England now has a new law rooted in the same ideology driving the wave of restrictive homeschool legislation in the United States. The law grants local authorities the power to prevent families from homeschooling if officials believe a proposed home education program is unsuitable or unsafe.

The measure delivered this and other major changes to England’s education system after years of deliberation by the nation’s parliament. It was signed into law by King Charles III near the end of April.

HSLDA’s international team has been engaged in discussions with homeschool leaders in England strategizing ways to challenge The Children's Wellbeing and Schools Act, or at least mitigate the way it is implemented.

While the legislation was being debated, HSLDA came alongside homeschool leaders and allies in England to oppose it using strategies and resources we’ve employed for similar campaigns in the US. We engaged with home education groups and leaders, worked with sympathetic lawmakers in an effort to pass positive amendments, and provided formal testimony explaining the dangers the legislation posed.

Now, the struggle to preserve freedom for English and Welsh homeschooling families enters a new phase.

“Just because a bill becomes law doesn’t mean the fight is over,” said Kevin Boden, HSLDA director of legal and international advocacy. “The battle may take a different shape, but we don’t give up.”

Ironing out the Details

Opportunities for challenging the law, known as The Children's Wellbeing and Schools Act, may arise after details regarding how the measure is to be implemented are revealed. For example, the national Department for Education (DFE) must still draft a standard curriculum for all state-funded schools as well as guidance for how local officials should scrutinize families who wish to homeschool.

The broad directives regarding what the law seeks to achieve, however, are clear. Notable changes for homeschooling include:

  • A national registry requirement for all students, including those who are homeschooling.
  • Assigning a unique identifier to each student so that they can be tracked across a wide array of government agencies. Entities that will have access to student information include child protective services, health services, and the police.
  • Granting broad authority to local officials to investigate parents and then determine whether to grant permission to homeschool.

As the DFE itself explained: “We are placing a duty on the safeguarding partners for local authorities, police, and health to give educators a greater role enabling them to influence decision-making at every level.”

A Battle of Ideas

Boden said these policy changes reflect a disturbing philosophical shift in how England views education. In this view, parents are inherently suspect. Consequently, the state must be empowered to usurp the natural and traditional role of parents as their children’s primary caregivers and advocates.

“England was one of the only countries in the world where public education was something families opted into,” Boden explained. “Now, when it comes to homeschooling, parents will essentially have to ask permission to opt out of the system. And even if they are granted approval, their children will be placed on a registry so that the government can track them.”

The same ideology, Boden noted, is already inspiring legislation in American statehouses. Connecticut, in particular, passed a law this year with provisions very similar to England’s, requiring parents to endure broad government scrutiny before being allowed to homeschool.

Specifically, Connecticut now mandates that any family seeking to withdraw a child from public school to homeschool must first be screened by the state Department of Children and Families.

As Ralph Rodriguez, HSLDA staff attorney, explained to our members, Connecticut parents could be disqualified from homeschooling for many reasons. These include “not just confirmed abuse, but a wide range of ‘neglect’ findings, some of which are minor, disputed, or entirely unrelated to a parent’s ability to educate their child.”

A Matter of Principle

HSLDA President Jim Mason noted that these new laws show tremendous disdain for two foundational principles of American and English jurisprudence: a high regard for due process and the presumption that parents act in the best interests of their children.

As he declared in a recent op-ed: “The state may have interests in the welfare of children, but it does not possess children. Parents do not exercise their role at the pleasure of a regulatory scheme; they fulfill a duty that precedes the state.”