Children, Schools and Families Bill

[Elaine Kirk]

The story so far

[Ali Admin]

The UK Government has today formally declared war on home educators by stating its intention to introduce a licensing scheme for parents.

Queen's Speech: Bill-by-bill

Children, Schools and Families Bill
Offers pupil and parent guarantees for standards of education. Schools to be given "report cards". Promises "greater flexibility" for primary schools to set their own curriculums. Also ensures that all young people receive at least one year of sex and relationships education. Home educators will have to be registered and inspected. A review of the publication of family proceedings in court. Whole bill applies to England. Other parts cover Wales and extends in part to Northern Ireland.

Wonder what became of that CONsultation thingie? Didn't they say they would be publishing the responses and taking them into account? Then again, they probably said the wrong thing and policy based evidence won the day again. Much more convenient, what?

[Qualitee]

What?......You actually believed what they said, tut.

Let them get on with it, they are totally incapable of carry it out!

Pauline

[Elaine Kirk]

Convenient

I am doubting very much whether they will find this move 'convenient' He probably found appointing a Children's Commissioner
whose morals allowed her to firstly collude to avoid the truth surrounding official involvement of agencies with Khyra becoming public knowledge on page 16
and following it with this meeting convenient

And the evidence of collusion between senior social services staff and the government – on the 16th January 2009, Maggie Atkinson and Graham Badman along with John Coughlan and John Freeman (Joint Presidents of the Association of Directors of Children’s Services (ADCS)) had a 24 hour session with DCSF staff to work on matters relating to the DCSF’s Children’s Plan; three days later the ‘independent’ Badman Review was launched.

Where it was no doubt decided that dishonestly associating Home Education with the sad death of Khyra Ishaq

Q36 Paul Holmes: In a few minutes we are going to move on to start looking at the Badman report and suggestions about the regulation of home education. As the person who is 99% of the way to being the Children's Commissioner for England at the moment, what do you think we should be saying as a Committee regarding the legislative process and the Badman report, and whether it is protecting children's interests or trampling all over the interests of home-educated children?

Maggie Atkinson: I will take you back, if I may, to when I was an adviser in Birmingham city council, where there were quite large numbers of home-educated children—it is getting on for 20 years now since I worked in Birmingham. At that time, as an adviser I had a right and a duty not only to knock on the doors of people who were choosing electively to educate their children at home, but simply to go into their premises and, on the most headline of bases, to look at whether the environment was right, whether there were age-appropriate materials in use, and whether the children seemed okay. They were never interviewed on their own, they were never taken on one side, they were never taken away from their parents and there was never any really intrusive work that I did as an adviser from Birmingham city council. I felt it was entirely appropriate, and it was within the bounds of reason. In the last two to three years, the regulations are such that I can go no further than the doorstep. I have absolutely no doubt that the vast majority of families who choose electively to educate their children at home are doing so for entirely right reasons, for entirely honourable, fair, just, creative and admirable reasons. But I would give you two words, and they are the first and second names of the child who died—Khyra Ishaq. I do not think that it is taking a sledgehammer to crack a nut simply to be able to go across the doorstep of the home where a child is being electively home educated. Not to interfere, not to insist, not to direct, but simply to check that they are as safe as you need them to be. Khyra Ishaq was electively home educated and withdrawn from the roll of her school in Birmingham, and within 10 weeks she had starved to death. That may be an extreme case, and horrible and dreadful, and it happens very, very, very rarely indeed. None the less, it happened.
Q37 Paul Holmes: Who rewrote the rules to stop you going across the doorstep in the way that you did 20 years ago?

Maggie Atkinson: My understanding is that it was statutory guidance that was rewritten within the Department.

And now that they have

Home educators will have to be registered and inspected.

in a bill they are no doubt thinking the new trial in January will provide the cover they need to conveniently push through legislation.
But we do know the truth

A JUDGE has dem-anded to know who checked on tragic Khyra Ishaq as she starved to death.

A court heard the seven-year-old had not been to school for six months, during which time she wasted away.
Prosecutors said they believed there had been only two attempts to contact her family during that time – one by teachers and another by police.

Both happened a month after the youngster had been taken out of school.

Recorder of Birmingham Judge Frank Chapman asked if either visit had been followed up over the remaining five months of Khyra’s life.
Prosecutor Hayley Firman replied:
“The information I have says that it wasn’t.”

Which is not very convenient

[Nina]

This is a bit of the beaten track but we had a visit from the Health Visitor yesterday just an introduction as we are new to the area I was told. Me being a little suspicious thought otherwise so was totally on guard for getting a hard time about our 'unconventional' family who say no to vaccines, still breastfeeding and home educate. Strangely she was very supportive of everything! There were a lot of questions about coping and getting time for myself but no negatives at all! Then she said we will see you when she's 4 yrs old for her review.
You see they have done away with all the reviews they used to do, so now they are seen when they are born for early immunisations, then 12 mths for MMR then nothing until they start school. Now while that suits me as mum of 3 it got me thinking, why are they so keen to crack down on home education and have us registered and reviewed every year when there are all these babies who are no longer getting their development checks because of a cut back in money.
Where is the safeguarding they are talking about? Are children less at risk in the first 4 year of their life than when they are older and being taught at home? The risk of something like that case could easily happen during those early years when there is no need to see a health visitor unless you want to, I wonder who would be to blame the government and their cutbacks possibly? Parents are given the choice for their babies to have someone review their child's development or NOT but as soon as they are school aged there will be no choice?
It just seems they are picking on the minority instead of looking and taking blame for the mistakes THEY have made.