Content uploaded by Beth Bodycote
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Beth Bodycote on Nov 04, 2022
Content may be subject to copyright.
An Exploration of the Experiences of
Parents Who Seek to Resolve School
Attendance Problems and Barriers
Bethany Bodycote
Faculty of Health and Life Sciences
January 2022
A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the University’s
requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy
DEDICATION
My biggest ‘thank you’ goes to my ‘A team’ at home – my husband Garry, my
sons Joe and Jake, and Joe’s girlfriend Kaitlyn, who have cheered me on and
volunteered many hours of practical help to allow me more time to focus on my
research - you are superstars!
Thank you to my ‘Academic A team’ – my (very patient) supervisors, Professor
Sarah Younie, Dr Sally Ruane and Dr Motje Wolf - you always seemed to have
just the right words of advice and encouragement for me, when they were
most needed.
I would like to thank the 40 parents who volunteered to tell me all about their
experiences and allowed me to share their voices. Thank you to all the
members of ‘Not Fine in School’ who have inspired and motivated me to keep
going, because every day I see why their voices, and their children’s voices,
need to be heard. We really must listen more closely to those who become
‘expert by experience’.
And a big thank you for your support and inspiration, also goes to Fran Morgan
and Ellie Costello who are working hard to champion the ‘Square Pegs’ who
don’t quite fit within our current education system.
DECLARATION
To the best of my knowledge I confirm that the work in this thesis is my original
work undertaken for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Faculty of HLS, De
Montfort University. I confirm that no material of this thesis has been submitted
for any other degree or qualification at any other university.
ABSTRACT
School attendance problems (SAPs) have been framed in terms of ‘truancy’,
‘school phobia’, ‘school refusal’, ‘school withdrawal’ and a range of similar terms.
This variation reflects the heterogeneity of both SAPs (Kearney et al., 2019), and
the varied backgrounds of practitioners conducting SAPs research (Birioukov,
2016). This longstanding discourse suggests the behaviour of absentee children
is deviant or neurotic, and their parents are in some way deficient, failing, or
neglectful (Southwell, 2006; Donoghue, 2011). However, this fails to address the
experiences of parents who actively seek to resolve SAPs, and perceive a child is
unable to attend for reasons of anxiety and distress, possibly in relation to school-
based influences (e.g., Mind, 2021; Ditch the Label, 2020). These aspects of
SAPs have received scant attention in the literature. Therefore, to understand this
phenomenon better, this study set out to investigate the perspectives and
experiences of parents in this situation.
Email-based interviews were conducted with forty members of a social media-
based support group for parents seeking support for their children’s SAPs.
Thematic Analysis of data led to the concept of ‘Parents Journeys’ through SAPs,
setting out an overview of common experiences. This indicated how social and
systemic responses to SAPs act as barriers that prevent or hinder parents’ ability
to comply with their legal duty to ensure children access an education (section 7,
Education Act 1996). It was noted that a tension exists where parents who
participated in this study have a shared understanding of SAPs which validates
their experiences, yet this is at odds with the shared reality and understanding of
school staff and other professionals.
Recent research highlights the importance of holistic assessment of individual
circumstances to better understand the influence of school and wider systemic
factors upon cases of SAPs (e.g., Melvin et al. 2019). In this study an adapted
version of Bronfenbrenner’s Bioecological Model (1979, 1998, 2005)
conceptualised the social and systemic complexity of the SAPs context from the
parental viewpoint. This adapted model offers a new way to understand how the
successful resolution of SAPs will require multi-level changes in school
attendance related discourse, practice, and policy.
i
ii
Table of Contents
Dedication ii
Declaration iii
Abstract iv
Table of figures ix
List of Abbreviations and Acronym 1
Chapter 1. Introduction 2
1.1 School attendance and school absence in England 2
1.2 Conceptualising School Attendance Problems 5
1.3 School absence monitoring and data collection 9
1.4 How does the education system provide for children who experience SAPs? 12
1.5 Parental voices and perspectives of SAPs 14
1.6 Defining ‘systems’ and ‘agency’ 16
1.6.1 Systems within society 16
1.6.2 The agency of parents 18
1.7 The researcher’s motivation 18
1.8 The structure of this thesis 20
Chapter Two. School attendance expectations, and consequential responses to school absence from a
parental perspective 23
2.1 Introduction 23
2.2 The development of school attendance expectations between the mid-eighteenth century and
mid-twentieth century 24
2.3 The evolution of school attendance expectations since the mid-twentieth century 27
2.4 The changing role of parents within England’s education system 30
2.4.1 Parents as partners in the provision of children’s education 32
2.4.2 Parents as consumers of educational provision 33
2.4.3 Parents who are responsible and engaged in children’s education, or fail to meet
professional expectations 34
2.5 The impact of English legal discourse on school absence 36
iii
2.6 Clinical and academic responses to school absence 38
2.7 Looking beyond the child and their home setting 46
2.7.1 Research utilising Bronfenbrenner’s (1979; 1998; 2005) Bioecological Systems Model 47
2.8 Parents and SAPs research 53
2.8.1 The representation of parents within existing SAPs research 53
2.8.2 Hearing the voices of parents with lived experience of children’s school absence 55
2.9 Chapter summary 59
Chapter 3. Methodology 61
3.1 Introduction 61
3.2 The philosophical approach underlying the study 62
3.2.1 Identifying an Ontology 65
3.2.2 Identifying an Epistemology 67
3.2.3 The involvement of the researcher 68
3.3 The research design 70
3.3.1 A method of data collection 70
3.3.2 Conducting email-based interviews 72
3.3.3 Critique of the data collection method 73
3.4 The use of thematic analysis 75
3.4.1 Generating initial codes 76
3.4.2 Generating initial themes 77
3.4.3 Revising the themes 78
3.4.4 Writing up the thematic analysis 79
3.4.5 Critique of the use of thematic analysis 80
3.5 The study participants 82
3.5.1 Recruiting the study participants 82
3.5.2 The recruitment process 83
3.5.3 Participant selection 84
3.5.4 Critique of the recruitment process 85
3.6 Addressing ethical considerations 85
3.6.1 Emotional distress 86
3.6.2 Researcher and participant familiarity 86
3.6.3 Informed consent and the right to withdraw 87
3.6.4 Confidentiality and data protection 88
iv
3.6.5 The internet as a site for research 88
3.7 Ensuring the quality of the research 89
Chapter 4. Responding to emerging school attendance problems 92
4.1 Introduction 92
4.2 An overview of parents’ experiences 92
4.2.1 Forty mothers with twenty-nine sons and eighteen daughters 93
4.2.2 The duration of children’s school attendance problems 94
4.2.3 Influences and triggers for attendance problems 94
4.2.4 Reported outcomes for the children of the study participants 97
4.3 Parents’ Journeys and the Parental SAPs Predicament 99
4.4 The elements of Parents’ Journeys 103
4.5 Responding to emerging school attendance problems 107
4.6 Recognising initial concerns 108
4.6.1 Difficult mornings 108
4.6.2 Difficult evenings and night-times 111
4.6.3 Difficult weekends 112
4.7 Coping with the reactions and responses of others 113
4.8 Making sense of observations and applying parental knowledge 116
4.9 Identifying a child’s difficulties and needs 118
4.9.1 Relating longer-term concerns to attendance problems 118
4.9.2 Parental instincts versus attendance expectations 121
4.10 Seeking professional advice and support 125
4.11 Chapter summary 128
Chapter 5. Navigating the systemic context of school attendance problems 130
5.1 Introduction 130
5.2 Experiences within schools 132
5.2.1 School senior leadership priorities 136
5.2.2 Threats of legal action used to manipulate children 138
5.3 Experiences within the health system 139
5.4 Experiences within CAMHS 141
v
5.5 Experiences within local authorities 144
5.6 Working relationships between families and professionals 145
5.6.1 Positive working relationships 146
5.6.2 Negative working relationships 149
5.7 Systemic failures 154
5.7.1 A lack of effective guidance to access support 156
5.7.2 A lack of working partnerships between services and systems 159
5.7.3 A lack of child mental health awareness and support 161
5.7.4 A lack of inclusivity in schools 163
5.7.5 A lack of compliance with DfE guidance and legislation 164
5.7.6 A lack of accountability 166
5.7.7 Differing interpretations of school attendance problems 167
5.7.8 A lack of knowledge and awareness of SEND 170
5.8. Parents working in related professional roles 171
5.9 Chapter summary 174
Chapter 6. Managing the home context while experiencing school attendance problems 175
6.1 Introduction 175
6.2 The impact on family life 175
6.2.1 Family disruption 175
6.2.2 Family relationships 177
6.2.3 Employment and finances 181
6.2.4 Reactions of others (wider family and friends) 183
6.3 Observing the impact of attendance problems on children - “we watched his spark go out” 189
6.3.1 Child wellbeing 189
6.3.2 Child withdrawal and isolation 197
6.3.3 Child loss of motivation and ambition 200
6.3.4 Child fear of the future 202
6.4 The emotional impact upon parents 204
6.5 Chapter summary 207
Chapter 7. Working towards a resolution for school attendance problems 208
7.1 Introduction 208
7.2 Parental empowerment 210
vi
7.2.1 Being proactive 211
7.2.2 Finding peer support 213
7.2.3 Finding third sector support 216
7.2.4 Finding professional support 218
7.2.5 Listening to a child’s voice 221
7.2.6 Rethinking priorities 222
7.2.7 Following parental instincts 223
7.2.8 Self-confidence and recognition of expertise as a parent 224
7.3 Reaching a place of resolution and reflection 225
7.4 Chapter summary 229
Chapter 8. Discussion: “They wouldn’t accept he wasn’t fine, and I wouldn’t accept he was” 230
8.1 Introduction 230
8.2 Incorporating parents’ journeys within a bioecological systems framework 233
8.2.1 Selecting Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological model (1979; 1998; 2005) 233
8.2.2 Representing parents’ experience within Bronfenbrenner’s model 236
8.3 The role of the parent 238
8.3.1 A focus upon mothers 241
8.4 The Microsystem and Mesosystem 243
8.4.1 Working relationships 244
8.5 The Exosystem 248
8.5.1 Systemic barriers 250
8.5.3 Peer support 255
8.6 The Macrosystem 257
8.7 The Chronosystem 259
8.8 Chapter summary 260
Chapter 9. Conclusions and Recommendations 263
9.1 Answering the research questions 263
9.1.1 What actions do parents take to resolve a child’s difficulties with attending school? 263
9.1.2 What do parents experience when they engage with various professionals in the education,
health, and local government systems? 264
9.1.3 What barriers do parents encounter in trying to achieve a resolution for school attendance
problems? 265
vii
9.1.4 What is it that assists parents in reaching a resolution for a child’s school attendance
problems? 265
9.2 Conclusions 266
9.3 Recommendations 267
9.4 Methodological considerations 271
9.5 Potential future work 273
References 275
Appendices 298
Appendix 1. The process codes used in stage 2 of the data analysis 298
Appendix 2. Overall themes generated from the data 300
Appendix 3. Recruitment Flyer 302
Appendix 4. Participant Information Sheet 303
Appendix 5. Initial questionnaire 307
Appendix 6. Overview of Parents’ Journeys 308
Appendix 7. Key Worker Service Triage Plan 310
viii
ix
TABLE OF FIGURES
Figure 1.1
Continuum of ‘school refusal behaviour’ on the basis of attendance. Kearney (2001:7) School
Refusal Behaviour in Youth: A Functional Approach to Assessment and Treatment. (Copyright
2001 by the American Psychological Association).
5
Figure 1.2
Overall absence by authorised/unauthorised absence, England, time series (DfE, 2020b, p. 4)
11
Figure 1.3
Percentage of pupils who are persistently absent by school type, Autumn term, 2016/17 to
2020/21 (DfE, 2021)
11
Figure 1.4
DfE Guidance and Legislation with possible relevance to SAPs
13
Figure 2.1
Bronfenbrenner’s (1979, 1998, 2005) Bioecological Systems Framework
48
Figure 2.2
Nuttall and Woods (2013) Synthesised Model
50
Figure 2.3
The KiTeS (2019) Bioecological Systems Framework for School Attendance and Absence.
