Of course, the headmaster knows better if a parent should be allowed to take a disabled kid on holiday... I actually find this mind-blowing. What is happening to the UK?

Family of severely disabled boy barred from taking term-time holiday - Education News - Education - The Independent

Absolutely ridiculous. Tbh if the child only has that time to live, he shouldn't be in school. He should be doing things he truly enjoys doing. Parents could surely "homeschool" him in the eyes of the government if they wanted? Poor sod

Just another way the state wants to control our children. Honestly... You have to apply for leave during the school year for your ****ing kid? He/she is your kid, should you not be able to take him/her wherever you damn well please? And its up to the headteacher whether or not the kid goes on holiday? Its almost like applying for leave from work. But oh wait. There is no choice in going to school, and theres damn well no salary either ! Theres a choice in working, AND you get paid!

Bullshit if you ask me.

When my taxes are paying for the teachers, facilities, and school infrastructure, who the hëll do parents think they are taking children out of school during term time? A crack down on "voluntary absence from the classroom" is long over due.

Maybe parents should (at least) be billed for the teachers time and facilities they have wasted?

Wasted? The teachers still have to go to work to teach the other kids.

Maybe the parents who decide to homeschool should be refunded the tax monies that they are forced to pay into the "education" system.

Its not often you can catch me complimenting the systems here in Canada, but at least I can take a weeks hols off school in the middle of April to go to Florida with my family and I don't have to get permission from anyone at the school.

It does appear to be an ill-thought-out policy, more to do with Gove's dogmatic "I know best" attitude than with any intention or expectation that it will actually make the education system more effective. I have recent, though second-hand, experience of the vagaries of the system.

My two sisters requested special leave for their kids during our recent family trip back to the UK. One was denied (but took the child out anyway and damn the consequences), the other had her request accepted. Both had requested leave of absence for a day (a Friday) to attend a family gathering in honour of my father. He's in rapid decline with complications related to Parkinson's disease (dementia, incontinence, severely compromised immune system, etc etc) and is not likely to be around much longer. It was the first time that there was an opportunity for him to have all his grandchildren at the same gathering, and almost certainly the last such opportunity.

The sister who had her request turned down explained all this, but was denied - despite the fact that her school friends subsequently told her that during the Friday in question, the last of term, they had played games and watched movies for almost the entire day. She is monumentally unimpressed with the head teacher and has written to him, copying all and sundry, asking for a full explanation of his denial given that he ought to have been aware of how his teaching staff were planning to fill the day. This will no doubt feature in her defence if she is prosecuted for unlawfully taking a child out of school...

The sister whose application was granted works in support of a number of local government and charity sector organizations in continuing education, so knows the jargon to use to get things done when there are boxes to be ticked. Apparently she described the family get-together as a "living funeral" - not an expression I'd heard before - and the head teachers of both her kids' schools (primary and secondary) were quick to say yes.

It will be interesting to see whether, and how quickly, the policy is reversed now that Gove has been unceremoniously demoted to Chief Whip.

You have a different opinion. There is no need to justify it, but teachers and schools are provided to teach children. If the children aren't there, that obviously isn't happening, so an opportunity cost for the children. Furthermore if every child was taking a week off here and there the school calendar and curriculum would be a nightmare for the teachers to manage with all the kids trying to catch up here and there with different parts of the curriculum.

I am inclined to agree that parents who make appropriate alternative teaching arrangements for their children should get some sort of rebate or tax credit.

So taking it to the case of this child here who was denied leave to go on his possibly last vacation with his mum and dad- really? I don't think his state-forced 'education' is going to help him in the grave...

So, yes, opportunity lost on the child. Opportunity to go on his possibly last vacation-lost.

Agreed 100%. Terminally ill children shouldn't be required to go to school, and in deed should not be in school at all if their attendance would be disruptive.

I don't think it specifically says in the article, but isn't "attendance" one of the many points upon which a school is judged in the UK these days? Poor attendance, authorized and non-authorized, lowers the appearance of it being a "good" school.

No excuse for the story here, but shows how the bureaucracy works.

I didn't read all the posts properly at first and thought this was in Canada but surprise surprise it's the UK

And if they are being judged on attendance, it is surely easier to put the pressure on parents trying to take unusual time off, rather than dealing with persistent non-attenders, which would probably be more difficult even if more important. Have to keep the figures looking good, which surely indicates the real value of league tables, etc.

I am of the opinion that if the child is able to keep up with the curriculum (which will most likely require some work on the part of the parents) then it should be up to the parents to decide if they miss school due to special circumstances. The current policy is obviously fomenting some serious power abuse on the part of headmasters. As the mother of this kid said, he is NOT going to have a career, I'm pretty sure he won't fall very much behind if he misses a week of school, and the headmaster must realise this. He/she only denied the vacation because he/she could.

I don't agree with your opinion that as a taxpayer you somehow have the right to demand that other people's kids attend school every day. You can't force me to drive my car every day because you already paid for the highway, or to take my kids to the park because your tax money helped pay for it. All kids should attend school regularly, but if they are able to get good grades then it's up to the parents to decide when family life is more important than going to school.

This is the third such article I have seen in the UK papers over the past couple of weeks, one involved a boy being refused time off to attend a parents wedding and the second one was about a girl who was excluded from the 100% attendance award because she took one day off to attend her Mother's funeral. I am all for encouraging attendance at school, but this has gone way too far.
My son misses quite a lot of school because of sporting commitments, the agreement with the school is that it is his responsibility to discuss with his teachers what he will miss on a particular day and to make sure he catches up. He is just going into Grade 11, he is a year ahead, is in the enhanced class for Maths and always places on the honour roll.
We have never had any problems from the school about his absences and his education is not suffering. Its a balance.