Interlude

Masters in this Hall - An English Carol


On the day of the late night giving of Petitions to Parliament, in opposition to the Badman Review into Home Education, I thought we could have a little bit of peaceful respite. Here's Asha with a piece I recorded this week at a concert. She's been playing the cello for about a year and I love hearing her play.

Lincolnshire Director of Children's Services Responds

I received this email response today and rather than waste any more time with petty correspondence have decided to lay it all bare. Please read it for yourselves and make your own mind up. I will, however, add my own emphasis to the reply as I really will not be taking the matter up with someone who cannot answer the questions!
----
Dated 1st December 2009

Dear Ms Matthan

Thank you for your recent email about Lincolnshire County Council Children's Services response to the DCSF consultation on Home Education. I have tried to respond to each of your points in my reply [You have tried but failed, you have simply not bothered to answer the ones you know you have no credible answer for].

The document to which you refer in your correspondence is the Local Authority's response to the national consultation. It does not reflect views of home education [What?]. Officers of the Local Authority considered each point of the consultation before responding. We did not consult with Electively Home Educating families [Oh good, Lincolnshire EHE families should feel very happy and safe that you are making decisions for them]. We did not think [Another excellent answer] that Government expected this and we knew [You did, you mind readers, you!, I though you did not consult with EHE families, how did you know?] that parents wanted to be able to respond directly to the DCSF on the points of the consultation, if they wanted to.

Lincolnshire Children's Services have established a strategy and structure for promoting the active participation of young people [ALL young people?] through out the county in decisions which affect them [Like EHE, obviously, as there are many Lincolnshire children who are EHE]. This is seen in the increasing use of school councils [Ah, School Councils - they are for SCHOOLED CHILDREN] and the establishment of the Lincolnshire Youth Cabinet [Please tell me how many EHE young people you have on the Lincolnshire Youth Cabinet]. The Participation Strategy 2009 gives more information how the Local Authority is promoting young people's participation in decision making, and can be accessed via the Lincolnshire Children website. I hope you find this useful [Very useful if you are SCHOOLED, but sorry, you are going to have to point me in the direction of the link for children to find out more about EHE on this 'children's site'].

We did not comment on existing arrangements [So, what are the existing arrangement, so we can all see them?] as this was not requested [I am asking], but we did comment on a possible change to those arrangements [That is so kind of you].

Lincolnshire Children's Services has yet to consider the content of the recent announcements relating to changes in support for Home Educating Families. We will, however, be giving full content careful consideration [Just like your careful consideration and consultation with the lovely families in Lincolnshire who home educate?] after Government has provided definitive guidance and legislates.

I hope this letter has gone some way to addressing your concerns [Nope. It hasn't. Not one bit. At all.] and I would like to reassure you [Please, don't try and reassure me of anything] that we want to work closely [Oh yes, as closely as you did BEFORE the consulation and during the response? Right! Gotcha!] and in partnership with Home Educating Families [That's us! Yes, the people you wrote to the DCSF about WITHOUT talking to!]. If [Big IF] the DCSF consultation and review of Elective Home Education arrangements result in change in legislation, and subsequently charge Local Authorities with new duties and responsibilities, we shall review our existing arrangements [Which we still do not know about, because you won't tell us, but you will be reviewing because the law has changed] to ensure that our policies, practices and procedures accurately reflect these developments [and on and on and on....].

Yours sincerely

Peter Duxbury
Director of Children's Services
----
Emailed 21st October 2009

Dear Peter [Director of Lincolnshire Children's Services]

I would appreciate you letting me know how many home educating families you have consulted in completing this form, please. I am shocked at the views expressed, where it appears that the LA is willing to subject law abiding, loving families to criminal proceedings despite the current law standing firmly in favour of all parents - whether they home educate or not.

I am interested to know whether these views are truly reflective of home educating families and children in the county or based on no consultation whatsoever. [Answer 10 LA has a duty to ensure that children have the opportunity to express their views, and that these view should be considered. We believe the voice of the child should be valued and recognised in any arrangements being made for their education. ] Do you also propose to ask ALL Lincolnshire children whether they are happy and want to be schooled?

The response states that new powers would be 'useful' for LAs but you don't seem to have demonstrated the use of existing powers which are already very powerful.

Are you able to enlighten me on what training in Elective Home Education your staff currently have (and where they received this training)? I have asked before but not received a response. A named person in the department which covers EHE would be very helpful.

