Dear Ms Primarolo,

Congratulations on your new role.  I hope this will be a time of fruitful work for you in this important area.

 As others have already written, I believe one of your first priorities should be to investigate the actions currently being planned by the government, following the publication of the Badman report.

Unfortunately, this report is characterised by leading and limiting questions in the review process, opinion rather than evidence and biased and selective use of submissions. It was started with a smear concerning an alleged connection between home education and child abuse but has found no evidence for this.  Nevertheless, invasive inspections are planned for home educating families.  In the eyes of many, this report has no credibility whatsoever.  Stating that families who home educate must submit to their homes being entered and their children interviewed on their own by an LA worker, without any reason for concern being given, is completely unacceptable.  I am also, as a parent, deeply concerned about the sort of person who will apply for this type of inspection role. 

Many children who are home educated, including one of my own, have been removed from school due to their special needs and their inability to thrive and survive in the school system.  For these children, home education is a place of refuge and learning at their own pace  - a place of confidence and happiness.  The questioning of children alone, with the inspector having the power to deny the right to home educate for "any reason" will be frightening for children, who may feel that they have to “perform” in order to continue being educated at home.  When children have made the choice to be home educated, I believe their choice should be respected and their privacy should not be invaded without good reason.

LAs already have the right to issue a school attendance order if parents do not give reasonable evidence that a suitable and efficient education is being provided.  Children’s services can already be called in if there is reason to suspect abuse.  With the introduction of the ContactPoint database, all children will be known about, including all of those who are home educated.  The current system can work well if the LAs use their powers correctly and are properly trained and funded.  Some LAs are excellent and work closely with home educators, but others have lost the trust of home educators because they have acted in a heavy-handed manner, do not have sufficient understanding of home education or have exceeded their powers.  It would be much better to use our limited resources to help those known to be at risk, such as the poor Chinese children who are victims of trafficking, rather than waste money on discriminatory and overly intrusive inspections of home educators.

There are a few positive aspects to the report.  We welcome the provision of examination centres and free examination entry as well as reduced rate music tuition.

My best wishes in your new job.

The Badman Report findings are shocking and an abuse our right to choose the manner in which our children are educated.  Its conclusions are based on biased personal feeling and opinion rather than proper evidence.  The recommendation that children should be interviewed ALONE "where deemed appropriate" is plainly wrong, this would not even happen if a child were being interviewed within criminal proceedings.  I urge you to consider the report and I too echo the views of other home educators so far expressed.

 I would urge you to oppose the reforms to current practice proposed by Graham Badman in his “Report to the Secretary of State on the Review of Elective Home Education in England”. 

The Review fails to make any case for its recommendations. The Secretary of State says it contains strong arguments but no evidence is presented either of the outcome of Home Educated children relative to their schooled counterparts or of any link  between  Home Education and child abuse. Yet the assertion that “Home Education could be used as a ‘cover’ for child abuse” (Terms of Reference for the Review) stands unrefuted.

As a Home Educating parent, I find this insulting and offensive.I strongly object to Recommendation 7:  ‘that designated local authority officers should have the right of access to the home.’ No other authority has right of access to the home: were I to be suspected of a crime the police would need a search warrant to enter my house. Parents, who make the choice to Home Educate, should be entitled to the same presumption of innocence and competence that school going children's parents receive. 

Also, it recommends that local authority officers should ‘have the right to speak with each child alone’ ... so that ‘officers will be able to satisfy themselves that the child is safe and well.’ I cannot imagine how a stranger, meeting  my child for the first time, with the implied threat of being able to force the child to go to school, could hope to have a relationship of trust that would enable a child to confide fears or concerns.

In contrast, numerous adults with whom my children have relationships and who come into contact with on a regular basis have every opportunity to report any concern they may have to the appropriate authorities. Although a further recommendation (Number 9) is that ‘all local authority officers and others engaged in the monitoring and support of elective home education must be suitably trained’, in section 11.3 Graham Badman urges the DCSF to ‘respond to recommendation ... 7 at the next available opportunity’ with the inherent implication that officers will have the right to enter my home and interview my children without me present, before suitable training has been undertaken. 

Mr Badman has been also quoted as saying, with reference to recommendation 1, (“...parents must provide a clear statement of their educational approach, intent and desired/planned outcomes for the child over the following twelve months,”) and “they will be judged on their plans. These statements should contain some milestones for children to achieve ... for example by the age of eight, I think they should be autonomous learners, able to read. ( http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/8095864.stm) However, he demonstrates no evidence of the value of such a goal, only that it is his personal opinion. Why should what appears to be no more than personal opinion be imposed upon the Home Education community?

