Cancer mum in battle to get sons at same school (From Thisisdorset)
When news happens send us your pictures, video and views. Text BE to 80360 or contact us by email
Cancer mum in battle to get sons at same school
11:00am Tuesday 7th February 2012 in News By Katie Clark
UPSET: Michelle Amey with her sons Charlie and George
A mum with cancer is pleading with education chiefs to allow her two young sons to attend the same school.
Michelle Amey, 35, can no longer drive after having brain surgery to remove a tumour and is battling with Dorset County Council to allow both Charlie, seven, and four-year-old George to attend Mudeford Infants School in Queens Road.
Michelle of Friars Cliff, Christchurch, has undergone surgery to remove tumours from her brain and adrenal gland in the last few weeks following the resurgence of the cancer she thought she had beaten.
She also had a kidney removed due to complications. Michelle said for the well-being of her sons she wants them in the same school to support one another. Husband Stuart works in Southampton and is unable to collect the boys himself.
But the education authority insists George must go to Somerford Primary School. Michelle said: “The situation has just been horrendous. It’s breaking my heart.”
The couple, who moved to a new house just over half a mile away two years ago, found out last spring George didn’t get a place at the school with his older brother.
She added: “I was shocked. They said it’s because he is a sibling out of catchment which comes quite far down the list in terms of their priorities.
“Stuart went to the appeals hearing and it was a split decision.
“And then George was offered a place at Somerford.
“I decided I was not going to put George in any school so he’s back at pre-school at Mudeford Wood Community Centre.”
Despite a place coming up at Mudeford Infants at the end of last year, the couple were again refused the position.
“The governors have been great and the head has been absolutely fantastic,” Michelle said.
“The boys know Mummy has got three things inside her and they know what’s going on.
“It has affected my eldest a bit more and it would be security for him to have his little brother at the same school.
“I just can’t cope with the journey between schools.” Michelle said:
“We just can’t get through to the council. “I think we are something like 260 feet outside the catchment area. The boundary is in the road next to us.”
Mudeford headteacher, Duncan Churchill, said: “We fully sympathise with the family.
“However, admissions are managed by the local education authority and they have to work within the law. It is a really unfortunate situation.”
'We have been very sympathetic'
JOHN Nash, Dorset County Council’s director for children’s services, said: “We are aware of this case and have worked very closely to support this family.
“The youngest child could not be offered a place at Mudeford Infant School as all the places were allocated in line with legal requirements.
“To admit another child would exceed the ‘class size of 30’ legislation.”
He confirmed an appeal was held where the details of the family circumstances were made clear to the appeal panel, but their opinion was to uphold the offer of a place at Somerford Primary School.
Mr Nash said: “We have been very sympathetic to this case and have gone beyond what is required to assist and support the family. We hope to find the best outcomes for them all.”
Local county councillor Alan Griffiths, said: “I would urge the school to support a change in their admissions policy.”
Comments(71)
High Treason
says...
12:39pm Tue 7 Feb 12
ekimnoslen
says...
12:48pm Tue 7 Feb 12
Lucy28
says...
12:51pm Tue 7 Feb 12
The infant class size regulations are guidelines they are legislation law, the admission authority whether that's the school or the council have no choice but to abide by it. The only recourse available would be the appeal panel who refused her appeal.
At the end of the day the council have in effect offer what she wants, her children to be able to attend the same school- its just not the school she wants and whilst I can understand why she wouldn't want to disrupt her older child but at the end of the day it isn't her catchment school and why should her child get a place over a in catchment or higher criteria school that's why the child wasn't offered a place earlier, you can't leapfrog over the waiting list.
Out of catchment with sibling attending isn't that far down the admission policy for the school - so I wonder whether either the school was over subscribed in catchment or whether the application was late.
The admission process is black and white and full of red tape, yes I agree but you can't have a system whereby the decision to offer a place is based upon peoples compassion because what may seem to be most important to one person may not be as important to another. That's why they have appeal panels to consider the grey areas and I would have personally thought that had it been their catchment school the appeal panel could have instructed the school to take the child.
