Because so far, it's worked like this.
1) A child is beaten up/assaulted/killed by their parents. It matters not whether that child is educated from home, privately, at state school or in flexischool, but let's say the child is first withdrawn from school.
2) The national media pick up the story. They need to sell newspapers. If they can use an idea that sells, they do so, regardless of whether people think it's fair treatment. Mothers who kill. That sells. Lost children. That sells.
3) There is a 'public outrage' where 'something must be done'. Voices shout for government to take action. Large businesses, including charitable and private organisations, see an opportunity to lobby parliament or advance their agenda.
4) Government responds. We had a Labour government which was only too happy to oblige with another database that would extend state involvement in all our lives and simultaneously demonstrate to the public how seriously this matter is considered.
That was then. What will happen next, under a new regime? We have a 'bonfire of the quangos' right now, begun under the banner of an economic recession. The idea that 'we're all in it together' provides a start point from which to sweep away those Labour institutions, reduce local authority control, and bring in some Tory policies.
That process will result in guidance shift, administrative overhaul, legislative change. But we will still have cases come to court where a child has been beaten up/assaulted/killed by a parent. There are some mad, bad and unstable parents in this world, and it will happen, regardless of government change, social policy, and how or where the child is educated.
The newspapers will behave the same. They will select the ideas that sell. If the child is not in school, sure we risk headlines of lost child, home educated, death. Home educators will shout about the agendas. People who are trained to respond to the idea that the authorities will act will shout 'something must be done'.
But how will you want the government to respond?
My feeling is that it's time for you, people in the public, to trust home educators as parents. You should trust us the same as you would trust any parent. You have placed too much trust in the authorities. You've been trained to look to those authorities as if they have the right answers and any answers you come up with need to be authenticated by their safeguarding system.
I don't think public trust in authorities has been rewarded, personally. We have a recent history related to safeguarding children in which some of those authorities have behaved appallingly. They've squirmed, lied, backtracked, sought to remove blame from themselves, loaded it onto others, exploited legal anomalies and blamed their own system.
Meanwhile, the Labour government responded to the cries that 'something must be done' by turning every adult into a villain, every children's author into a predator, every parent into a potential abuser. They showed you 'how seriously they took matters' by seeking to vet and bar every adult who went near a child, subjecting parents to continuous scrutiny and judgment, defaming home educators, and issuing red flags to identify abuse in children which included stuff like messy hair and dirty clothing. (Into which categories I'd say every parent should fit, if they are doing a proper parenting job. Add categories: grazes on both knees, mud to the eyeballs, and look of determination while holding a stick.)
We'll see what happens next, under this government, and no doubt soon.
I assume there are some children, living close to us all, attending school or not, however they are educated, who suffer crap parents and who need the support of other agencies. Those agencies are there for all kids and any responsible person can use their eyes and judgement and call them. But you cannot assume guilt on any group of people; you cannot single out for special examination home educating parents, any more than you can demand special examination of parents of religious or philosophical viewpoints. The fact that bad things happen does not equate to a compulsory register for all home educating parents with safeguarding inspections, automatic monitoring and home visits. We had that clamour, and that proposed response, and we need to think how it impacts on everyone.
Really, I think it's time to look at the home educating parent who lives next door and stop demanding action on all home educators. Use your own common sense. Take responsibility for your own judgments. Trust in your own thinking. You don't need to have a local authority inspector come round and show you they ticked a box for your neighbour simply on the basis that they home educate.
And if you don't trust any parent, that can't be my responsibility to resolve.
Showing posts with label I answered this one enough. Show all posts
Showing posts with label I answered this one enough. Show all posts
Wednesday, 10 November 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)