.png)
Have you found the website helpful?
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Dear Parents/ Caregivers,
Welcome back to the new school year.
I would like to take this opportunity to remind you of the importance of showing support for your child/ children. As a school, we strongly encourage you to attend assemblies, prizegiving, sports days and parents' evenings. We invite you to be an active part of our school community and we regularly provide the opportunity for you to come and see the amazing achievements of your child/ children.
We know that it makes a real difference to a child when they have the support of their loved ones.
Warmest regards,
A Headteacher
‘Mum, can Dad come and see my race at sports day?’
‘Mum, can Dad come and see my work at parents' evening?’
‘Mum, can Dad come in for the Father’s Day breakfast in my class?’
‘Mum, can Dad come and see me in my leaver’s assembly?’
‘Mum, can Dad come and see me get my award for maths?’
The answers to these questions, for many children, might simply be, ‘yes, of course.’
But what if your children’s father is on the Sex Offenders Register?
It might seem like a no-brainer to some (surely, the answer is in the question! Now move along!). To others it might be a case of thinking ‘Well, he should have thought about that!’.
To address the former, the question is not, in fact, straightforward. Even if the answer is a resounding ‘no!’, it is important that schools follow process. But what if they don’t know the process or decide not to follow it? This is a point I will return to later.
As to the latter, the expression ‘he should have thought about that’ is frequently said (by the schools also). It’s a dismissive statement, designed to remove empathy and prevent rational thought. Making this statement, (often said as though it’s the most profound line that could ever be expressed – spoiler, it’s not) does nothing to address the subsequent issues caused to the children of people who have committed a sexual offence. Who, therefore, ‘should think about this’? Nobody?...
It’s not a situation I ever imagined facing (who does?). In fact, in recent years there have been countless ‘there-doesn’t-seem-to-be-a-guidebook-available-for-this-type-scenarios. Neither, it seems, is it a situation that schools put much thought into. Nor, for that matter, has the Department for Education. There is no specific guidance for this (in respect of a parent being on the SOR – they are not automatically banned). This makes for a complex situation, leaving schools free to ‘make up’ the rules. Unfortunately, when we start making things up as we go along (especially because of fear or hearsay), it creates a complex and messy situation for all.
When my children’s father was released from serving a four-and-a-half-month prison sentence, he was released homeless and not allowed to see our children. The homelessness was predictable (something that the state could not help with because he was not deemed high enough risk to house). The fact of not being able to see his own children was caused by an ‘administrative error’ whereby social services didn’t bother to read his conditions and just made assumptions based on other cases.
He had also been comprehensively forensically risk assessed. Something that the state seems unable to do – there is no nuance – when you are a sex offender, everyone must run for the hills.
Fear is a huge factor, I have learned. The school’s approach was seemingly driven by fear- both for their professional reputation as individuals and for the reputation of the schools. I have strong reason to believe that school leaders we have met along the way have Googled my children’s father, based on some of the questions I have been asked.
In addition to my own experiences, I can say that having been part of a vast support network of families in similar situations and offered 1:1 support to countless women, both personally and professionally, there is no consistency in response to how to deal with a family whereby a parent has committed sexual offences on the internet.
My argument is that irrespective of what schools decide (they are, after all, ultimately both public and private spaces), that the process applied should be consistent and fair and should be informed by fact not hysteria and the rights of the children and family should be acknowledged.
Governing bodies and proprietors should be aware of their obligations under the Human Rights Act, the Equality Act, (including the Public Sector Equality Duty), and their local multi-agency safeguarding arrangements. Yet it seems that when a parent has committed sexual offences, there is no need to worry about process or procedure!
In the fallout of my children’s father committing online sexual offences, my children experienced (in the space of nine months) having to leave their home and schools behind (we fled our home ahead of media coverage of the case and cut off contact with everyone), parental separation, parental imprisonment, changing their last names, initial lack of school places, lockdowns, parental unemployment, death of a grandparent and poverty.
