From across England come eerily similar stories of local authority officers behaving in what some home educating parents see as unjustifiable ways. This centres in the main around requests to see the child physically and discuss with parents and child the nature of the educational provision being provided. The rationale behind this is fairly plain. It is easy enough for a parent to write that a child visits the library, plays the violin and belongs to various clubs; this does not make it true. Some local authority officers have found that when they talk to the children themselves, some of them have no idea at all what they are supposed to be doing. Clearly, the parents have been putting down whatever they think will sound like a good education!
Local authorities do not work in a vacuum. They talk to each other regularly, not only neighbouring authorities, but ones at the other end of the country. When Mike Allpress was the lead person in this county, Essex, on elective home education, he used to organise conferences in Harlow for other authorities in the south east. Representatives came from as far away as Southampton and a common framework would be agreed. This happens all over England. Just as some home educators band together and exchange information on lists such as the Badman Review Action Group, so too do local authorities pass on concerns to each other. Most of them also belong to the main Internet groups like BRAG, HE-UK and so on. They are very well informed about developments in the world of home education.
The behaviour of local authority officers responsible for home education in various parts of the country is now showing a common theme. In the Unitary Authority of Poole, in Suffolk, Oxfordshire, Birmingham and Gateshead, the same tactic is being used. Children who have not been seen for some time because their parents refuse visits, are the target for attention. The thrust of this is that local authorities want to see the kid and talk face to face with the parents. I can see their point. We often see parents on lists and forums who ask for help in putting together educational philosophies, but who would be rather at a loss if asked outright just what they had been doing for their kids education this week!
Home education in this country has been established by precedent, rather than statute. Apart from a few oblique references in some laws which were drawn up without even considering home education as such, most of the legal basis comes from old court cases; Bevan v Shears, Phillips v Brown, Harrison & Harrison v Stevenson and so on. Having failed, at least for now, to gain any new legislation, the aim is to build up a few court cases which will tend to show that local authorities have more power than the old cases of precedent indicate. They are being quite cautious about this and as soon as a parent complains to one of the home eduction groups, they will back-pedal. However, as I have pointed out before, the great majority of home educating parents do not belong to Internet groups. The first that we will hear of such a court case is when it has been reported in the papers.
At a guess, I would say that several local authorities will find parents who are supposedly home educating but are actually not providing even the sketchiest attempt at any sort of education. These parents will have School Attendance Orders issued against them and at least a few will refuse to comply with them. The resulting prosecutions will allow the local authorities to state their views in court and as long as they choose the right parents, the magistrates will then allow the allow the prosecution to succeed. A few successes of this sort, particularly if any appeals by the parents to higher courts fail, will change the landscape of home education in this country. As I say, the present way that home education is tolerated in England is a result of court decisions. The situation can be altered in the same way. In the absence of any new legislation, this is how local authorities will be able to effect a change in the legal situation around home education. What has been noticed in places like Birmingham and Suffolk are the opening shots in this campaign.
Showing posts with label Poole. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Poole. Show all posts
Saturday, 18 December 2010
Sunday, 5 December 2010
Doorstepped in Dorset; Part 2
Two people in particular raised very good points about yesterday's post. One of these was Margaret, the other was somebody who lives in the area and upon whose word I rely.
Margaret posed a number of hypothetical cases and asked if I would still have been so welcoming had the house been in uproar or chaos for various reasons. I suppose that the answer to that is that as long as I was surte that the person demanding my attention and wishing to to speak to me was genuinely there because she was concerned about my daughter's welfare, then I would, albeit with a bad grace, probably allow them to see the child. If we were on the way out, I might suggest that she walk with us to the bus stop and ask her questions on the way. if the house were a mess, I might insist that she remain on the doorstep. I would certainly make it plain that she was only on my property by my permission.
I have actually had some irritating experiences of this sort myself and so this is not at all theoretical. when a new 'advisor' started work in Essex, she wanted to rush round and see every child in a hurry. I had been visited a few months previously and suddenly got a letter suggesting that this person would come round shortly. I made my annoyance clear when I replied, but allowed the visit anyway. An even better example is when my daughter started to complain of mysterious tummy aches. She was otherwise healthy, eleven years of age and with pronounced breast development. I did not really need a medical practitioner to tell me the most likely explanation for these pains, but thought it best to be on the safe side. It was late September. The doctor, an elderly man, associated September with back to school. Noting my daughter's age, he began asking about starting secondary school and whether she had any problems at school. The implication was plain; psychosomatic problem caused by a desire to avoid school. When he discovered that she did not attend school, the direction changed at once. He moved seamlessly from attributing these tummy aches to starting secondary school, to suggesting that they were caused by not starting secondary school. Questions about wanting to be with her friends were asked and the hint was that I was keeping her at home for reasons of my own. (Quite true; I wanted to provide her with a decent education!) I have no doubt that he marked down in her notes that here was an anxious and isolated child suffering from psychological disturbance. readers will be relieved to know that my own diagnosis proved more accurate and that her periods began a few days later.
