Home Education: Government Not Persuaded That New Legislation is Required

The government has rejected calls for intrusive legislation which would give local authority officials the power to visit the homes of children educated at home to monitor their ‘educational, physical and emotional development’.

Speaking at the conclusion of a two-hour debate, Lord Agnew of Oulton, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education, reasserted the government’s view that local authorities ‘already have the tools for the job’ of taking appropriate action where it appears that parents are failing in their duty to provide their child with a suitable education.

He also signalled the intention of the Department for Education to publish a draft of revised guidance documents on elective home education for local authorities and for parents, and to consult on them.

Lord Agnew stated:

I reassure parents who educate children at home. We know many of them do this for positive reasons and they do it well. We want that to continue with a minimum of fuss and bureaucracy.’

However, in response to concerns expressed earlier in the debate about some parents withdrawing their children to avoid prosecution for poor school attendance or to prevent their child being excluded (sometimes on the advice of the school itself), the Minister added that:

[I]t also appears increasingly likely that there are parents who are not doing this for positive reasons, may do it only because they see no alternative and would prefer not to be doing it for their children. It is time that we looked to their needs as well.

Of the 12 contributors to the second reading debate, all but one spoke in support of Lord Soley’s Home Education (Duty of Local Authorities) Bill. In a complete reversal of the well-established legal principle that responsibility for the education of children rests with parents and not with the state, the Crossbench peer Baroness Deech remarked: ‘If I had my way, school education would be compulsory unless parents could prove that they had good reason to avoid it.’

Note of caution

Not all peers were equally dismissive of home education, however. While she supported the general principles of the Bill, the former Education Secretary, Baroness Morris of Yardley, injected a note of caution. She noted:

[W]hile the state is very good at inspecting within a very regulated framework, it is less good at exercising judgment and discretion where people are not absolutely following that framework and regulation but are nevertheless doing a decent job.

Lady Morris urged the House to ‘tread warily’, lest it ‘damage some good provision’. She was anxious to be sensitive to the needs of parents and suggested that the law needed to accommodate ‘innovation and quirkiness’.

Probing questions

It fell to the Conservative peer, Lord Lucas, to raise some probing questions about the evidential basis for the Bill. He observed that the data was lacking ‘even to identify whether overall we have a problem’ and made a plea for more evidence. He further questioned whether the state is equipped to sit in judgment on parents: ‘I believe that, by and large, the state does not make better decisions than parents about children. Even if the state knew everything, it still would not make better decisions.’

Lord Lucas argued that those who home educate on principle should not be required to conform to a methodology which may be necessary for the smooth running of a school, but which is unnecessary in a home education setting. He expressed concern that Parliament should ‘not seek to regulate away’ the freedom of home educators to do things that cannot be done in schools and concluded that a Bill that concentrated on support would be preferable to one that focussed on ‘extensive supervision’ and punishment.

Copyright © 2018, Family Education Trust-All rights reserved.

Image Courtesy: Impaq Home Educators 




Parents Not Politicians

Important new data was released by the Evangelical Alliance this week, following a poll by ComRes to test public opinion concerning the role of parents in Relationships and Sex Education.

Primary legislation passed in the Children and Social Work Act 2017 stated that parents would not have any right to remove their children from Relationships Education lessons during Primary school years. The DfE has made it very clear that this will not change.

But the public, it seems, thinks very differently about the role of parents. This is what the evidence from the survey says:
• Parents should have access to the content of relationships education lessons in advance – 78%

• Parents should be notified if external organisations are contributing to lessons – 80%

• Parents are the most appropriate people to decide when primary age children should learn about sexual activity and sexual orientation – 65%

• Politicians are the least appropriate group to make the decision about when children should learn about such sensitive issues – 66%

• The curriculum should include learning about family and friendships, how to stay safe online and unsafe contact with strangers – 86%

• Relationships education should respect the diverse religious and cultural backgrounds of children and their families – 71%

It would be a foolish government that did not take note of these kinds of statistics. And yet, in Parliament this week, during answers to education questions, Schools Minister Nick Gibb was happy to give an assurance that Damian Hinds shares his predecessor’s commitment ‘that relationship and sex education lessons must be LGBT inclusive’, which means that politicians will be determining what very young children are taught, regardless of what the majority of parents think.

You have until 12 February to make your views known via the call for evidence. The DfE is particularly keen to hear from parents. You are asked what you think are the three most important aspects of Relationships and Sex Education that should be taught in primary schools and also in secondary schools.

You are asked the same about PSHE. You don’t have to answer all of the questions and each question has a 250 word limit. Use the opportunity to tell the government what you don’t want your child to learn, as well as what you do want.

You also have the opportunity to describe how you, as a parent, want to be informed about RSE teaching in your child’s school. This is a chance to insist that you are given advance notice of lessons and are able to view all content. And although the DfE is adamant that the law on withdrawal will not be changed, you can still express your views about it.

The data from the ComRes survey is already being used to draw politicians’ attention to the wishes of the vast majority of the voting public. But a survey isn’t as effective as individual parent voices, so make your voice heard and add it to the growing call for parents, not politicians, to make crucial decisions about what children are taught.

Copyright © Christians in Education-All rights reserved