The Badman report should be rejected. Home educated children are not at more risk for child abuse, servitude and forced marriage.

Why investigate happy, healthy home educated families, rather than aim the resources at the children who are known to be at risk? Just because we are doing things differently? Why should the LEA have the right to enter my home, a right that the police and social services don't have unless there is good cause to suspect abuse, and interview my child without me present?

Achievement targets from the former school are likely to be guesses, and won't be relevant as many home ed children don't follow the same curriculum as school.

Parents should not have to ask permission to educate their children in a way that reflects their personal beliefs.

The Badman report criminalises home educating parents and victimises home educated children. We need support from the LEA, not a witch hunt.

Please work to safeguard a childs right to be electively home educated without interference from Local Authority persons. I urge you to look carefully at Mr. Badmans review and challenge it in every way you can.

Please look very carefully at the Badman Review of Home Education and consider whether you consider it to be reasonable or ethical to discriminate against a minority group by allowing government officials access to the family home and the right to interview children 5+ with no other adult present.

Badman recommends this be applied to all Home Educating families without any prior evidence of harm or abuse. This smacks of a totalitarian state, and in fact Badman quotes German laws introduced by the *** in support of his recommendations. The muddling of welfare issues with educational issues is one of this reports fatal flaws in my opinion - the two should be dealt with separately.

Im writing to you to complain in the strongest terms to the Badman report on home education. I totally disagree with the points made and I would urge you to meet with home educators to hear thier views and concerns, as most mps that have been approached are woefuuly ignorant of home education in particular autonomous education.

Ivisited a local school recently, just to see if my two boys would benefitand was very pleased to find that the children were at least two to three years ahead. I teach my three children aged 11, 7 and 5 at home and have done for the past 7 years. I can honestly say that it has been a privilage to see them grow into well adjusted and curious children with a thirst to learn and explore thier world.This is what home education can be and is for many children.I would implore you to take this matter up with other mps as soon as possible. maya lucas

 I would like to add my voice to everybody else's regarding the Graham Badman Home Education review.

Please treat this issue with urgency, the review is anything but objective and puts many people's ( mainly children ) civil liberties in serious jeopardy.  Throughout the review Mr Badman  is at pains to point out that we must weigh the rights of the parents against the rights of the children.  He seems to have completely missed the not inconsiderable point that most home educating parents are taking up this responsibilty because it's their children's rights that they are fighting to protect!

People don't just home educate on a whim, they do it after a lot of research and heartfelt soul searching and above all consulting their children! 

 I could write pages on this subject but wont because plenty of others have already made succinct arguments against the review and I would  strongly  urge you to please study it yourself as well as familiarising yourself with  the COMPLETE versions of any of the contributor's quotes ( the Church of England's for example ) and not take Mr Badman's edited ones at face value.

Our families and our children's rights are under threat, please help.

Many thanks.

Please ensure that you carry out a thorough investigation of Graham Badman's spurious and misleading Review of Home Education as it appears to have the hallmarks of serious breaches of educational and civil rights of law-abiding citizens. Home educated children's rights and liberties are being trampled upon as they face the negative media coverage of this review with unsubstantiated child abuse (and worse) allegations against their parents.

Susanna Matthan

 Congratulatons on your new post.

As previous posters have said, you could do a great deal of good by simply axeing the Badman Review (and also save a lot of money, which has got to be a popular move?)

It's utter nonsense, biased, ill thought out, under researched, and drawing absolutely barmy conclusions. Maybe the previous minister was 'too close' to see it, but be honest, admit it's rubbish, bin it and strike a blow for freedom.

This government really needs a headline about a minister cutting through red tape, showing some common sense, and handing the power back to the family. Go for it!

Dear Dawn Primarolo

Please take the time to acquaint yourself with the Badman Review of Home Education which threatens the wellbeing and autonomous education of tens of thousands of children in the UK. This report, which resembles the infamous 'dodgy dossier' over Iraq's WMDs, has come to conclusions that bear no resemblance to the realities of home education. The report was initiated under the false assumption that Home Education is a breeding ground for child abuse but then goes on, in its list of recommedations, to make it clear that the real aim of the report is to crush Home Education as a choice for parents, or turn it into a mirror image of the schooling system. This government bangs on about 'choice' all the time - usually when it wants to ram some new privatisation of public services down our throats - but when large numbers of people are actively pursuing a real alternative to a state system that is failing  so many children, New Labour commission a report designed to end that choice, one that has been enshrined in British law since the 1940s.

