Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill

Written evidence submitted by Chelsea Peace to The Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill Committee (CWSB242). 

Introduction

As a home educating parent, I am deeply concerned by aspects of The Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill. While its stated aim is to ensure children's welfare and access to education, the Bill introduces measures that could negatively impact the wellbeing, education, and rights of home educated children and their families and misrepresents home education as a safeguarding risk.

Executive Summary

Areas of Concern

● Proposed Register of Children Not in School – The requirement for detailed and frequent reporting disregards the dynamic nature of home education, shifting focus from learning to administrative compliance

● "Best Interests" Decisions – The Bill grants Local Authorities (LAs) undue power to override parental judgment, allowing intrusive home visits without safeguarding concerns

● False Link Between Home Education and Safeguarding Risks – The Bill perpetuates an unjustified narrative that home-educated children are at greater risk, fostering distrust and unnecessary state intervention

Recommendations for Further Action

● Consult home education experts and listen to families

● Support home educators rather than impose punitive measures

● Remove unnecessary bureaucratic requirements

● Limit LA home entry to cases with clear safeguarding concerns

Conclusion

● The Bill assumes LAs, not parents, know what is best for children

● It risks unnecessary interventions, distress for families, and forced school attendance

● Calls for policymakers to protect parental rights, respect educational diversity, and reconsider the Bill

  Background

Since birth, my partner and I have provided a loving and enriching environment for our child, an environment which truly meets their needs. We have watched them flourish-learning with curiosity, joy, and confidence.

Initially, we fully intended for our child to attend state school. We registered them at a local state-run forest nursery and explored several primary schools in our area. However, as I became increasingly engaged in our child’s learning journey, I began to research various educational philosophies, learning styles, and alternative provisions. This exploration deepened my understanding of our child’s natural learning process.

As parents, we have a legal duty to provide our child with a suitable education. After careful consideration, we decided that home education was in our child’s best interest-a deeply personal and profoundly loving choice made with their well-being at heart. To make this possible, I left my career, and we became a single-income household. This sacrifice reflects our commitment to providing a tailored, child-centered education that is flexible, responsive and best suited to our child's needs.

Our child is happy and thriving in a rich, diverse, and responsive educational environment. They are safe, supported, and engaged in meaningful learning. If they ever express a desire to attend school, we would fully support their decision. However, they are currently flourishing through home education, and we are deeply concerned that elements of this bill threaten their wellbeing and the integrity of our educational choice.

  Areas of Concern

  1. Proposed Register of Children Not in School

The bill requires home educating parents to submit an overwhelming amount of information to the LA. Mandating extensive record-keeping and requiring updates within 15 days of any change reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of home education and places an unnecessary burden on us as a home educating family. It imposes a school-based framework on a fundamentally different model of education and risks shifting our focus away from our child's learning to bureaucratic compliance.

Education takes place through everyday experiences, extended family involvement, and community engagement. It is not confined to rigid hours or predefined subjects. One week may focus on domestic science, another on history, and another on physical education. Our learning approach is dynamic, fluid and responsive to our child's interests and needs.

  2. "Best Interests" Decisions

Under current law, as parents we have the duty to provide our child with an efficient, full-time education suited to their age, ability, and aptitude. The Bill, however, grants the LA power to determine our child's "best interests," undermining our legal responsibilities and intimate knowledge of our own child.

Furthermore, the bill allows the LA to enter our private home without any safeguarding concerns. This is an unacceptable intrusion into our family life. We, as parents, not the state, are best positioned to understand our child's needs. Government intervention should only occur when there is a clear and justified safeguarding risk.

  3. The False Link Between Home Education and Safeguarding Risks

The Bill conflates home education with safeguarding concerns. This is a false and damaging narrative, creating an atmosphere of suspicion around home educating families, which is both unjust and unfounded. There is no evidence to suggest that home educated children are hidden. There is no evidence to suggest that home educated children are at a greater risk than their school educated peers. As a family we engage with our community, we interact with a diverse range of people, and our children are supported by extended family and friends.

The Bill allows for subjective interpretations by LA staff, leading to potential bias, discrimination, and unwarranted interference. Rather than supporting home educating families, this bill frames us as a problem to be managed. It offers our family no protection against misjudgment or overreach by authorities.

  Recommendations for Further Action

1. Engage with Experts in Home Education

○ Consult professionals such as Dr. Naomi Fisher and Jenn Hodge, who specialise in home education and children's learning.

○ Listen to the voices of home educated children and families who have firsthand experience.

2. Support Rather Than Penalize Home-Educating Families

○ The Bill should encourage a supportive relationship between LAs and home educating parents rather than imposing punitive measures.

○ Local Authorities should be required to understand home education as a legitimate and effective alternative to school-based learning.

3. Remove Excessive Bureaucratic Requirements

○ Remove the requirement for home-educating parents to submit extensive, ongoing documentation to the LA.

○ Recognize that education outside of school does not conform to a rigid timetable or curriculum but is instead personalized and adaptable.

4. Restrict LA Powers of Home Entry

○ LAs should only have the right to enter a family's home where there is a clear, evidenced safeguarding concern. The state should not intrude upon private family life without due cause.

  Conclusion

The Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill operates under the assumption that Local Authorities are better placed than parents to determine a child's best interests. It undermines parental rights, disregards the established legal duty of parents to provide education, and imposes unnecessary burdens on home educating families.

Even when parents are providing an efficient and suitable education, the Bill grants LAs the power to determine if school would be "better" for a child. This is a dangerous overreach, allowing authorities, who have no personal knowledge of the child, to make life-altering decisions.

Moreover, the Bill falsely equates home education with safeguarding risks. If enacted, it could lead to unnecessary home visits, distress for children, and even forced school attendance orders. Such measures would be not only unjust but potentially traumatic for home educated children.

Home education is a legitimate, effective, and loving choice for many families. Instead of imposing restrictive and punitive measures, the government should seek to understand, support, and respect the rights of home educating parents and their children.

I urge policymakers to reconsider this Bill in its current form and to work towards legislation that upholds parental rights, supports educational diversity, and protects the wellbeing of home educated children.

February 2025