As it happens, the Education Secretary has just announced today that that the LA must meet SEN needs and fund exams even for EHE children. How does Lincolnshire plan to meet these announcements?

Parliament Live TV Select Committee with Ed Balls

Looking forward to hearing from you at the soonest.

Thanks,

Me
-------
Lincolnshire LA Response to EHE Consultation
From FoI request

Name: Peter Duxbury Director of Children’s Services
Organisation: Lincolnshire Children’s Services
Lincolnshire County Council, County Offices, Newland, Lincoln LN1 1YQ.

1 Do you agree that these proposals strike the right balance between the rights of parents to home educate and the rights of children to receive a suitable education?

Agree

We consider that the proposals are a sound balance of rights and responsibilities. They strengthen and clarify LA roles and responsibilities towards young people in Lincolnshire receiving EHE, whilst also recognising the parent’s right to choose to educate their children themselves.

2 Do you agree that a register should be kept?

Agree

Strongly agree that a register should be kept. This will enable the Local Authority to ensure that it fulfils its duties towards all pupils in their area and minimise those young people who are, or become missing from education. It will also contribute to robust safeguarding procedures for the LA.

The will be cost implications for the Local Authority in maintaining and updating a register on an annual basis

3 Do you agree with the information to be provided for registration?

Agree

We consider it a huge benefit to both LA and families for there to be clear guidance around what information should be provided. However we recognise that parents are also entitled to be provided with clear and concise information from their LA re EHE procedures, contact information, availability support and so forth.

4 Do you agree that home educating parents should be required to keep the register up to date?

Agree

A register which is not kept up to date with accurate information dose not serve any useful purpose

5 Do you agree that it should be a criminal offence to fail to register or to provide inadequate or false information?

Agree

Yes - Families should have a duty to provide adequate and accurate information. This will be have huge benefit on the LA capacity for ensuring EHE and safeguarding procedures can be carried out in an effective and thorough way. How this is actually addressed by the LA will have staffing and cost implications

6 a) Do you agree that home educated children should stay on the roll of their former school for 20 days after parents notify that they intend to home educate?

Agree

We believe that this provide a benefit to the LA by establishing a time window in which safeguarding checks can be made and the LA provide information to the family about home education and their authorities own arrangements. Furthermore it will give families the opportunity to consider their decision to EHE with the knowledge that if they then decide, after due thought, that it is not the route they wish to pursue they can return their child into the school.

Will require DCSF to clarify if the 20 refer to calendar days or school days?

6 b) Do you agree that the school should provide the local authority with achievement and future attainment data?

Agree

Believe that the provision of a base line for the child’s attainment level will be a positive aid for subsequent visits and enable evidence of progress to be measured. Future attainment data will furthermore give LA additional information when reviewing the rate of progress and scope of learning the young person has received whilst being home educated. Schools could use the 20 days period to provide this information to the LA and Parents.

7 Do you agree that DCSF should take powers to issue statutory guidance in relation to the registration and monitoring of home education?

Agree

The LA welcomes the proposal to issue statutory guidance in relation to the registration and monitoring of home education. Currently there are many aspects which are unclear or provide potential for discord between LA and EHE families.

8 Do you agree that children about whom there are substantial safeguarding concerns should not be home educated?

Agree

We believe that the welfare of the young person is paramount and should be given greater weight than a parents right to educate their child according to their own wishes.

LA would welcome the statutory right to refuse a parents request to EHE. However we also recognise that this will require the establishment of an appeal process for the parent .

Further guidance will be required from DCSF around the nature of concerns, definition of substantial, and of length of time any such concerns should be considered a valid reason to refuse to sanction a parent’s decision to home educate. These may be : -
Whilst a child is open to Social Care
Child has been accommodated by the LA
Subject of a Child Protection Plan
Child in Need.
For a defined period after any of above circumstances and case has been closed.
A time line in which the LA should review the decision to refuse to sanction a request to EHE,
A time line after which period parents may reapply.

Any such developments will have financial and staffing repercussions

9 Do you agree that the local authority should visit the premises where home education is taking place provided 2 weeks notice is given?

Agree

Yes it provides an invaluable opportunity to meet the child and family in their own environment, which will inform and guide the visiting officers’ understanding of the family. We believe it will also promote improved relationships between families and LA, and provide the opportunity for misconceptions to be challenged and a positive relationship based on trust and mutual respect to develop. LA must be able to reassure families that officers are not judgemental of individual family circumstances and respect the wide range of differing cultures and values which exist with all communities including those electing to home educate their children . It is the quality of the education and range of opportunities provided for the young person which is which is relevant to any home visits.

