Safety valve

James Preece on why there is no need for a home education register

As some readers may already be aware, the Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill has had its second reading in Parliament and is now at the committee stage, when Members of Parliament review the legislation and propose amendments in advance of the final reading in the House of Commons. By the time you read this, that third reading may be imminent or it may be months away.

The bill appears well intentioned; after all, who could be against the wellbeing of children? But, of course, the devil is in the detail and in some ways, this looks more like a power grab by the government than an earnest effort to help children.

A key area of concern for traditional Catholics are the proposed changes around Home Education. The bill proposes a mandatory register of children not in school including a requirement to provide, “the names and addresses of any individuals and organisations involved in providing that education,” meaning that as currently worded, you would be legally required to tell the government if your home educated child attends classes for sacramental preparation. I’m sure they will say that’s not the intentionbut the letter of the law is the law.

Since the Children’s Act (2004) the government is required to carry out a Serious Case Review whenever a child has died or come to serious harm and abuse or neglect is suspected. So far not a single one of those reviews has identified Home Education as a deciding factor in preventing abuse. These unfortunate children are sometimes home educated, but they are always known via some other means. The theoretical “hidden” or “ghost” child case has never happened.

To take the recently reported case of Sara Sharif. Yes, her parents took her out of school to home educate and weeks later she was dead. But less widely reported is the fact that she was under a care order from birth; she had told social workers about repeated abuse, her teachers had raised concerns. She died in August during the summer holidays when she would have been at home for the summer holidays anyway. Are we to suppose that a home education register would have made any difference to her?

This is not the story of a girl who “fell through the gaps” but of one who was let down repeatedly by the authorities. How convenient to pin the blame on home education and avoid the difficult questions.

Far from being a safeguarding issue, it is my experience that home education often acts as a safety valve that allows parents to protect their children from a school system that is failing them. In 2024 more than 40 percent of children failed to get a pass mark in GCSE Maths and English - a number that dwarfs the number of children being educated at home - but there are worse things than failing your GCSEs. Children in school are victims of bullying, violence and sexual harassment in person and online. If they have special education needs, especially where they are on a waiting list for diagnosis - help is often non-existent.

Home Education allows parents in these difficult situations to get their children out of there. But what if Mum and Dad are not good at maths and the prospect of good GCSEs looks slim? Shall we assess the education as lacking and force the child back into an environment where they were already struggling? There has to be a way to offer support and assistance without the demand for 100 percent control.

The demand for a home education register represents a fundamental shift in our understanding of who is ultimately responsible for a child's education and wellbeing. The Church teaches that parents are the first and primary educators of their children and that governments are to assist parents, but do not have primacy. The government is supposed to monitor schools as a service to parents, not monitor parents as a service to the local authority. This isn’t merely a Catholic view. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that: “Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.”

It’s the age-old story of, “give us more power so we can protect you” and, “it’s worth it if it helps only one child.” As we have seen - there is no evidence of a single child this register would have helped and plenty of evidence of children for whom home education is a vital respite from “the system”.

But James, they are not coming for “good” home educators like you - only the bad ones. If you have nothing to hide you have nothing to worry about. That isn’t how the law works and for good reason. Would you be happy if the police were allowed to search all homes on an annual basis, because some people steal and we need to know what people have in their attics? No - so why support compulsory registration of parents who simply wish to teach their own children?

Ultimately, the proposed changes are another step in the direction of radical individualism where family relationships are secondary to the rights of the state to govern the individual. It is not a good thing and I urge you to do your own reading, “educate” yourself and then please write to your MP about this bill.