Rights & Responsibilities.
Discussion
EDP24 said:
mother-of-five who failed to send her youngest daughter to school was yesterday given a six-week suspended prison sentence and 80 hours' community work.
Lisa Ashford, 39, of Westfields on the Fairstead estate in King's Lynn, appeared before magistrates in the town for the fifth time for failing to make sure 12-year-old Lucy attended Springwood High School.
Should child and other benefits be paid to people who are not prepared to face up to their responsibilities.Lisa Ashford, 39, of Westfields on the Fairstead estate in King's Lynn, appeared before magistrates in the town for the fifth time for failing to make sure 12-year-old Lucy attended Springwood High School.
http://www.edp24.co.uk/content/edp24/news/story.as...
AJS- said:
More alarming to me, should you be criminally prosecuting people for poor school attendance of their children? Why?
Kids don't attend school > don't pass exams > can't get a job > live on benefits/shoplifting etc. > breed > allow their kid's to do the same > and so on....If a parent doesn't make an effort to ensure their little darlings go to school, who will? I don't see what can be done other than prosecute the chavvy b
ds.AJS- said:
More alarming to me, should you be criminally prosecuting people for poor school attendance of their children? Why?
What is alarming is that you're asking that question!ALL parents are responsible for their children up to a certain age (normally 16). Thus they must be held to account. It's this refusal to accept responsability that leads to chavism, feral kids, no respect by kids and bad behaviour in school.
It's about time (but sadly probably too little, too late) to get these irresponsible parents to toe the line and discipline their sprogs...
TankRizzo said:
AJS- said:
More alarming to me, should you be criminally prosecuting people for poor school attendance of their children? Why?
Because a lot of parents don't give a toss that their little darlings are roaming the streets when they should be in school. "Not my problem guv".AJS- said:
More alarming to me, should you be criminally prosecuting people for poor school attendance of their children? Why?
[judgedread]It's the law
[/judgedread]
more info here:
http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/schoolattendance/otheriniti...
Edited by FunkyGibbon on Wednesday 22 July 13:02
fk fk fk fk. So I am now paying for attendance improvement officers as well as way to 5 co-ordinators. All of whom are utterly useless. Clearly from the photograph the fat bh is not getting her 5 a day and the bloody kid is still bunking off school. In Brazil they just shoot them if they are alone on the street during school hours. Thats a bit harsh, but we are way way way too soft. Time to get rid of the matriarchy and liberal bleeding heart nonsense.
k fk fk fk. So I am now paying for attendance improvement officers as well as way to 5 co-ordinators. All of whom are utterly useless. Clearly from the photograph the fat bh is not getting her 5 a day and the bloody kid is still bunking off school. In Brazil they just shoot them if they are alone on the street during school hours. Thats a bit harsh, but we are way way way too soft. Time to get rid of the matriarchy and liberal bleeding heart nonsense.Why not just stop benefits for each day child not at school.
e.g. that get, XX per week in whatever benefits. Divide that by 5 and for each day of non attendance, remove 1/5th of their benefits. Child off all week, then no benefits at all.
For non benefit claiming parents, £100 per day fine (or means tested), can be taken at tax level via PAYE maybe, or council tax and so on, whatever.
e.g. that get, XX per week in whatever benefits. Divide that by 5 and for each day of non attendance, remove 1/5th of their benefits. Child off all week, then no benefits at all.
For non benefit claiming parents, £100 per day fine (or means tested), can be taken at tax level via PAYE maybe, or council tax and so on, whatever.
Dracoro said:
Why not just stop benefits for each day child not at school.
e.g. that get, XX per week in whatever benefits. Divide that by 5 and for each day of non attendance, remove 1/5th of their benefits. Child off all week, then no benefits at all.
For non benefit claiming parents, £100 per day fine (or means tested), can be taken at tax level via PAYE maybe, or council tax and so on, whatever.