52
Figure 3.1
Comparing Positivist and Interpretivist Paradigms
63
Figure 3.2
A sample of the initial process coding (using TAMS Analyser software)
76
Figure 4.1
Length of time individual children were reported to have experienced SAPs
94
Figure 4.2
The Parental SAPs Predicament
103
Figure 4.3
Responding to emerging school attendance problems
104
Figure 4.4
Navigating the Systemic Context
105
Figure 4.5
Managing the Home Context
106
Figure 4.6
Working towards a resolution
106
Figure 4.7
Process of investigation and reflection as parents make sense of children’s difficulties
117
Figure 8.1
Lerner’s Developmental Contextual view of human development (Lerner et al. 2002)
234
Figure 8.2
Bronfenbrenner’s (1979, 1998, 2005) Bioecological Systems Framework
236
Figure 8.3
A Bioecological Systems Model of Parents’ Journeys through School Attendance Problems
237
Figure 9.1
SAPs Triage Key Worker Service
269
1
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYM
BTEC - Business and Technology Education Council (qualification)
CAMHS - Child & Adolescent Mental Health Services
DfE - Department for Education
DfES - Department for Education & Skills
DfH - Department for Health
DfHSC - Department for Health & Social Care
EHCP - Education Health and Care Plan
EWO - Education Welfare Officer
GP - General Practitioner
iGCSE - international General Certificate of Secondary Education
IPA - Interpretive Phenomenological Analysis
LA - Local Authority
LSA - Learning Support Assistant
NHS - National Health Service
Ofsted - Office for Standards in Education
PRU - Pupil Referral Unit
SALT - Speech and Language Therapist
SAPs - School Attendance Problems
SATs - Standard Assessment Tests
SEMH - Social, Emotional and Mental Health
SENCo - Special Educational Needs Coordinator
SEND - Special Educational Needs & Disabilities
SENDIASS - Special Educational Needs & Disabilities Information & Advice Support
Service
TA - Teaching Assistant
TAF - Team Around the Family
2
Chapter 1. Introduction
This chapter sets out the context of this study by explaining current expectations
around school attendance, along with key aspects of the systemic response to
school absence in England. The context of School Attendance Problems (SAPs)
and the framing of parents within this context is also discussed. The chapter then
highlights literature detailing a sub-category of parents who are proactive in trying
to resolve SAPs. It is noted that the experiences of these parents have not yet
been explored, and therefore this study aims to fill this gap, and contribute the
voices of parents as stakeholders.
1.1 School attendance and school absence in England
Parents in England are assigned with a legal duty to ensure their children receive
a suitable, effective, full-time education (section 7, Education Act 1996). Parents
can choose to fulfil this duty by electively home educating or by enrolling children
at a school. If enrolled at a school, children are expected to attend all timetabled
sessions, unless they are absent for a reason that can be authorised by the
school under the Registration (Pupil Registration) Regulations 2006. Whether or
not an absence is authorised holds significance for parents as they can be
subject to penalties including fines and imprisonment for unauthorised and
persistent absence (section 444 (1) and (1a), Education Act 1996).
Since compulsory education was introduced in England in the late nineteenth
century, various social and political discourses have instilled a strong belief in the
importance of educating children through a system of mainstream schooling
(Lees, 2014). The Department for Education (DfE) open their School Attendance
guidance document with the following statement which reiterates the opinion that
academic success is dependent upon regular attendance at school:
Central to raising standards in education and ensuring all pupils
can fulfil their potential is an assumption so widely understood
that it is insufficiently stated – pupils need to attend school
regularly to benefit from their education. Missing out on lessons
leaves children vulnerable to falling behind. Children with poor
3
attendance tend to achieve less in both primary and secondary
school.
(DfE, 2020a, p.5)
The DfE monitor and report on levels of authorised, unauthorised, and persistent
absence (DfE, 2019b). Schools are expected to encourage and support high
levels of attendance (DfE, 2022), with checks made on their performance within
Ofsted inspections (Ofsted, 2021c, paragraph 227). The notion of persistent
absence concerns children who attain less than 90% attendance in each
academic year (DfE, 2019b). This level of absence is considered socially
significant, seen in scale of school absence and challenges for policy makers
who fear longer term social problems (Coles et al., 2010). Persistent absence is
also considered individually detrimental, seen in loss of social contact with peers
and others, damage to wellbeing and to potential academic and career success
(DfE, 2016; DfE, 2019b).
There are conflicting discourses, such as those expressing concern about the
various harms being done to children within school environments (e.g., Harber,
2004; Fortune-Wood, 2007; Gray, 2020). Lees (2014) discusses these critical
voices and suggests:
The condemnation of the idea of compulsory schooling occurs because
young people usually deemed as required by various forces to attend
schools – be it legal, economic or because of social expectations – are
being hurt. Schooling can cause physical, psychological, and emotional
pain.
(Lees, 2014, pp.143-144)
This hurt and harm has been linked to factors including school-based bullying,
sexual assault, racism, excessive academic pressure, punitive behaviour
policies, and a lack of effective school-based support for mental health
difficulties, SEND, and long-term physical illness (e.g., Cowburn and Blow, 2017;
Ditch the Label, 2020; Girlguiding, 2021; Mind, 2021; No Isolation, 2020). In
addition, school-based practices such as off-rolling (Ofsted, 2019), and
avoidance of taking responsibility for additional or alternative provision, are linked
4
to categories of children ‘missing education’ or the ‘unexplained exits’ of pupils
identified with SEMH, SEND or persistent absence (Hutchinson and Crenna-
Jennings, 2019a; 2019b). Others reject the claim that mainstream schooling is
the best way to gain an education, and instead acknowledge success achieved
through other methods including elective home education (Rothermel, 2000;
Lees, 2019), democratic education (Hope, 2019), and self-directed education
(Fisher, 2021).
Absence from school without authorisation, or the awareness of parents, is linked
to the concept of a child viewed as ‘truant’, or ‘a child who stays away from
school without leave’ (Harper, 2021). The legislative response to truancy has
reflected the belief that absence from school is indicative of parenting failure
and/or children’s disaffection from education, which are considered behaviours
requiring punishment and correction (Wardhaugh, 1991; Arthur, 2005; Donoghue,
2011). However, it has also been argued that this punitive approach has proven
over time to be unsuccessful in reducing levels of absence, and it fails to
consider or account for school-based and wider systemic factors of influence
(Southwell, 2006; Sheldon, 2007; Sheppard, 2011).
The umbrella term School Attendance Problems (SAPs) is used to describe types
of absence from school which have been defined and constructed within clinical
and academic fields (Heyne et al., 2019). SAPs have historically been framed in
terms including truancy, school refusal, and school withdrawal, in discourses
which suggest the child chooses non-attendance and the parents are in some
way deficient. Again, it is argued that this discourse has failed to consider or
account for school-based and wider systemic factors of influence to the same
extent it considers child and family factors (Pilkington and Piersel, 1991;
Lauchlan, 2003; Pellegrini, 2007).
It has been estimated that at some point in childhood, around 28% of children will
experience difficulties attending school (Kearney, 2007). Evans (2000, p.183)
also observes that ‘school refusal’ (as a type of SAP) is a ‘common, perhaps
even normal behaviour’, that is practiced by most students at some point in their
school years. It is also noted that individual children display varied reactions and
5
behaviours in relation to attending school for a range of different reasons (West
Sussex EPS, 2004/2022). Kearney (2001) provided what he terms a continuum
of school refusal behaviour (Figure1.1) to illustrate this range of difficulties with
school attendance.
Figure 1.1 Continuum of ‘school refusal behaviour’ on the basis of attendance. Kearney (2001:7) School
Refusal Behaviour in Youth: A Functional Approach to Assessment and Treatment. (Copyright 2001 by the
American Psychological Association).
Considering this wide range of reactions and behaviours it can reasonably be
stated that many families are likely to experience SAPs during childhood, with
varying degrees of difficulty and impact. If parents do find themselves in this
position, they have a legal duty to seek a resolution to enable a return to school
or access to education, to avoid the possibility of fines or prosecutions. This
study explores the experiences of parents who have tried to resolve the school
attendance problems of children who suffer severe and chronic anxiety in relation
to attending school.
1.2 Conceptualising School Attendance Problems
According to Berger and Luckmann (1966), expectations such as attendance at
school have been socially constructed through a process of habituation and
institutionalisation. To reinforce this expectation, absence from school has been
constructed as problematic through a focus upon truancy as deviance, linked to
the punitive legislative response, and supported by clinical research which has
placed blame within the child and family, while failing to investigate other factors
of influence (Kearney, 2007; Pellegrini, 2007). This is significant because those
who are unable to conform to this constructed expectation are viewed as
dysfunctional and requiring correction or punishment.
6
Miller and Rose (2008, p.14) discuss the process of problematisation, and
suggest that to socially construct a problem ‘issues and concerns have to be
made to appear problematic, often in different ways, in different sites, and by
different agents’. When a problem is identified it needs to be framed in a common
language that supports an ongoing narrative (such as the ongoing narrative
around truancy). The problem needs to be analysed and assessed by those who
claim expertise, utilising the norms of the bodies of knowledge involved. When
relating this process to the problematisation of school absence and the current
conceptualisations of SAPs, it is argued here that a common language has only
partially been achieved based upon clinical, academic, and political discourse.
This has created an unequal balance of expertise, meaning further work is still
needed to contribute the voices of parents and other family members.
Political and legal discourse has constructed absence from school as a social
problem linked to the term ‘truancy’. Truanting children have been portrayed as
deviant or maladjusted, and their parents as ineffective or uncaring about their
child’s welfare or education (Carlen, Gleeson and Wardhaugh, 1992; Southwell,
2006). This discourse developed with the application of psychoanalytic
terminology such as ‘a form of truancy associated with neurosis’ (Broadwin,
1932), and ‘psychoneurotic-truancy’ (Partridge, 1939). The concept of ‘school
phobia’ was introduced by psychiatrist, Burt in 1920 (Tyerman, 1968), and
reiterated by clinicians, Johnson et al. (1941). The notion of ‘school refusal’ was
introduced in the mid-twentieth century by psychiatrists such as Klein (1945) and
Hersov (1960). Other clinicians have applied a variety of terminology including
‘school anxiety’ (Morgan, 1959) and ‘anxiety-based school refusal’ (Last and
Strauss, 1990), each of which imply a within-child cause for the absence from
school.
In some studies, researchers have defined overarching terms for absence, such
as ‘school avoidance’ (Berg, 2002); ‘chronic non-attendance’ (Lauchlan, 2003);
‘school attendance difficulties’ (Sheppard, 2005) and ‘voluntary and involuntary
absenteeism’ (Birioukov, 2016). Further, more recent terminology such as
‘emotionally based school avoidance’ (EBSA) (West Sussex EPS, 2004/2022);
7
‘extended school non-attendance’ (ESNA) (Gregory and Purcell, 2014); and
‘persistent school non-attenders (PSNA) (Tobias, 2018) has been used by
educational psychologists to focus upon categories of behaviour, rather than
implying a specific cause or directing blame.
This significant variation in conceptions is indicative of the range of backgrounds,
objectives and approaches of the researchers involved (Birioukov, 2016). There
have been suggested reasons why few clear definitions or explanations have
been formed and these debates are difficult to resolve. For instance, it is noted
that school absentees are a heterogenous group, which implies that they need to
be understood on an individual basis rather than by trying to group them within
categories (Elliott and Place, 2019). Kearney (2002) suggested that absence is
best understood by considering the functions that it serves for the child, while
others argue that distinctions need to be maintained between the constructs of
truancy as a behavioural or conduct-based issue, and refusal as an emotional or
anxiety-based issue (e.g., Lyon and Cotler, 2007). Carlen, Gleeson and
Wardhaugh (1992, p.62) summed up the ongoing debate by observing that SAP
terminology has been based upon a pathological model that views non-attenders
as ‘either 'mad' ('phobic' and therefore psychologically disturbed), 'bad' (truant-
delinquent' and therefore socially and morally disturbed) or […] 'sad' ('truant as
victim')’.