10 Do you agree that the local authority should have the power to interview the child, alone if this is judged appropriate, or if not in the presence of a trusted person who is not the parent/carer?

Agree

We believe this would be a useful power for the LA. LA has a duty to ensure that children have the opportunity to express their views, and that these view should be considered. We believe the voice of the child should be valued and recognised in any arrangements being made for their education. We hope that this will not be overlooked when any changes are considered for the Elective Home Education guidance. Consideration needs also to be given as to how LA can address their duty to promote the ECM outcomes in relation to EHE children.

11 Do you agree that the local authority should visit the premises and interview the child within four weeks of home education starting, after 6 months has elapsed, at the anniversary of home education starting, and thereafter at least on an annual basis? This would not preclude more frequent monitoring if the local authority thought that was necessary.

Agree

We consider that it would be a benefit to families and pupils that the timeline for meeting with EHE families be equitable where ever a family may live, and agree that the timetable for visits as specified in the proposals should be accepted. A minimum of one meeting per annum for families who are established on EHE will give consistency for families and LA alike.

Whilst currently LA’s do not have clear guidance as to frequency of visits to families there exist considerable variation between different authorities and therefore the frequency of support and/or contact between LA and families.

A minimum of one visit per annum also provides for a more proactive response from the LA eg if the family have move and not informed the authorities, or if family circumstances have changed. However there may be resource implications relating to staff time in order to meet this criteria

Establishing an initial visits during the first year and a minimum of one annual visits per family will impact on staffing and costs for the LA.

In the middle of the night..

As long as I have lived, I have never had any enemies. Honestly. Or at least I thought I didn't. Until this week. And they suddenly appeared, out of the blue, with a full frontal attack.

Anyway, we'd had a quite lovely weekend away working at a conference and I came back exhausted, so exhausted that I went to bed as we came through the door. Upstairs at 6.30pm, bed by 7.00pm. Anyone who knows me will know that this is a miracle. I was out like a light, it must be my newly blended medication (the combination of thyroxine and beta blockers) and slept for five hours, solidly. Then Chris came to bed and I woke up. I tried to fall asleep, tried shutting my eyes tightly, tried opening them, shutting them, opening them... no joy. I was totally awake. So, I decided to read... and this is what I laid my hands on. Honest.

Wage battle with those who fight against me.
Set yourself against those who contend with me.
Take up your shield and armour and come to my rescue.
Draw your bow and lift your war axe against those who are pursuing me.
May the plans of those who plot my ruin not succeed, may they be disgraced and turn back in dismay.
May they be as straw scattered by the wind.
Let their way back be dark and slippery as they are pursued.
For without reason they set a trap for me and dug a deep hole for me to fall into.
May they be ensnared in their own trap and fall into their own pit unexpectedly.

Evil men accuse me of things I know nothing about.
They repay me evil for good until my soul sinks in despair.

But when I stumbled, they were glad.
They got together and laughed.
They treated me as a stranger and attacked me when I was down.
These same people ridiculed my faith.
They mocked and sneered at me.

Please rescue me from these men and their verbal blasts, save me from these hungry lions.

Don't let these people gloat over me.
Don't let them hate me for no reason and maliciously wink at each other without a cause.
They don't speak in a friendly tone and deceitfully talk against peace-loving people.
They accuse me of things I never did.

Come to my defence and plead my case.
You are righteous and just.
Please declare me innocent.
Don't let my enemies gloat over me.
Don't allow them to say "Wonderful! We have what we wanted. S/he is now under suspicion."
May those who gloat over my suffering and distress be shown to be wrong.
May they contradict themselves when they speak against me.
May they be forever put to shame.

So, with thoughts of bow and arrows, straw scattering in the wind, naughty people falling into pits they dug for other people... I fell asleep again. For seven hours. Well, that was worth it.

From Directgov to BBC Look North

Directgov (Public services all in one place)

Review into home schooling

Earlier this year Graham Badman former Director of Children’s Services in Kent, was asked to carry out a review into home schooling. There are around 20,000 children registered as home educated, but estimates suggest many more could be invisible to the system. The aim of the review was to find a solution that would balance the rights of parents with the rights of children to a decent education in a safe environment.

