Weather
Mother who let kids stay off school pays the price (From Thurrock Gazette)
Get involved: send your pictures, video, news and views by texting TGNEWS to 80360 or you can email us Click here for details »
|
JOIN THE DEBATE BY ADDING YOUR COMMENTS ON THESE STORIES Registration to post comments only takes a few seconds. Click here to go to the registration page. |
Mother who let kids stay off school pays the price
3:00pm Wednesday 27th May 2009
MAGISTRATES slapped a Tilbury mother with a £3,285 fine for not sending her children to school.
The woman, who cannot be named for legal reasons, did not attend Grays Magistrates Court on Thursday May 21 but was found guilty in her absence.
She was fined £525 for each of her six kids, aged five to 15, and ordered to pay costs of £120 and a victim surcharge of £15.
Thurrock Council’s Cabinet member for Children’s Services, Councillor Sue MacPherson, said: “I am shocked that some parents would willingly deprive their children of the opportunity to benefit from an education.
“Parents have a legal requirement to ensure their children go to school, and the council will continue to take legal action against those who refuse to provide their children with this basic right.”
On the same day, another Tilbury mother received a conditional discharge for failing to send her 15-year-old daughter to school.
The woman, who also cannot be named for legal reasons, appeared at Grays Magistrate Court where she pleaded guilty at Grays Magistrates Court and received a 12-month conditional discharge.
In addition, she was ordered to pay £120 costs and a £15 victim surcharge.
More News stories
- Rape probe: Police arrest girl
- Huge illegal booze seizure in Thurrock
- John out to bounce back from Dragon's Den failure
- Nathan sells everything - for orang-utan adventure!
- Tories say cut expenses to help save £4million
- New plan to save the State Cinema is unveiled
- 'We weren't told about clinic closure'
- Drew's through to contest final
- Newsagent's campaign for survival
- Drink-drive social worker is suspended
Your Say YourThurrock
Don South, says...
2:29pm Thu 28 May 09
rogwj wrote:This is the end of a very long and drawn out process. You are not just taken to court. But if you ignore everything this is what happens.
While I cannot condone parent-inspired truancy, and there must be a lot more to this case than as reported by the Gazette, I wonder what the magistrates were thinking when imposing this sentence. If the woman has six children, all of school age, where is she going to get the money to pay such a fine? Next parts of the story I suppose will be a further sentence for non-payment of fine with the children being taken into care if the sentence is custodial.
SaveOurStanford, Stanford says...
10:38pm Sun 31 May 09
Aaron Kiely, South Ockendon says...
8:57am Wed 3 Jun 09
It's not been a deterrent and the fine is more than likely going to push her AND her children in to poverty.
You look at why there has been a breakdown in the relationship between the family and the education system - and then work from there. The education system is rotten and while I would still people be in it than out, we cannot sidestep the issue that we need a radical new approach to education.
An education responsive to the needs of children and young people, not the standardised market-orientated approach at the moment.
The Contrarian, Purfleet says...
1:42pm Wed 3 Jun 09
Aaron Kiely wrote:I make you right. I'd have sent her to prison. Also, I'd be interested to know what definition of "poverty" you're using. Nobody in this country lives in poverty if you measure it in absolute terms.
How is fining her going to do anyone any good? It's not been a deterrent and the fine is more than likely going to push her AND her children in to poverty. You look at why there has been a breakdown in the relationship between the family and the education system - and then work from there. The education system is rotten and while I would still people be in it than out, we cannot sidestep the issue that we need a radical new approach to education. An education responsive to the needs of children and young people, not the standardised market-orientated approach at the moment.
Sadly, although one needs a tv Licence to own a tv, and ar5ehole can have kids, and that includes the feckless and bone idle, of which there are a significant minority in Tilbury.
Couldn't agree more with your last comment. That said, the state (almost by definition - and with a virtual monopoly) will never be able to provide the sort of education our kids deserve.
Local Advertisers
Local Information
Enter your postcode, town or place name
rogwj, says...
9:59am Thu 28 May 09