the husband of the woman who has been fined for taking her 13 year old out of school without permission to give her away at her wedding in st lucia, just said on tv that there were 'inconsistencies' in the school's policy, what did he mean?
http://menmedia.co.uk...-fined-by-magistrates
Could the story be hinting at a set of regulations for the parents of children who go for long holidays on the Indian Sub-Continent and another for couples who want their children as witnesses at their weddings?
"There are children at Marple Hall that have been given authorised holidays. Because of the inconsistent decisions I didn't think I should have been fined."
Presumably that point - only quoting from the article.
Could the story be hinting at a set of regulations for the parents of children who go for long holidays on the Indian Sub-Continent and another for couples who want their children as witnesses at their weddings?
i just read it that the husband was either trying to imply something similar to add fuel or he knew something contraversial but wasn't prepared to say at this time.....huge leap i guess
He meant that the policy isn't consistently applied. Her other child was given permission by his scchool to attend his mother's wedding. The other boy, attending another school was denied permission.
It seems rather odd that a school has the power to deny a pupil attendance to his own mother's wedding. I am sure when the law was introduced, that it was never envisaged that schools would take such an hard line or would be so inflexible in applying it.
As the court case is over they've missed their opportunity to have the headmaster of the school questioned under oath about permitted long absences for one section of the pupils.
The school can't really defend their actions properly with regards to authorised absence as they're bound by confidentiality, some parents might think Johnny in 9B was skiing in the Alps when in actual fact he was in hospital for surgery.
if his mum and step-dad hadn't taken him with them but left him at home they may well have been charged with child endangerment, as assume their family were also on holiday with them judging by the wedding photos
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.