I appreciate that my view won't be popular but hey ho
robsmith123
says...
1:27pm Tue 7 Feb 12
cheese19
says...
1:31pm Tue 7 Feb 12
There should be a caveat in the rules where PARENTS health issues can be taken into consideration and not just childrens.
This is clearly a situation that will impact on the children enough already with the mother being ill, they NEED stablility at this time, not to be torn apart. I thought the government preached 'parental choice', but clearly not in all situations.
Cath Nuttall
says...
1:52pm Tue 7 Feb 12
Senseless bureaucracy overriding common sense and understanding!
Ceri16
says...
2:00pm Tue 7 Feb 12
*Fiona*
says...
2:08pm Tue 7 Feb 12
________________
Mr Nash said: “We have been very sympathetic to this case and have gone beyond what is required to assist and support the family. We hope to find the best outcomes for them all.”
Mr Nash feels they have "gone above and beyond what is required"
No sorry Mr Nash you have not.
Lucy28
says...
2:22pm Tue 7 Feb 12
cheese19 wrote:Ok I misread it, but the article also doesn't say that there isn't places either
In response to Lucy28, where in the article does it say the council have offered them to go to the same school? From what I can see the eldest is at Mudeford and the youngest has been offered Somerford school, which if they live is Friars Cliff is even further out of catchment. The catchment school would be Highcliffe, so where is the logic of the Council to offer an alternative school out of catchment? Also IF they were offered Highcliffe, given that she is unable to drive how are the children meant to be at school on time every day when the schools are in different directions?
There should be a caveat in the rules where PARENTS health issues can be taken into consideration and not just childrens.
This is clearly a situation that will impact on the children enough already with the mother being ill, they NEED stablility at this time, not to be torn apart. I thought the government preached 'parental choice', but clearly not in all situations.
Still dispite that I stand by what I said I don't agree that when admission authorities allocate limited school places that they should be offered based upon the individual circumstances of the parent or the family. What maybe compelling reasons to you may not be for someone else.
The application allows you only to state a preference not a choice. Hopefully a place will become available for him soon.
Tracy01
says...
2:35pm Tue 7 Feb 12
For the whole family's wellbeing at such a difficult time placing the two boys in the same school is imperative.
Lewis74
says...
2:36pm Tue 7 Feb 12
Wintonian
says...
3:08pm Tue 7 Feb 12
The family finds itself in a very unfortunate situation, but if this child had had the rules 'bent' for him, every child above him who was refused would have an almost automatic successful appeal because the published policy was not adhered to and the refused applicants had someone with lower priority admitted ahead of them.
Dorset Mitch
says...
3:19pm Tue 7 Feb 12
uberbloke
says...
3:44pm Tue 7 Feb 12
So give it a year and we can look forward to the headline "Cancer mum in court for continually child truancy"
Just sort it out and give the child a place.
Alibabs
says...
3:57pm Tue 7 Feb 12
According to the text of the newspaper a place was available at Mudeford Primary but they were refused; this would appear to rubbish any claims of potential class size over 30 or any necessity to remove another child to make space.
I wish this Lady and her family all the best and hope for a favourable outcome.
portia6
says...
4:09pm Tue 7 Feb 12
its so hard when you can't drive.
Maybe this could be a short-term
solution until a place could be found
near their home?
portia6
says...
4:09pm Tue 7 Feb 12
its so hard when you can't drive.
Maybe this could be a short-term
solution until a place could be found
near their home?
Debboo
says...
5:20pm Tue 7 Feb 12
billm
says...
5:36pm Tue 7 Feb 12
Cupcake1980
says...
6:04pm Tue 7 Feb 12
afcb-mark
says...
6:33pm Tue 7 Feb 12
Secondly, why should the older child be uprooted from his friends and familiar surroundings and be sent to a new school. I think it sounds like these 2 little boys have already had quite a lot to deal with in their short lives so far.
If I was the mother I would refuse the place at Somerford and home school the little one until he is offered a place at Mudeford. Most of their time in reception is used for play so he won't be missing out or ruining his education.
Don't give in to them and don't budge until they give you and your sons what you deserve.