When they did get school places, I made the schools aware of the situation that we had experienced as a family. I met with senior leaders and had open and honest conversations. I was thanked for sharing our circumstances. I wanted my children to be supported and understood so of course I made the time to do this. I do not feel that my family has been afforded the same level of respect and transparency by the school leaders.
The initial conversation happened in the context of both my children’s father and I being unemployed. There was a lack of available childcare spaces in the after-school provision and no childminders collecting from the school. This left me in a difficult position regarding seeking employment due to having to be at school at 08:40 and collect by 3:15. Traffic around school is heavy, which also adds time to the journey and means needing to leave early and return home later (it takes almost an hour in the morning and in the afternoon). I mentioned to the exec head that the children and I were having to use the food bank, and his response was that it’s ‘broken Britain.’ There was no offer of help with a childcare place (the waiting list had been closed).
I asked about the children’s father dropping them off at school and collecting them. It would have been very helpful if he had been able to do this because at the time, his employment prospects were low, and of the two of us, I had a better chance of getting into immediate work. We had a conversation with our social worker and with my children’s father’s probation officer. Neither agency objected to him dropping off and collecting the children, and both offered to meet with the school for a discussion. I approached the school about this, and it was as though I had dropped a match into a box of fireworks. The head was suddenly unable to reply to my emails anymore and passed it on to the exec head.
The exec head couldn’t even tell the children’s father himself – in fact, the exec head couldn’t even tell me of his decision. It was delivered second-hand, via email from the head that my children’s father was banned from school and must not set foot on school premises. So that was that, then. Except it wasn’t. I read every page of safeguarding guidance for schools. I read every relevant school policy. I read guidance from the DfE, from legal firms. I felt somehow that process had not been followed. And I was correct. I let the school know (following discussion with probation) that my children’s father would drop the children off outside the school premises in the event that I was unwell or unable to drop them off (not every day, I did not ask for that) and I asked that a member of staff could accompany my children off premises to meet their dad in the event of an emergency (not every day. In. An. Emergency. When I could not get there in time). At the time we had no family living near by, and we were in and out of Covid lockdowns).
The exec head emailed me to tell me in no uncertain terms that this would not be happening. The children would not be accompanied down the driveway In.An.Emergency to meet their father because he could not risk ‘the health and safety of his staff’ (to the tune of what specific risk? Looking in the eyes of a sex offender?). Secondly, that if ex ever does need to drop the children off, the school asks that he waits in his car and does not get out. The car is parked across a busy main road and the school, at the time, was happier for a 5- and 8-year-old to cross a road unaccompanied, such was the fear of my children’s father WALKING DOWN THE ROAD. Probation could not believe it. It was a massive overreach. The school has no jurisdiction to tell someone to stay in their car.
I made a SAR (subject access request) to the school asking for minutes from the meeting with the governors as well as any other relevant communication. My fears were around who knew what (since we had moved house and were effectively anon, that our safety could be put at risk by gossip). The exec head responded to the SAR, forwarding all relevant emails (basically one thread).
The thread began with an email to the exec head from Children’s Services saying that following assessment of our family, my children’s father can drop and off collect our children from school. The next email was from the exec head to two members of the governing body. It was all done by email. There was no meeting. The email stated unfortunately we have a paedophile and his family who have moved to the area and we can’t have him drop off and collect the children can we?’ the response from the governors was personal, informal, and basically (no, of course not X, we endorse your decision (first name terms)). As an ex-school governor (who was constantly frustrated by the matey-matey approach of the Chair of Governors and the head) it spoke to me of a decision already made, of friends backing up a mate, no questions asked about process. When I pushed for process, I was told briefly that the exec head and the head had ‘done a risk assessment.’ Which was interesting considering that they had not engaged with ex’s professionals, so I had to wonder where they had gathered their information on risk.
There was no discussion around ‘what next?’ for this family. What might the implications be for the children of removing a parent from school? What communication process should we follow to ban a parent? How do we notify him? What do we say to the children? What support might the family need? Nobody asked any of that. It was just NO. Of course it was. The craziest part about it all – the exec head didn’t even take the time to find out my ex’s name. He just made up what he thought his name was (based on my new name) in an email to me. So, he notified ME of a ban relating to someone else, who doesn’t in fact exist. What the school had failed to realise and yet they could have easily found out if they had met with his professionals - is that my ex has not changed his name and is not planning to– unlike the children and I, he has kept his own name.
When one of my children started at secondary school, I had a phone call from the new head at the start of term. The head’s words were, ‘regarding your ex. Erm, we are going to make the same decision as the primary school.’
‘Decision about what?’
‘Erm the decision they made about him not being at school.’
‘You do realise that that the primary school did not follow process when they made that decision?’
‘Erm’
So, if you decide based on their decision, your decision also won’t follow process. Can you follow the process please and engage with him and his professionals? Also, can I ask why you are even contacting me about this? He is my ex. Why not contact him?’
‘Well, that’s just the way it will have to be, I’m afraid.’
‘So, I am expected to be a messenger?’
‘Yes.’
And so went on, for the next three months a back-and-forth email conversation between me and the head’s secretary, passing messages on from the head to me and back again (for some reason I was not allowed his direct email). The gist of the conversation was me asking for school to follow process, engage with my ex and notify him of their decision in writing. What I was met with was excuses, evasion, at times silence. My children’s father’s professionals were happy to speak with the school – an offer which was ignored. Until the school, upon grilling my son, realised my son was staying with his dad – and then they made a social services referral. This was not only devastating and hugely traumatic, but it could also have easily been avoided if they had engaged with him and his professionals in the first place. Thankfully, social services were able to put the school in their place and no action was needed. We have been assessed as a family (we endured a total of seven social workers over 2.5 years) and if our son chooses to stay at his dad’s, he can.
Eventually, the secondary school realised they could not ignore the ‘elephant in the room.’ With our son staying at his house and my ex having joint parental responsibility, they needed to at least acknowledge his existence. The daunting prospect of having to engage with him must have loomed large for them. They must have been terrified at the career-ending prospect of communicating with a parent! It took at least three failed email attempts from my ex (with read receipts applied) and claims from the school of non-receipt before we realized that the headteacher was too scared to send an email to ex’s personal email. So, my ex decided to use his work email instead, and lo and behold, a reply was forthcoming. The headteacher eventually agreed to meet with him (after delaying for several weeks). They had a video call where it was established that he would not be allowed to come into the school at all. However, he still has not received anything in writing regarding this matter, and that meeting was six months ago.
The school did try to make provisions for my son during parents' evening by setting up a video call system in a private room so my ex could dial in as each teacher came to meet us. Unfortunately, nobody seemed to have been informed about this plan, or at least they had not read the memo - so my son and I were left sitting in a room alone. It was quite chaotic, and the fact of something being different was visibly obvious to my son’s peers when we were taken to a side room, making my son feel quite self-conscious. Eventually, I abandoned the plan and just went around meeting the teachers with him, as we usually would.
The headteacher was apologetic, and for once, it felt like they were trying to acknowledge my child’s rights as well as his father’s parental rights.
The situation we experienced could have been made less traumatic and much smoother had the following things taken place:
I urge for a more robust discussion on this topic. There is a process to follow when determining whether a parent should be banned from school. Yet, it appears that schools frequently overlook the process in circumstances involving parents who have committed sexual offences. In our case it feels as though they have made it up as they go along – and their general reluctance to put anything in writing to him speaks volumes about their confidence in their own decisions. I asked both the primary and secondary school to write a ‘later in life’ letter to my children, explaining why they banned their father from school. Both have declined. It is worth noting that social services obliged with such a request when I asked them to do so after our case was closed. They were able to put into writing an explanation as to why they became involved in my children’s lives, addressed to the children when they are older.
Whilst many in society may advocate for ongoing punishment for sexual offences, we must also consider the profound effects on the children involved. It is essential to balance accountability with an understanding of the impact on the next generation.
This blog was written by an individual living in England but the experience is equally applicable to Scotland.
.png)
