Labour’s Laura Kyrke-Smith, MP for Aylesbury has proposed an amendment to the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill which, if included, would deepen the persecution of home educating parents. She proposes that a local authority (LA) must assess any ‘request’ from a parent withdrawing a child from school. Their ‘request’ must be assessed against a safeguarding framework which will be provided by the Secretary of State.
The key issue with this amendment is the removal of the parents’ right to home educate. Under present law a parent can simply deregister their child from school, because parents are responsible for the education of their children. Under this new amendment, every parent will be required to make a ‘request’ to a local authority, thereby making it clear that the state controls the way children are educated.
Further, she proposes that every family should be risk assessed as either low, medium or high risk. Current or previous Child Protection Plans (CPP) automatically elevate a family to medium or high risk, with a particular focus on the mental health of the parents; a history of persistent absence, or a previous failure to engage appropriately with ‘professionals.’
Perhaps with superficial analysis, one could find some interesting safeguarding measures here, but, when you consider the point of view of the families they would actually affect, the implications are worrying. Families that have overcome earlier difficulties would be considered ‘high risk’ and their lives forever blighted by their early trouble. Parents who have had to fight for their school-refusing children will be judged to be recalcitrant and problematic if they haven’t engaged with authorities in the way they would like. The harsh reality is that the establishment see no room for redemption. Once you have had a social worker; you are always a problem family.
The real cincher with this amendment is in the final section which suggests that families should subject themselves to monthly, un-scheduled visits to check on the welfare of the children. These visits would be compulsory. It is impossible to imagine how this would work in practice given that home educating families typically engage in a range of activities outside the home; plus there would be massive staffing implications for the local authorities of such a measure. As ever, however, there is a principle at stake here and that is the sanctity and privacy of the family home as well as the primacy of parents in the lives of their children.
It is worth noting that this is just a proposed amendment which may or may not be added to the Bill. But it reveals the current Government’s attitude towards home and family. Families are simply extensions of the state — to be assessed and controlled. Further, this particular amendment belies any notion the establishment would be prepared to positively support someone trying to do the best for their family. It assumes that the state knows best and ultimately that parents are not to be trusted to look after their own children. Please refer to the serious problems of this amendment in any current communications you have about the Bill with your MPs.
ParentPower Team
ppadmin