The review's recommendations include:

• local authorities should give more support to home schooling families, such as helping provide access to the national examination system, sports facilities, libraries and music teaching
  
• all parents who plan to home school have to register on a compulsory annual registration scheme
  
• parents should be asked to outline what they aim to achieve over the following 12 months at the time of registration
  
• properly trained local authority officials should be given the right of access to the home to check that the child is making progress and to make sure they are safe and well
  
• local authorities should be able refuse registration to home educate if there is clear evidence of safeguarding concerns

Children's Minister Delyth Morgan said: "Most home educators do a fantastic job and I want to ensure they get more support from local authorities. But we can’t afford to let any child slip through the net – in terms of their education, or safety.

"We have to balance the rights of parents with the pre-eminent rights of children to a decent education in a safe environment.

"These recommendations are proportionate and reasonable. The fact is most developed countries require registration to home educate, with the majority also having a process of systematic monitoring. It’s only right we afford our own children and young people the same checks and balances."

Well, well, well... a Facebook friend linked this to her wall today (18 Nov 2009). Let me fill you in on the context... Badman's consultation is not out! Yet, this page on Directgov is dated Friday, 12 June 2009. Even before a hundred+ responses hit our keyboards, this was out! How did they know that this is exactly what we wanted? Amazing! Their powers of foretelling the future are truly amazing.... only... they're not.

But Delyth said our responses would be considered... she did, honest... she told our daughter... she wrote to her... she can't have... L... I... E... D... could she? To a child?

But she said "We will take into account the responses to the consultation and any report arising from the Select Committee inquiry into the review of home education when deciding how to proceed." She said she was pleased to hear from children... she must like them... mustn't she? Drifting off....

Anyway, this evening I watched our local news, BBC Look North (time limited link). Big hoo-haa over an NHS questionnaire for parents about their children. Parents are being given the questionnaire to predetermine behaviours in children, even pregnant mothers were introduced to the idea and some said "No thanks" while others thought it was a wonderful idea and could allow teachers to "predict their child's character". I nearly threw up over my curry and rice at that point, (home made, not take-away). You see, one of the questions asked how many times the child has take-aways? Yes, it did. And another question was about how often the child lied??? Yes, lying. Which brings me back to Delyth. If she was lying, do you think we can fill in one of those Lincolnshire NHS questionnaires for her, and get her sorted out asap? Here's hoping...

Read about it here. Thanks to another Facebook pal for this link :-)
Comment on the School Entry Wellbeing Review.

Declaration to Parliament - Notice of Refusal to Co-operate

Following today's Queen's Speech, the government has clearly declared war on home educators, by ruthlessly plunging ahead in plans to FORCE home educators to be registered, inspected and licensed. This is illegal and outrageous. One of the assumptions was that they are 'safeguarding the vulnerable' reiterating their fraudulent claims that home educators are somehow abusers beyond all doubt. So, in order to stand up agains bullying and intimidation, home educators are standing together to hand in our NOTICES OF REFUSAL TO CO-OPERATE with Badman's Review.

"Safeguarding the vulnerable - strengthening the powers of local authorities and others with regards to registration, inspection and intervention will mean effective systems are in place to protect those that most need it. The Bill will introduce a new home educators’ registration system and take new powers for Secretaries of State to intervene in youth offending teams that are failing and potentially putting young people and their communities at risk."

This is urgent, and requires active participation by all Home Educators. Please read and forward to all Home Educators and Home Education lists that you belong to.

This is a DECLARATION TO PARLIAMENT, putting them on notice that they should not add the recommendations of the Graham Badman Report into new law, and that we will not co-operate with any such law should they dare to enact it.

If you agree with what it says, select all the text between the dividers, copy the text to a new document, print it, sign it or otherwise make your mark on it, and then send it to your MP.

Then forward this entire message to any Home Educators and parents that you know and urge them to do the same. You may disseminate this public notice to anyone and any place you think will help it gain momentum.

Whether you are involved in the petition or any other initiative makes no odds. Use this to make your views clearly known to your MPs and show them once and for all that we are united!

To find your MP's address use this site: http://www.theyworkforyou.com/

+++++++++++++++++ Notice of Refusal to Co-operate ++++++++++++++

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN

WHEREAS the recommendations of the GRAHAM BADMAN REVIEW OF ELECTIVE HOME EDUCATION have been accepted in full by the Secretary of State.

AND that these grossly disproportionate recommendations hold serious implications for the civil liberties of parents, children and families in this country.

AND that these recommendations place primary responsibility for assessing the suitability of education and the welfare of the child on the state, rather than the parent - with no prior evidence that either is unsatisfactory prior to this grossly intrusive intervention.

AND that the recommendations of the review assumes that the home is an inherently unsafe or unhealthy place for the child to be.

AND that these recommendations undermine the role of the parent and trample over family freedoms in its haste to set parent and child up against each other, bestowing additional and selective "rights" on home educated children that only the government can adequately minister to.

AND that these recommendations destroy the very possibility of true autonomy in learning.

AND that these recommendations operate from a position of requiring proof of parental innocence rather than reasonable suspicion of guilt.

AND that these recommendations discriminatorily use the coercive and interventionist tools of parental licensing, warrantless entry to the home, inspection according to arbitrary external standards, and an unconscionable new power to interrogate the child without the parents present.

AND that the outcome of these recommendations will be horribly discriminatory to a minority community, the measures eventually having to apply to anyone who has their child at home with them: parents with under 5s, those whose children attend private school, and also those with school-aged children who are at home in the evenings, over the weekends, and throughout the summer holidays.

AND that the outcome of these inspections will be based on the very human whim and prejudices of a local authority officer, who will have the power to destroy the life and education that that parent has conceived for his or her child.

AND that if the government is to avoid further discrimination it also stands to reason that each child who attends school must be given the same "rights" as home educated children - to "have their voices heard" regarding whether or not they are happy to be educated in school, whether they are satisfied with their teachers and whether they feel safe in such an environment.

WE ACCEPT that it is right that appropriate and proportionate action, as currently outlined in the law, may be taken to rectify a situation if there are serious concerns about a child's welfare, observing that a child being at home with its parents is not, and never has been, in and of itself a child welfare issue.

AND HEREBY RESOLVE that any such utterly disproportionate legislation if passed will fundamentally alter the relationship between citizen and state, and would constitute a fundamental violation of our rights,

AND that any such legislation is illegitimate on its face.

NOW UNDERSTAND that by this declaration, Parliament is PUT ON NOTICE that I and others will not co-operate with any such legislation, and strongly caution you not to consider, debate, or enact any such legislation.

Signed _______________________________

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Teasing Out the Knots

Morgan Gallagher (can be x-posted freely)

There has been a huge amount of traffic, both in blog spheres and the mainstream media, about the proposed new regulations affecting electively home educated children in England over the past few months. Much of it has ended up with some truly despicable spin being perpetrated by the UK Gov, in order to make their viewpoint seem rational. This has resulted in some epics fails in factual understanding of the issues, perhaps the most appalling being the moment Victoria Climbie's torture and death was linked to home education. By an 'expert'.

In the light of how high feeling, and Government spin, is running, I felt it useful to try and tease out some of the knots that have so many people tied up so tightly - in both directions. The biggest knot, I feel, is that it all seems so... rational. What the Government says, looks so innocuous and rational , that most people are simply bewildered when others scream and shout about oppression and civil liberties and human rights.

If you don't know what I'm talking about, a report has been prepared stating that, as law, home education needs tight control and regulation. Two main reasons are cited for this.

1) To protect home educated children from child abuse

2) To ensure all home educated children receive a good education

Now, the problem with this, particularly for the man in the street, or even on an omnibus in Clapham, is that is look perfectly reasonable. Utterly, utterly rational. Any 'right minded' person is going to look at that and say "Quite Right" and move on.

If you object, and say "hang on, that's just not on..." you will be looked at like a social deviant, who clearly has something to hide. "What's that, you don't agree that children should be protected from child abuse? You think it's okay for kids to be kept at home, locked and beaten and made to do housework and not learn to read, whilst their suffering goes unheard?" "ARE YOU A MONSTER?"

So to object to the premise, is to object to children being protected. You are, indeed, a monster.

But it only looks reasonable, if a sleight of hand is in place. And most people are not spotting the sleight of hand. They're going straight to the kids, and their minds are flashing the horrible horrible memories of Maria Cauldwell, of Victoria, of Tyra Henry, of Baby Peter. And once those children have flashed into their minds, that's it - THE CHILDREN WILL BE PROTECTED... and all rational response stops. Because the connection looks reasonable. But it isn't.

It's not reasonable.

And it's not reasonable because home educators do not abuse their kids. It's not reasonable because home educated kids are not hidden. It's not reasonable because some kids are so damaged by school that home education is safer for them. No, none of these actually apply.

It's not reasonable because... there is no connection between child protection and education.

This debate, binds and ties and twists and blends these two elements together, and tries to suggest they relate to each other. There is no connection. Child safety has nothing to do with education. Formal education is just something that happens to kids as they get older.

Child safety, and the check and balances, and the safe guards and procedures... exist regardless of education, regardless of school. The child safety procedures are imbedded in all medical and health contacts, from before birth. They are a net of connections between every Government employee who connects with you on anything to do with health and well being. They have nothing to do with school, or school, or education.

Trying to get this over to people, that this is a twisting of how the worlds already works, this view that schooling is an element in child protection, is very hard. Partly, because as a society we've grown used to dumping everything at the school door and demanding teachers do it. Every scrap of information and skills we deem all children should know - we dump over to the teachers and scream if it doesn't happen. Schools are now in the business in extremely deprived areas, of teaching children to toilet, speak and eat. Every year, 4 and 5 years olds who are still in nappies, cannot talk and only eat mush and milk, are presented to the school system. That's an extreme example.. but it's accurate. It does happen. We think it's entirely reasonable that school, and teachers, do everything.

This is not reasonable. It is not the job of school, and teachers, to raise children.

It is their job to educate them. Certainly, they do have an eye out for child protection, and if there is a suspicion of a problem... what do schools do? They bring into operation the ... child protection system. The one already in place. The one that has been in place for that child, since before they were born.

The system that already exists. The one every child, even those outside school, is already in. The one that exists, and the one that does not disappear like magic *poof* when the child has its fifth birthday.

Confused? Hmm.. let me try it like this. Let's look at the proposition, that school protects you from child abuse, and all children must be protected, as we don't know what is going on at home. Let's journey to Maria's house, and examine her pathway as a responsible adult, ensuring her child at home is kept safe by going to school...

Ding Dong
"Hello?"
"Mrs Maria Peterson?"
"Yes."
"Mother of Geoffrey, who is now" rustles paperwork " 15 days old?"
"Yes."
"Hello Mrs Peterson, may I call you Maria..? We're the education welfare officers from the nursery in your catchment area. We're here to discuss Geoffrey’s' placement, may we come in."

The visitors come in and are seated. Maria is confused, but she listens patiently.

"Well Maria, we'll be quick. We've just brought Geoffrey’s admittance papers, and to say we hope to see him on Monday morning."
"I'm sorry, see him where?"
"At the Nursery, Maria. For him to start his Early Years Learning Programme."
"I'm sorry
"As you know, we have target for all our little ones, nothing too strenuous at Geoffrey’s age, can he hear sounds, recognise faces etc, so it's best he gets a good grounding now. Where he can be cared for properly, and with excellent tuition."
"Look, I'm really sorry, I don't understand."
"Surely you want the best for Geoffrey?"
"Yes, of course I do."
"Well then, we'll see you on Monday, or rather, we'll see Geoffrey."
"I'm sorry, I'm not happy about that."
"Really, why not?"
"I don't want Geoffrey to leave me, he's too young, I'm perfectly capable of taking care of his needs, and making sure he has what he needs. I don't want him in a Nursery."
"Oh dear."
"What do you mean 'oh dear'?"
"Well, Maria. That's a bit suspicious, isn't it? Why don't you want Geoffrey to go to Nursery?"
"I don't know what you mean!"
"It's our job to protect Geoffrey, Maria, we need to know he's safe. And how can we know he's safe, if he's here home with you?"
"WHAT!"
"Can you not see that attending Nursery is a safeguard?"
"What?"
"Can you not see that Geoffrey being in Nursery 5 days a week, is a safeguard for him? We'd notice if anything was wrong?"
"Well, yes, I see your point, but no, I'm here with him, he's safe with me. I want him here, with me, where I can care for him."
"Well, of course you do, you're his mother. But surely you can see it's better if he goes to Nursery? We can all be sure of him being safe then?"
"No I don't agree, actually. Geoffrey is better here with me."
"Oh dear. Well then, we'll have to make a report, and talk to everyone. I'm sure you'll see that now you've refused, we need to keep a close eye on things. Keep a check. Just sensible, isn't it?"
"I don't know what you're going on about, and I want you to leave." Maria looks as if she is going to cry.
"We will go in a minute Maria, now we know how you feel about Geoffrey going into the proper protection programme for him. But one thing, might I ask where he is and if we can see him?"
"He's upstairs having his nappy changed."
"Oh, and who is doing that, a blood relative?"
"No, my friend, Ginny, who's here to help me with the first couple of weeks."
.. furious writing of notes...
"I see Maria, well, I have to ask for Ginny's full name and address now. After all, we need to check she's been CRB checked."
"WHAT!"
"Well, no one at Nursery would be able to change Geoffrey’s nappy without being CRB checked, surely you can see it's just common sense to apply the same rules?"
"That's outrageous."
"We have noted your resistance. It will be a feature of our report. Now, one last thing.. you say Ginny is here to help...?"
"Yes, she's been wonderful. She's done a lot of cooking and cleaning whilst I've got the feeding established. And she's taken the baby whilst I've got a shower, and some sleep. I don't know what I'd have done without her."
"Well, that's lovely. I've noted in the report that you're not coping, and require extra help. Luckily, the Nursery in your catchment area has extended opening hours for mothers like you, and so we can take Geoffrey from 6am to 8pm. That should help a great deal, shouldn't it? When the social workers come tomorrow, they'll have the care plan all set up. It's Geoffrey that's important, after all, isn't it?"

