Struggling To Pay Your Mortgage And Feed...
News2 mins ago
Selfish Cheapskate Parenting Now Legal.........
183 Answers
http://
In order to get a cheaper holiday it's ok to degrade your child's education. Wonderful. Brainless parents win again. When will our dopey judges move to this planet?
In order to get a cheaper holiday it's ok to degrade your child's education. Wonderful. Brainless parents win again. When will our dopey judges move to this planet?
Answers
Oh dear! A topic (almost) as dear to my heart as the wretched EU! “When will our dopey judges move to this planet?” Alas it’s not the fault of dopey judges (even dopey New Judges!). It’s down to sloppy legislation. The 1996 Education Act simply says that parents must ensure that their children attend school “regularly
18:34 Fri 13th May 2016
The modern rule only came out three years ago, Prudie, so it's really really recent.
Incidentally, can I just point out that among the parents who "should not have had children", by NJ's, and TTT's, and implictly by ellipsis' argument, are my own parents? It's really quite hard *not* to take that personally.
Incidentally, can I just point out that among the parents who "should not have had children", by NJ's, and TTT's, and implictly by ellipsis' argument, are my own parents? It's really quite hard *not* to take that personally.
“…and didn't affect anyone else....I know that.”
Regretably, gness, you cannot possibly know that. You have no idea what impact your child’s absence
“And you are putting every child into the same box…”
I’m doing no such thing. The law, which requires attendance at school, puts children in the same box. State education costs around £110bn a year. It is not “free” and it is not cheap. And it cannot properly function with children coming and going as their parents think fit.
“Mine taught themselves to swim and learnt French from a few weeks in France, as well as seeing different people and places. It's always worthwhile.”
Couldn’t agree more. And there’s about thirteen weeks each year in which to take them.
“They don't spend time catching them up.... they never have done.”
That was not my experience, but if you are right then the children involved are being badly served. They have missed education which they cannot recover. By your hypothesis, if there were no teachers available at all it would still be OK – the children could simply catch up with the help of teir parents (where available).
I don't know why this idea has evolved among parents that they should be entitled to take their children out of school for holidays at will. As I said earlier, when I was at school it was unheard of (and still is today among privatly educated pupils). It costs about £8,000 for a year’s (39 weeks) education for a secondary school child. That’s about £200 per week. If parents had to make a direct debit for £800 per month for each child they had at school they may be a little more reluctant to take their child out of school for a fortnight knowing they had wasted £400 per child. As it is, of course, none of their money is wasted because the taxpayer at large picks up the tab whether his child goes to school or not.
But money is indeed not the point. Children need to be educated and the “dreaded” OFSTED tables do indeed measure attendance because it’s only when children attend that they can be educated. To suggest that random planned absences among pupils has no effect on the school’s performance is somewhat naïve and with that I’m going to bed.
Regretably, gness, you cannot possibly know that. You have no idea what impact your child’s absence
“And you are putting every child into the same box…”
I’m doing no such thing. The law, which requires attendance at school, puts children in the same box. State education costs around £110bn a year. It is not “free” and it is not cheap. And it cannot properly function with children coming and going as their parents think fit.
“Mine taught themselves to swim and learnt French from a few weeks in France, as well as seeing different people and places. It's always worthwhile.”
Couldn’t agree more. And there’s about thirteen weeks each year in which to take them.
“They don't spend time catching them up.... they never have done.”
That was not my experience, but if you are right then the children involved are being badly served. They have missed education which they cannot recover. By your hypothesis, if there were no teachers available at all it would still be OK – the children could simply catch up with the help of teir parents (where available).
I don't know why this idea has evolved among parents that they should be entitled to take their children out of school for holidays at will. As I said earlier, when I was at school it was unheard of (and still is today among privatly educated pupils). It costs about £8,000 for a year’s (39 weeks) education for a secondary school child. That’s about £200 per week. If parents had to make a direct debit for £800 per month for each child they had at school they may be a little more reluctant to take their child out of school for a fortnight knowing they had wasted £400 per child. As it is, of course, none of their money is wasted because the taxpayer at large picks up the tab whether his child goes to school or not.
But money is indeed not the point. Children need to be educated and the “dreaded” OFSTED tables do indeed measure attendance because it’s only when children attend that they can be educated. To suggest that random planned absences among pupils has no effect on the school’s performance is somewhat naïve and with that I’m going to bed.
I think things which don't reach the page, so that one was a bit disjointed.
Anyway, I am trying to convey that the againsters don't give a fig if the holiday-takers drop a grade. As long as no teacher time is wasted helping them catch up or computer aid helps pupils track what they've missed then what have we to worry about? But its the non-holidaying pupils whom this law is attempting to protect - from disruption in lessons. If there is no danger of that, then revise this law to make it about 'classic' truancy.
Forgot to say, public service uses the expression "compassionate leave" for things like gness's terminally-ill acquaintance's situation. The law probably used "exceptional" circumstances as an equivalent expression.
Out of place to say it but I used to think "gone to Disneyland" was actually a euphemism for a child having a terminal illness.
Anyway, I am trying to convey that the againsters don't give a fig if the holiday-takers drop a grade. As long as no teacher time is wasted helping them catch up or computer aid helps pupils track what they've missed then what have we to worry about? But its the non-holidaying pupils whom this law is attempting to protect - from disruption in lessons. If there is no danger of that, then revise this law to make it about 'classic' truancy.
Forgot to say, public service uses the expression "compassionate leave" for things like gness's terminally-ill acquaintance's situation. The law probably used "exceptional" circumstances as an equivalent expression.
Out of place to say it but I used to think "gone to Disneyland" was actually a euphemism for a child having a terminal illness.
NJ....however much we disagree and whatever you think you know about my daughter's education I am the one who knows everything about it ....where she was educated...how she was educated and what absences she had.
....nothing I did had an effect on the education of the other pupils....now I know that....there is absolutely no way you can.
....nothing I did had an effect on the education of the other pupils....now I know that....there is absolutely no way you can.
@gness
//
Togo @ 22.50....
//
Actually that was me at 22:50, although the sequence of posts in this thread has already altered, between page refreshes.
//what makes you think that's going to happen when it hasn't in the past?
23:25 Fri 13th May 2016//
Did you not see the 10pm news? (BBC?) Parents across the land are, apparently, overjoyed at this ruling and will now press ahead with what was merely pent up, before now.
Watch this space.
//
Togo @ 22.50....
//
Actually that was me at 22:50, although the sequence of posts in this thread has already altered, between page refreshes.
//what makes you think that's going to happen when it hasn't in the past?
23:25 Fri 13th May 2016//
Did you not see the 10pm news? (BBC?) Parents across the land are, apparently, overjoyed at this ruling and will now press ahead with what was merely pent up, before now.
Watch this space.
@jim360
//It's really quite hard *not* to take that personally.//
I agree with this sentiment. There are no shortage of closet eugenicists, out there.
Did you respond to my pleading 1970s holiday prices? Long before the entire concept of no-frills cheap air tickets.
Fill me in though, how much for a family of four, two weeks in Spain, Easyjet or Ryanair. Ballpark figure, to the nearest hundred. Peak rate. Including restaurant meals but exclude the booze.
I have my peril-sensitive sunglasses at the ready.
//It's really quite hard *not* to take that personally.//
I agree with this sentiment. There are no shortage of closet eugenicists, out there.
Did you respond to my pleading 1970s holiday prices? Long before the entire concept of no-frills cheap air tickets.
Fill me in though, how much for a family of four, two weeks in Spain, Easyjet or Ryanair. Ballpark figure, to the nearest hundred. Peak rate. Including restaurant meals but exclude the booze.
I have my peril-sensitive sunglasses at the ready.
