Parents warned as Nottingham cracks down on missing pupils
MORE parents are being prosecuted for failing to ensure their child attends school.
In the year up to the end of July 2011, a total of 103 parents were successfully prosecuted by Nottingham City Council.
-

And in the following four months alone, between August and the end of November last year, the figure had already reached 44, putting it on course for a rise.
The city council says a tougher stance against parents is behind the increase.
In all, 506 parents were prosecuted in the four years between January 2008 and December 2011.
The figures were provided to the Post by Nottingham City Council.
It is in spite of figures from the Department for Education published last year which suggested the number of student absences in the city was falling.
Councillor David Mellen, portfolio holder for children's services at the city council, said: "Parents need to remember it is illegal for their child to be absent without authorisation and they could face prosecution as a result.
"Nottingham City Council is working with the police to bring successful prosecutions against the parents of children who are persistently absent from school. We understand however that some parents need help and offer advice and practical support to families."
Parents who have been caught out are being fined up to £1,000 for failing to ensure their child attends school.
In some of the worst cases, where parents are seen to do little or nothing about their child skipping classes or even condone it, they can face stiffer penalties.
Mr Mellen added: "Our firmer stance has led to more cases being presented in the magistrates' court where parents fail by reasonable justification to ensure their child's attendance at school."
Mr Mellen said that allowing children to have time off school had a severe impact on their results when it came to exams.
The council said it is looking to clamp down after research showed that missing 17 days of school in a year can lead to a drop of one grade at GCSE level.
In 2009-10, 5.8 per cent of secondary city school pupils were classed as persistently absent, down from 7.4 per cent the previous year.
The rates for 2010-11 have yet to be revealed.
A persistent absentee is defined as a pupil who had 64 or more morning or afternoon sessions off school during the year, equivalent to about 20 per cent of the school year.







15 Comments
View all
by BLawrenson
Friday, February 03 2012, 9:57PM
“"Wayne", all schools are required to have an anti bullying policy including Ellis Guilford and are required to implement it. Bullies are ingenious at covering up their actions and it is often one persons word against several others especially if it is not physical bullying. It is not my contention that all schools are perfect but a lot of the bullying takes place away from school and much nowadays is on the web so it is not just a school problem.”
by WayneLooney
Friday, February 03 2012, 6:33PM
“All schools nowadays are required to have an anti bullying policy and to see that it is implemented. So BLawrenson how is it that my granddaughter refused point blank to go to Ellis Guilford school and the school said it had no instances of bullying?? Thank God, she has now left school and is a lot more happier than she was at that school.”
by MiRRv
Friday, February 03 2012, 5:59PM
“bit naive that blawrenson”
by codeblueuk
Friday, February 03 2012, 5:09PM
“Keeping kids either in a main-stream school or special centre during the day is not only vital for their education and outcomes but for the community. It should be a basic duty of the authorities to ensure they know if a child should be in school and when they are not. Having kids running around causing problems for themselves or their communities is completely unacceptable.
Some facts: 90,000 children have criminal convictions (not just those that have committed crimes and doesn't represent the number of crimes). 6,0000 children were permanently excluded last year. More worrying is that local authorities have no idea how many children in their area should actually be attending school; there is not statistic available for the 'missing and lost'.”
by BLawrenson
Friday, February 03 2012, 4:15PM
“In that case "Countytilidie" I would expect this to come out prior to any Court proceedings and that action appropriate to the case could be taken to safeguard the parents.”
by countytilldie
Friday, February 03 2012, 11:14AM
“and what do you do in the case of some parents who are scared of their kids,fear of violence,it does happen”
by BLawrenson
Friday, February 03 2012, 10:40AM
“"Chewchewchew", in cases such as the one you highlight then I think the Court should turn their attentions to the child. Perhaps there is a need for compulsory attendance centres where such truants would be required to stay during school holidays or weekends. Being deprived of mobile phones, tv, mp3 players, Facebook and Twitter for a few weeks and made to behave responsibly might convince them that it was sensible to attend school regularly and at least Mum would have some respite from a stroppy teenager.”
by Chewchewchew
Thursday, February 02 2012, 6:20PM
“One thing that can be particularly difficult is when parents have to go to work before school start times so they can't take their kids right up to the gate if needs be. I know someone who had this problem. She had a mortgage, full time job and her teenaged daughter was truanting but unless she jeopardised her job by turning up late every morning then all she could do was use other punishment such as grounding and stopping pocket money, guilt tripping... none of which worked. Getting children to school is very hard if you have other responsibilities that you can't ignore.”
by Gayleh69
Thursday, February 02 2012, 4:48PM
“Mary
I suppose because you were bullied is why you called me names on here last week, is it?”
by Earl_Manvers
Thursday, February 02 2012, 4:16PM
“Please do not take martynofderby's advice. For the first five days of a fixed period exclusion, you are responsible for your child and must make sure they are not in a public place during school hours. You could most certainly face prosecution for ignoring this.”