HED0581
Written evidence submitted by [member of the public]
[Note: This evidence has been redacted by the Committee. Text in square brackets has been inserted where text has been redacted.]
To whom it may concern,
With regards to the Parliamentary Committee call for evidence on home education, I would like to address certain points. We are a home educating family with 3 children being home educated, in addition, I have run home education groups, and help admin several home education (HE) groups online providing support to other local families. I would like to submit evidence for the committee to discuss and consider, as the outcomes and discussions will directly impact my family and our children who are [ages].
A further expansion of duties is not necessary and call for the committee to allow HE families to continue as they have been, with their HE journey. If it’s not broken – don’t fix it. I would urge any resources to ‘fixing problems’ be pooled to fixing the current educational schooling system – and not that of EHE.
We were asked to provide our philosophy to the LEA – it is already set out in law that families by law have a duty to provide an age relevant/suitable full-time education for children. The law and responsibility is very clear. When a family chooses to EHE, this is something that is taken seriously as this is an obligation set out by law to provide an education that is suitable, and would encourage the committee not intervene in EHE families in how they fulfil their duties – any attempt to limit the rights and obligations of parents is contrary to the law as it stands.
It is also important for the committee to understand that there is a difference between families who EHE, and those families who are forced into home schooling because of lock-down measures. The two should not be mixed up into one single group – families who have been forced into schooling children at home, and have been provided with a school alternative at home should not be classed as EHE – as they have not elected to HE also, they absolutely do not educate their children with the same ethos, values and principles as those who have actually Elected to Home Educate – because they are FORCED into a situation where they have to have their children do their schooling (from their mainstream school) at home. Home Education for these parents is not ‘ELECTED’ and therefore any safeguarding measures for those children should be considered separately - and outside of the discussion of EHE.
The strongest predictor of a satisfying adult life is emotional health and well-being in childhood. Exam grades have little relevance.(Clark et al, 2018). Research studies on mental ill-health have shown that school is a major contributor to the mental health problems of schoolchildren. (Gray, 2018; Lueck at al, 2015; Plemmons et al, 2018). In such circumstances, a parent concerned about a suitable education might wish their child not to be in school.
I used to run a home education group, whereby the books, craft materials, learning materials and educational toys had to be funded by the local community. It would seem fair to allow funding for local HE groups to be able to purchase materials needed, and take some of the financial strain away from HE families.
The current regulatory framework is sufficient in ensuring wellbeing and achievement – and this freedom allowed within the law should be kept. I see no reason why the framework needs to change. The law is very clear, and freedom within the law, should be allowed for in order to keep all the above named benefits of HE.
With regards to safeguarding –the problem an efforts should be focused at schools rather that EHE. Allegations against parents of potential abuse or neglect have not been proved within EHE setting. There is more evidence against schools in this respect. For instance, traumatic bullying in school (experienced daily by many thousands of children) is almost three times more likely to lead to psychosis in adult life than those without that experience (Varese et al, 2012). Currently almost 100,000 schoolchildren are suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder due to severe bullying (Lewis et al, 2019).
The role of inspection should be kept as is – there is no reason to change it, even with the current COVID situation. Inspection would undermine the law that already states the obligations. The law states that it is the obligation of the parents – and so, if inspection is imposed, this would in fact contradict the law as it stands.
Education law is clear that naturally and historically, responsibility for education rests with a child’s parents. This is a point well made by the Education Committee’s 2012 report “Support for Home Education”; in section 10 it states:
“10. The role of the local authority is clear with regard to home education. They have two duties: to provide support for home educating families (at a level decided by local authorities themselves), and if families wish it; and to intervene with families if the local authority is given reason to believe that a child is not receiving a suitable education. It is not the role of the local authority routinely to monitor whether a suitable education is being provided, and local authorities should not act as if it is, or cause parents to believe that it is.”
Whilst departmental guidance has changed since 2012, legislation has not changed.
The legal basis for EHE remains the same currently as it did in 2012; and therefore there is no need for it to change now. As Lord Bingham had stated in the case between Ali v Lord Grey School [2006] UKHL 14 the keenest interest for selection of the best education for a child is parental responsibility
I look forward to hearing how to committee meeting goes.
Yours sincerely
[name]
November 2020