This lack of any agreement in conceptualisation can be considered a barrier in
itself to improved understanding, as Heyne et al. (2019, p.3) suggest
‘inconsistencies and ambiguity are obstacles to the advancement of assessment,
intervention, and scientific knowledge surrounding SAPs’. To encourage a
consensus, Heyne et al. (2019) propose an updated definition of three dominant
ways of conceptualising SAPs - truancy, school refusal, and school withdrawal,
and they add school exclusion as a fourth concept (which is significant as it now
acknowledges that school-based actions can create and influence attendance
problems). Heyne et al. (2019) apply Kearney’s (2008b) criteria for problematic
absenteeism as a part of these updated definitions, whereby Kearney suggests
that problematic absenteeism exists when the young person:
8
(1) has missed at least 25 percent of total school time for at
least two weeks, or
(2) has experienced severe difficulty attending classes for
at least two weeks with significant interference in a child’s
or family’s daily routine
(3) and/or was absent for at least 10 days of school during
any 15-week period while school is in session (i.e., a
minimum of 15 percent days absent from school)
(Kearney, 2008b, p.265)
This criterion is then combined with the following definitions:
Truancy is absence from school for a whole day or part of the day, or absence
from the proper location within school. This absence occurs without the
permission of the school, and the young person tries to conceal it from their
parents (Heyne et al., 2019, p.16).
School refusal occurs when a young person is reluctant or refusing to attend
school, and this occurs with emotional distress that hinders attendance. The
young person does not try to hide the associated school absence from their
parents and does not display anti-social behaviour. The parents have made
reasonable efforts (currently or at an earlier stage) to secure attendance or
express their intention for their child to attend school full-time (Heyne et al., 2019,
p.16).
School withdrawal is defined as absence from school that is not concealed from
parents. The absence is ‘attributable to parental effort to keep the young person
at home, or attributable to there being little or no parental effort to get the young
person to school’ (Heyne et al., 2019, p.16).
School exclusion is an absence from school or from specific school activities.
This absence is caused by the school: employing disciplinary measures in an
9
inappropriate manner; ‘being unable or unwilling to accommodate the physical,
social-emotional, behavioural, or academic needs of the young person’; or
‘discouraging the young person from attending, beyond the realm of legally
acceptable school policy’ Heyne et al., 2019, p.17).
These terms are not without their difficulties and some controversy remains, for
instance the researcher is aware that many parents object to the use of the term
‘school refusal’ as it is argued that children can be unable to attend and calling
this reaction a ‘refusal’ unfairly implies children are making a choice. Provided
terms in use are not associated with the apportionment of blame or cause in this
way, they offer some conceptual clarity in a confused field, and provide a way of
distinguishing different types of SAPs. ‘School attendance problems’ is the
terminology chosen for use within this study to fit with current academic thinking,
however the researcher refers to ‘school attendance problems and barriers’ in the
study title to reflect her recognition of the significant influence of systemic
barriers.
The following section discusses the current legislative context for monitoring and
responding to school absence. This includes clarification of the terms used by
schools and the DfE to define absence data.
1.3 School absence monitoring and data collection
As stated in Section 1.1, if enrolled at a school, children are expected to attend
all timetabled sessions, unless they are absent for a reason that can be
authorised by the school under the Registration (Pupil Registration) Regulations
2006. These acceptable reasons are that a child is too unwell to attend (and the
school accepts this as valid); the parent has been granted permission in advance
(for religious observation or a holiday in exceptional circumstances); or if a child
has a medical appointment; is being educated off-site; or has been excluded.
Authorised absence is defined as:
Absence with permission from a teacher or other authorised
representative of the schools. Counted in sessions, where each
session is equivalent to half a day.
(DfE, 2019b, p.45)
10
Whereas unauthorised absence is defined as:
Absence without permission from a teacher or other authorised
representative of the school. This includes all unexplained or
unjustified absences and late arrivals. Counted in sessions,
where each session is equivalent to half a day.
(DfE, 2019b, p.45)
Whether or not an absence is authorised holds significance for parents as they
can be subject to penalties including fines and imprisonment for unauthorised
absences under section 444 (1) and (1a) of the Education Act 1996.
Unauthorised absences can also lead to the imposition of Parenting Contracts
under section 19 of the Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003, a School Attendance
Order under section 437(3) of the Education Act 1996, or an
Education Supervision Order under section 36 Children’s Act 1989.
Unfortunately, comprehensive data about persistent absence do not exist
because DfE statistics have not differentiated between categories or different
types of SAPs. Additionally, prior to the standardisation of attendance data
collection in 2006, schools had maintained differing ways of defining and coding
school absence (Archer et al., 2003). Since 2006, standardised school
attendance data have been collated by the DfE through the school’s census.
Figure 1.2 provides an overview of authorised, unauthorised, and overall
absence figures between 2006 and 2019. This illustrates how overall and
authorised absence rates appear to have fallen, while unauthorised absence
rates have seen slight but sustained increases since 2015/16. Figure 1.2 also
indicates that unauthorised absence has increased as a percentage of all non-
attendance and has increased as a percentage of all possible attendance.
11
Figure 1.2 Overall absence by authorised/unauthorised absence, England, time series (DfE, 2020b, p.4)
Persistent absence is currently defined as missing 10% or more of the sessions a
student is expected to attend in each academic year (DfE, 2020a). Reflecting that
it is a category of concern, the definition of persistent absence has been
amended by the DfE to encourage schools to act at an earlier stage (in 2011 the
threshold at which Persistent Absence was defined changed from pupils missing
20% of sessions to missing 15%, and in 2015 it was changed from 15% to 10%).
Figure 1.3 Percentage of pupils who are persistently absent by school type, Autumn term, 2016/17 to
2020/21 (DfE, 2021a)
2016/17
Autumn
term
2017/18
Autumn
term
2018/19
Autumn
term
2019/20
Autumn
term
2020/21
Autumn
term
State-funded
Primary
school
10.0%
10.1%
9.2%
11.2%
9.9%
State-funded
Secondary
school
13.4%
13.3%
12.7%
15.0%
16.3%
Special
schools
27.8%
28.6%
27.6%
30.0%
29.2%
Total
11.6%
11.7%
10.9%
13.1%
13.0%
12
When the most recent percentage figures for persistent absence at 13.14% (DfE,
2020c) and 13% (DfE, 2021a) (see Figure 1.3) are converted into pupil numbers,
it indicates that there have been between 916,000 (2021) and 921,927 (2020)
persistent absentees. For 40% of these persistent absences there was no
formally recorded reason (i.e., they were Coded O or 'other', as unauthorised
absence in the attendance register). This means that close to one million children
are persistently absent, and for many no data are collated to uncover the reasons
why, and little is done to understand what they and their families are experiencing
because of this persistent absence from school.
1.4 How does the education system provide for children who experience
SAPs?
If a child is struggling with any aspect of attending school, it is expected they will
be able to access support within their school (DfE, 2018a). This may take the
form of pastoral support, or support for a specific learning need, disability,
medical need, or an event such as bullying or assault. There is a general duty of
care which is explained in relation to mental health difficulties in the following
extract by the Coram Children’s Legal Centre:
Every school teacher owes a pupil a duty of care. This duty
is loco parentis (that is, in the place of the parent). Broadly, this
means the school has to do what is reasonably practicable to
ensure they care for their pupils, as any reasonable parent
would do. This duty is usually reflected in a structured pastoral
system within schools that upholds key values related to well-
being. The child’s class teacher is usually an initial point of
contact for the child. This means that if a pupil is experiencing
mental health difficulties, they can speak to this teacher.
Depending on the seriousness of the mental health difficulty,
this teacher can either speak to the pupil themselves or refer
them to the head teacher, who can call upon more specialist
help
(Coram Children’s Legal Centre, 2022)
Various school and local authority policies, and DfE statutory and non-statutory
guidance documents exist (see Table 1.4 below), alongside a range of
professional roles and services that can be relevant when SAPs occur. However,
13
there is no specific SAPs policy, DfE guidance, or standardised pathway for
parents or professionals to follow, meaning that parents and professionals need
to identify which policies or guidance documents might be of relevance in
individual cases, depending upon what they think the underlying triggers or
causes might be. A parent will also need to locate information which helps them
understand how to comply with relevant policies, and navigate systemic
processes and requirements, before they can effectively proceed in attempting to
resolve SAPs.
Table 1.4 DfE Guidance and Legislation with possible relevance to SAPs
Trigger
DfE Guidance document
Legislation
Illness –
Physical
Supporting pupils at school with medical
conditions: Statutory guidance for
governing bodies of maintained schools
and proprietors of academies in England
(DfE, 2015a)
‘The aim is to ensure that all children with
medical conditions, in terms of both
physical and mental health, are properly
supported in school so that they can play a
full and active role in school life, remain
healthy and achieve their academic
potential.’
Section 100, Children and Families Act,
2014 - ‘Governing bodies have a statutory
duty to make arrangements to support
pupils with medical conditions.’
Equality Act (2010)
Illness –
Mental
Supporting pupils at school with medical
conditions: Statutory guidance for
governing bodies of maintained schools
and proprietors of academies in England
(DfE, 2015a)
‘The aim is to ensure that all children with
medical conditions, in terms of both
physical and mental health, are properly
supported in school so that they can play a
full and active role in school life, remain
healthy and achieve their academic
potential.’
Mental health and behaviour in schools
(DfE, 2018)
Section 100, Children and Families Act,
2014 - ‘Governing bodies have a statutory
duty to make arrangements to support
pupils with medical conditions.’
Equality Act (2010)
SEND
SEND includes
learning
difficulties,
disabilities,
and/or social,
emotional, or
mental health
difficulties.
SEND Code of Practice (DfE/DoHSC, 2015)
Paragraph 6.2 - ‘Schools must use their
best endeavours to make sure any child
with SEN gets the support they need (this
means doing everything they can to meet
child’s SEN’
Children & Families Act 2014.
Every school is required to have systems in
place to identify children needing support,
and to assess, monitor and secure
appropriate support for any SEN they may
have.
If the school takes appropriate action but
the child is still unable to make the
progress expected the school or the
parents can request an Education, Health
14
and Care Plan (EHCP) assessment for the
child.
Bullying
Preventing and tackling bullying: Advice
for headteachers, staff and governors
(DfE, 2017)
There are legal duties on schools,
academies, and Local Authorities to
safeguard and promote the welfare of
children, including preventing bullying and
assault. - Section 175, Education Act 2002;
Section 89, Education Inspections Act
2006; Children Act 1989; The Education
(Independent School Standards)
Regulations 2014 (Part 3); The Equality
Act, 2010.
Sexual
Assault
Sexual violence and sexual harassment
between children in schools and colleges
(DfE, 2017)
Children who
are unable to
attend school
Ensuring a good education for children
who cannot attend school because of
health needs: Statutory guidance for local
authorities (DfE, 2013)
School and Local Authority policies state
that extended absence requires medical
evidence to be authorised. This is expected
to come from a GP or referral to CAMHS or
a Paediatrician.
Alternative Provision: Statutory guidance
for local authorities (DfE, 2013)
Schools should notify the Local Authority if
children are absent due to illness for more
than 15 days. Local Authorities have a duty
to ensure that a child receives alternative
educational provision whilst absent for any
reason, - Section 19, Education Act, 1996
Local Authorities are under a duty to
identify children not receiving an education
– Section 436, Education Act 1996
Additional
documents
Keeping children safe in education 2021
(DfE, 2021d)
Behaviour and discipline in schools (DfE,
2016)
School attendance parental responsibility
measures (DfE, 2015b)
Equality Act (2010)
It is unlawful for an education provider to
discriminate directly or indirectly against a
pupil on the basis of their disability.
An education provider is expected to take
positive steps to ensure that disabled
pupils have equal access to education and
the provision of services.
1.5 Parental voices and perspectives of SAPs
Within existing literature, the importance of obtaining the perspectives of all
stakeholders has been acknowledged in recent years, as it supports the
development of a comprehensive and holistic understanding of SAPs. (Malcolm
et al., 2003; Pellegrini, 2007; Gren-Landell, 2021). As discussed by authors
including Myhill (2017) and Browne (2018), studies that include the voices and
perspectives of parents are limited in number and have rarely explored parents’
experiences in depth or considered the full impact of SAPs for families. This
study considers this gap in the literature is of significance because the current
legislative framework places a duty on parents to resolve SAPs and yet parents’
voices are rarely heard. This study also recognises how the parental voice has
15
been problematised within the literature, yet the input of parents needs to be
facilitated as a significant part of any solution (Aucott, 2014; Gren-Landell, 2021).
Once compulsory education was established, absence from school was framed
as truancy, with the punitive legislative response indicating that parents were
deemed to be a fault for failing to ensure their children attended school. Clinical
research then attempted to categorise parents according to how they were
perceived to influence and respond to children’s SAPs. This led clinicians to label
parents as neglectful (Hiatt, 1915), neurotic (Warren, 1948), ambivalent or
ineffectual (Davidson, 1960), and irresponsible (Berg, 1997). These perceptions
and labels have persisted over time and are still reflected in current definitions of
SAPs.
Within existing literature discussing SAPs there is mention of sub-categories of
parents who are proactive in trying to resolve barriers to attendance. Although
mention of these sub-categories exists, they are rarely acknowledged and have
not been investigated further. For example, Reid (2002, pp.149-154) defined five
sub-types of parent-condoned absence which were listed as: Anti-education;
Laissez Faire; Frustrated; Desperate; and Adjusting. The Frustrated parent
category seems to represent pro-active parents most closely, as they are said to
try everything to find help and support but feel let down by the system. Heyne et
al. (2019, p.9) also refer to Reid (2002) and suggest the ‘Frustrated parents’
mentioned are likely to be those ‘who have lost hope following unsuccessful
attempts to help their child attend school’.
A further example is offered by Dalziel & Henthorne (2005, p.65) who identified
four approaches adopted by parents in response to SAPs. Those approaches
were: Parents who are trying hard; Powerless parents; Overprotective or
dependent parents; and Apathetic non-engaging parents. The approach of
‘Parents who are trying hard’ was described in terms of parents who encouraged
their child using various methods, and who worked co-operatively with
professionals. It was also noted that the reasons for absence often related to
illness, an educational need, or behavioural problems. These parents were
16
described as ‘sometimes frustrated by delays with interventions and lack of
tailored support for individual needs’.
A key factor of this study is that it enables and validates the voices of parents in
situations involving SAPs, in recognition that some parents proactively seek a
key role in influencing successful outcomes. This aspect of SAPs – where
parents actively try to collaborate with teachers and other professionals in finding
a way for their child to re-enter the classroom – has received scant attention in
the literature. To understand this phenomenon better, it is necessary to
investigate the experiences of parents in this situation and that is what this
research sets out to do.
1.6 Defining ‘systems’ and ‘agency’
Within this study reference is made to ‘systems’ within society and to parental
perceptions of ‘agency’, therefore the application and relevance of these terms
within the SAPs context are explained here, to offer clarity for the reader.
1.6.1 Systems within society
This study refers to systems as a range of patterns of interaction at different
social levels. More specifically, systems are defined structures for organising and
providing specific services, such as the nationwide system of school settings
organised to provide an education for the population. This also highlights that
there is a distinction to be made between the broader concept of ‘education’ and
the more specific concept of ‘schooling’. From a sociological perspective,
education is defined by Giddens and Sutton (2017, p.81) as: ‘the passing on of
knowledge, skills and norms of behaviour so that new members can become part
of their society’; whereas ‘schooling’ is defined as: ‘the formal process through
which certain types of knowledge and skill are delivered via a predesigned
curriculum and is usually compulsory up to a certain age’.
A central argument supporting this study is that school attendance is a socially
constructed expectation and requirement, which is maintained by various
structures and systems of society, and therefore school absence is also a socially
constructed problem. Consequently, the parental experiences under investigation
17
in this study reflect the impact of various interactions and responses within and
between these social structures and systems. The study draws upon a
perspective shared by Meighan and Harber (2007, p.15) who assert that a
society is an ‘all pervasive entity’ with functional requirements and purposes. At
the macro level such a society is structured in parts or systems (such as systems
of education, health, or economy) which are closely linked. In this sense,
individual people can act relatively independently within these combined social
structures or systems, if they conform to the rules and accepted behaviours
constructed through ongoing social practices over time. The corresponding micro
perspective suggests that individuals ‘create society every day by their social
actions’ (Meighan and Harber, 2007, p.15). Therefore, individuals can also
inspire change within the structures of society through processes of debate and
negotiation, which if successful, can change patterns of social action.
In terms of education, Meighan and Harber (2007) argue that ‘the effectiveness
of any school structure can be measured only in terms of the needs of the
system’. Moreover, they argue that for social order to be maintained, rather than
aiming to have the agreement of all members, society requires ‘a few having the
power to define social necessity and imposing their definitions on the less
powerful’ (Meighen and Harber, 2007, p.297). These societal processes and
structures feature within this study in relation to systemic and governmental
influences upon individuals which are linked to the compulsion to access
education, specifically through attendance at school.
To study and understand how complex interactions within societal systems
impact upon people, Mills (1959) proposed that we need to develop a quality of
mind which he named ‘the sociological imagination’ (1959, p.5). According to
Mills, use of the sociological imagination requires us to connect the personal,
social, and historical aspects of our lives and consider how they might influence
us and influence any given situation. More specifically, Mills explains we should
look beyond our individual problems and make a distinction between ‘the
personal troubles of milieu’ and ‘the public issues of social structure’ (1959, p.8).
According to Mills, troubles are viewed as ‘private matters’ which ‘occur within the
character of the individual and within the range of his immediate relations with
18
others’. Whereas Mills defines issues as ‘public matters’ which often involve a
‘crisis in institutional arrangements’ and as such are complex to define and
unpick (Mills, 1959, p.8). Mills’ theory is applicable here as this study aims to
understand experience at the micro-level of private matters, by considering how
they are influenced by macro-level public matters.
1.6.2 The agency of parents
The researcher acknowledges that agency as a concept is likely to be a feature
in many parents’ experiences as they endeavour to navigate relevant systems to
resolve their children’s SAPs. Goodall and Montgomery (2014, p.4) relate agency
to ‘the capacity of parents to act (in a beneficial manner) in relation to their
children's learning’. Therefore, a sense of agency is related to how much each
person perceives they can take responsibility, and act in a given context. As
such, agency is measurable in regard to whose terms things happen under, and
to what extent each person can contribute and be heard and respected within a
given context. It is suggested that in an education related context where parents
and school staff need to work collaboratively, a sense of shared agency would
require an understanding of individual roles and positions, and respect for the
contribution each agent is able to offer from their perspective.
Section 1.7 will now explain the motivating factors behind the researcher’s drive
to undertake this study.
1.7 The researcher’s motivation
The researcher’s motivation for undertaking this study relates to her own
experience of SAPs as a parent, and her awareness that other families are
having similar experiences. Here she shares a summary of her experience:
“Our son had hardly missed a day of primary school, but in September
2008 he managed one day at secondary school and then my family were
suddenly plunged into a new world of ‘school refusal’. This first term at
secondary school became a period of anxiety, family arguments, tears,
worry, confusion, shame, and fear. There was a succession of stressful
meetings with school staff and GP and CAMHS appointments. We were
19
unsure why he had reacted so badly to secondary school but were
repeatedly told “he just has to keep going to school and he will get used
to it”. The school told us they had never seen this type of behaviour
before, so we questioned ourselves - what was it that we had done wrong
as parents to cause this?
No one seemed to know how to help, and we felt very isolated and alone.
Our son was not sleeping, not eating, extremely anxious, and whenever
he was pressured to attend, he began self-harming. Deep-down, we knew
there must be an underlying reason why he was reacting in this way. He
had seemed happy at primary school, but something had drastically
changed. Nothing we did as parents had changed, yet it seemed we were
automatically viewed as the source of the problem. We also knew we
could be fined or prosecuted, but desperately wanted to protect our son,
so we sought a better understanding of why he found secondary school
so difficult, and how we could improve things for him.
Initially we tried a part-time timetable, travelling in to school for one or two
lessons a day, but it didn’t really help. Then, after the Christmas holiday
the pressure on him to attend increased, and it seemed the only option
was to deregister him from mainstream school. We then signed him up
with an online school, chosen because he desperately wanted to feel
‘normal’ and ‘go to school’ just like his peers. We desperately wanted that
for him too (although we struggled to pay the fees). Despite the
assumptions that had been made about him and us, his education
mattered yet there was a conflict because we also cared about his health
and welfare. It truly was a ‘rock or a hard place’ situation.
He continued with online education for six years, achieving passes in six
iGCSE exams. All through this time we tried to find help. We suspected
our son was autistic and repeatedly explained our concerns to clinicians
at CAMHS, yet they dismissed this possibility. CAMHS became a
frustrating experience with many delays, waiting for appointments and for
reports (one took almost a year to be typed up).
20
When online school came to an end, our son tried to start a course at
college, but again he became overwhelmed in the environment. He
became depressed after this, and our search for help continued. At the
age of 17 he was between child and adult’s services and there were many
‘dead ends’ where no service wanted to get involved.
We returned to CAMHS and explained his situation. Finally, we found one
Clinical Psychologist who listened to us, assessed him, and read through
his notes in full. Eventually he was diagnosed as autistic. This diagnosis
and his interest in attending college led to him being prescribed anxiety
medication and offered Cognitive Behavioural Therapy. We arranged
support for him to start at a college with a more suitable environment. He
went on to complete a two-year BTEC with one 100% attendance award,
a Student of the Year award, and Distinction* grades in all areas. He then
went on to university and recently graduated with a First-class degree.”
When her son’s SAPs began the researcher searched everywhere for information
and help, which led her to a locate an online support group for parents. This
contact with other families provided the family with the knowledge, inspiration,
and courage to deregister from the secondary school at the end of the first term.
Following this, the researcher became increasingly involved with another online
family support group. It became clear to her that there were many families facing
similar experiences, and she did her best to offer help based upon everything she
had learned. The longer this went on, the more committed and passionate she
became about raising awareness. One day, a ‘now or never’ realisation came,
and in 2012 she enrolled at her local university as a mature student, with a vague
but burning hope, that she would somehow find a way to make a difference.
1.8 The structure of this thesis
The structure of this thesis is as follows:
Chapter 1: Introduction
This chapter set out the context of this study by explaining the expectations
around school attendance, and key aspects of the systemic response to school
21
absence in England. School attendance problems were conceptualised, including
a discussion of ways that parents have been framed within clinical and academic
discourses. The chapter drew attention to literature detailing a sub-category of
parents who are proactive in trying to resolve SAPs. It was noted that the
experiences of these parents have not yet been explored within the literature.
Chapter 2: Literature Review
This chapter explores the development of compulsory school attendance as a
societal expectation. This provides a background context to SAPs with a focus
upon the framing of parental involvement in school attendance and school
absence. The chapter then discusses various ways that parents have been
involved within the study of SAPs. Following this, the chapter discusses studies
that look beyond the child and their home context to consider the impact of
numerous ecological and systemic factors. The chapter concludes with a
summary of recent studies that promote the use of a systemic model to aid
understanding of the wider contextual influences upon SAPs.
Chapter 3: Methodology
Chapter 3 presents a discussion of the methodological paradigm which was
selected and applied to guide this research. An interpretive paradigm supports
the idealist ontological assumption that social reality is made up of shared
interpretations. The Chapter describes the methodological decisions made by the
researcher and the processes used to collect and analyse data.
Chapter 4: Responding to emerging school attendance problems
Thematic analysis of data highlighted common themes and elements of parental
experiences that were combined to form the concept of Parents’ Journeys
through SAPs. Chapter 4 describes the initial elements of Parents’ Journeys
where they recognise the emergence of school attendance problems and
undertake complex interpretations and assessments of their children’s difficulties
and needs.
22
Chapter 5: Navigating the systemic context of school attendance problems
Chapter 5 considers elements of the Parents’ Journeys in relation to their
experiences when they attempt to access support within the education system,
health services and local government.
Chapter 6: Managing the home context while experiencing school
attendance problems
Chapter 6 discusses parents’ experiences in managing various aspects of family
life whilst also coping with SAPs. This includes the responses and reactions
displayed by family and friends, the impact upon family relationships, and
practical aspects such as fulfilling work commitments.
Chapter 7: Working towards a resolution for school attendance problems
Chapter 7 explores the resolving elements of Parents’ Journeys and the peak of
the Parental SAPs Predicament, which evolves as the full impact of SAPs on the
child, parents and family becomes apparent. However, within their journey certain
resources empower parents and this influences the decisions parents make to
secure the best outcomes they can for their children.
Chapter 8: Discussion
Chapter 8 presents and discusses an adaptation of Bronfenbrenner’s
bioecological systems framework which aims to represent the structural context
of the parents’ experiences described in Chapters 4, 5, 6, and 7. Chapter 8 also
offers a range of arguments that relate to the study findings and the ways they
can be interpreted through the framework of a bioecological system.
Chapter 9: Conclusions and Recommendations
Chapter 9 discusses answers to the research questions that guided the study. In
addition, the conclusions reached because of the study are stated. The chapter
then shares the researcher’s recommendations including a pathway to support
informed by the adapted model discussed in Chapter 8.
23
Chapter Two. School attendance expectations, and consequential
responses to school absence from a parental perspective
2.1 Introduction
This chapter sets out to provide an overview of the development of societal
expectations and concerns around school attendance at both macro and micro
levels, to establish the context in which individual parental experiences are
explored. To achieve this, the chapter draws upon primary sources including acts
of parliament and government documents, and secondary sources including
socio-historical accounts and journal articles. Consideration is given to the
timeline of political influence and social factors that mark out the evolution of a
state funded and managed, legally enforceable system of mainstream schooling
to educate the nation’s children.
The chapter then considers two relevant aspects of the literature around school
attendance problems (SAPs). First, a short discussion examines critical
perspectives of England’s legislative response to SAPs. Second, the evolution of
clinical and academic discourses in response to SAPs is explored. The
discussion then turns to consider academic research which upholds the need to
look beyond the child and home context of SAPs. It is argued that this approach
will advance a more holistic consideration of numerous ecological and systemic
factors which influence children’s ability to attend school (e.g., Lyon and Cotler,
2007; Gregory and Purcell, 2014). This section then considers recent studies
(e.g., Nuttall and Woods, 2013; Melvin, et al., 2019), which support this argument
by utilising Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological systems model (1979; 2005).
Having set out aspects of the historical, social, and academic context of the
study, the chapter then considers ways that parents have been involved in the
study of SAPs. This draws upon articles in academic and professional journals,
along with a selection of relevant recent doctoral theses. This discussion
considers ways that parents have been problematised within definitions of
various SAPs over time (e.g., Partridge, 1939; Johnson, et al., 1941; Berg, et al.,
1978; Reid, 2002). This discussion develops further to consider parental
24
participation in recent studies (Myhill, 2017; Browne, 2018; Orme-Stapleton,
2018; Mortimer, 2019) where it is now acknowledged that the parent voice
contributes to the understanding of SAPs.
2.2 The development of school attendance expectations between the
mid-eighteenth century and mid-twentieth century
There was a sense of uncertainty and precariousness within English society
during the mid-nineteenth century which Lawson and Silver (1973) attribute to a
range of factors including substantial population growth, changes in agricultural
practices, and the spread of urbanisation triggered by the Industrial Revolution.
According to Gillard (2018, no page) by the start of the nineteenth century
‘education was being organised, like English society as a whole, on a more rigid
class basis’. By the mid-nineteenth century, significant growth in international
industry and commerce triggered a growing demand for educated workers who
were capable of clerical work. This international contact also prompted
recognition that in comparison to the standard of schooling systems in countries
such as Germany, Prussia, and France, England was lagging (Gillard, 2018).
Chitty (1992, p.3) argues that the reasons for this backwardness were complex,
but largely related to the opposition of the churches, and landed and middle-class
suspicions about state-controlled education, which had led to a hostile reaction to
the notion of mass educating the poor.
In 1870, the Elementary (Foster) Education Act (HMSO) began the process of
establishing the state’s responsibility for funding and providing a school-based
education for children in England and Wales. According to Gillard (2018), the
1870 Act recognised that enforcing mass attendance would be inappropriate until
there enough school places had been arranged for all children. Therefore the
1870 Act offered a compulsory school place for children up to the age of thirteen
if they did not already have access to existing educational provision. The 1870
Act also began the process of establishing a statutory obligation upon parents to
ensure children attended school once they had a place. However, initially the
strength of enforcement of this obligation varied across local areas (Gillard,
2018).
25
The 1880 Education Act (HMSO) strengthened the law around attendance and
made education compulsory for every child between the ages of five and ten
(Gillard, 2018). Successive Education Acts empowered school boards (in 1870),
and then local education authorities (in 1902) to enforce attendance using local
byelaws, school attendance orders, prosecution of parents, and/or removal of
children from the home to send them to ‘truant schools’ (Lawson and Silver,
1973, p.325).
According to Lawson and Silver (1973) in the mid-1890s it was reported to
Parliament that there were:
Nearly three quarters of a million children whose names ought to be on
the books of some elementary school, and who do not appear at all… Of
these who are on the books of the elementary schools, nearly one fifth
are continually absent.
(Lawson and Silver, 1973, p.325)
The reasons for this persistent absence are unclear, however, enforcement of
mass education had been especially unpopular with poor and working-class
families, as they relied on wages earned by children to supplement meagre
household incomes (Gillard, 2018). Carlen, Gleeson, and Wardhaugh (1992)
explain that costs associated with school attendance, such as school fees and
suitable clothing and boots, were problematic for some families. Additionally,
some families considered attending school was a waste of time because their
children’s likely employment would not require them to read or write. These
family-based concerns indicate a conflict between what had become parents’
legal duty to ensure children accessed education, and the financial and practical
demands of family life and survival.
Lawson and Silver (1973, p.323) state that the 1870 Education Act had marked
the point when education ‘became a vital element in the development of social
policy’. Between 1870 and 1890 the welfare of children became a greater priority,
and by the start of the twentieth century there was 'a changing climate of opinion
about the value of education' (Lawson and Silver, 1973, p.326). The successive
26
legislation passed between 1870 and 1902 embedded the concept of school
attendance as ‘parents and children became accustomed to ‘the habit of
schooling’ (Cunningham, 2006, p.172).
Cunningham (2006) argues that this alteration in priorities, and the habituation of
the population, was achieved through a combination of persuasion and court
action (with 100,000 prosecutions a year for non-attendance in the 1880s). Once
sending children to school had become a norm or a habit, it freed parents and
wider society from the worry of arranging where children were during the day,
especially while adults went to work. It also offered levels of stability and routine
which, when combined with the political discourse concerning the benefit of
education for children, would have made schooling seem a beneficial opportunity.
The process of integrating a system of compulsory education into society is
considered by Zhang (2004), who explains:
When compulsory education was introduced to Britain and the
USA, the argument for compulsion was that only one
generation of the population needed the attendance laws to
enforce compulsory schooling. And it was believed that
resistance to the full-scale institution of government compulsory
education would only last for one generation. The second
generation and the ones afterwards would accept it as a natural
part of growing up.
(Zhang, 2004, p.29)
This suggests there had been an assumption that once compulsory education
had become a habit or a ‘norm’ within society, there would be no non-compliance
and no need for punitive consequences for non-compliance. However, in
England, and in other countries around the World, legislative enforcement still
exists over a century later (Gren-Landell, 2021). Reflecting upon the necessity to
continue with a mechanism to enforce compliance through threats of financial
and legal penalties for school absence, Donoghue (2011) argues that having the
power to imprison parents provides both ‘the capacity to regulate and punish
behaviour’ and offers symbolic messages ‘in the context of the social
moralisation of ‘flawed’ parents’ (Donoghue, 2011, p.219).
27
Sheldon (2007) claims that even after sending children to school had become
accepted as a cultural norm, important continuities remained:
A small minority of persistent absentees remained a problem
and a much larger number of children continued to truant on an
occasional or intermittent basis, on their own initiative, with
parental approval or at the parents' behest.
(Sheldon, 2007, p.267)
The following section provides a summary of the key developments that have
occurred since the mid-twentieth century, in relation to school attendance and
absence.
2.3 The evolution of school attendance expectations since the mid-
twentieth century
Following the Second World War, the need for a reconstruction and further
reform of the social and economic infrastructure was clear, and the 1944
Education Act was passed in the context of the emerging Welfare State
(Wardhaugh, 1991). Gillard (2018) argues that the 1944 Act was one of the most
important of all UK Education Acts as it defined the structure of post-war state
education in England and Wales. Section 36 of the 1944 Education Act clarified
that it was a parent’s legal duty to arrange the education of their children, stating:
It shall be the duty of the parent of every child of compulsory
school age to cause him to receive efficient full-time education
suitable to his age, ability, and aptitude, either by regular
attendance at school or otherwise.
(Education Act, 1944, p.29)
If parents failed to fulfil this duty the penalties were fines for the first two offences,
and a fine and/or imprisonment for any subsequent offences (Wardhaugh, 1991).
In addition, Section 37 of the 1944 Education Act set out how local education
authorities could serve school attendance orders on parents who failed to comply
with Section 36. The 1996 Education Act then updated this legal duty as Section
7 stated:
28
The parent of every child of compulsory school age shall cause
him to receive efficient full-time education suitable—
(a) to his age, ability, and aptitude, and
(b) to any special educational needs he may have,
either by regular attendance at school or otherwise.
(Education Act, 1996, p.4)
This duty means that parents are required to choose between a school-based
education or a home-based education (as the ‘otherwise’ option), based upon
their child’s needs and abilities and parental preference (Bridges, 2010). This
position is clarified in the Department for Education’s School Attendance
Guidance which states that ‘parents have a duty to ensure their child of
compulsory school age receives suitable full-time education, but this does not
have to be at a school’ (DfE, 2020a, p.9). However, as Lees (2014, pp.9-11)
argues, education has been conflated with schooling and parents are often
unaware that school is not the only option. Lees (2014) observes that the choice
of ‘regular attendance at school or otherwise’ (Section 7, Education Act 1996) is
not widely promoted by governments and isn’t encouraged as a legal option if
children experience SAPs.
The 1996 Act aimed to strengthen the enforcement of parental responsibility in
relation to children’s problematic behaviour and truancy. To achieve this the Act
introduced a range of new legal powers to enforce attendance, including
parenting contracts, parenting orders, school attendance orders, education
supervision orders, penalty notices, and truancy sweeps (Donoghue, 2011). This
legislation is still current and there are two offences for which a parent can be
found guilty under Section 444 of the 1996 Education Act. Section 444(1) makes
parents guilty of an offence if their child is absent without authorisation by their
school. Penalties include a fine of up to £1,000. Absence without authorisation is
a strict liability offence, meaning a lack of regular attendance is all that needs to
be shown. Under Section 444(1A), if a child is absent without authorisation and it
is judged that the parent knew about the child’s absence and failed to act, then
the parent is guilty of an aggravated offence. Penalties include a fine of up to
£2,500 and a prison sentence of up to 3 months.
