Where do you draw the line Bob ? Deciding what is acceptable in society and discouraging what is not, if necessary by criminalising it, is the whole purpose of the legislative arm of government and quite a bit of the purpose of the executive arm too. Government has decided that compulsory education (the clue is in the name) is best for children. If we disagree then the correct response is to campaign against it, not just ignore the law.
No-one’s arguing that children should be taken from their parents at birth and confined in a school 24/7/52 until they’re 18. There are evenings and weekends and scheduled holidays. The argument is that they should go to school for some of their time. Schools run most efficiently (and heaven knows recent governments have tried to squeeze every last bit of efficiency out of them) when all the kids are there at the same time. That’s good for the schools and good for the kids.
Incidentally, exactly these arguments would have been used by the poor in the 1880s.
I took my daughter out of school for one day when I had organised a tour around Westminster with the local MP. She is now in her final year of a Politics and Philosophy degree so I feel vindicated.
Children should be taught that education is more important than a sun tan IMHO.
I have some sympathy with this. This is how my secondary school headmaster worked (back in the late middle ages). But he was both enlightened and as hard as nails. So the scheme worked because parents had to do what they were told.
I’m not a teacher, but the few I know tell me that these days the problems are not with the kids but with the parents. They argue about everything. If discretion was allowed on this then some headteachers would yield to pressure and some kids’ education would suffer.
It’d also be good if schools staggered their holidays a lot more than they do. If they can’t agree dates then they should be decided by lottery, or rota, 2-3 years in advance. It can’t be beyond the wit of man to spread the demand out more evenly over the year.
I should add that I think a little flexibility in what the head can approve would be eminently sensible. Mind you it makes not one bit of difference as we chose to save the government money by not spawning,still waiting for my tax rebate…
There was no other outcome, the idea that parents rights come before their children’s, makes me shudder. He should have just paid the fine in the first place.
There really was no other outcome. Him winning would have rendered the current law unworkable, and what he was really trying to do in essence was take financial advantage of the compliance of other families.
A small number of academy chains do this for some staff, but it is only a small number (and slightly difficult to justify under the value for money requirements).