Disability discrimination home education case

[Ali Admin]

This case will be an interesting one to watch.

A Rotherham couple claim they have been discriminated against because they have decided to teach their severely disabled daughter at home.

The legslation in England still requires consent to be obtained for the withdrawal of a child from a designated special school (but not a child with special needs in a mainstream school), which is presumably why the LA are behaving so badly and invoking child protection procedures.

The family are fortunately now in touch with local home educators.

[Ali Admin]

Carlotta has blogged more about this case over at Dare to Know.

For parents of disabled children who have experienced both the schooling system and home education, the double standards are very hard to tolerate. Home educators seem to be held to far, far higher account. One parent commented:

"From the fuss they kick up you'd think schools, both special needs and mainstream, were providing what disabled children needed. This is so far from the truth.

Where are the SS when the school forget to feed a child, don't provide a communication aid, don't provide escorts on the bus who can administer medication, don't fulfil the child's social needs cos they are strapped into a chair, have a wheelchair that is too small and is hurting them, are bullied because of their special needs????

[vinny]

Originally Posted by Ali P

This case will be an interesting one to watch.



The legslation in England still requires consent to be obtained for the withdrawal of a child from a designated special school (but not a child with special needs in a mainstream school), which is presumably why the LA are behaving so badly and invoking child protection procedures.

The family are fortunately now in touch with local home educators.

Ive been wondering about the implications of Badmans report for disabled parents who home ed.

[Diane]

Hi Vinny,

If it goes through (which it won't because we won't let it), prejudice will have free reign. I imagine that some LA agents think that disabled home educating parents cannot educate their children for all sorts of reasons. Even now people have been told that, because they have suffered from depression - a common response to coercive society - they are not able to home educate without oversight from LA agents.

In other words, the little buggers can be massively prejudiced and discriminate against perfectly capable people.

Diane
http://www.threedegreesoffreedom.blogspot.com

[Elaine Kirk]

I am reading the present guidance to local authorities and this kinda leapt out at me
I am going up a lot of blind alleys at the moment but worth running past you al the same

can anybody else see it ?

2.16 Section 53 of the 2004 Act sets out the duty on local authorities to, where reasonably
practicable, take into account the child’s wishes and feelings with regard to the provision
of services. Section 53 does not extend local authorities’ functions. It does not, for example,
place an obligation on local authorities to ascertain the child’s wishes about elective home
education as it is not a service provided by the local authority.

[Diane]

Do you mean the bit about ascertaining children's opinions because home education is not a service provided by the local authority? Ipso facto, then, home education has nothing whatsoever to do with the local authorities. They do not provide anything. They are not responsible. Parents are. Parents are the ones with the duty.

There's also the thing about Section 7 which has always been explained to me as parents providing a suitable and efficient education. Parents providing. Not children getting. So we should not assume that children accept the education. Therefore, children cannot be tested or measured on something they may or may not receive. It should go back to the parental PROVISION of education being looked at by authorities.

Diane
http://www.threedegreesoffreedom.blogspot.com

[Elaine Kirk]

so it comes back to them using home ed to con the gullible public into thinking they are changing the law to protect poor home ed children when in fact it is just a gateway to everybody's home??

[Amy Thomson]

Originally Posted by Elaine Kirk

so it comes back to them using home ed to con the gullible public into thinking they are changing the law to protect poor home ed children when in fact it is just a gateway to everybody's home??

I've been thinking that they're pushing this through so they can get into every family home to push the ECM/GIRFEC agenda.

[Diane]

Looks that way. Unfortunately, it's such a slow boil (although heating up quicker now) that people don't notice. Well, so what if some nice government lady has to come in and see the children... I've nothing to hide.

Makes me want to shake them.

Diane
http://www.threedegreesoffreedom.blogspot.com