29
Between 1997 and 2004 the New Labour government spent over £885 million
funding anti-truancy initiatives and reforms designed to improve school
attendance. Total absence fell from 7.80% in 1995-1996 to 6.59% in 2004-2005.
However unauthorised absences remained between 0.73% and 0.78% between
1994-1995 and 2003-2004, and then increased to 0.83% of available days in
2004-2005 (Commons Public Accounts Committee, 2005, pp.7-9). Moreover by
2010, truancy rates reached their highest level since 1997 (Donoghue, 2011).
The House of Commons Committee of Public Accounts (2005) report into the
impact of these initiatives recommended ten key practices to help schools
manage attendance more efficiently. Many of these recommendations have since
been integrated into school practices, including communication of a clear policy
on attendance, regular analysis of attendance data, and schemes to reward
attendance. One further aspect that was highlighted in the report was that
national absence data had been of limited use and was not completely reliable as
it had been submitted annually as whole school data, and without standardised
guidance. To address this the collection of absence data was transferred from
the Absence in Schools Survey to the School Census in 2005/2006, and the DfE
now publishes termly, standardised, pupil level absence data (e.g., DfE, 2018b;
2019a; 2020b; 2020c).
After 2010, the Conservative – Liberal Democrat coalition government continued
to implement the neoliberal policies introduced by the Conservative government
between 1979 and 1990 (Gillard, 2018). These neoliberal policies encouraged
the marketisation of education, for instance by offering freedom of choice for
parents, and making schools more efficient by monitoring and reporting on pupil
achievement (Ball, 2017; Benn, 2012). As Secretary of State for Education, Gove
extended the DfE’s focus on standardisation of achievement and measuring the
performativity of teachers and pupils, which included further crackdowns on
attendance and absence figures. Gove (2011) referred to children who were
persistently absent from school as the “missing million” and the “educational
underclass” (who often did not achieve academically because they had not spent
enough time at school). Gove instructed the Government’s Expert Adviser on
Behaviour to conduct a review of truancy. The resulting report, Improving
30
Attendance at School (Taylor, 2012), offered ten recommendations, most of
which were brought into force in 2013. These included: publishing reception
absence data to help schools intervene earlier; overhauling the fine system for
school absence; and strengthening rules around term-time holidays. It is
noteworthy that in the introduction to Taylor’s report, the reasons given for the
recommended actions were arguments made repeatedly over time in relation to
disaffection, neglect, and parents not valuing education (Taylor, 2012). Yet, there
is no mention of children who are persistently absent for other reasons such as
illness, unmet educational needs, or other difficulties that do not originate within
the child, parent, or home.
The ‘austerity’ programme initiated in 2010 by the Conservative – Liberal
Democrat Coalition government triggered a reduction in state spending, which
led to budget cuts and consequential changes to policies across many services
(Hanley, Winter, and Burrell, 2017; Gillard, 2018). These included the reduction
or restructuring of services linked to school attendance and absence such as
educational welfare services (Henderson et al., 2016), and school nurses (Royal
College of Nursing, 2017). The National Association of Headteachers (2019)
reported that cuts to funding for schools have impacted upon all aspects of
school provision, including numbers of pastoral and SEND support staff, who
often work with pupils experiencing SAPs. Numerous reports have described the
deterioration in Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services due to chronic
underfunding, which continues to impact upon the support available to children
experiencing attendance difficulties (STEM4, 2019; Office of the Children’s
Commissioner, 2020/21).
2.4 The changing role of parents within England’s education system
This section will discuss the changing roles that have been constructed for
parents through the political discourses and legislative demands discussed in
Sections 2.2 and 2.3, in relation to children’s attendance at school.
31
Dockett and Perry (2012) discuss family transitions that occur as children begin
attending school, and how this is the significant point when a child’s identity
changes to school-child. They demonstrate that this is often a time of mixed
emotion, when children need to ‘adopt the symbols of school (such as the
uniform), the language and habits of school, and new patterns of behaviour, and
develop new skills’ (Dockett and Perry, 2012, p.59). For parents this is also a
time of transition as their role alters to parents of a school child. Sending a child
to school then involves a range of accommodations, including an acceptance that
other adults will become more influential in their child’s life, and that these adults
will also draw inferences about and make judgements about their parenting skills
(Dockett and Perry, 2012; Cartmell, 2017).
Based on an ethnographic exploration of starting school, Cartmell (2017) argued
that this transition to school child is socially constructed through narratives
shared between parents, children, school staff, the wider community and
Government policies and practices. Cartmell (2017, p.84) referred to the work of
Handel (2014) who observed that once a child achieves the status of school
child, s/he must start the process of becoming an acceptable school child. The
notions of an acceptable school child, and a good school child, could be
significant for children who struggle with attendance, as they may fail to achieve
either status in the eyes of those around them. The requirement to become a
good or acceptable school child also has implications for parents.
Once compulsory education was established through legislation, parents were
primarily conceptualised as those responsible for ensuring daily attendance.
Gradually the conceptualisation of parents in government policy documents
widened, and more became expected of parents in terms of how they engaged
with their children’s schools, and how they supported their children’s success as
learners (Gibson and Simon, 2010). Bridges (2009, p.2) argued that one of the
most significant ways that the English government had intervened in parenting is
through the ways it constructed relationships between parents and schools.
Bridges (2009, p.2) related this to regulation of how much say and agency
parents had within the education system; how much information was shared
about the school-based education children received; the choice of schools
32
available to parents; and the type of relationships parents and teachers could
develop.
Politicians have attempted to address school non-attendance as persistent
absence, often through what Furedi (2008, p.186) termed the ‘politicisation of
parenting’. Evolving discourse through government policy and campaigning
constructed a range of parental roles including parents as partners, parents as
consumers, engaged parents, responsible parents, and failing parents.
Suggested reasons behind the construction of these roles will now be explored in
more detail.
2.4.1 Parents as partners in the provision of children’s education
David (1995) discussed the evolving discourse concerning a partnership between
the state and parents in relation to education. David (1995) noted how the 1944
Education Act was underpinned by the notion of parental wishes, with Section 76
stating that Local Education Authorities (LEAs) had to ensure pupils were
educated in accordance with the wishes of their parents (while balanced against
unreasonable public expenditure). In effect this referred to LEAs providing a
spread of schools that catered for differing ages, abilities, and aptitudes, which
parents could then select from, or opt for private school provision or home
education (as the ‘otherwise’ option).
The concept of parents as partners was first evidenced in 1967 when The
Plowden Report into primary education encouraged closer links between school
and home. The Plowden Report emphasised the importance of home-school
communication and encouraging the establishment of regular meetings between
school staff and parents, open days, and parent teacher associations (Alexander,
2010). Following this, in 1978 The Warnock Report into special needs education
was published. Chapter Nine was titled ‘Parents as Partners’ and the narrative
promoted the ideal of equal partnership between parents and professionals. The
Warnock Report recognised that an open dialogue between parents and
professionals would facilitate the sharing of parental knowledge of children’s
needs, alongside the sharing of professional expertise. However, Hodge and
33
Runswick-Cole (2008, p.3) argued that the term ‘partnership was often loosely
defined’ leaving parents and professionals confused about how this partnership
role should work in practice, especially when it is observed that the parent –
professional relationship is often ‘a source of conflict and tension’ for both parties
(Hodge and Runswick-Cole, 2008, p.3).
Mann, et al. (2020, p.339) highlight the ‘ambivalence towards partnership with
parents’ which they identified within DfE policy documents, and they argued that
‘policies alone have not guaranteed positive parent-teacher partnership’. Reports
of the difficult experiences of parents who attempt to work with professionals to
access support through schools and local authorities include features of
marginalisation and exclusion (Lamb, 2009; Hornby and Lafaele, 2011),
epistemic gaps within communication (Hodge and Runswick-Cole, 2017), and
blame linked to a default position of assumption of parental failing (Clements and
Aiello, 2021).
2.4.2 Parents as consumers of educational provision
Gillard (2018) discussed how a narrative of giving parents more power was
initiated by the 1980 Education Act where provision based upon parental wishes
moved on to view parents as consumers. This was linked to the rhetoric of
parental choice within the 1988 Education Reform Act. This Act introduced
Conservative-led neoliberal policies, establishing school performance
accountability, creating competition between schools, and encouraging school
management modelled on business (Benn, 2012; Ball, 2017). Parents became
educational clients and consumers, assigned with individual responsibility for
choosing the best school for their child's needs (David, 1995; Ball, 2017).
The 1992 Education Act established Ofsted and introduced school league tables
as mechanisms to help parents make informed choices about the school at which
they enrolled their children. David (1995, pp.268-270) noted a change in
education policy at this time, whereby the political concern about equal
opportunity in terms of access to schooling shifted to parental or private rights
34
and responsibilities. David (1995, p.276) also highlights how this shift was
represented by the switch in Conservative rhetoric from a children’s charter to a
parent’s charter. David (1995) described this as ‘a sea-change in the state –
parental partnership in terms of rhetoric if not the actual practices’, suggesting
that the notion of parental choice needed to be balanced against the factor of
compulsion to arrange children’s education. Further, Benn argued that politicians
only pretend that parents can choose schools, as the reality is that schools
choose pupils through covert and overt selection processes (2012, p.88).
2.4.3 Parents who are responsible and engaged in children’s education, or
fail to meet professional expectations
From 1997, the New Labour government maintained education policies with a
continuing focus upon home-school relationships and parental choice. However,
Reay (2008) argued that New Labour education policies were increasingly aimed
at turning family homes into extensions of the school learning environment,
primarily using home-school contracts. This was deployed through the concept of
the engaged parent who supports the work of the school by supervising the
completion of homework to boost their child’s achievements, and engaging with
activities at school (Wyness, 2020). Wyness (2020) also suggested that
government policies promoted the notion of responsible parents, who ensure
their children conform to the behavioural and educational standards expected by
schools and society, with a particular focus upon truancy being highlighted
through media reports.
The discourse evolved to focus upon failing parents following concerns about the
impacts of poverty and considerable social change upon family life, especially for
working class families (Bridges, 2009; Gibson and Simon, 2010; Ball, 2017). This
prompted a range of legislation and provisions aimed at educating parents and
intervening in family life, including Every Child Matters (DfES, 2003), and Every
Parent Matters (DfES, 2007). In the document Every Parent Matters (DfES,
2007) the government’s intention was stated to be the provision of services to
support and engage parents who were seen to need help to improve their
children’s educational outcomes and social mobility. However, Gibson and Simon
35
(2010) argued that Every Parent Matters failed to offer parents the practical
empowerment it had promised. Instead, the focus of the document was clarifying
parental responsibilities, along with communicating the consequences for non-
compliance if these responsibilities were neglected.
The discourse that surrounded these New Labour policies and interventions was
directed at parents who were seen to be failing to conform to professional
expectations (Argent, 2007). Regarding school absence, Southwell (2006)
argued that following the failure of New Labour’s £885 million campaign (1997-
2004) to reduce truancy and improve school attendance, the government
changed their focus from ‘defective’ children to ‘defective’ parents. Further,
Southwell (2006) maintained that the increasingly oppressive response towards
truancy that followed this campaign failure was more about saving political face
than about concern for children and their education (2006, p.92).
After 2010, the Conservative – Liberal Democrat Coalition government continued
to make strong links between existing societal concerns and a lack of parental
discipline in the home, and they used this narrative to introduce even more
interventions for 'failing parents’ or ‘flawed parents’. This was evidenced when
schools minister, Gibb responded to the Spring 2010 school absence figures by
announcing measures to ‘get tougher on parents and pupils who do not abide by
the rules’ (Donoghue, 2011, p.217). This focus on failing parents continued to
encourage a general feeling of mistrust of parents and their capabilities to judge
what was in the best interests of their children (Bridges, 2010). Goodall (2019)
concurs, arguing that the focus on improving parenting skills had become
combined with a process of judging and regulating parents, particularly in relation
to mothers, single parents, and working-class families.