I'd have to do some research about prices. I've already checked my own holiday prices. The current going rate for a week's holiday next week (when it's school term time) is about £130 for a family of four in the equivalent sort of hoilday I would have enjoyed. That has, apparently, not changed much from 20 years ago. Beyond that, I don't have figures to hand. And, just to be clear, my holidays were in Cornwall, Devon, Somerset, Dorset, the Isle of Wight, Wales possibly and then somewhere else in the south-West, rather than a trip to Malaga or some such. It was tightly budgeted.
I think we also had holidays in the Summer, too, but they were similarly stupidly low-budget, being camping in a cheap tent at cheap sites with very cheap accessories.
I think we also had holidays in the Summer, too, but they were similarly stupidly low-budget, being camping in a cheap tent at cheap sites with very cheap accessories.
Ballpark figures
-------itv.com----
Pricing up two adults, one child of 10, one of 8
The costs of travelling to Disney World, Florida, with Virgin Holidays in (Clockwise L-R) May, July and November Credit: Virgin Holidays
Disney World, Florida, staying at the Animal Kingdom Lodge:
May 28 -£5,833.85 (£1,458pp)
Jul 22 - £6,870.37 (£1,718pp)
Nov 26 - £3,116.80 (£779pp)
---------
So he's saving between £1000 and £3700 by breaking the (appalingly badly written) law.
There is no precision in law, it seems. An art, not a science.
Not "regularly" - every third Thursday is "regularly". It should say "daily", unless covered by medical certificate or compassionate grounds.
Even a rank amateur, like me, can write laws better than this one. I think they write them like this on purpose so rich clients can have it bent this way, in their favour, and poor folk get to pay the fines, out of money they don't have because if their stingey, cheapskate, employers.
-------itv.com----
Pricing up two adults, one child of 10, one of 8
The costs of travelling to Disney World, Florida, with Virgin Holidays in (Clockwise L-R) May, July and November Credit: Virgin Holidays
Disney World, Florida, staying at the Animal Kingdom Lodge:
May 28 -£5,833.85 (£1,458pp)
Jul 22 - £6,870.37 (£1,718pp)
Nov 26 - £3,116.80 (£779pp)
---------
So he's saving between £1000 and £3700 by breaking the (appalingly badly written) law.
There is no precision in law, it seems. An art, not a science.
Not "regularly" - every third Thursday is "regularly". It should say "daily", unless covered by medical certificate or compassionate grounds.
Even a rank amateur, like me, can write laws better than this one. I think they write them like this on purpose so rich clients can have it bent this way, in their favour, and poor folk get to pay the fines, out of money they don't have because if their stingey, cheapskate, employers.
"So he's saving between £1000 and £3700 by breaking the (appalingly badly written) law." How has he broken the law if Magistrates said he had not committed an offence and the High Court agreed. I agree the law is written poorly but the High Court declined to define what "regularly" means so they have not helped the situation. The DOE has said it is looking at amending the legislation and there is nothing to prevent them from wording it in such a way as to apply retrospectively.
@Thecorbyloon
//How has he broken the law..//
Okay then: the spirit of the law.
The rest of my previous reply addresses the (seemingly deliberate) imprecision of the wording of the law. I think I originally intended to say "bend it this way for the rich and that way for the poor, who pay all the fines, blah, blah".
How else can (e.g.) drink-drive MPs/judges get off on a technicality while Johnny Yobbo gets the full penalty?
Watertight laws and equal treatment for everyone is all that is asked for.
//How has he broken the law..//
Okay then: the spirit of the law.
The rest of my previous reply addresses the (seemingly deliberate) imprecision of the wording of the law. I think I originally intended to say "bend it this way for the rich and that way for the poor, who pay all the fines, blah, blah".
How else can (e.g.) drink-drive MPs/judges get off on a technicality while Johnny Yobbo gets the full penalty?
Watertight laws and equal treatment for everyone is all that is asked for.
Hypo......I worked in my son's school for three years.....two of the staff are still my closest friends....
My daughter attended a very small school.....I ran their Brownie Pack.... the craft club and was on the PTA......I am still friends with some of the teachers.......we meet often after all these years.....so I know......
I didn't need psychic powers or a crystal ball......the interest I had in the education of my children sufficed.
