Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill

Written evidence submitted by Jennifer Watts to The Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill Committee (CWSB98)

1. I am writing as a concerned home educating parent about the Children's Wellbeing and Schools bill. I have grave concerns about this bill and it's effect on the freedom of parents to determine what best suits their own children's wellbeing, needs and physical safety. 

Firstly there is no need for a home education register at all as LAs already have a register of the children that are being home educated in their area. Children deregistered from school are already known to the LA so they are already on their registers. In addition, The LA can already make enquiries about a home educated child's education and can serve a notice 437(1) and in the end a SAO. As regards safeguarding concerns, the LA can also already refer a family to children’s services if they have safeguarding concerns. If children are currently "lost" or "fallen through the cracks" it can be argued that is a failure of professionals to use existing legislation. 

2. Also the proposed register will ultimately require an unattainable level of detail from home educators that will in effect ban forms of learning that are not fully timetabled "school at home", which most do not do. This will have a profound effect on those children who do not learn from traditional methods.

3. Of particular concern is Section 24 which expects LAs to refuse consent to deregister if there is a child protection case, or assessment in process. I feel this would be problematic for families who have had malicious referrals from nosey neighbours or estranged family members or for those who are on CP plans for issues which do not relate to their parenting or the home.  It also expects LAs to refuse deregistration from a special school if the LA determines it not to be in the best interests of the child. This could be misused by schools providing the LA with incorrect information and also parents know their child best and know what is in their best interests. This section needs re-wording to protect all children and treat each situation individually.  

s24 8(b) could cause harm where the parents are separated due to abuse. 

s24 12 automatically denies new deregistration requests within 6 months of previously being denied. This is very problematic due to children’s constantly changing needs and family circumstances constantly changing. This should also be removed. 

I feel that section 24 should be removed entirely.  Current legislation allows LAs and SS to access emergency rulings to protect children they determine to be at risk therefore these extra restrictions are not required. 

4. Of further concern is 436C part 1

The details required from home educators is excessive. 

a) and b) is information the school already passes on to the LA on deregistration. 

d) is not quantifiable in hours as home education is flexible

e) is absolutely impossible for most home educators, and will mean many styles of home education will become impossible as they cannot provide this level of detail. Part (iv) or e) will affect home educating individuals who arrange drop off sessions for children at an activity/event, it would lead to people stopping organising valuable and educational events which would have a detrimental effect on the children.

5. Part 2 

k) any other information should be written into the bill, not be added at a later stage in secondary legislation. 

6. Part 3.

LAs should not be allowed to add in their own criteria. Many LAs already misuse their duty, this would cause chaos and would be a massive overstep, if a register must be in place, then the criteria should be uniform across all LAs. 

436D

1 b) This is unclear if it mean both parents need to provide the information. This could be dangerous if their one partner has left because of abuse.

2 a) the LA should not be allowed the freedom to ask for the information whenever they want, this needs limits or some LAs will take advantage and do it far too often.

b) it is not realistic to expect home educators to update the LA every time they use a new group, website, tutor. This will put parents off and that will be detrimental to their children's education. 

7. 436E

1 a) and b)

plus 3 a) and b)

The required information from unspecified groups will ultimately lead to groups refusing to accept home educators, for example will swimming lessons, language group lessons organised by a parent, scouts, home ed group outings etc be included? This is too vague and open to an unattainable amount of information. Not all groups know a child is home educated, as it is not a criteria to be known in after-school and weekend groups. This is a ridiculous expectation and will not be manageable.

436 G

The LA does not offer support to home educating families as they are chronically underfunded. Most home educators do not want or need this support as there is lots of support available in the home educating community already. Most LAs do not understand home education and what home educated children need. If support must be given free GCSE exams would be the only thing I would say most home educators would like. 

436H

5 c) the LA are definitely not able to decide what is right for the child as they do not know them, that should be for the parent to decide  

436 I

2 a) and c) will be misused and misquoted to force home visits before SAO is even considered, this happens already.  A home is a child's safe space and some home visits could be harmful to the child for example if the child is autistic or has anxiety.  My questions to consider are: What training will the visiting person have? Will this be legal as only a person with a warrant has right of entry to the home?

3 choosing to protect your child and their safe space will be used against families, too much trust in the LA making the right decision is given. May have nothing to hide but with 100’s of families treated badly each week by LAs, you have everything to protect.

436P

8 This is extremely concerning as at the moment , many LAs serve SAOs for nefarious reasons, with evidence some use them to force compliance with their own made-up rules. Currently if a parent is providing a suitable education but the LA refuses to accept, that then that parent can go to court, and show a court the education is suitable. The risk is minimal, with the SAO being enforced and the parent fined as the worst case scenario. 

This proposed section increases the penalty meaning fewer families will risk going to court even if the education is suitable! The LAs will misuse this further.

I hope you will consider my points and realise that this bill will be detrimental and have an extremely negative effect on home educating families and ultimately is an attack on families' freedom.

January 2025