Also, you contradict yourself - the LA already has to monitor homschooling if they are to find evidence of no provision which meets the legal requirements in order to issue the SAO, surely? I mean how else would they get this evidence?

No, they have a duty to make 'informal enquiries' as to the provision that the parent is making
They can provide evidence in a number of ways, they can, if they wish agree to a visit ( many dont for various reasons- I dont because my child cannot cope with strangers in the house), submit a report, or meet with staff etc. Its up to the home educator. The local authority then looks at how they have responded to the enquiry and may then make further enquiries as to whether education is being provided.... IF they think the evidence provided doesnt meet the requirements of the law then they can apply for an SAO.. its then up to the parents to prove to a court that they are educating their child under S7...

The law doesnt place any duty on local authorities to visit nor monitor, in fact case law says it is quite wrong for local authorities to insist on a home visit or an inspection..

what these proposal will do is allow a home education 'inspector' to pass home education fit or not on their own preconceptions of what a suitable education under S7 ism criminalise a parent and return a child to school( or force them in for the first time) without any evidence or a court hearing to agree they are acting reasonably... once the 'licence' is withdrawn. If a parent continues to HE then they will be committing a criminal offence.. there will be no judicial process governing whether a child should be educated according to the parents wishes at home ( as is also in the education act 1996 and included under S8 EHCR....)

 

[kyser_soze]

For anyone who's interested, here's Badman's report, carried out over 4 months, not 6 weeks, as previously advertised.

on their own preconceptions of what a suitable education under S7

Well it doesn't, it and Badman's report both say that the guidance on this should be national, and that it is compatible with the existing legislation.

Also, the bit about 'right to enter home' in the report does not mean that an LA offical can enter your home without a warrant, and the bill in it's current form doesn't even mention this.

What it does attempt to do is give LA workers a clear legal path to gain right of access, and from what I read this would need to be done under the auspices of a CPP within current legislation regarding right of access to the home (i.e. it would require a warrant)

And why do you think it's wrong for LAs to be able to refuse registration on safeguarding grounds?

 

[LilMissHissyFit]

Where in the bill is any of this? Where is the piece of paper from the DCSF that says this? Where is the costing implementation report?

Its linked to from here

http://www.freedomforchildrentogrow.org/heconsult.htm

all the relevent links are on this website( which Ive given 3 times now, I take it you havent read it??)The government has said accepts ALL the recommendations and it will implement the badman report IN FULL

.... I will try and find the badman report in its entirety if its not on there

ETA it is on there, its the very first link on that page- at the top
http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/consultations/downloadableDocs/PDF FINAL HOME ED.pdf


forgive me but Im still trying to get 3 kids to bed..... I dont have time to sit here feeding you links over and over that Ive already given and info you could find yourself
Im not trying to be rude but I am on my own with them... Im not ducking out for long and I will come back to this

 

[LilMissHissyFit]

For anyone who's interested, here's Badman's report, carried out over 4 months, not 6 weeks, as previously advertised.



Well it doesn't, it and Badman's report both say that the guidance on this should be national, and that it is compatible with the existing legislation.

Also, the bit about 'right to enter home' in the report does not mean that an LA offical can enter your home without a warrant, and the bill in it's current form doesn't even mention this.

His evidence gathering lasted 6 weeks... his review was announced at the beginning of may, he reported on the 11th june

Regardless of what he says.. it wasnt even announced until the beginning of may that this badman report was going to be carried out. The consultation period for people to submit evidence to him for his report was a mere 14 days!!!!

The proposals which have been issued by the DSCF state clearly "right of entry to the home with 14 days notice"

Couyld you point me at ANY safeguards in badmans report which woul protect a childs right NOT be forced into school, to be allowed a judicial review of a local authorities decision
and can I please draw your attention to the part of badmans report where he states that LA's can refuse registration "On any safeguarding grounds"

so what would these be?? There is NO answer to that.... a local authority staff member could look at me as a single parent and decide I wasnt doing a good job because I was on my own with them and theres no other adult in the house - IF they wished and I would have no right of appeal, niether would my child

 

[spanglechick]

Spanglechick why dont you go back and READ my posts?
There is NO plan for children to be asked anything by ofsted inspectors in groups... the plan is the local authority staff ( who are already very anti home education generally)
will have

Automatic right of entry to a home where a child is home educated - without a warrant
Automatic right to interview a child, without their parent or another trusted adult being present and asked questions about their welfare in a way which extends FAR from the remit allowed of staff at a school
Do you not agree that if you just chose a child and asked of them "do you feel safe at home, are you happy at home" you would get into some form of trouble at school- if you had absolutely no basis whatsoever to ask them, no concern at all???

Do you think all schooled chidlren should be interviewed by a stranger for a period of several hours (EIGHT hours, including planning and travel time has been mooted in the costing implications report) twice a year?

Asked to 'perform' without their parents present or another trusted adult( unless they have an identoifoied communication problem- LEA's routinely deny childrens special needs and this is likely to be severely abused by LA staff for convenience sake or to accuse parents of preventing their children being interviewed alone)

To be honest if someone was going to come into my house for say 4-5 hours twice a year( even if we were being generous with the planning and travel times required) and quiz me about aspects of my life, my work, my relationship with my parents and ask me to demonstrate and perform... Id say ANYTHING to get rid of them and Im a pretty capable adult!


