Since the election of a Labour givernment in 1997, there has been a steep rise in instances of petty authoritarianism by public servants. Those whose wages are funded by the taxpayer appear to have forgotten just who they are being paid to serve.
There has been an excellent article in the Daily Telegraph by Christopher Snowden entitled ‘Whose child is it anyway?’ and details yet another example of dictatorial behaviour by a Headteacher who also has expressed a worryingly proprietorial attitude to the children in their care. These petty martinets who occupy positions of power over our children, really do need to be reminded just whose children they are, and should be told that they are the parents’ children and not the property of the State. Schools are only temporarily ‘in loco parentis’, no matter how much these tinpot dictator with a PGCE, like the Headteacher in this example, may wish it to be otherwise.
Christopher Snowden said:
“A new academic year at Milefield Primary School in Grimethorpe, South Yorkshire, gave authorities a fresh opportunity to override the will of parents in the name of heath. As reported in the Telegraph, a ban on packed lunches has so far led to six children being removed from the school by their parents, but the governing body remains unrepentant.
Justifying the new diktat, head teacher Paula Murray applied the newspeak of the public sector, saying that she was “taking a holistic approach to school meals”. On the basis that what is not compulsory must be banned, she noted that there is “no requirement for the school to provide an area for children to consume packed lunches” and that the new policy would (in so many words) be based on the pretence that such facilities do not exist. Plenty of seats will be available for those who are prepared to eat school dinners, but they miraculously vanish when a child wants to eat a sandwich.
Parents of first-time offenders will, Murray says, “receive a phone call or text reminding you that we no longer have the provision to cater for packed lunches”. There is no word on what will happen to repeat offenders, but presumably, like the six-year-old who was found guilty of “persistent and deliberate breach of school policy, such as bringing in crisps, biscuits, sausage rolls, mini sausages, scotch eggs and similar” at another school last year, they will be expelled.
Most remarkably, Ms Murray reacted to accusations of coercion by saying: “We’re not forcing anyone”. How so? Because “parents have the choice of taking their children home if they don’t want them to have a school meal.” Insofar as this is a “choice”, it is not one available to most working parents, particularly since the school has rather spitefully required them to take their children home “for the full lunch hour”, signing them in and out at reception as they do.
Mick and Debbie Curphey, both of whom work for a living, have reluctantly kept their two children at the school in order to prevent disruption to their education, but they will now be out of pocket since they will have to pay for school dinners for their eight-year-old. Herein lies the rub. The school has portrayed its policy as a gold-plated version of the “free lunch” provision for four-to-seven-year olds set out in the new Children and Families Act. But by banning packed lunches for all children, the effect will be to force parents of eight to eleven-year-olds to buy meals that their children do not want, rather than less expensive packed lunches that they do want. In this way, Nick Clegg’s misguided act of middle-class welfare (which will cost taxpayers one billion pounds a year) is used to rob Peter to pay Paul. Free for some, costly for others, but compulsory for all.
None of this concerns the head of Milefield Primary School, who self-righteously proclaims that “We have got to work towards what’s best for our children”. The clear implication is that parents have not got their children’s best interests at heart, that they are unfit to feed their own offspring, and that schools exist to protect kids from their parents. Her use of the proprietorial term “our children” – rather than “the children” or “our pupils” – is telling. She uses the term to imply ownership by her institution, perhaps even by the nation, but when Adam and Claire Martin, who have moved their three kids to a different school as a result of the ban, say that they “don’t need somebody to tell us what our children should be eating”, the word “our” is literal, meaningful and should be deserving of respect.
Sadly, there are occasions when the state needs to intervene to protect children from their parents, but they are mercifully rare. Far more common are instances of state agencies throwing their weight around to impose their values upon responsible individuals and their families. With their dubious belief that hot food is healthier than cold food (even if it goes uneaten), the meddlers of Milefield are amongst them, but the fact remains that a ham sandwich at lunchtime is not, and never will be, a child protection issue. It is an insult to parents to suggest otherwise.
See the original article and the comments on it here:
It seems all is not well with this particular school, and it is not just about the issue of packed lunches. It appears that the quality of education isn’t much to write home about either. A growing number of this school’s parents are voting with their feet and transferring their children to different schools or in one case choosing to homeschool. Here are two comments from one particular parent who has opted for homeschooling:
“I am one of those parents, I am now homeschooling my two boys aged 7 and 10. It’s the best decision I have ever made. This started out about the principle of the policy and my older child being on a weight maintenance plan set by a nutrition team that we were referred to by the children’s hospital. The school have refuted it. I was told I would have to get all new paperwork and doctors signatures. I already have paperwork and the team we have dealt with have got far better things to be doing than pandering to a head teacher that is power crazy!
Out of the 7 days the school has been open, the meals have been miscalculated and some children have been served beans on toast! So there is no way now I would even trust them with my sons diet, one of my initial concerns after reading the captain Birdseye style menu!
If a child does not like the meal they have to prove it over 3 weeks, if they don’t eat it for 3 weeks the school will try and work out something for that child!
There are 6 children at the minute, What the council has omitted from their information is that there have been transfer formsgone in for a further 6 children and possibly more now”
and
“Thank you, I have identified areas in which my kids have been failed by the system/school, and it’s appalling. I am now teaching my older child suffixes and explaining them he didn’t know the basic rules. His sentence structure was appalling, luckily he is bright and he is doing brilliant in just one week the progress he has made is great, this only serves to confirm my decision was the right one. His maths is good but could be better, in just one week his progress is awesome. Multiplication I had already taught him as the school only started teaching it on a ‘had hoc’ basis last year, so he hadn’t be shown the facts of division. All very basic.
My 7 year old has been massively confused literacy wise so I have no choice but to go back to the beginning and highlighting his weak points and using his strong points to boost his confidence, again the progress he is making is brilliant. Simpler words have been confused as staff referred to words as split digraph, phoneme, simile etc..Do they need to know that really? My son heard the fancy terms but had know idea what it applied to! So I am having to actually undo some bad practice! They also watched far too much TV at school, horrid Henry etc…I hate that program!
One sad fact for me I was on that playground every day and never missed a single meeting with staff, I would collect the youngest and ask is he doing well, is he being a good boy etc, nothing was ever said. I was told my oldest son was very bright and was doing great. My younger son I was told slower progress but ‘that’s a boy thing’ and not to worry as he is getting it every day. I am now very confident he has got more this last week than he did in a full term at that school! I can’t wait for the EWO to visit it is clearly visible the progress made!
I was initially concerned the boys would try and play me, but I laid down the rules and apart from the odd minor hiccup it’s been better than I could have imagined! One very big plus to this, we are closer than we have ever been and have bonded in a way I did not think possible.
So again thank you for the luck I am sure I will need it at some point ☺”
Judging by the improvement that this lady’s children have made since starting homeschooling, it seems that not only has she made the right choice, but that she has found that the ‘service’ her children were getting from her children’s previous school left a lot to be desired. Many more parents should do a bit more poking around concerning what their children are being taught and what sort of ethos is being imparted to them by teachers.
Our children are primarily our children and our responsibility, and it is long past time that agenda-driven petty dictators like Paula Murray were told in no uncertain terms where to get off. We all pay through our taxation for our education system, and it’s time to claim it back and demand a much better and more accountable service.