Sound preposterous? Amusing but totally outrageous?

It's what is in the guidelines. That's why everyone is screaming. That sleight of the hand you saw, when they started talking about learning objectives, and then segued into child protection? That's what the report does. Ask a question on learning, and if receives a negative response, moves into child protection.

Now, I want you to test your own responses to home education. I want you to take the above conversation, about a 15 day old baby, and ask yourself when the conversation becomes sensible.

One year? Two years? Three years? Four years? Five years? Six years? Seven years?

When does the above make sense for you? When is it right to say to a mother "No, you need to let that child out of the house and go to school, it's the best for the child?"

I have to tell you, there is no time that scenario makes sense. There is no magic point where the parent's decision for how their child will receive an education, is superseded by an alarm clock.

Let's look at it from two perspectives - safety, and education.

When is it safe for a parent to be in sole charge of the safety of their child? If you felt it was reasonable at say 4 or 5 years, above. ... ask yourself a question... why is it safe for a day old baby to be at home with its parents... but not safe for a five year old?

Because that's what's being proposed - that there is a 'date' for when parents can, or can't, be in safe charge of their own children.

Why, given the child protection legislation already in place, is a child suddenly at more risk, for not being in school? Particularly in a world where the overwhelming majority of child cruelty cases take place in under 3s.

Ah, you say - that's the point! Being at home without anyone to oversee them.. that's why they got abused! No, it's not. Baby Peter was in a Government Nursery, paid for as part of his child protection support plan. Just like I described for baby Geoffrey. Victoria Climbie has already been reported, and was likewise referred to a child protection scheme, which never got round to checking on her. It was an NSPCC run care centre, and no one visited Victoria as they were organising a party and got too busy. And subsequently doctored the documents to pretend they hadn't forgotten her.

All of the dead children you know of, that you immediately think of when they say "But the children need to be seen to be protected..." were all seen.

None of them were hidden.

Some were even old enough to be in school.

None of them were protected.

They were all failed by inefficient staff overworked and underpaid, struggling, and not doing their jobs. And that's the kind way of looking at it.

So, I return again, to the above scenario... when is it reasonable for the State, to say "No, you must send your child to school, for its own protection?"

Put like that, it's preposterous, isn't it? When you untie the knots and let slip the binding. Child protection is about child protection... it has only the most slight and tangent connection with education. It just isn't part and parcel of the same discussion.

Ah but.. yes, well, I agree.. but that's not the issue, is it? Children need to receive a proper education, don't they? We need to know that is happening, don't we?

Yes, we do. You may be surprised to hear, given the media coverage, that we actually have that system in place. Already. There is a perfectly robust set of rules and regulations that give local authorities the power to ask about home educated children's education, and to force the child into school if it's deemed not good enough. Honest, It's there. Totally.

Then what is all the fuss about, I hear you cry?

Don't ask me, I haven't a clue. Why is the Government banging on about this? *shrugs shoulders* Makes no sense to me. Some will point out the existing powers don't allow the Government to ride roughshod over the parents and do things in a measured way. It means the authority has to work with the parents, and can't just snap their fingers and enforce their own opinion. Others will point out that the man who held the revue, also owns a company that makes money out of education contracts with local authorities. Others will say the Government just wants to make sure it's social engineering programme reaches Every Single Child, no matter what.

