Friday, 18 September 2009

Spinning, bumping and grinding

So Mr. Badman has noted the serious interest taken in his pseudo-intellectual recommendations and the furious pace of home educators who have brilliantly and effectively dismantled the edifice on which they stand (or totter).

He has had to shout for his pals in the LAs to come and help him as he sinks further into the mire upon which he set out his stall.

If you take a report so poorly written that becomes a platform upon which a government builds changes in the (already perfectly good) law, and in the report you use dodgy statistics, irrational proposals, hopeless illogic, and seek reckless destruction of laws that serve us well by providing a balance between the power of the state (local authorities) and the power of the people (parents), then you can expect to be questioned, have your work eyed up like a stripper's g-string, and thoroughly and roundly criticised.

That we allow a man who is so blatantly and obviously prejudiced to write such damning and completely inane and dangerous drivel is a strike against the heart of this country.

That he has the nerve (I nearly said balls!) to flail about like a drowning weasel to ask for more evidence to back up his insanity is another strike against the living tissue of this land.

That he is allowed more time to receive this help, to regroup his forces of darkness to continue this disgusting and evil power-play against law-abiding, caring parents is a thrust of the dagger down into the very soul of Britain.

So let's see how deep the rabbit hole goes. How many consultations? How many ultra vires LAs? How many happy children who home educate? How many home educators on the review panel?
How much money has been drained out of the coffers for this utter vile travesty? How many children are better off for this DCSF and its spin meisters?

Consultations? Four or five. Others that concern home educators. Too damn many. We actually have lives, you know.

Ultra vires LAs? Dozens? I have been a member of a few lists for four years and can recall agonised parents shouting for help so many times. My own LA representative lied to me about having the right to come into my house (but, cunningly, I had checked with a member of a national home education group so I knew that she had no right). She lied to me. A public servant, whose rations I help to pay for, brass-faced and staring me in the eyes, LIED to me.

Happy home educating children? I don't know an unhappy one, and have never heard of a child who doesn't unfold like a pinched plant leaving the darkness and reviving in the sun as they grow into home education.

Home educators on the review panel? None. Eh? Yes, none. The true experts. The non-school, home educating as I live and breath experts. Representation in Badman's group of bad advisors? Not one.

Tax payers' money? Well, my 88 year old mother probably contributed her share. The bill will add to about £275,000. Of course, this is a guess; informed by Tanya Byron's equally stupid review of computer games. We, who pay for these things, don't know the true total because the DCSF won't tell us. Telling us how much we've coughed up is a form of harassing and vilifying Badman apparently.

How many children are better off? None. In fact, they are worse off. Quite a few concerned mothers have told me that their children are terrified to see officials alone, don't want to be showing their work, don't want to perform for schooly agents like performing fleas, and are scared of the Badman.

They've cried themselves to sleep.

Cried. Children. Shed tears.

Some of them are petrified that they will be forced - frog-marched - back to school from which safe and glorious hell hole they had previously been removed because they were in danger.


Yeah, right.

Pull the other one.


  1. Very well written Danae, says it all really.
    Its extremely upsetting that some uncaring, uninvolved individual, under some bogus premise can have such a damaging affect on myself and my children, irrespective of whether his recommendations come to fruition - the damage has been done. We cannot begin to heal the injury (dare I say mental turmoil or does that pick me out as unsuitable to HE?) as the torment continues, sapping our time and energies away from our children. What have you done BadMan? And for what?

  2. Thank you, Michelle.

    As you say, the damage has been done. We have to wonder for what? Personal aggrandizement? A belief in what you are doing?

    My home educator eyes are now open. I will never trust another government document or spokesperson as long as I live.

    And that is damage too.

  3. Could swear I had commented on this Danae, something about us being to stubborn and principled to stomach the lies.

  4. My children have been worse off on several occasions since this Badman affair started, if for no other reason than because we have felt that we have to spend time dealing with this rubbish when we would far rather be getting on with other stuff. The fact that they are now up to scratch on parliamentary process, the proper meaning of democracy, theories of the relationship between the individual and the state, and each could produce a rounded speech on the problems of the review's recommendations is but small compensation, I think.

  5. I have spent far too much of what should have been time with and for my child dealing with these consultations. I have more than one friend who has said that it felt like death by consultation. I have to agree. The stress these consultations has caused my family has been huge. I can't remember a year without a let up from consultations or other seriouse threat to freedom in education. Elaine G-H

  6. Entry to homes is illegal it is not allowed FULL STOP
    interviewing children without a parent , carer, friend present? very very naughty to suggest spesh when the person suggesting it is a unicef trustee and the united nations even give juvenille offenders the protection of having a parent/carer/friend present not least to, in the words of the UN ''prevent intimidation and coercion''
    And I have heard that they feel that we are only arguing a few of the rec's and that means in their eyes that we accept all the others!! I think that we need to make it clear to the select committee that we do not accept the recs FULL STOP.

  7. to clarify I am aware that the courts can grant entry to homes under certain circumstances when presented with evidence to support the application not really applicable to innocent families though is it?

  8. Excellent post, thank you! (that's you on the vilification hit list too, though)