A couple who let their two young children cycle to their private school have been warned they could be reported to social services unless they supervise the journey.And who wouldn't want independent, self-confident, responsible children?
Oliver and Gillian Schonrock let their son and daughter, five and eight respectively, make the one-mile trip from their home on their own.
They say it helps to teach the youngsters independence, self-confidence and responsibility.
Well, guess who:
But other parents and teachers at £12,000-a-year Alleyn's Junior School in Dulwich, south east London, are said to think the practice is irresponsible and dangerous.And so they've taken in upon themselves to correct the situation. Seems a familiar story, doesn't it?
On the return journey they are supervised, either by one of the parents or their nanny, which is deemed acceptable - but the Schonrocks have been told that they must ensure their children are accompanied on the journey to school as well or they will be referred to Southwark Council's Children's Services department.I love that phrase 'deemed acceptable', don't you?
Mr and Mrs Schonrock say rules on child protection, rather than the school, are to blame for the predicament they find themselves in.No! No, no, NO!
The government can impose all the rules and legislation it wants, but people are required to impliment them.
It's not enough to fight the govenment; the people who are inclined to this sort of behaviour need to be defeated too, if we are to retain any hope of a truly free society.
13 comments:
"other parents and teachers"
would love to find out the occupations of those "parents" who had an issue.
Bloody hell! I used to cycle from Ilford to East Ham to visit my Gran when I was 8. Please, JM, no jibes about trollybuses and horse drawn rag and bone men either. Oh, hang on a mo, actually they were on the roads too.
When I was a teenager the school was responsible for the conduct of its pupils both within, and outside the school (or at least that's what they told us). To this end if we misbehaved whilst in uniform there would be repercussions.
However a couple of years back I paid a visit to my former grammar school to voice concerns about the yobbish behaviour of some pupils on their way home.
The response this time was "Oh sorry, we can't be responsible for their behaviour once they have left the school grounds"
So, if that's the case, why can Alleyn's Junior School order their children to be chaperoned to/from the premises? If they are below the age of parental responsibility does it matter if they are 5 or 15?
microdave said...
"Oh sorry, we can't be responsible for their behaviour once they have left the school grounds"
So, if that's the case, why can Alleyn's Junior School order their children to be chaperoned to/from the premises?
I would suggest, because they are threatening the parents with general, ie National, "child care guidance" rather than relying on teachers/schools powers.
A bit like a "citizens arrest" scenario.
BUT, we have seen similar from these dictatorial nazi teachers before. Remember the school that put notices in all the local shops, that the bastards were not to be served with "unhealthy foods"?
Teachers are getting to big for their bloody boots, and on the way they are becoming RIGHT wee fascists. About time they were cut down to size.
Ach, aye! THEN they wonder why every so often they get punched in the nose by a parent!
I agree about the prodnose parents and school, but I don't believe any child has the road sense to be allowed out on their own before the age of about 12. They have no idea of the risks - it's up to the responsible adult to teach about the risks, but you don't do that by allowing them out on public roads alone. If it were me, I would be accompanying them to school and back (it's only a mile after all), which would give me some valuable exercise too. When the kids have demonstrated that they have the awareness to handle it for themselves, then leave them to it. But that won't happen when a child is 5 years old, sorry. There's a difference between over-protection and teaching a child to handle risk in a safe and structured way, but teaching requires parental involvement, time and effort. Wrapping kids in cotton wool (or leaving them to their wn devides) is much easier.
And yes, I went all over the place, alone, when I was 7 or 8 - but that was when traffic was a third of what it was today and cars weren't as fast. I even "left home" once at age 8 and cycled doen the A1 into the next county. But as an adult with ~50 years of cycling behind me, I still feel at risk on the country lane where I live, which is used by cars, lorries, vans and everyone else as if it is a racetrack.
Which it is, of course, but only when I am on the motorbike.
'Retain any hope of a free society'????
It's over. It has been for years, and it's not coming back.
microdave
It used to be that the parents were responsible until the child reached school, then the school were responsible (in loco parentis) until the child got home.
furor teutonicus,
you are right, the schools want it both ways.
Julia,
I think there has been some tinkering with the system, possibly a knee jerk reaction to the Baby P case.
This is part of Thanet Council's child protection policy and it gives examples of who might come across a child at risk.
Housing Officers in contact with families involved in anti social behaviour or poor conduct of tenancy
Housing Benefit Officers carrying out home visits
All Officers interviewing members of the public in our offices and at the Gateway or other TDC buildings
Environmental Health Officers investigating complaints about noise, properties representing a public health risk
and so on.
The school is likely to be between a rock and a hard place. Nulabor strikes again.
"would love to find out the occupations of those "parents" who had an issue."
Yes, that might well prove interesting!
"Bloody hell! I used to cycle from Ilford to East Ham to visit my Gran when I was 8."
Ah, but as Richard points out below, that was when there was a much lower rate of traffic.
And probably a lot better standard of driving!
"When I was a teenager the school was responsible for the conduct of its pupils both within, and outside the school (or at least that's what they told us). To this end if we misbehaved whilst in uniform there would be repercussions."
Oh, yes!
My mother, who went to a grammar school, recalls the assembly where all present were informed of the intense displeasure of the headmistress that some of her charges were observed to be sitting on Tube train seats when elderly passengers were standing...
"Teachers are getting to big for their bloody boots, and on the way they are becoming RIGHT wee fascists. About time they were cut down to size."
Indeed. I'm surprised they have time for this, what with the utterly appalling educational record.
"If it were me, I would be accompanying them to school and back..."
They've accompanied them to the school, just not back.
Good point about the traffic levels.
"It's over. It has been for years, and it's not coming back."
I don't think it's coming back in the same format, but I'm confident that it isn't too late to halt the decline. If enough people wish to...
"I think there has been some tinkering with the system, possibly a knee jerk reaction to the Baby P case. "
Hard cases don't just make bad law, it seems. They also make bad policy!
I don't believe any child has the road sense to be allowed out on their own before the age of about 12
Ballocks! Complete and utter CRAP. When would you let them leave home? Before or after collecting their old age pension?
Each child is different, and each journey is different. Some five year old children can easily and sensibly negotiate a mile journey on a busy road. And some cannot be trusted out when they are twenty.
some tinkering with the system, possibly a knee jerk reaction to the Baby P case
Maybe, but if so, I don't recall that Baby P was walking to school, if I remember correctly most of the recent horror stories happened in the child's own home - perhaps they would have been safer let out on their own from the moment they could crawl.
Ballocks! Complete and utter CRAP. When would you let them leave home? Before or after collecting their old age pension?
Well, we'll have to disagree on this one. If you read what I said, I argued that children need teaching about the risks of using the road, and that this was a parental responsibility. Once you are satisfied that the children are capable of handling the risks, you let them get on with it. But a road isn't like a soft play area, where they can be safely left to their own devices. I agree that all kids are different (mine were and still are), but I still can't agree that a child of 5 (or even 8) has the mental capacity to handle a solo journey on a public road. It's the same with leaving them alone in the house - you know when they are ready for that, but it certainly isn't at 5 years old.
English Viking wrote; 'It's over. It has been for years, and it's not coming back.'
That's the truest and saddest comment of all.
Wake up people. We are going quietly into the long dark night.
In the words of one J. Cleese, "It is a dead free society. This free society is deceased. It is no more. It is an ex-free society."
Post a Comment