I have no clue why they are doing it. I'm just pointing out that by binding child protection to education, and deciding that Government supplied education is the only safe option... they are pulling the wool over many an eye. What looks reasonable in the long view, is utterly preposterous in close up.

Think I'm wrong? Think that it's easy to make it all sound ridiculous but it's all very clear and simple, and quite above board, and totally reasonable?

Let's look at the tying of child protection and education in another light then, shall we?

knock knock
"Come in. Ah, Mr Preston, how nice of you to join us. I'll introduce you to everyone shall I? As everyone knows, I'm James Ashiq, head teacher here at Saint Swithuns. This is our Education Welfare Officer, Margaret Aston. This is Sophie Oudibou, the Child Protection officer from Social Services, and this is the Mark Munroe, from the DCFS. Mark is in the area checking on how we are all working together, you don't mind him being here?"
"Ehm no.. but I’m a little confused?"
"Confused, why?"
"I'm confused as I thought I was here to talk about the problem with Sophie not doing her homework?"
"Yes Mr Preston, can I call you John?. yes, that's why we are here."
"But.. well. I've explained. We do try to get her to do her homework. But she's 14 now, and a little headstrong. She doesn't like school that much, and her Mum and me... well,. there is rather a lot of it, isn't there?
"No, I think you'll find we give exactly the right amount for the guidelines. Totally the right amount."
"Yes, but.. oh well, look, can you please tell me what all these people are doing here?"
"Well, if you sit down, I'll explain... would you like some tea...no? Oh well, I'll just get to it, shall I. As you know, the Government has the best interests of all children at heart. This is why we have rigorous standards in education and social and moral care, that all children are entitled to. Standards we work hard to maintain at St Swithuns."
"Yes, I know that, I was at parent's meeting. We did choose for Sophie to come here."
"Oh course you did, and a good choice too! Now, we have some concerns, that Sophie isn't meeting her targets."
"I know she's not doing her homework, that's why I'm here to discuss it. The question is, and I must insist on an answer, why are all these other people here?"
"Well, Mr Preston, you must realise we are all concerned about Sophie, and her meeting her Every Child Matters target. And her 5 GCSEs at 'C'. We're not sure she's going to do all that, if she isn't getting her homework in."
"Why are all these people here?"
"Well, surely you understand that if Sophie doesn't satisfy her educational targets, it's a child protection matter?"
"WHAT!!!!!"
"We only have her best interests at heart, Mr Preston, which is why we'll be filling in the paperwork for her to have her own children's guardian to speak for her, from our reports, at the hearing."
"What hearing?"
"The one we'll decide to call today., if we're not happy with the outcome of this meeting. To see if we need to apply for a care order for Sophie, if you continue to allow her to fail in her homework assignments."

Does it still sound reasonable?

Does it sound far fetched?

If you think it sounds far fetched, then you need to wake up and do some reading of what's actually being proposed. And then you might realise why everyone who has read it, and understands it, is screaming their head off.

For when you let slip the knots, and tease out the false connections being made for heaven knows what agenda.. it's your child we're fighting to protect. Your family that may face this.

Don't think just because your kid is in school this doesn't apply to you. If this principle is allowed to be put into law... that education authorities can invoke child protection as a way of assessing education... well, you may need to be saving up a for a lawyer, not University fees.

Evidence submitted to the Select Committee

Do take some time to read the evidence put forward as part of the Select Committee Enquiry into Badman's Review. I trust you will be able to tell the difference between the views of home educators and 'official' responses which robustly declared that Badman's review was scientific and sound. Judge for yourself.

Amongst the responses, you will find that Badman was interested to know whether home educating mothers suffered from Munchausen's by Proxy! So, that'll be tens of thousands of home educating mothers accused of keeping their children home BECAUSE they suffer from a mental illness! Astounding and unbelievable, but I'll leave that for you to decide.


Children, Schools and Families Memoranda

Happy reading!

String Celebration 2009

After about 8 months of hard work, Chris and colleagues coordinated this amazing event. Asha is playing in this 300 strong String Celebration 2009 orchestra, in this final bit of the Oliver! Finale. I zoom in at after about a minute and you may spot her in the centre of the shot. The sports hall was buzzing and packed out, probably the best place to be in Grantham all year :-) Well done and thanks to absolutely everyone!

Enjoy!