A reminder here of the Department for Education guidance on schools and parental responsibility Understanding and dealing with issues relating to parental responsibility - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk) For clarity, all people with PR have the right to engagement with the school and to view school files, but unfortunately not all parents are honest with schools and may convince staff there are injunction/prohibitions or whatever against the non-resident parent. In this situations schools should check by asking for court orders before acting.
Parents are entitled to full information, to be invited to parents’ meetings and the like. Difficulties with schools need escalating to the local Education Authority, with reference to these guidelines. We do not know of a case where this has not worked. We also know of successes in private schools, academies, free schools and religious schools although the referral route is often different.
The situation with nurseries and childminders is less clear. Nurseries often claim they have no contract with the non-resident parent and so no obligation to report to them.
There is one issue not dealt with, it is one that presents problems, particularly in cases of alienation. Where a parent may claim that their child is ‘Gillick competent’ and exercising their right for their personal information to be withheld from the target parent. (LINK)
The situation with doctors is less promising, though a reference, when dealing with surgery manager and GPs can be made to British Medical Association’s guidance (LINK).
Local Authority Social Services Departments used to be common offenders in excluding parents when children are made the subject of orders. Legally, part of their investigations must legally enquire if any of the children they deal with have ‘other parents’ with PR. The social workers are attached to the child and so when they investigate the child circumstances and find a single parent (apparently), that is the context of their investigations. Non-resident parents will have to ask they are invited to meetings and consulted regarding their child. We know of no recent cases where they have been excluded, but this may be simply because most families we deal with are ‘private law’ cases.
What do you think?
Send us feedback!
