Image default
Safeguarding Analysis

Being ‘known’ didn’t protect the children in the 7 SCRs

Gill Kilner, long term home educator, activist and blogger on the fallacious assertion that home educated children need to be known by professionals to be safe. She breaks down the NSPCC report on the seven Serious Case Reviews involving ‘home educated’ children

“Is being known to authorities any protection for children at risk? Absolutely not, according to every single one of the seven serious case reviews cited in this report.”

“Under current legislation and guidance, there is no formal registration process for elective home education which means that some home-educated children may be completely unknown to the local authority.”

Yes, but only those children about whom no concerns have been expressed to the local authority. Anyone else would be known to them. All of the children in the Serious Case Reviews listed were known to their Local Authorities!”

“Do all children have to be visible to the authorities? All the time, 24/7? If they were, would this actually help to ensure their safety or might it have the damaging effect of unsettling their peace of mind which relies on their family’s enjoyment of autonomy, privacy and trust? Are ‘the authorities’ to be relied on to keep our children safer than parents are, in general? Certainly not, according to this map of convicted cases of professional child abuse.”

Read in full: NSPCC: determined to learn the *wrong* lessons from case reviews (Sometimes its Peaceful, 26 Oct 2016)

Related posts

Home education and the safeguarding myth


Professor Liz Davies: register of children not identified at risk is wrong


Safer children? Safeguarding referrals within educational context


Rethinking child protection – serious reform needed (research by Devine and Parker)


Professor Liz Davies: How the system fails to protect children


Estimating child abuse can overload social workers and put pressure on families