Hey when the civil service counted the money last week they were ten quid short. I know lets spend £10000000000000000000000000000 trying to find it. e.g. that get, XX per week in whatever benefits. Divide that by 5 and for each day of non attendance, remove 1/5th of their benefits. Child off all week, then no benefits at all.
For non benefit claiming parents, £100 per day fine (or means tested), can be taken at tax level via PAYE maybe, or council tax and so on, whatever.
Obviously sending kids to school can make them better educated and disciplined, but if there is no will to go from either them or the family then they're more likely to simply be disruptive for the kids that do want to be there.
If they really don't want to, send them out to work.
The ready availability of state benefits and the lack of any serious consequences of crime creates far more chavs than the lack of unwilling attendees at a school.
If they really don't want to, send them out to work.
The ready availability of state benefits and the lack of any serious consequences of crime creates far more chavs than the lack of unwilling attendees at a school.
The problem is that if you pull the benefits of the parents then you punish the child but you need to punish the parents which is difficult to do without harming the kids. Bit of a catch 22 IMO.
Maybe there needs to be boarding schools for these kids to get a bit of discipline or benefits paid out in food vouchers etc. Or maybe boarding school for a few weeks and the parent is put to good use in a chain gang type program.
Maybe there needs to be boarding schools for these kids to get a bit of discipline or benefits paid out in food vouchers etc. Or maybe boarding school for a few weeks and the parent is put to good use in a chain gang type program.
AJS- said:
It's fairly simple to my mind. Scrap benefits altogether. It would punish the kids in the short term which might be unfair, but being human beings they would fairly quickly adapt to rely on extended family and community, and even in extreme cases their own efforts.
Why not turn it round? Accept that the parents are a lost cause, but make a stella/fags allowance dependent on little Johny`s exam results. That way maybe there would be some encouragement at home to do well. Tycho said:
The problem is that if you pull the benefits of the parents then you punish the child but you need to punish the parents which is difficult to do without harming the kids. Bit of a catch 22 IMO.
Maybe there needs to be boarding schools for these kids to get a bit of discipline or benefits paid out in food vouchers etc. Or maybe boarding school for a few weeks and the parent is put to good use in a chain gang type program.
And we could call those schools "Borstal Schools".Maybe there needs to be boarding schools for these kids to get a bit of discipline or benefits paid out in food vouchers etc. Or maybe boarding school for a few weeks and the parent is put to good use in a chain gang type program.
This is stupidity. Who now will ensure the child is at school when the mother is in jaill? Are we seriously suggesting the people can burgle/shoplift and not get jailed but a mother who doesn't get her kid in school does? Plenty of kids get dropped off by their parents, then go for a stroll just before school starts, and accidentally miss the day?
FFS you don't need to attend school to pass exams, in my old school I was better off not going in half the time, with the disruption etc.
FFS you don't need to attend school to pass exams, in my old school I was better off not going in half the time, with the disruption etc.
Jasandjules said:
This is stupidity. Who now will ensure the child is at school when the mother is in jaill? Are we seriously suggesting the people can burgle/shoplift and not get jailed but a mother who doesn't get her kid in school does? Plenty of kids get dropped off by their parents, then go for a stroll just before school starts, and accidentally miss the day?
FFS you don't need to attend school to pass exams, in my old school I was better off not going in half the time, with the disruption etc.
Read it again. FFS you don't need to attend school to pass exams, in my old school I was better off not going in half the time, with the disruption etc.
Eric Mc said:
Tycho said:
The problem is that if you pull the benefits of the parents then you punish the child but you need to punish the parents which is difficult to do without harming the kids. Bit of a catch 22 IMO.
Maybe there needs to be boarding schools for these kids to get a bit of discipline or benefits paid out in food vouchers etc. Or maybe boarding school for a few weeks and the parent is put to good use in a chain gang type program.
And we could call those schools "Borstal Schools".Maybe there needs to be boarding schools for these kids to get a bit of discipline or benefits paid out in food vouchers etc. Or maybe boarding school for a few weeks and the parent is put to good use in a chain gang type program.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff