| |
 MP Mark Field |
MP backs kids taught at home
'Abuse fears ‘can lead to interference’
ANXIETY over child abuse could threaten the rights of the growing number of parents who choose to teach their children at home, MP Mark Field has warned.
The Cities of London and Westminster MP defended parents who opt out of mainstream schooling, highlighting the growing myth that home education is a cover for “child abuse”.
He used the plight of two mothers in Pimlico who withdrew their children from school to argue in support of home education during a debate in parliament last week. The warning comes as the government presides over the findings of an independent review of home education, the Badman report, which has recommend closer monitoring and control by the state of home schooling.
In Westminster there are 40 children who are taught at home. Bullying, disgruntlement over excessive testing and the national curriculum are the main reasons parents turn to home schooling.
Mr Field said the liberty of parents should not be compromised because of child protection and the idea that children needed to be “seen” by the state.
He said: “The government are manipulating current anxiety about child abuse to intrude further into home education when they have little legal right to do so. There is a real fear that the government, under the banner of child protection, will try to interfere with the freedom of choice of home educators.
“The freedom that is so fiercely guarded by the majority of home educators and their choice to pursue that path is due to a fundamental rejection of the state’s values, and lack of faith in the state’s ability to provide a suitable education for their child.”
Mr Field went on to put the case against increased state intervention.
He added: “So sacred is the independence of home educators that for a long time they have remained under the radar. The government have a right only to ensure that the education that the state, predominately via local government, provides is of good quality, and the authorities can intervene only when people are seen to be breaking the law.
“It is for the same reason that police do not routinely visit people’s homes to check for stolen property. Therefore, there is an overwhelming case that home educators should be allowed to get on with their lives without undue state interference.” |
 |
|
|
| |
| |