You don't know....so you shouldn't make the mistake of assuming a situation.
My daughter attended a very small school.....I ran their Brownie Pack.... the craft club and was on the PTA......I am still friends with some of the teachers.......we meet often after all these years.....so I know......
I didn't need psychic powers or a crystal ball......the interest I had in the education of my children sufficed.
You don't know....so you shouldn't make the mistake of assuming a situation.
@gness
At no point did you make it apparent that you were with your daughter, in school and out, throughout her childhood. I had to draw that information out by asking you the question.
//You don't know....//
I *said* I didn't know.
// so you shouldn't make the mistake of assuming a situation./
What else am I to do, given an information vacuum?
Your stance in the argument was "nothing wrong with taking your kids out, in term time" and, later on, that this never did *anyone else* any harm.
So my follow up question was how come you knew so much about the lives/successes/failures of other people's children, as a consequence of holidays you and your daughter had taken.
Only after that do you let on that you are/were a schoolteacher.
Please allow for the fact that I hardly know you. You and other Answerbankers are so familiar with each other but I never understand how/why. Stick me in the remedial class and let me catch up, under my own steam, eh?
At no point did you make it apparent that you were with your daughter, in school and out, throughout her childhood. I had to draw that information out by asking you the question.
//You don't know....//
I *said* I didn't know.
// so you shouldn't make the mistake of assuming a situation./
What else am I to do, given an information vacuum?
Your stance in the argument was "nothing wrong with taking your kids out, in term time" and, later on, that this never did *anyone else* any harm.
So my follow up question was how come you knew so much about the lives/successes/failures of other people's children, as a consequence of holidays you and your daughter had taken.
Only after that do you let on that you are/were a schoolteacher.
Please allow for the fact that I hardly know you. You and other Answerbankers are so familiar with each other but I never understand how/why. Stick me in the remedial class and let me catch up, under my own steam, eh?
Hypo.....of course I don't expect you to know everything about me.....but I'm not going to put down every detail when I make a point.
I said early on that I know my choices didn't effect any other pupil or member of staff.....both in my work and as a parent......had it been otherwise I would have said so.....I am honest......odd at times...but honest.
Despite that, more than once I've been told on here that I can't/don't know that.....I do.....of course I do. To ignore any potential impact on another would be selfish.
Because I believe so strongly that education is not schooling....but a partnership between home and school in a way that best suits a child my relationship with their schools and teachers began at day one...and as said, continues today...
Between us we produced two well balanced and successful children.......who went on some holidays in term time....nothing to do with money....but for the opportunities those holidays presented at that time.
I'm afraid I can't offer you a place in a remedial class.......can't be doing with that term.....
But if you feel you need to catch up you can come to my room when I don't have a lesson or better still...join me in the library......that's where I like to do any catch up that's needed.....MrsGness...books and fun lessons.
It will be under your own steam.....but you'll be amazed at the progress you make doing things my way.......☺
I said early on that I know my choices didn't effect any other pupil or member of staff.....both in my work and as a parent......had it been otherwise I would have said so.....I am honest......odd at times...but honest.
Despite that, more than once I've been told on here that I can't/don't know that.....I do.....of course I do. To ignore any potential impact on another would be selfish.
Because I believe so strongly that education is not schooling....but a partnership between home and school in a way that best suits a child my relationship with their schools and teachers began at day one...and as said, continues today...
Between us we produced two well balanced and successful children.......who went on some holidays in term time....nothing to do with money....but for the opportunities those holidays presented at that time.
I'm afraid I can't offer you a place in a remedial class.......can't be doing with that term.....
But if you feel you need to catch up you can come to my room when I don't have a lesson or better still...join me in the library......that's where I like to do any catch up that's needed.....MrsGness...books and fun lessons.
It will be under your own steam.....but you'll be amazed at the progress you make doing things my way.......☺
Latest Posts
ChatterBank2 mins ago
ChatterBank3 mins ago
Body & Soul13 mins ago
Crosswords16 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.