School Rules just petty?

As far as I am aware, until children "Come of Age", currently on their 18th Birthday, their parents make decisions on their behalf. I do with my children, as do countless other parents. The reasons are quite simple, even at 15,16 and 17 years of age, some children do not always have the wherewithal to look after themselves or their own interests, therefore the parents have this responsibility. Especially if the child or minor is still in full time education.

Hurworth School, near Darlington County Durham has banned a pupil Miss Kayleigh Baker from "other voluntary activities" because her parents refused to sign a form for her to attend extra revision lessons. Part of these other voluntary activities, include playing for the netball team and attending the school prom.

The item has hit the BBC news website, please have a read see what you think.

My thoughts are, that as Miss Baker is already a high achiever, a prefect at the school, a member of the school team and until information to the contrary comes to light, I believe her parents are looking after her best interests. They and they alone know the stress that she is capable of managing, they and they alone have an idea of what she is capable of.

According to the Head Dean Judson, as her parents refused to sign allowing extra revision, she was banned form other voluntary activities. Which is a bit like taking the ball home because you can't get your own way. We have no way of knowing whether Miss Baker actually needs the extra classes, or even if the extra classes would not harm an otherwise high achieving student. What we appear to have is a school versus parent as to who knows best about a child needs.

School chief executive Eamonn Farrar said the extra study sessions were made compulsory five years ago.

He said: "If we were to give the children the choice of attending the extra study sessions, what do you think the response would be? They wouldn't attend.

I actually doubt that what Mr Farrar has said here is strictly true, most parents would jump at the chance to have their child given extra tuition just before exams, and would therefore force or otherwise cajole their child into attending.

But it must surely follow that any parent who would prefer their child to not attend these extra lessons, must have valid reasons for doing so. One can only assume that Miss Bakers parents made their decision on the basis that her high standards were not at risk by her non attendance, which basically means they think she doesn't need the extra lessons.

Only time will tell which side is right, but I would hazard a guess and go with the parents, who's belief and knowledge of their daughter, far outweighs the schools over zealous adherence to its authoritarian rules.

As everyone discovers in time, one size does not fit all! After all having one of the school governors resigning over the affair cannot be good for school moral, and what kind of message does it send to future pupils and their parents?

_______------------ UPDATE ----------________

It has been said in the media and the DofE, that the extra lessons are "out of school hours" and therefore cannot be made compulsory! So it is definately a case of the school trying to impose its will on students!