A blog which is mainly about home educating in the UK.
Sunday, July 22, 2007
Right of Access for LAs is NOT a Good Idea (for Them)
For more development on the them of why LAs should be very careful about demanding right of access to home educators, see Gill's post here. Thanks Gill for this.
pmI think the point made by Gill at hers about "risk based assessment" may mean that LAs are just about still not subject to a duty of care under the current guidelines, though if they ask for more powers, I certainly feel they are leaving themselves more open to this problem.
This difference should make LAs more cautious in their appeals for more powers, though it doesn't seem to have registered with them. Our only remaining hope in this regard must therefore be that the DCSF are being better informed legally.
"...until one of them accidentally picks on someone wealthy enough to sue them."
It wouldn't necessarily have to be someone wealthy either. Many people have access to credit, even a large proportion of benefit claimaints. It would be worth borrowing the money to bring a lawsuit, then having one's legal representative request the expenses of repaying the debt (plus any interest or charges incurred) be added to the claim.
It probably wouldn't be an option for everyone, for a variety of reasons, but I know I'd do it if they picked on my family.
"My impression is that the "otherwise" aspect of your education law was never meant for common people."
I would agree there. I imagine it meant governesses etc
It's strange to think that our education freedoms were probably born of nothing more than laziness on the part of whoever was responsible for the wording of the initial legislation...
There are a number of wealthy people in Britain who do not choose to flaunt their wealth and in fact live in apparent poverty. And you can't always judge by address. A recent example where I live is a man who died after a diet of porridge every day (not that it killed him!) and was somehow electrocuted by his single bar fire in his filthy house. They discover he is a multi millionaire.
Whether or not these people are in the HE community, of course, is a different matter!
I don't think they care, they want the power. Social workers are liable for negligence too.
ReplyDeleteTo some extent I agree - until one of them accidentally picks on someone wealthy enough to sue them.
ReplyDeleteThey won't pick on people who are wealthy.
ReplyDeleteBut they can't always be sure who is and who isn't.
ReplyDeletepmI think the point made by Gill at hers about "risk based assessment" may mean that LAs are just about still not subject to a duty of care under the current guidelines, though if they ask for more powers, I certainly feel they are leaving themselves more open to this problem.
ReplyDeleteThis difference should make LAs more cautious in their appeals for more powers, though it doesn't seem to have registered with them. Our only remaining hope in this regard must therefore be that the DCSF are being better informed legally.
Of course they can know who is wealthy and who is not, just the home address will be enough for them to have an idea.
ReplyDeleteMy impression is that the "otherwise" aspect of your education law was never meant for common people.
A person's home address isn't always a safe indicator of their wealth.
ReplyDeleteIt rarely isn't. If you go there and take a look it definitely is.
ReplyDelete"...until one of them accidentally picks on someone wealthy enough to sue them."
ReplyDeleteIt wouldn't necessarily have to be someone wealthy either. Many people have access to credit, even a large proportion of benefit claimaints. It would be worth borrowing the money to bring a lawsuit, then having one's legal representative request the expenses of repaying the debt (plus any interest or charges incurred) be added to the claim.
It probably wouldn't be an option for everyone, for a variety of reasons, but I know I'd do it if they picked on my family.
"My impression is that the "otherwise" aspect of your education law was never meant for common people."
I would agree there. I imagine it meant governesses etc
It's strange to think that our education freedoms were probably born of nothing more than laziness on the part of whoever was responsible for the wording of the initial legislation...
Leo,
ReplyDeleteThere are a number of wealthy people in Britain who do not choose to flaunt their wealth and in fact live in apparent poverty. And you can't always judge by address. A recent example where I live is a man who died after a diet of porridge every day (not that it killed him!) and was somehow electrocuted by his single bar fire in his filthy house. They discover he is a multi millionaire.
Whether or not these people are in the HE community, of course, is a different matter!
Yes, but the state certainly knew the man was a millionaire. Wealth is not something easy to hide from the state.
ReplyDeletematresses have been known to hide considerable wealth!
ReplyDelete