Every parent untrustworthy

On the number10 website:

‘We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to remind his government that parents must remain responsible in law for ensuring the welfare and education of their children and that the state should not seek to appropriate these responsibilities.’

The petition has its roots in the Home Education community, but it involves a far bigger principle about responsibility for bringing children up. I’ll declare an interest straight away as a retired home educator (our sons are now at university and 6th form college).

Local authorities have always been responsible for assessing education provision but the government now wants all children to be evaluated against the Every Child Matters ‘five outcomes’ welfare framework. This follows LA complaints that they had no way of meeting their targets where home educated children are concerned because they don’t have the data. Government has initiated yet another consultation on home education – the 5th in 3 years – in order to establish an inspection regime for the five outcomes.

Although the previous consultations have concluded that the present regime offers sufficient protection to children, the government has turned it into a child protection issue, saying that home education is being used as a cover for abuse and forced marriage, and they have garnered the support of the NSPCC. Government has been put under pressure to supply the evidence to support their claims, but none has been forthcoming.

At stake is the far wider issue of whether parents can by default be assumed capable of raising children without state oversight. Government and LAs have become increasingly edgy about home education because they can’t see what’s going on from day to day. Are they really saying that parents can’t be trusted to promote their children’s wellbeing unless they are monitored?


8 Responses to Every parent untrustworthy

  1. Pete Darby says:

    The whole excercise is predicated on it’s being the councils job to ensure the outcomes, rather than to promote the outcomes.

    Hell, if I was in charge of a council being measured on the outcomes, I’d do the promotion bit and sit back. Because measuring the effectiveness of promoting outcomes is measuring the weight of fog.

  2. neil scott says:

    the rights of chilren being abused in middlesbrough is well known advertising on buses bill bords as asbo kids is against there rights as children underaged children,also the hansard website,they work for you is for mps to gain as much information about whats happening in your life then its being used against you,they allowyou entry but then state a nonsense claim that your proving a good point and stop you from using it to gwet the attention of the mps who are supposed to help

  3. Louisa Herbs says:

    “Local authorities have always been responsible for assessing education provision”

    Have they?

  4. archrights says:

    Point taken, Louisa – that was seriously lazy shorthand. “Local authorities should satisfy themselves as to the suitability of education when it comes to their notice that a child is home educated”. Ho-hum.

  5. Louisa Herbs says:

    I think that makes it worse LOL. I know that DCSF are working their little sox off to persuade us and LA’s to think this is what S.436(a) means but S.436(a) AIUI is about establishing educational setting. EHE guidelines are clear that LAs should assume suitable education that is suitable to AAA and SEN is being provided unless there’s indication to the contrary. In which case section 437 kicks in. So any LAs reading please take note!!

  6. Can local authorities really be held responsible?
    I don’t think so!!

    – Peter

  7. I home-schooled my learning disabled son and it was very abusive- children are often taken from vulnerable parents – the authorities puposely make parents as angry as possible so as to use the ammunition against them and inform judges of ‘personality disorders’ (it’s usually PTSD brought on by having to fight the councils) . It’s revealed that Anthony Douglass of CAFCASS and I believe a judge called Munby, have finanical interests in residential and foster care homes, Jamma Umoja and CORAM, check this out, Munby sits on SENDIST Tribunals. It’s felt, across the board with Childrens’ Rights campaigners, that pedophilia at the very top, even at ECHR and the UN (based in starving area of Thailand apparently?!) these pedophiles operote- naturally much of the brethren remain ignorant of what they protect, all of this needs investigation urgently, and as a parent, I would appreciate CCTV inside every classroom in the UK and only for convicted violent offenders or sex offenders to be prevented from seeing their children. As it is now, good parents are separated from their children for no good reason. I have a case filed at ECHR, I requested ”article 39, child in danger”’last year, and they’ve still done nothing, OFSTED and a variety of authorities know these facts, one can only hope the police are investigating. I have had email interfered with and am currently ‘stone walled’ as Norman Scarth was once. I have no interest in ‘winning’ my case but in justice only. People are not being motivated enough to take action unless this happens to them, this is changing.

  8. anon says:

    The State owns the children the minute we register for birth certificates.

    When they take the children back for whatever reason they want to dream up, they are only repossessing their property in their eyes.

    ‘forced adoption’ is alive and well and heading for home educators…at first they came for yours and I did nothing…rings a bell

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: