Parents Fined for Daughter’s Chronic School Absences

Stoke-on-Trent City Council has begun legal proceedings against the parents of a persistent teenage truant. This one teenager was racking up almost 200 absences from school without getting caught. Michaela Hill prosecutes the case and focuses attention on ongoing obstacles to school attendance. This shortcoming in our education system is particularly acute for students with…

Alexis Wang Avatar

By

Parents Fined for Daughter’s Chronic School Absences

Stoke-on-Trent City Council has begun legal proceedings against the parents of a persistent teenage truant. This one teenager was racking up almost 200 absences from school without getting caught. Michaela Hill prosecutes the case and focuses attention on ongoing obstacles to school attendance. This shortcoming in our education system is particularly acute for students with special educational needs.

The parents, who do not live together, admitted failing to ensure their daughter attended school regularly during two specific periods: from 21 January to 17 July 2024 and from 17 January to 23 May this year. In the lead-up to these times, that same teenager racked up 94 unauthorised absences in one term, 88 in another.

They were spending as much as £70 a week on taxis just to get their daughter into school. Even with their tried and true tactic, the damage had been done. The school is a little more than a mile away from their house. For the past number of years it has angsted over the student’s chronic absenteeism.

Mark Bromley, attorney for the parents, praised their willingness to acknowledge the issue.

“They both accept her attendance is unacceptable.” – Mark Bromley

It was then revealed in court that many of the home visits to investigate the attendance problem have already taken place. Michaela Hill addressed the restrictions educators have quoted in her response to our Request for Champions, Writing for Change :

“She’s simply a girl that doesn’t like school, and the position has been going on for a number of years.” – Mark Bromley

The mother lost her case in court, leading to a community order and an £80 fine. She was further ordered to pay a £114 surcharge and £156 costs. The father received a significant financial penalty. He was issued with a £200 fine and an £80 surcharge, and he was required to pay the same costs as his partner.

“My understanding is the staff can’t physically restrain her and keep her on the premises – if she leaves, she leaves.” – Michaela Hill

Both parents are currently in receipt of benefits, which raises concerns about their financial capacity to support their daughter’s education effectively. The case underscores the complexities surrounding school attendance for children with special educational needs and the responsibilities of parents in ensuring regular attendance.

Both parents are currently in receipt of benefits, which raises concerns about their financial capacity to support their daughter’s education effectively. The case underscores the complexities surrounding school attendance for children with special educational needs and the responsibilities of parents in ensuring regular attendance.

Alexis Wang Avatar