Arjay
says...
6:34pm Tue 7 Feb 12
Of course our hearts go out to a young mum who is suffering in this way, but I can see that setting a precendent for these (or any other)'special' circumstances could open the flood gates for appeals.
And as has already been stated, carrying out this mum's request would mean selecting - and moving - another child out of the school, to make room for this extra little boy.
Would you like to be the person responsible for a making that selection?
Both boys at Somerford seems the least worst option, in this case.....
tlittler
says...
6:35pm Tue 7 Feb 12
Debboo
says...
6:44pm Tue 7 Feb 12
afcb-mark
says...
6:51pm Tue 7 Feb 12
Debboo wrote:All heart!!!!!!!!!!!
They were in the catchment area, then moved OUT of the catchment area, despte knowing exactly where the borderd are. It seems to me they made the decision themselves.
Debboo
says...
6:58pm Tue 7 Feb 12
afcb-mark wrote:I DO feel sorry for them, it is a very heartbreaking, gut wrenching story, but you bend the rules for one, where does it stop?
Debboo wrote: They were in the catchment area, then moved OUT of the catchment area, despte knowing exactly where the borderd are. It seems to me they made the decision themselves.All heart!!!!!!!!!!!
Sallya
says...
7:00pm Tue 7 Feb 12
Cath Nuttall wrote:I agree with Cath. This poor lady does not need all this stress. She needs to focus on beating her cancer and be there for the 2 lovely boys not worrying about this.
In these exceptional circumstances you would expect the authorities to bend the rules. At a time like this the family needs support and the boys would benefit greatly from being at the same school where they can derive comfort and support from each other. Senseless bureaucracy overriding common sense and understanding!
Lucy28
says...
7:04pm Tue 7 Feb 12
cheese19
says...
7:07pm Tue 7 Feb 12
Arjay wrote:Again I refer to my question earlier on today, where in the article does it state that BOTH boys have been offered a place in the same school? It states that one is in Mudeford and the other was offered Somerford, which is FURTHER outside catchment area for Frairs Cliff.
My reading is that both boys HAVE been offered a place at the same school? - just not the one their mum prefers.
Of course our hearts go out to a young mum who is suffering in this way, but I can see that setting a precendent for these (or any other)'special' circumstances could open the flood gates for appeals.
And as has already been stated, carrying out this mum's request would mean selecting - and moving - another child out of the school, to make room for this extra little boy.
Would you like to be the person responsible for a making that selection?
Both boys at Somerford seems the least worst option, in this case.....
It also states that a place DID come up in Mudeford school, so no other child would have to have been selected or moved to 'make room', there was room.
Personally I agree with afcb-mark on both of his comments, why should the older one be uprooted? Thus disrupting him from his friends, many of which I am sure the younger child knows as well, so they both then lose out. You end up making 2 little boys even more unhappy, instead of giving them one bit of happiness in what seems to be a difficult start to their lives. But then the people who make the decisions wouldnt have to deal with the upset children at home......whilst undergoing treatment for a terrible illness!!!!!!
afcb-mark
says...
7:08pm Tue 7 Feb 12
Debboo wrote:You were 10 years old when you were at a different school to your brother, this little boy is 7 and far too young to just 'get on with it'. Why should he be torn away from his friends and a place he feels safe. Like I said, it seems like these 2 little boys have already had a pretty tough time, why inflict more misery onto either of them or their mother. She should not have to be worrying about this with what she has been through.
afcb-mark wrote:I DO feel sorry for them, it is a very heartbreaking, gut wrenching story, but you bend the rules for one, where does it stop?
Debboo wrote: They were in the catchment area, then moved OUT of the catchment area, despte knowing exactly where the borderd are. It seems to me they made the decision themselves.All heart!!!!!!!!!!!
Lucy28
says...
7:19pm Tue 7 Feb 12
It doesn't say both schools but it doesn't say there isn't places at both schools either. What difference would it make to the older child if his brother goes to a school within walking distance from his school. They aren't currently in the same place. If the older. child is 7 and the schools an infant school he is in his last year, next September the younger child's on his own anyway.