Home educated children do have access to outside help and agencies, they can go to the GP, call childline, call social services themselves, just as anyone at school can
I would personally have no objections at all to having to provide the local social services dept with a list of 'other adults' who my children see regularly and the settings in which I see them... I will have to find it but EO surveyed home educated children recently and asked them to list how many different adults they saw and in what context.... many saw a HUGE variety of people... some not so many but all the respondents mentioned librarians, shop workers ( corner shop etc) people they knew as opposed to strangers leisure centre staff, home education groups, other families ( both of home ed and schjooled children)
Thats ALOT of people that children can turn to.... children in schools get abused and nobody notices, sometimes children report abuse in school ( bullying by children and staff) and nobody does a damn thing about it

can you see why when these proposals wont apply to schooled children home educating families feel so aggrived? When local authority staff can, without a warrant just come into your home? Stay for hours,'inspecting' your children and then, without court action or any checks, opportunity for evidence to be presented etc be told one one persons say so that you are substandard pr they have 'concerns' and your child is forcibly returned to school because it will be a criminal offence to home educate without a 'licence' ( and the govt are referring to this as a licencing scheme)

and european law didnt stop peoples info being held on a DNA database after committing no crime- its still being held for a number of years even AFTER a ruling that it shouldnt be as its in breach of the ECHR.. so forgive us as a minority group for not having any faith whatsoever that the government will ignore our rights and our childrens

i'm trying to be polite and raise points, but i'm not going to engage with this. it's too emotional and defensive, you seem to be attributing to me uncritical support of these proposals, despite my having explicitly said that it isn't the case. frankly, i've enough stress of my own without having more heaped upon me here. if your intention was to stifle debate with me, then congratulations.

 

[LilMissHissyFit]

well you raised points- I responded... sorry if you are feeling stressed in other areas of your life It wasnt my intention to upset you
IM merely trying to respond to the questions youve raised...

Can I also point out if your way of life (and for many home educators educating your child IS a way of life, its not a 9-3 sit down with the books type effort)
and educate your child in a way you see fit without being 'judged' by someone else as 'fit' or unfit and the safety, security and welfare of your children was under threat- without any safeguards being placed on their rights ( lots of talk about safeguarding children but none about safeguarding them from LEA staff and abuse of process) You'd be argiung in an emotive way about it

For many people 'education' is about a job, something they do, they send their kid to school or they teach or whatever but its one area of their life
This report and these proposals place every home educating parent in a position of suspicion... that they must prove they arent harming their child in order to be able to carry on. For parents who have withdrawn their children from school as a last resort because school was harming their child its a massive threat to allow hat same authority such power over their lives and their children

 

[kyser_soze]

From page 46 of the report:

Timing
The review will be conducted over 4 months, starting in January 2009 and concluding in April 2009 with a published report in May 2009. Ministers will then consider whether any further work is required on any aspect of home education, on the basis of the findings contained in the review report.

So factual inaccuracy No.1 - review period dates wrong.

 

[LilMissHissyFit]

They are wrong... I promise you, This review wasnt published until 11th june
Home educators were made aware of it in May.
I personally know home educators who spent alot of time speaking to badman, their children spent time with him, trying to give him a real insight into how home education works.....

Their evidence was completely disregarded...

The government hadnt even concluded the 'consultation' about the report ( to which over 5000 people responded) before Ed balls wrote to Badman saying his report had been accepted and proposals would be implemented IN FULL

So why a consultation??

There are home educators who have spent alot of their time unpicking the various relationships between players in this.... the review, badman, the people he took evidence from and who influenced his report were not independent... therefore the repoort cannot be viewed as independent of the DSCF.... if you read it it contains lots of his opinions and very little evidence which would back these proposals being necessary never mind proportionate as a response.

 

[kyser_soze]

Safeguarding:

http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/everychildmatters/resources-and-practice/IG00060/

stuff on LCSBs

So there are plenty of answers to your question 'What's Safeguarding'

And let's be clear here. These proposals still leave the state of play in the UK far less regulated than in the rest of the EU, Australia and NZ.

Their evidence was completely disregarded...

Well, aside from those who said that there needs to be a better framework for homeschooling, obviously. I have read large chunks of it this evening, and yes it contains his opinions - it's his review!

BTW, Health Visitors have 'right of access' to the home, as do social workers. This recc puts those charged with maintaining this register on the same legal footing.

 

[LilMissHissyFit]

where are the safeguards which protect children from abuse of process by local authority staff???? I know what safeguarding IS.... however all the DSCF seem interested in is allegedly protecting a child from its parents ( with the assumption that every home educating child needs checking on regularly)
BUt there is NO evidence whatsoever to show that theyve thought about this from the other perspective
At the moment there are safeguards- judicial safeguards that could be used by LA's when necessary... they are allowed to ask for evidence... there is the safeguard that the child can attend court as can their parents..... a judge can decide

If you look in the badman report there is not one check or balance against local authority staff abusing, misusing or misinterpreting their powers ( which already happens, it widespread which is why HEers are so concerned).......