In the above case, I tolerated the ill informed views of a bloody fool, because he clearly meant well. This is the principle by which I have always worked when I come across people who don't really know about home education.
In Poole, my informant tells me that those monitoring home education are turning up unannounced at people's homes and trying to bluff their way into the house by claiming to have legal powers which they do not possess. Apparently, they literally put their foot in the door in order to prevent the parent from shutting the door in their faces. I am told that despite what I say, these people do not mean well at all. If this is so and their motives go beyond the welfare of the children, I suppose that I must ask what other reason there could be for their behaviour? I do not doubt for a moment that these individuals are claiming to have powers which they do not have. Neither do I doubt for a moment that they are behaving like door to door salesmen and refusing to leave when asked politely. This is unfortunate. Another complaint is that despite the availability of funding from central government for children with special educational needs who are being educated at home, Poole takes the line that those who home educate have chosen to do the thing alone and without assistance. This is the line which other local authorities are also taking.
As I have said, I have experienced irritation from the local authority and Health Service myself on this front. Nothing which I came across stemmed from anything other than concern for my daughter, however misplaced. I wonder if any readers can suggest another motive for all these actions down in Dorset? I suppose that senior managers covering their arses against a re-run of the Khyra Ishaq case is one; are there any others?
Margaret posed a number of hypothetical cases and asked if I would still have been so welcoming had the house been in uproar or chaos for various reasons. I suppose that the answer to that is that as long as I was surte that the person demanding my attention and wishing to to speak to me was genuinely there because she was concerned about my daughter's welfare, then I would, albeit with a bad grace, probably allow them to see the child. If we were on the way out, I might suggest that she walk with us to the bus stop and ask her questions on the way. if the house were a mess, I might insist that she remain on the doorstep. I would certainly make it plain that she was only on my property by my permission.
I have actually had some irritating experiences of this sort myself and so this is not at all theoretical. when a new 'advisor' started work in Essex, she wanted to rush round and see every child in a hurry. I had been visited a few months previously and suddenly got a letter suggesting that this person would come round shortly. I made my annoyance clear when I replied, but allowed the visit anyway. An even better example is when my daughter started to complain of mysterious tummy aches. She was otherwise healthy, eleven years of age and with pronounced breast development. I did not really need a medical practitioner to tell me the most likely explanation for these pains, but thought it best to be on the safe side. It was late September. The doctor, an elderly man, associated September with back to school. Noting my daughter's age, he began asking about starting secondary school and whether she had any problems at school. The implication was plain; psychosomatic problem caused by a desire to avoid school. When he discovered that she did not attend school, the direction changed at once. He moved seamlessly from attributing these tummy aches to starting secondary school, to suggesting that they were caused by not starting secondary school. Questions about wanting to be with her friends were asked and the hint was that I was keeping her at home for reasons of my own. (Quite true; I wanted to provide her with a decent education!) I have no doubt that he marked down in her notes that here was an anxious and isolated child suffering from psychological disturbance. readers will be relieved to know that my own diagnosis proved more accurate and that her periods began a few days later.
In the above case, I tolerated the ill informed views of a bloody fool, because he clearly meant well. This is the principle by which I have always worked when I come across people who don't really know about home education.
In Poole, my informant tells me that those monitoring home education are turning up unannounced at people's homes and trying to bluff their way into the house by claiming to have legal powers which they do not possess. Apparently, they literally put their foot in the door in order to prevent the parent from shutting the door in their faces. I am told that despite what I say, these people do not mean well at all. If this is so and their motives go beyond the welfare of the children, I suppose that I must ask what other reason there could be for their behaviour? I do not doubt for a moment that these individuals are claiming to have powers which they do not have. Neither do I doubt for a moment that they are behaving like door to door salesmen and refusing to leave when asked politely. This is unfortunate. Another complaint is that despite the availability of funding from central government for children with special educational needs who are being educated at home, Poole takes the line that those who home educate have chosen to do the thing alone and without assistance. This is the line which other local authorities are also taking.
As I have said, I have experienced irritation from the local authority and Health Service myself on this front. Nothing which I came across stemmed from anything other than concern for my daughter, however misplaced. I wonder if any readers can suggest another motive for all these actions down in Dorset? I suppose that senior managers covering their arses against a re-run of the Khyra Ishaq case is one; are there any others?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