Debboo
says...
7:42pm Tue 7 Feb 12
afcb-mark wrote:Um, my little brother was 7, so what's your point? Come on, the kids have probably got very little understanding of whats going on. And dont you think a parent being dead is slightly worse than just being ill? Now leave it alone will you?
Debboo wrote:You were 10 years old when you were at a different school to your brother, this little boy is 7 and far too young to just 'get on with it'. Why should he be torn away from his friends and a place he feels safe. Like I said, it seems like these 2 little boys have already had a pretty tough time, why inflict more misery onto either of them or their mother. She should not have to be worrying about this with what she has been through.afcb-mark wrote:I DO feel sorry for them, it is a very heartbreaking, gut wrenching story, but you bend the rules for one, where does it stop?Debboo wrote: They were in the catchment area, then moved OUT of the catchment area, despte knowing exactly where the borderd are. It seems to me they made the decision themselves.All heart!!!!!!!!!!!
ShuttleX
says...
7:44pm Tue 7 Feb 12
robsmith123 wrote:Don't read it then.
another non-story from the Echo. Is a shame as this paper used to report news.
ShuttleX
says...
7:51pm Tue 7 Feb 12
Lewis74 wrote:Lewis74 wrote:
Anyone with an ounce of compassion would look carefully at the "rules" in these circumstances. There are so many situations all over the country where children out of catchment receive school places- often through choice rather than need. To compound the stress and anxiety this family are living with seems so unreasonable. Most decisions borne from a rule book can be reversed with the right amount of pressure and effort- I trust the decision makers here will take the necessary steps to keep these boys together.
"Anyone with an ounce of compassion would look carefully at the "rules" in these circumstances."
,
You expect compassion from the Council? Why would they need compassion, when they have rules to hide behind. They can't use common sense, as that would entail then actually thinking outside the box, something they are incapable of doing, in fact there is a rule stopping them doing just that.
.
“Rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men" Guess which one Mr Nash comes under?
trebor78
says...
8:00pm Tue 7 Feb 12
The fact is this poor mother is quite clearly seriously ill, and what would have been a difficult situation (dropping two children off in two different places at the same time, and picking them up) is now a totally impossible situation because she has now suffered a brain tumour (aswell as a host of other complications) and is now unable to drive as a result.
Now, put yourself in this situation... Surely you would want the simplest solution, a solution that causes no extra stress and strain, that incidently is only going to add a further burden to an already strained and upset family...
Like many people have already posted, exceptional circumstances, call for exceptional actions...
sazy123
says...
8:41pm Tue 7 Feb 12
Carley Smith
says...
8:43pm Tue 7 Feb 12
bmthmumof2
says...
8:44pm Tue 7 Feb 12
I would like to know out of interest what on earth you need to make the appeals board grant an appeal if
a. - a sibling already attends
b. - they are 120 yards out of catchment (i mean come on, 120 yards out - thats a 15 second sprint!!!)
c. - a parent is undergoing treatment for cancer
d. - they are now unable to drive due to an op to remove the cancer - how do they expect a person to be in 2 places at the same time and now to do that on foot?
All of the above and still no??!!
I know everyone has their own issues and problems in life, some people may read this article and think- out of catchment end of. But especially those who are parents and have children of similar ages can you imagine being in their situation - i mean really imagine being in their situation?? Would you want to take your eldest out of a school they have been in for 3 years, all the friends they have, all the familiarity they know when they are having so much uncertainty at home? Would you want to do that? Would you want your kids to be seperated at schools so on days when they have worries and anxiety (maybe about mummy) they didn't have one another. I know this isn't the only factor that should count but they are so close to the catchment anyway - its not like they have moved to Ferndown or somewhere?!!
Imgaine the worry and stress an illness can put on a family, I know her children are young but even the youngest of children get affected in all different ways, then add onto that the stress of having to all the time keep nagging and putting your story to appeal after appeal and letters to mp, reports to newspapers etc etc - is enough not enough?
I am not saying oh just give a place to anybody because they want their kids to go to a particular school or they want their kids to go to school together even though they've moved out of catchment. All im saying is this is an exceptional circumstance and red tape is good and should be there but sometimes it should be bended slightly.
I really hope that something positive comes out of all of this for them all.
rayc
says...
9:22pm Tue 7 Feb 12
What a country to live in when the petty bureaucrats are scared to make an exeption to their rules for this desperate family. I wonder if they would be able to find a place for a 'right' applicant.
Jamie T W
says...
10:57pm Tue 7 Feb 12
I understand the school must stick to it's admission policy, but being only 260 feet out of catchment, seems to be an absolute joke when your sibling has already been at the chosen school for two years.
Surely sense must prevail to alleviate any further anxiety and stress for this family, in what must already be a very difficult time.
clarerowthorn
says...
10:58pm Tue 7 Feb 12
Bmthdad
says...
12:01am Wed 8 Feb 12
It is about the well being and peace of mind of a woman suffering from cancer, and the well being of two little boys that could do with the other around at school, which is daunting enough let alone in their circumstances.
It is also about the peace of mind of what appears to be a hard working dad too.
All in all, it is about a decent family that are asking for something back from a part of their community in the shape of the school and council.
The RIGHT thing to do is to give the family what they are asking for.
ANYONE on here that thinks otherwise is a human disgrace, and the two women Lucy28 and Deboo that commented above ought to be ashamed of themselves.
The family are in EXCEPTIONAL circumstances that are hopefully a "one off".
DO IT NOW Bournemouth Council or be damned.
Ohec Blimey
says...
10:22am Wed 8 Feb 12
Dons04
says...
10:42am Wed 8 Feb 12
Debboo wrote:The article does not state that the family knew they would be out of catchment area when they moved and as it is only yards this suggests they did not realise.
They were in the catchment area, then moved OUT of the catchment area, despte knowing exactly where the borderd are. It seems to me they made the decision themselves.
lorna4988
says...
10:44am Wed 8 Feb 12
Obviously people in their perfect little lives need a bump with realtity.
All this lady wants is for her children to be together as by the sounds of things her health is deteriorating as a mother you want what you think is best for your kids. Now tel me what exactly would you do in her situation??
Bmthdad
says...
12:48pm Wed 8 Feb 12
lorna4988 wrote:Hear hear. It's really not so complicated to offer some charity and compassion to this family is it?
I think what some people have written on here is absolutely disgusting and you should all be ashamed of yourselves!! Do you really think this woman has asked for this to happen to use as an excuse to get her child in to a school its sick that you would think this.
Obviously people in their perfect little lives need a bump with realtity.
All this lady wants is for her children to be together as by the sounds of things her health is deteriorating as a mother you want what you think is best for your kids. Now tel me what exactly would you do in her situation??
squeaky1989
says...
12:52pm Wed 8 Feb 12
cr1106
says...
1:41pm Wed 8 Feb 12
cr1106
says...
1:46pm Wed 8 Feb 12
RED RUSS
says...
2:35pm Wed 8 Feb 12
portia6
says...
5:29pm Wed 8 Feb 12
with the council to sort this out hope
no political points will be used!
*Fiona*
says...
5:53pm Wed 8 Feb 12
Bmthdad wrote:Its not Bournemouth education directorate its Christchurch.
This is not about rules or regulations or catchments or quotas.
It is about the well being and peace of mind of a woman suffering from cancer, and the well being of two little boys that could do with the other around at school, which is daunting enough let alone in their circumstances.
It is also about the peace of mind of what appears to be a hard working dad too.
All in all, it is about a decent family that are asking for something back from a part of their community in the shape of the school and council.
The RIGHT thing to do is to give the family what they are asking for.
ANYONE on here that thinks otherwise is a human disgrace, and the two women Lucy28 and Deboo that commented above ought to be ashamed of themselves.
The family are in EXCEPTIONAL circumstances that are hopefully a "one off".
DO IT NOW Bournemouth Council or be damned.
Rich©
says...
5:54pm Wed 8 Feb 12
I've read the story & Mrs Amey wanting to send both children together to the same school. So If Somerford school was to offer two places for both children would that help ? because I'm thinking here that the crux of the matter is Mrs Amey doesn't want to send her children to Somerford School.