Specifically, Badman's recommendations include allowing Local Education Authority staff to interview children without a parent present even if the parents have not given permission for the interview to take place (not even child protection social workers or the police have the power to do this). This is an appalling infringement of our  rights and home educating parents are being treated as potential abusers even where there is no evidence for these suspicions. The state already has the power to intervene if they think abuse is taking place (a power they have failed to use on numerous ocasions when there is plenty of evidence to justify concern)  therefore the only conclusion that can be drawn is that this has little to do with the welfare/rights of children and more to do with controlling and indeed crushing Home Education - as the following recommendations indicate.

The review proposes that home educators should draw up annual plans that are open to review and which must be met in order for the child to continue to be home educated.  This proposal is particular distressing to autonomous home educators who follow the interests of the child and therefore by definition are unable to plan in advance. This form of education is particularly (willfully) misunderstood –it is referred to in the report as “childminding”. Had the authors of the report attempted any real research into the subject they might have produced an analysis of this well established approach to education. This is just one example of the reviews superficial engagement with the issues.

 Another recommendation is for home educating families to register with the LA with the proviso that registration can be withdrawn if the LA does not feel the child is being educated to externally defined criteria. This suggests we are not talking about registration but a licence. “Education” is defined by the national curriculum; a very narrow view of what constitutes an education but if we do not adhere to this our children can be forced into school. As parents we feel that it is our right and not the state's to judge what is best for our child and under what conditions he will flourish educationally and personally. Around 16 children a year commit suicide in this country because they are being bullied at school  - this frightening statistic indicates that the government perhaps ought to taking a long hard look at addressing some of the systemic problems inside state provided education rather than go on a rampage through the civil rights of Home Educated parents and children. I urge you to find out more about Home Education if you are not already familiar with it and use your voice to speak up against this very bad report and the government's ill-advised whole hearted embrace of it.
 

Dawn, Change the recommendations from Badman regarding homeschoolers. His premise is that homeschoolers should be suspected of child abuse and so recommends laws to treat us as such.

 We homeschoolers have higher and better expectations than what the schools can provide. It's a luxury and a right to homeschool, the way we want. There is no proof that homeschoolers are at any risk or a breeding ground for criminal activity, Badmans own report says as much, yet his recommendations say otherwise. What Mr. Badman recommends will turn homeschooling into gov't. run schools at home. He might as well figure out what our wages will be.

Please do what you can, Dawn, to stop this abuse of power by Mr. Badman.

Home education, and indeed educational diversity, is known to produce highly creative and adaptable adults, often with an entrepreneurial spirit - which is exactly what is needed in the difficult economic times ahead of us.  The Badman Review ignores all the research which supports this - to our country's peril.  We urge you to reject the recommendations in this extremely flawed and biased report.

Can the Children's Minister please take an interest and do something about the unnecessary drugging of our children.

In particualr our disabled children are being unnecessarily - in in some cases illegally - drugged, as a 'first line of action' when they have such problems as behavioural difficulties or sleep pattern disturbance.

 What is loosely called 'psychological help' needs urgently to be brought into use, so that children who already have difficulties are not also faced with the side effects of drugs which are unnecessary.

If such children and significantly their parents/carers are given the tools to live well and fit in with the expectations of society, they will fare much better.

 They are not dolls to play with, but real live people. And when even paediatricians take no account of their humanity - whilst stating that they are 'the experts', a disgraceful downward spiral of prescribing takes place, which harms our most vulnerable children and helps no-one except in the short term the NHS Budgetting staff.

Objections by caring parents, to this drugging regime, bring only legal action by solicitors who run the Trusts. That action istaken against the interests of these children, their parents. The money used, to overpay barristers and solicitors, in legal actions against already vulnerable children, could be far better spent on giving the help which those children need.

 Don't drug our children.Use other ways to help them.  

I am deeply concerned about the Badman review into elective home education. We have been home educating 8 out of our 9 children for religious reasons, as Christians. For us it is a conscience thing. If we were to have that right stopped we WOULD leave Britain. I see the report as flawed, there were claims about abuse that were never substantiated, and the reason why more home ed children are KNOWN by social services, is because they are reported by many, as home educating is viewed as DANGEROUS by some. I see the whole report as lacking balance. No references were given to the excellent accomplishments of EHE children. No references were given to the positives, it was all negative and slanderous.

All the home ed children we have met are very happy, and our own children included. It would be a very rare case indeed where the children are not. When children meet together they are relaxed, and many of them have been taken out of school because they have been abused in school. Given the statistics I think there needs plenty done in school to safeguard children, and improve standards, I find it hypocritical to try to impose a standard on us, when the schools rarely if ever meet that. We are to be treated EQUAL under the law, not as second class citezens, and the idea of having our children interviewed alone, just because we might be child abusers is dangerous! I understand a balance needs to be made with the LEA's but this is an unjust balance, giving the LEA poilice powers.