 

[kyser_soze]

TBH, no matter what I say is going to change your mind in any way, but it's pretty clear that there has been an organised campaign against any kind of registration or change to the existing law, and they've managed to stir up a hornets nest about it on the net. There's nothing in the Bill about forced entry into homes, nothing about CRB checks (and given the recent decision regarding the childcare arrangements of those two WPCs this seems pretty unlikely to happen, even if you're educating someone else's kid)

I would add that pretty much all of the accounts on the sites you linked too (sorry, but I don't take information off sites with agendas) are of the 'I know someone who said' variety - 2nd or 3rd party anecdotal tales aren't evidence, they're hearsay.

Finally, Section 4 of his report does somewhat give lie to your comments about 'not listening' - he actually concludes:

Herein I believe lies a fundamental problem, namely the absence of a representative voice for home educating parents and home educated children. The Government of Tasmania supports a system that not only gives elective home educators a voice in policy determination but also a role in the monitoring and support of other home educating families. Having raised this notion with both groups of home educators and individuals, such a structure at this time may be a step too far but I do believe there is need for a representative body at a local level so that there is a regular exchange of views and transfer of knowledge between local authority and home educating parents and children. I do not underestimate the difficulty of creating such a representative body but believe it to be essential if the recommendations in this report are
to be effective in giving greater assurance to the state about the wellbeing and education of a significant number of children, and affording the freedom to educate their children that many parents have sought. If nothing else such a body should promote understanding and bring
about the dissemination of good practice.

Also, are you really trying to say the British Humanist Foundation, which expressed it's concerns about kids being home schooled for religious reasons, are patsys for the DCSF?

 

[LilMissHissyFit]

Well, aside from those who said that there needs to be a better framework for homeschooling, obviously. I have read large chunks of it this evening, and yes it contains his opinions - it's his review!

BTW, Health Visitors have 'right of access' to the home, as do social workers. This recc puts those charged with maintaining this register on the same legal footing.

No, health visitors dont have a 'right of access' they are entotled to call to your home, you are under no com[pulsion to allow them entry..

Social workers only visit when there is concern.... home educators wish to be treated in the same manner, with some respect.... and to be allowed to educate their child according to the law
Allowing strangers the right of access to a parents home should only happen where there is suspicion and entry to the home is necessary to prove that things are ok... therefore these proposals start from the position ( which is entirely baseless) that all children are at risk from their parents unless someone has been in the house and checked the house
But that doesnt go far enough, so naturally we would have to get the child on their own in the house and ask them questions..... this doesnt follow that abuse would be disclosed and is open to all sorts of very questionable accusations and situations arising- I wouldnt allow my child to be interviewed alone without someone he truested there but i suspect anyone I suggested would be rejected by the LEA

IF I absolutely had to allow my child to be interviewed I would require the presence of a solicitor to be appointed FOR MY CHILD and an appropriate adult be provided to lessen the risk of coercion ( can I just point out that children are allowed their parents as appropriate adult unless they are suspected of being involved in the offence) and I would insist the interview be video recorded... I have committed no crime and neither has my child so why should they not be afforded the same protections?

and incidentally the laws and procedures here would be some way more onerous than exist in most states in the USA, NZ OZ etc why? because their laws are driven by a desire to ensure a child is being educated ( many states in the USA require a diary to be kept of a minimum number of hours) Most do not insist on the child being seen, tested, interviewed or their home checked by officals... some do but again, children are often registered under a certain school board and tests can take place at a local establishment designated for that purpose or at home.

These arent, they arent really about education at all, they are about checking on childrens welfare... Social services departments contain staff trained to do this job, home education representatives do not... and social services departments have a hard enough time trying to protect children who need protecting.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Yeah, but

a. I conceded all of the main points you make there a couple of posts ago and the various bits of Hansard that I read pretty much laid out the 'process' by which this got to be included in the CHS Act.

and

b. You're ignoring Section 9:



The argument that's fairly easy to use in the cause of implementing the Badman Report recommendations is that the current system doesn't allow for adeqaute monitoring of education. It also leaves the door open to argue that in order for the State to do this, a system of checks is required. There is nothing in either of these paragraphs that is incompatible with the current proposals.

So it boils down to an argument of what constitutes "adequate monitoring".

 

[ViolentPanda]

well, i'm sure they'd ask homeschool kids in a group, if they were taught in that group full time (siblings).

you are absolutely wrong about that.


again, this is part of the student voice stuff. It's part of 'Every Child Matters', and ofsted do have to check on it.

but they have daily access to the school's designated child protection officer. Something not all homeschooled kids have an equivalent access to. Out of interest, why shouldn't they be asked?

I think that what's important here is how they're asked.
Now, it seems to me (and perhaps I'm being naive) that exercising "right of entry" powers in order to "interview" an unsupervised child is a recipe for not achieving a meaningful operation or deriving any information that will be helpful in ascertaining the child's true educational state, because the child will have just witnessed/experienced their parent(s) being coerced into compliance.