It's that one word "Somerford" that I see causing Mrs Amey problems.
Well I can try & alleviate any concerns, I live in Somerford, I went to all the schools in Somerford as did my children & we have all come through the education very well. To be honest I've heard worse horror stories coming out of Highcliffe School then Somerford !!!
Bmthdad
says...
6:31pm Wed 8 Feb 12
*Fiona* wrote:Ok then substitute Bournemouth with Christchurch. My mistake.
Bmthdad wrote:Its not Bournemouth education directorate its Christchurch.
This is not about rules or regulations or catchments or quotas.
It is about the well being and peace of mind of a woman suffering from cancer, and the well being of two little boys that could do with the other around at school, which is daunting enough let alone in their circumstances.
It is also about the peace of mind of what appears to be a hard working dad too.
All in all, it is about a decent family that are asking for something back from a part of their community in the shape of the school and council.
The RIGHT thing to do is to give the family what they are asking for.
ANYONE on here that thinks otherwise is a human disgrace, and the two women Lucy28 and Deboo that commented above ought to be ashamed of themselves.
The family are in EXCEPTIONAL circumstances that are hopefully a "one off".
DO IT NOW Bournemouth Council or be damned.
Bmthdad
says...
6:38pm Wed 8 Feb 12
Rich© wrote:I think the issue is that one child has already started at the other school and therefore it would be even more disruptive to move the child that already has school "roots" to Somerford to be with his brother that is just starting.
I have all the sympathy with the family & wish them all the best.
I've read the story & Mrs Amey wanting to send both children together to the same school. So If Somerford school was to offer two places for both children would that help ? because I'm thinking here that the crux of the matter is Mrs Amey doesn't want to send her children to Somerford School.
It's that one word "Somerford" that I see causing Mrs Amey problems.
Well I can try & alleviate any concerns, I live in Somerford, I went to all the schools in Somerford as did my children & we have all come through the education very well. To be honest I've heard worse horror stories coming out of Highcliffe School then Somerford !!!
denmarmat
says...
6:54pm Wed 8 Feb 12
excella
says...
8:55pm Wed 8 Feb 12
timbaker
says...
10:09pm Wed 8 Feb 12
Marcus James wrote:I challenge every single one of the po-faced people who have commented on here who think that 'rules are rules' to go through anything close to what Michelle has gone through and still believe it is right that her two children cannot go to school together.
Why do officials hide behind "guidelines and rules", the same guidelines and rules that they are happy to break when it suits them such as waiting times for answers to appeals and enquiries etc
We cannot help all of the people all of the time but surely there need to be situations in which rules can be broken and in which the school and the governors etc can take a “view”
It is a non-argument to say "what if a place was offered for both at Somerford" - why on earth should the elder boy be uprooted from his school? It is ridiculous that there is even debate about this.......
Bmthdad
says...
10:29pm Wed 8 Feb 12
timbaker wrote:Couldn't agree more and cannot understand why there is an argument as it is so very obvious what should be done.
Marcus James wrote:I challenge every single one of the po-faced people who have commented on here who think that 'rules are rules' to go through anything close to what Michelle has gone through and still believe it is right that her two children cannot go to school together.
Why do officials hide behind "guidelines and rules", the same guidelines and rules that they are happy to break when it suits them such as waiting times for answers to appeals and enquiries etc
We cannot help all of the people all of the time but surely there need to be situations in which rules can be broken and in which the school and the governors etc can take a “view”
It is a non-argument to say "what if a place was offered for both at Somerford" - why on earth should the elder boy be uprooted from his school? It is ridiculous that there is even debate about this.......
It is about what is RIGHT.
treacs
says...
10:31pm Wed 8 Feb 12
c0untingd0wn
says...
11:06pm Wed 8 Feb 12
afcb-mark wrote:I 100% agree with afcb-mark.
How on earth is this poor woman who cannot drive due to her illness supposed to get 2 infants to two different schools at the same time and how is she supposed to collect them when they finish at the same time. Pathetic.
