"To home-educate children in the UK, one does not need a teaching qualification nor any specialist equipment and whilst some families follow a routine for learning, others do not.

There are families known to their LEA as home-educators and there are others that are not (Muckle 1997).

Currently, families home-educating children in England and Wales who have never been to school, are under no obligation to inform anyone

Whilst the school option involves formal assessment and inspection, the 'otherwise' alternative involves neither in any legislative form.

'LEAs, however, have no automatic right of access to the parent's home. Parents may refuse a meeting in the home, if they can offer an alternative way of demonstrating that they are providing a suitable education, for example, through showing examples of work and agreeing to a meeting at another venue.'

DfEE (1998a, point 4)" *


It appears to be particularly this last reccommendation of the Badman report that assessment and inspection of home schooling provision be more formalized, including the option of inspectors meeting with the children themselves, that has caused consternation and extremely angry responses amongst home educators who equate this with their children being perceived 'at risk'

A situation that was provoked by an NSPCC (an independent Childrens charity) policy adviser who during an interview unwisely made an inaccurate observation about a high profile child abuse case -

"Some people use home education to hide. Look at the Victoria Climbié case. No one asked where she was at school. We have no view about home education, but we do know that to find out about abuse someone has to know about the child."

This was immediately made a political issue by a UKIP MEP who demanded his resignation and claimed the NSPCC's "job is to vilify decent parents." advocating complete 'freedom' for parents.


*a description of the current situation by Dr Paula Rothermel C. Psychol. FRSA