This is a long and convoluted tale! but they are still responding – which must be good!!
This was the previous email from them, and i wrote as a sort of response but mostly new query…
-
Thankyou very much for your response. I am very concerned that the
review will not be unbiased. the recent article in the independent is a case
in point. Mr Badman had invited the NSPCC to sit on the review panel for
the home education review.
in the independent article, Mr Patel is quoted as saying
-Vijay Patel, policy adviser for the NSPCC children’s charity, also sees the
need for a review. “Some people use home education to hide. Look at the
Victoria Climbié case. No one asked where she was at school. We have
no view about home education, but we do know that to find out about
abuse someone has to know about the child.”-
Looking at the Victoria Climbie case she was neither hidden nor home
educated, and one of the agencies singled out for criticism in this case is
the NSPCC.
In fact, in a previous appearance on the Jeremy Vine show to speak
against home education, Mr Patel admitted that the NSPCC did not hold
any information or evidence that would suggest that home educating was a
risk of abuse.
How can you assure or reassure me that there will be any fairness or
validity in the review, when the experts asked to assess the case are
clearly biased against home educators and promulgating the concept of
home educators as abusers with either no or fabricated evidence.
Please could you ask Mr Badman to include on his panel people with
knowledge of Home Education, and not so obviously opposed to elective
home education. At present I cannot see the validity of this review, and I
am concerned that my childrens’ wellbeing will be jeopardised by an ill
informed, biased review team who are reviewing poorly written questions in
an ill conceived and unfairly shortened review.
SO friday I got a response from them….
Thank you for your further email of 26 February regarding the Review of
Home Education. I have been asked to reply.
The Department for Children, Schools and Families and Graham Badman, who
is leading the independent review of home education, know that there is
no link whatsoever between the tragic death of Victoria Climbie and home
education.
The Government knows most home educated children are neither abused nor
neglected. However, parents who abuse or neglect their children will
find it easier to conceal this if they say they are educating their
child at home as they will not be seen regularly by a teacher or other
professional. This means that LAs do not have the same level of
assurance about the welfare of children being educated at home, and
there is a greater risk that the warning signs of abuse of a child not
in school will not be picked up at an early stage.
Graham Badman has been appointed to undertake and independent review. I
would like to assure you that he is fully independent of the
Departments: he is not an employee and his terms of engagement do not
specify any constraints to the scope of the review or the range of
outcomes he can report. He has extensive experience of engaging with
those opting for alternative education including experience as an
Education Welfare Officer and other posts in local government. The last
post he held prior to retirement was management of Kent Children’s
Services.
Yours sincerely
A…. H…..
Public Communications Unit
…what do you think????
I think that’s a load of twaddle that says nothing.
And I’d like to see it in the papers that the government knows that NSPCC got it wrong, and I’d like to see the NSPCC vilified for it. Wonder how you go about being an investigative reporter and actually getting this stuff into mainstream press.
Good on you for plugging away. It is quite laughable that they think we should be re-assured by the fact that Mr Badman has previously worked as an EWO!
i would agree that all the emails i get from AH are hopeless!! I think that they are still responding is good, and wonder if anyone else is still in communication?
@Allie – either laughing or crying. ‘we’re doomed Mr Mainwaring’ is my main thoughts on this, but like the home guard, will plan to go down fighting!!
I am wondering whether i can face a response, but it will be on the basis that as an ewo, surely he represents the views and concerns of LA’s rather than unbiased. oh, and to seek reassurance that they are forwarding the emails on to the review team.
I think they have a very different understanding of the word independent to us, they are meaning independent of government rather than of influence or bias.
That is a complete non-answer, isn’t it? AH has been well-trained (or perhaps it’s instinctual) in not answering a direct question.