“It will be construed by many parents as a threat and it is not helpful. If schools want to get the support of parents and gain their confidence, threatening them with social services will not help.”


..I agree with this and there was a spokesperson from the Safeguarding team on TV yesterday..(it might have been BBC/I can't remember..)..saying much the same that what these schools are doing in threatening parents is really unhelpful/a child revealing that they are playing a certain game is not something which the schools should involve themselves in unless there are other factors involved/other disclosures that caused them concerns for the child...I think that the schools/federation or whatever it is, is being very over zealous in their actions, which would do more harm than good in gaining the support of their parents to work with them on aspects of E-safety...

I have a feeling this is something to do with the 'troubled families' government initiative, if it's part of a joined up multi-agency approach to safeguarding then it could be one of the tools used?
in that 2 criterion on a checkist have to be identified to trigger intevention, truancy and SENCO identified educational issues being 2 of them also. It seems schools are heavily involved in this process already, I don't think this is an over reaction by the school but a very real threat.
Remember, big brother is watching you...and your kids.

I do not think that this report is merely saying that young kids who watch 18 plus video games will automatically become 'serial killers', but rather that when very young children admit in class that they do play 18 + video games at home as a matter of course, then it does suggest that the parents are guilty of careless neglect at best (if they are unaware) and wilful neglect at worst, (if they are aware), and this just might be an indicator of potentially more grave 'parental neglect'.

There is a growing tendency within society now to overlook the fact that during school-hours, teachers are by necessity, 'parents by proxy', and that - given normal rising and bedtimes for children during weekdays - teachers actually spend LONGER with our kids than we do. This being so; it is a recipe for disaster to impose responsibility for our children on schools without also delegating to them the necessary authority.

Supposing teachers were to discover that an 8 year old was smoking cigarettes at home? Or worse still smoking cannabis or drinking alcohol? Supposing that teachers discovered a 10 year old girl openly boasting of having regular sex in her bedroom with an 18 year old boyfriend while her parents were out or watching TV downstairs?

I agree that the 'ultimatum' could have been worded better but to be fair, I think that schools are increasingly being 'damned if they do' and 'damned if they don't.'

Great post Kirk

..you say damned if they do and damned if they don’t but it’s not that at all...it’s about appropriate action if action is needed...and writing to and threatening all parents is neither appropriate nor helpful..all schools are reliant on the trust and support of their parents to work together in a partnership... and how would this happen if the school is threatening to report to the police something which is entirely a parent’s decision ...how is that in the interest of any child...a primary school child playing an 18+ video game..(whether anyone think that’s appropriate or not..)..is not any indication of neglect within the home, there would have to be some other factors involved for that to be the case...

...maybe that child has an older sibling who plays the games and maybe sometimes that sibling lets them have a go..?...maybe it’s the parent’s game and the parent themselves let their child play on it under their supervision..?...maybe they’ve decided..(as the parent..).. that the child is able to cope with that..(because all children are different..)...If a child were to reveal that they played ********** game at home and they thought about death all of the time when they played it..?...then that would be a safeguarding concern...if a child were to be persistently late for school and tired/hungry because their lateness meant that they never had time for breakfast... and they revealed that they hardly ever got sufficient sleep because they were busy playing ************ game every night and really late...?...then that would be a safeguarding concern...and those concerns would require some action from the school and that action would vary depending on the individual situation...in the first instance it may just be to have a chat with the parents..and obviously to discuss a solution...maybe outside organisations would be involved in some situations because it could be that the family does need a bit of help...and that’s what it’s really all about/not punishing..but identifying when help is needed in a family/what the help is and helping that family to get it..parents as a rule in most cases don’t neglect their children/they try their best to parent their children in the best ways they can... but sometimes they can struggle for various reasons....what it isn’t about and what isn’t helpful to anyone involved is to ‘punish’ or to threaten to punish parents ....and I would think also unhelpful to the police who have limited resources...

The voice of reason Ammi... I applaud your post.

I really do think it's out of the schools hands and it's more of a government initiative, the schools are getting the flack for it...however all the ifs, buts and maybes are not going to change the fact that schools are being given more responsibility for getting a handle on issues that could manifest into something in higher school.
The police are not an issue as it was social services that are the agency that the families are referred to.

Hi Ammi,

It is not very often I disagree with your views, and this is no exception.

I actually agree with a lot of the points you are raising, but I must point out that you are misinterpreting what I actually wrote. I did say:

"and this just might be an indicator of potentially more grave 'parental neglect'."

As opposed to definitely in all cases.

I am not condemning all parents who let their children access, play or even watch as bystanders the playing of 18 games or films - because with intelligent, mature and responsible parents, their judgement and their personal knowledge of their children is far more credible than any teacher's 'second hand' opinions.

However - not ALL parents are intelligent, mature and responsible, and not all parents care for their kids in the way you claim.

What is an innocuous revelation from one 6 year old regarding playing 18 rated games, may be have far more alarming connotations in another 6 year old revealing the same fact.

I believe that in the case of child neglect or even abuse, it is forgiveable if the schools err on the side of caution.

I would not take offence if I was a parent who allowed my child to watch or play 18 rated games and the school - or even Social Services or Police -contacted me as a 'follow up' to my child revealing as much in school, because I have no fear that in every possible respect, my kids are patently not neglected.

On the other hand, if such an action exposes just one family where neglect or abuse is being perpetrated, and remedial action can be invoked, then I feel the school's actions will be justified.

I do agree that 'contacting the parents' is a far more diplomatic alternative to 'contacting the police' and I did write that the 'ultimatum could have been worded better', but I stand by the points I raised about schools having custody of our children during weekdays for longer than we have, and that 'responsibility' without 'authority' is a recipe for disaster.

..I respect your opinion, Kirk and identifying children at risk is obviously very important in schools as children can often make disclosures to school staff and those disclosures will always be acted on, appropriately to each individual case ...with neglect for instance, I can't see that a child revealing that they have played a particular video game is any sign of neglect on it's own so there would have to be some other factors involved...it's doubtful for instance that a child who is bright and alert in lessons, fully attentive, has a healthy diet, always on time for classes/happy and relaxed at school/socialises well with peers etc etc etc...but reveals they have played a certain game is suffering any neglect in their home so maybe just mentioning what they have said to their parents in case they weren't aware of it..?...


...I think with parents, we just see things differently/and will agree to differ with this...for school staff the priority concern is always for the child..that a child is safe, that they are confident, that they are happy/anxiety free...to help raise their self esteem so they can reach their potentials etc...for this it's important that we also work alongside the parents/trust from parents as well as from children is extremely important..we're not there to judge them or their parenting skills/decisions....and I don't think of parents as good or bad or not intelligent or not mature as such because most parents are really trying their best...but more that some may struggle and need help from outside organisations..to help them reach their potential as parents, maybe you could say....