Comments on the Badman report?

On the whole, I thought it was quite a balanced report. Registration is for me a none issue, In the UK we have almost no idea of how many students are being home educated with the press quoting anywhere between 20,000 and 180,000. Registration would allow the home educating community as a whole to demonstrate that it is powerful and that, as we all maintain, the outcomes for the child are above that of state funded education.

Registration would also allow a funding regime so that local authorities can offer a pick and mix of resources and assistance for home educators. So lets stand up and be proud of what we do and allow registration.

Where the Badman report starts to get sticky is on the following three issues.

The right to enter the home

The right to interview the child without the parent present

The recommendation that the DCSF reviews and provides a definition of a suitable and effective education.

Now I personally don't mind someone visiting my home and discussing what I do regarding the education of my child. I don't actually know that many home educators who do. However, I live in an LEA where the existing guidelines are well interpreted by intelligent, thoughtful people. I have heard of others where the visitor is little more than a petty bureaucrat with little or no understanding of anything other than the national curriculum.

The right to interview my child without me present however is one that really gets my blood up. What parent, anywhere, is happy to let a stranger into their home and effectively put them in a room with their child. What teacher or social worker would wish to put themselves into this position with the possibility of unsubstantialable accusations being made against them?

The final recommendation, which is what constitutes a suitable and effective education. I would be surprised if this didn't lead to an attempt to force all home educators to follow the national curriculum. I think one of the great strengths of home schooling is that it can encompass so many learning methods and curriculums. A DCSF review will remove that strength.

My final problem with the review is Ed Balls response which hedges on providing any of the benefits to home educators whilst rushing to put the recommended legislation in place.

Our government should be ashamed of itself and yet seems smugly proud

His name says it all! LOL!

I read some of this report from another source. I can't say how bad the United Nations Rights Of The Child treaty is. It's dangerous to not only our families but the to the United States. This treaty will over ride the Constitution according to http://www.parentalrights.org./

Badman wants to be able to search our homes because we are home schooling and with out a warrant, and question our children with out the adults present. This is against the law in our country in every state.

Badman is dangerous for home schoolers. Plain and simple.

ETA: The US senate is considering radifing the UNCRC. For me as an American it is important to watch what is happening around the world. Especally since under the current president we are moving very quickly down the road of socialism which most of Europe is already going down.

If we ratify the UN's CRC treaty then how long will it be before we lose the rights gaurenteed to us in the US Constitution? How long will it be before we have a Badman of our own? How long will it be before the "education police" come knocking on our doors wanting to search our homes, go over our curricula, and question our children? How long will it be until we are like Germany where mom's and dad's are jailed for home schooling? As a human being and a member of the world around me I have chosen to wake up and look around. I have chosen to keep up with not only American policies but also those who influance American policies. Some time those policies come from across the pond. God willing this one won't.

“Under this act [parental rights], before the US government could interfere in the parent-child relationship, the government would have to show that the action is necessary to protect a compelling interest and that the means that the government uses to protect this interest is the least restrictive available.’ Senator [John] Warner is acknowledging that the measure would, for the first time in American history, authorize direct federal involvement in the home if that involvement can be swaddled in the rationale of a government-defined ‘compelling interest’.” (William Norman Grigg, “Does the State Own Your Child?”, The New American (Magazine), July 8, 1996, page 7. )

The PRA is a Trojan horse. The UNCRC is a straw man. Careful what you wish for.

Renee - this report relates to the UK, where we don't have a constitution.