Secondly, why should the older child be uprooted from his friends and familiar surroundings and be sent to a new school. I think it sounds like these 2 little boys have already had quite a lot to deal with in their short lives so far.
If I was the mother I would refuse the place at Somerford and home school the little one until he is offered a place at Mudeford. Most of their time in reception is used for play so he won't be missing out or ruining his education.
Don't give in to them and don't budge until they give you and your sons what you deserve.
Don't the school have a heart?
Surely the younger child should be pushed up the waiting list and not be number 13!
I always thought the schools cared for their children and want whats best for them and their families.
They must be going through a tough time at the moment. I'm sure they can do without all this hassle.
Please Mudeford School, please make it happen.
*Fiona*
says...
7:37am Thu 9 Feb 12
Get in national newspapers and on the TV.
The council needs to be publicly shamed and feel the full force of public condemnation.
Timmyland
says...
8:59am Thu 9 Feb 12
afcb-mark
says...
11:09am Thu 9 Feb 12
I would imagine it really takes it out of her to do the walk to one school let alone having to then grab one child and rush along to another school quite a distance away to pick up the other one.
I wonder how many of the people sitting on the education panel could do that whilst suffering from cancer plus other health issues.
They should all be ashamed of themselves, where is their compassion? Did they suddenly lose it the minute they were given such an 'important job'
My thoughts are with Michelle and her family and I hope this weight is lifted for her very quickly so she can put all of her energy into improving her health. I also hope she hasn't been too upset by some of the comments on this story as the majority of posters fully back her.
Please keep us updated on thos story ECHO
Rally
says...
4:03pm Thu 9 Feb 12
Given the truly tragic circumstances and assuming that the husband commutes to and from Southampton, couldn't the husband come to some arrangement with his employer whereby the husband starts later/leaves earlier so that he can ferry his children to and or from the schools concerned?
Binky
says...
5:06pm Thu 9 Feb 12
After a few weeks of struggling with the situation, I attended an appeals committee, and the panel accepted unanimously that they would find room at the new school for my younger son. He started at the school the following week.
I am astonished that the education authority has refused to help this mother with what is not an unreasonable request, when they were willing to help me. Has so much changed in five years? It is not just the well-being of the mother that needs to be respected here, but the emotional state of the two brothers, who need as much stability and normality as possible at this very difficult time in their lives. I sympathise with this lady 100% and I hope that a solution can be found very soon.
yasinac
says...
9:40pm Thu 9 Feb 12
Rally
says...
10:35pm Thu 9 Feb 12
yasinac wrote:Yasinac wrote, '...As for the Dad doing the school run, he'd have to work 10 til 2 to accommodate the school runs and I'm sure none of you are naive enough to think that with a cancer diagnosis money worries vanish out of the window, if anything these things increase, so a drop in salary from the shorter hours is just not viable.'
I am astonished at some of the appalling comments on here. Until recently my son attended Mudeford School and I'm sure that if Mr Churchill could wave a magic wand and secure a place for Charlie's little brother he would. This is an extreemly friendly community school that extends a hand of support to all that it can. Dorset County Council deal solely with school admissions and transfers, and notify schools of any changes to the roll, so it's them that has to make this happen. As for the Dad doing the school run, he'd have to work 10 til 2 to accommodate the school runs and I'm sure none of you are naive enough to think that with a cancer diagnosis money worries vanish out of the window, if anything these things increase, so a drop in salary from the shorter hours is just not viable. Taking this story to the media was most probably a last ditch attempt to be listened too and I hope that the thoughtless comments from some of the posters above have not upset Mrs Amey too much. Wishing you all a happy outcome.
I hadn't thought it through properly and apologise to Mr and Mrs Amey for this.
portia6
says...
10:45pm Thu 9 Feb 12
issue here working class against the
middle class raises its head again.
portia6
says...
11:05pm Thu 9 Feb 12
of hard knocks this family need
a sensitive understanding advocate.
Marcus James says...
12:11pm Tue 7 Feb 12
We cannot help all of the people all of the time but surely there need to be situations in which rules can be broken and in which the school and the governors etc can take a “view”