This section has aimed to highlight how political discourses have constructed
various roles for parents who engage with the education system. This is
considered significant because these discourses and roles have shaped thinking
about parental influence upon attendance, often by encouraging suspicion,
36
judgement, and blame, which in turn is likely to have shaped the responses and
support offered to parents and children.
The following sections explore research into two further aspects of school
attendance expectations. Section 2.5 discusses law-based academic discourse
that has been critical of the legislative approach towards school absence as
truancy. Then Section 2.6 considers clinical and academic discourses which
have contributed to the range of SAPs that have been constructed since the late
nineteenth century.
2.5 The impact of English legal discourse on school absence
This chapter has evidenced how between 1870 and 1918 the system of mass
schooling evolved in terms of widening the group of children provided for by the
state, to achieve the current span between five and eighteen years of age. Since
1870 there has been a gradual tightening of the legal requirements to ensure
children access full-time education, with a range of penalties that can be levied
on parents. A literature base that sits alongside this legal discourse of Education
Acts and legislation is research conducted in related disciplines including law,
criminology, and education welfare (Heyne et al., 2019; Gren-Landell, 2021).
Various studies have found there is no evidence to show that compulsion or legal
sanctions have significantly reduced school absence (Carlen, Gleeson and
Wardhaugh, 1992; Zhang, 2004; Sheppard, 2010; 2011; Donoghue, 2011;
Epstein, Brown and O’Flynn, 2019). Moreover, Donoghue (2011) argues that
legal sanctions can only be an effective deterrent if the parent is the only cause
of a child’s school absence; or if the child is of an age where a change in
approach by the parent will be effective in resolving any problem or barrier
preventing attendance.
Both Carlen, Gleeson and Wardhaugh (1992) and Arthur (2005) state that
legislation, educational reforms, and legal judgements have all impacted
negatively on parents’ ability to enforce children’s school attendance. For
instance, Carlen, Gleeson and Wardhaugh are critical of the passing of
legislation which ‘does not specify how a child should be brought back into the
37
classroom if they are ‘refusing’ to attend’ (1992, p.25). They also argue that
families are placed in ‘a double bind’ by English legislation, whereby ‘on the one
hand it requires parents to ensure their children’s attendance at school while, on
the other, paradoxically, it provides the child with legal protection from its parents’
(1992, p.26). This relates to the use of physical force, which professionals can
expect parents to use to manhandle a resistant child from the home into the
school, (which could conversely be viewed as causing physical harm).
Arthur argues that successive legislation has had ‘a powerful impact which tends
to undermine rather than reinforce the ability of parents to offer their children help
and guidance’ (2005, p.237). This refers to legislation such as the Anti-Social
Behaviour Act (2003) which updated the use of parenting contracts, parenting
orders, penalty notices and ‘fast track to attendance’ interventions to encourage
parents to address poor attendance by engaging with schools and local
authorities. According to Arthur, rather than penalising parents, without
acknowledging the holistic context of their situation, parents should be assisted in
guiding and nurturing their children, through the provision of resources and
support services.
Epstein, Brown and O’Flynn (2019) studied the experiences of 126 parents of
children experiencing difficulties attending school. Their findings indicated that
‘the punitive approach leads to harm for parents, children, and vulnerable
families. It also appears to be ineffective in getting reluctant and fearful children
back into the classroom’ (2019, p.61). They concluded that ‘the current law is
cruel and discriminatory’ (2019, p.5). Donoghue (2011) and Epstein, Brown and
O’Flynn (2019) posit that the use of criminal law is both inappropriate and
ineffective, with the former arguing for an alternative civil, child welfare approach,
and the latter for a social pedagogy based, holistic approach, as it ‘may provide a
more effective framework for addressing the multifarious and socially complex
problem of truancy’ (Donoghue, 2011, p.244).
From an educational psychology perspective, Apter (2017, p.3) argues that
‘punishment is rarely an efficient way of modifying an undesired behaviour, even
38
if they make the person doing the punishing feel better’. Research conducted by
Kendall et al. (2004) explored the effectiveness of parental prosecution for school
absence from the perspectives of parents who had been prosecuted, magistrates
and court clerks, and Local Education Authority and Education Welfare Service
staff. The findings suggested that the most beneficial aspect of prosecuting
parents was the message it sent out to other parents. Kendall et al. (2004) found
professionals observed that even if prosecution improved a child’s attendance it
tended to only be a short-term improvement, suggesting the underlying reasons
or problems had not been addressed. It could therefore be argued that although
there needs to be a systemic response to truancy as a social expectation that is
going unmet, a rethink about the aims and appropriateness of the response is
required.
Pellegrini (2007, p.67) argues that the existing legal discourse directs attention
towards parents as the ‘locus’ of school attendance problems, but the child is
viewed as a ‘passive subject’ only to be discussed, but not given a voice.
Pellegrini (2007) then observes that legislation is constructed to allow the state to
intervene in the parenting role if a parent is seen to have failed to provide a
suitable education, and he states:
Without denying the importance of legislation to protect
children’s rights, the legal discourse appears narrow in the way
it constructs school non-attendance. It focuses on the family
only, and does not appear to consider systemic factors, which
may play an important role in school non-attendance.
Pellegrini (2007, p.67)
This contributes a viewpoint to the question of to what degree parents can be
expected to resolve school absence if it is caused or influenced by systemic
factors, but existing legislation does not allow space to consider such influences.
2.6 Clinical and academic responses to school absence
Lawson and Silver (1973) observed how by the end of the nineteenth century
there was an increasing emphasis upon the duty of English society to help its
39
individual members, alongside recognition of a collective responsibility for serious
social problems, including truancy. Sheldon (2007, p.274) argued that by the
early decades of the twentieth century levels of truancy had fallen to the extent
that any cases of persistent truancy appeared abnormal, which were then
thought to suggest ‘deeper problems in the family’. At that time there was also an
increased interest in the study of psychology (Lawson and Silver, 1973), and
child development and educational practices (Gillard, 2018). This reflected both
an increasing interest in the welfare of individual children, and the desire to boost
the status of education and teaching practice. As these developments occurred,
attitudes towards truants and their families began to alter, with suggestions of
merging attendance monitoring with welfare roles and health interventions. As
Sheldon (2007, p.272) explained ‘there was increasingly an acknowledgement
that truancy could be linked to the health and physical welfare of the child’.
Section 1.2 provided a brief overview of SAPs terminology which has developed
over time and this section now consider the evolution of this discourse in more
depth. One of the earliest published theories about truancy was shared in work
by Kline (1897), who suggested truancy was linked to instinctual behaviour, and
a migratory instinct within children (like that found in animals and birds). Kline
(1897, p.26) theorised those children were compelled by this instinct to wander
and ‘maintain psycho-physiological activities in attune or rhythm with those of the
organic and inorganic world’. This was echoed by Burt (1925) who drew upon the
work of Kline and others when writing about ‘Young Delinquents’. Burt’s chapter
‘Temperamental Conditions: Instincts and Emotions’ included sections on
Wandering as ‘a blind impulse to roam or travel, a hunger for new scenes and
new experiences’ (1925, p.456). This theory is reflected in the aetiology of the
word ‘truant’, which is defined as ‘one who wanders from an appointed place’,
linked to the Old French word truant meaning ‘beggar or vagabond’ (Harper,
2021). Burt (1925, p.500) also considered the treatment of truancy in terms of
running away from home and school. Here he suggested that a full study should
be made of the child and their character and abilities, and a study of the child’s
home, social and school circumstances, to ‘search for the secret instigating
factor’ or ‘look where the limitations press most severely – whether home or
school cramps him the most’.
40
Kline (1897) and Burt (1925) appear to display an open mindedness to
understanding truancy which was subsequently diminished by a narrower focus
upon the family and home that developed once education became compulsory
and attendance needed to be enforced. These developments in thinking about
truancy were reflected in the growth between the 1930s and 1970s in clinical
studies conducted by psychologists and psychiatrists, both in the UK and
internationally, which medicalised absence from school. Early debates about
truancy as a conduct disorder (Williams, 1927; Warren, 1948), branched out to
consider ‘sub-groups’ of truants who displayed “neurotic behaviours”. This
pathologising discourse created a range of psychoanalytical terminology such as
‘a form of truancy where a child is suffering from a deep-seated neurosis of the
obsessional type or displays a neurotic character of the obsessional type’
(Broadwin, 1932, p.254).
Further work led to theories about school phobia or school refusal - considered
as neurotic illness or a psychoneurotic disorder (e.g. Johnson, et al. 1941;
Coolidge, et al., 1957; Hersov, 1960; Berg, Nichols and Pritchard, 1969; Berg, et
al., 1985) or as separation anxiety - reflecting a problematic relationship between
child and mother (Johnson, 1957); or as school withdrawal, which is viewed as
parental complicity in absence (Tyerman, 1968; Berg, et al., 1978).
Some clinicians worked on comparisons between the conduct-disorder type of
truancy, and the neurotic-disorder type of truancy as school phobia or school
refusal (Kahn and Nursten, 1962; Tyerman, 1968; Hersov and Berg 1980; Berg
et al., 1985; Elliott 1999). Other work focused on defining and redefining existing
concepts, such as that of Berg, Nichols, and Pritchard (1969) who produced the
first set of defining features for school phobia, which have been widely cited and
utilised as the basis for further adaptation (e.g., Heyne, et al., 2019).
Literature from the 1980s onwards reveals a growth in the involvement of a wider
range of disciplines, including educational psychology (e.g., Blagg, 1987; Conn
1987), education (e.g., Reid and Kendall, 1982; Cooper and Mellors, 1990), and
criminology and law (e.g., Pratt, 1983; Carlen, Gleeson and Wardhaugh, 1992).
41
This expansion of disciplines helped to support the developing interest in the
environmental and social context of SAPs.
In the 1990s the debate about SAPs was extended by Kearney and Silverman
(1990; 1993) who suggested that rather than focus upon symptoms, it would be
more helpful to consider the functions served by school refusal. It was suggested
that these differing functions would then indicate differing forms of intervention in
response. This reflects the earlier viewpoints of Kline (1897) and Burt (1925),
where their analysis also focused on the function rather than the form of truancy.
The four functions of school refusal Kearney and Silverman (1990, p.1993)
identified were avoidance of negative affectivity-provoking objects or situations
related to a school setting; escape from aversive social or evaluative situations;
attention-getting behaviour; or positive tangible reinforcement. According to
Lauchlan (2003), this functional analysis approach has helped draw more
attention to the influence of the school environment, and the responsibility
schools could bear for pupil absence.
Research related to SAPs has broadly been conducted following either a medical
or social model of understanding (Heyne et al., 2019). The medical model links
SAPs to problems that lie within the child, possibly as an illness or behavioural
deficit. Therefore, responses focus on the use of medication or therapy to treat
the disability caused by within-child issues (Giddens and Sutton, 2017). This
individualistic approach directs thinking towards a deficit or deviant aspect of the
individual that requires treatment and fixing (Beresford, Nettle and Perring, 2010).
Alternatively, the social model approach views the individual within their social
context, as part of an extended network of people and other influences. This
network and the individual both have an impact upon each other. The social
model considers aspects of disability are created by organisations not making the
right provisions to adequately support people’s needs (Giddens and Sutton,
2017). The existence of these contrasting models highlights the need to consider
the ontological and epistemological position of those involved in research and in
professional practice, as their chosen approach will create differing
interpretations of data and observations (Pellegrini, 2007; Birioukov, 2016).
42
Blagg (1987) critiques the results of earlier clinical research into truancy and
school phobia, and considered the work was hampered by a range of
methodological weaknesses including vague, inconsistent use of terminology, a
general lack of controlled statistical studies, sample bias and skewed samples.
Similarly, Wade (1979) talks of clinicians’ theoretical prejudices being maintained
in write ups, and narrow, potentially dangerous assumptions being made.
Pilkington and Piersel (1991) presented a critical analysis of the theory of
separation anxiety as a reason for school phobia, and they turned their attention
to the lack of emphasis on external factors, and de-emphasis of school-related
fears.
Pellegrini (2007) also highlighted the bias towards a clinical construction of SAPs
that had been formed by clinical and academic discourses since the 1930s.
Pellegrini (2007, p.66) identified ‘a range of interpretative repertoires used to
construct extended school non-attendance pathologically, by using an overtly
clinical language’, which he considered had contributed to an extremely limiting
view of the problem. Elliott and Place (1998, p.44) argued that many studies of
SAPs were produced by researchers with a medical background who had little
expertise or professional experience in educational matters; they suggested that
‘it is perhaps for this reason that the literature makes little reference to examining
the ways by which the school can help a child to overcome a reluctance to
attend’. Similarly, Shilvock (2010, p.40) argues that clinicians will ‘have a limited
knowledge of the child’s education context, which may hinder the reliability of
their judgements, and reflect a tendency to position young people’s distress into
clinical categories of illness’.
Shilvock (2010, p.56) also suggested that it was appropriate to recognise how
‘school staff may have had an element of bias in their responses’ and may have
‘been more willing to attribute the reasons of school refusal to external
influences, as opposed to suggesting school-related factors directly’. This is
significant because, as Torrens Salemi (2006, p.57) observes ‘the theories that
frame school refusal research, and their ontological and epistemological
orientations, have hidden assumptions, which can lead to unknown implications
for students, their families, and their futures’. Similar criticisms were shared by
43
Reynolds et al. (1980) who suggested studies conducted by researchers involved
in educational services tended to have a restricted focus upon truancy, which led
them to locate the causes in either microsystem level factors such as the family,
or macrosystem level factors such as the class system. These differing or
restricted perspectives were also noted by Kearney (2003) to be a contributory
factor in the lack of consensus around SAPs, as he concluded:
Such disparity has been manifested by the presence of
different sets of professionals who often evaluate a particular
aspect of problematic school absenteeism at the expense of
viewing the population as a whole. As a result, practitioners,
researchers, and others are often “not on the same page” when
addressing students or clients, examining research samples, or
classifying absentees.
(Kearney, 2003, p.57)
A further contribution to the task of unravelling the complexity of the phenomenon
has been offered by researchers who have investigated how children (e.g., Baker
and Bishop, 2015), parents (e.g., Havik, Bru, and Ertesvåg, 2014), or
professionals (e.g., Torrens Salemi, 2006) construct and understand SAPs
differently. Malcolm et al. (2003) investigated how a sample of children, their
parents, and education personnel understood school absence. Malcolm et al.
(2003) found it was common for children to attribute school factors as reasons for
non-attendance, but they rarely identified home factors as a cause. The parents
in the study believed that bullying was the main reason for children’s reluctance
to attend school, followed by problems with teachers or schoolwork. However,
Malcolm et al. (2003) found the school and local authority staff constructed
school absence as behaviour triggered by home based influences, including
negative parental attitudes towards education, domestic violence, and children
needing to act as carers for younger siblings. Some possible school factors were
also acknowledged by the professionals, including difficulties with school staff or
other pupils, or the primary to secondary school transition.
Similar differences in the perception and construction of school absence are
echoed in other studies, such as Clissold (2018) who interviewed three pupils,
four parents, and three members of school staff. Clissold (2018) found pupils
44
attributed attendance problems to negative school experiences, mental health
difficulties, a lack of understanding or lack of support at school, and unsuitable
support strategies and provision. Parents saw anxiety as the most significant
factor, which they related to a range of triggers and problems. Parents also noted
the influence of unsuitable support or provision in school. School staff also
focused upon anxiety; however, they placed more emphasis on the influence of
within child and within family factors (Clissold, 2018).
Reflecting a different approach, Davies and Lee (2006) interviewed 48 young
people (school non-attenders and attenders), some of their parents, and several
education professionals. Their study attempted to understand why some students
stop attending and others keep attending. Davies and Lee (2006, p. 208) viewed
their task as researchers was to develop understanding by ‘standing back from
the assumption that non-attendance is a problem’. Instead, they viewed young
people as self-withdrawers who ‘offer a critique of the school and the system and
solve their personal problems by refusal to engage’ (Davies and Lee, 2006,
p.208). They suggested that self-withdrawal is evidence of a contractual
breakdown. The contract being one where the young person attends and
complies at school, and in return the school offers ‘a safe environment,
meaningful and relevant learning, opportunities for association with friends, and
dignified and respectful treatment’ (Davies and Lee, 2006, p.208). This
contractual breakdown occurs when the young person does not feel safe,
protected, respected, or dignified. As a result, Davies and Lee (2006)
acknowledged that rather than being a problem for the student, non-attendance
can be a solution to a problem, and the problem exists for schools, local
authorities, and the political community instead.
The first decades of the twenty-first century have seen further developments, with
an increasing number of educational psychology and social science-based
studies of SAPs in the UK. These studies have often been critical of the existing
body of clinical discourses, for instance Lauchlan (2003, p.138) claims that there
had been an inclination to play down school-related factors. Instead, there are
arguments for greater multi-disciplinary collaboration, and a more holistic
consideration of individual SAPs contexts (e.g., Lauchlan, 2003; Southwell, 2006:
45
Davies and Lee, 2006; Pellegrini, 2007; Reid, 2008; Lees, 2014; Gregory and
Purcell, 2014; Baker and Bishop, 2015).
Other alternative arguments have been put forward to challenge dominant clinical
narratives. These perspectives also suggest some conflict in opinion in terms of
where, and how, the actual problem is sited and constructed. Birioukov (2016,
p.341) argued that the ‘fairly arbitrary definitions of absenteeism employed in the
international literature’ fail to reflect the complexity of SAPs. Birioukov (2016)
proposed that the concepts of voluntary and involuntary absenteeism more
accurately represent factors that motivate a student to attend or reduce a
student’s ability to attend school. Knage (2021) has also argued that although
SAPs have been described as a multifactorial phenomenon, the response within
research has been to simplify this multiplicity by maintaining a focus on one
aspect or factor of influence. Offering an alternative perspective, Knage suggests
there is a need to engage with socio-cultural perspectives and theories that can
more effectively help to account for the complexity of the phenomenon.
Furthermore, Knage (2021) suggests that although school absence is framed as
the problem, it may not be the absence from school that is problematic, as
depending upon how a child is engaged while not in school, as it is possible they
could still be gaining an education elsewhere. To reflect this, it is suggested that
we consider the statement:
Absence is not the problem itself, it may only be the sign of
one. And sometimes it is actually just we the adults that have a
problem with children not being in school.
(Knage 2021, p.12)
This perspective is an antithesis to the dominant political discourse that an
appropriate education can only be gained through attendance at school. This
contrasts with reports of home education and self-directed learning leading to
successful outcomes (Knox, 1990; Rothermel, 2000; Fortune-Wood, 2007;
McIntyre-Bhatty, 2008; Morton, 2010; Wray and Thomas, 2013; Lees, 2014;
Cunningham, 2021; Fisher, 2021). For instance, both Fortune-Wood (2007) and
Wray and Thomas (2013) reported on case studies where children’s symptoms
46
had indicated cases of school phobia and school refusal, however, once those
children were removed from schools and home educated, they either immediately
or gradually regained their wellbeing, confidence, and interest in learning.
Echoing Davies and Lee (2006) and Knage (2021), Frydenlund (2021) argues
that the absence from school is not the true problem we need to resolve, even
though it has been constructed as problematic through its causal links to other
concerns. Frydenlund suggests this is faulty logic, and it is the way people
respond to a child being absent from school that creates the negative impacts of
school absence. Therefore, Frydenlund (2021, p.90) urges ‘we need to take a
closer look at the consequences we make absence have’.
Section 2.7 will now consider further arguments for the need to look afresh at
what are commonly considered to be the underlying causes of school absence.
2.7 Looking beyond the child and their home setting
As discussed in Section 2.6, the clinical and political responses to truancy and
other types of school absence since the late nineteenth century have entrenched
the belief that SAPs reflect within-child (emotional, behavioural, or psychological)
factors, while Section 2.8.1 will highlight how SAPs have been linked to parenting
failures and/or home-based problems. This has deflected attention away from
school-based and systemic factors that impact upon a child’s ability to attend
school. However, a growing number of researchers have drawn attention to the
relevance of considering the impact of the school environment as a trigger for
SAPs, and to consideration of the influence of the wider systemic context (e.g.,
Blagg, 1987; Pilkington and Piersel, 1991; Lauchlan, 2003; Archer, Filmer-
Sankey, and Fletcher-Campbell, 2003; Pellegrini, 2007; Lyon and Cotler, 2007;
Kearney, 2008a).
A model which has relevance here is Bronfenbrenner’s (1979; 1998; 2005)
bioecological systems model which describes a child as being nested within
numerous contexts including individual, peer, family, school, and community, with
the child interacting within and across these multiple social contexts,
47
accumulating both risk and protective factors for behavioural and mental
problems across time. A sociocultural framework such as this recognises the
relationships and influences between micro (individuals), meso (organisations,
groups, communities), and macro (structures and policies) level systems.
Lyon and Cotler (2007) suggested that an interesting aspect to consider is the
connections and interactions between home and school environments, as they
observed that previous SAPs related research at the time had not considered the
relationships between the two. It was argued that the mesosystem component of
Bronfenbrenner’s (1979; 1998; 2005) model offers a useful tool for analysis of the
relationship between home and school. Lyon and Cotler (2007, p.558) argued
that ‘links between the family and school settings are the most widely studied
type of mesosystem in the ecological systems literature but have never been
applied to school refusal behaviour’. Investigation into these links between the
home and school settings could yield valuable information as both are central to
the experience of SAPs as a whole.
A growing body of work has applied Bronfenbrenner’s (1979; 1998; 2005) model
to support consideration of systemic influences within the SAPs context (Nuttall
and Woods, 2013; Myhill, 2017; Browne, 2018; Clissold, 2018; Mortimer, 2019;
Melvin et al., 2019). This approach assesses the roles of the key people involved,
along with factors at all levels of a person’s environment so that their whole
context can be understood and analysed. The following section explores the
relevance of Bronfenbrenner’s (1979; 1998; 2005) model in more depth and
discusses relevant work where researchers have applied Bronfenbrenner’s
(1979; 1998; 2005) model to support and extend understanding of SAPs.
2.7.1 Research utilising Bronfenbrenner’s (1979; 1998; 2005)
Bioecological Systems Model
Bronfenbrenner studied the social and ecological contexts of human life. As his
work evolved, Bronfenbrenner acknowledged how people undertake a dynamic
role in their own development through interactions with their surrounding
environment. His ongoing observations inspired Bronfenbrenner to combine
ecological and biological factors to form a bioecological systems theory (1973;
48
1979). Bronfenbrenner noticed how reciprocal interactions between people are
developmentally influential mechanisms, and he named these mechanisms
proximal processes (Bronfenbrenner and Ceci, 1994). Bronfenbrenner also
observed how each person’s direct environment is influenced by many distal
factors, or distant aspects of society such as political, economic, and cultural
influences. These varied influences at close and more distant levels are
represented in Bronfenbrenner’s model (1979; 1998; 2005) using concentric
circles surrounding a child, or any person, at the centre (see Figure 2.1).
Figure 2.1. Bronfenbrenner’s (1979, 1998, 2005) Bioecological Systems Framework
Surrounding the central circle, the microsystem contains the environments within
which the child spends most time – such as the home, school, and local
community. Around the microsystem, the mesosystem represents the
interactions (or proximal processes) between the elements of the microsystem.
The next layer is the exosystem which contains the settings that the child does
not experience, but they have influence over what happens in the microsystem
CHILD
Microsystem
Mesosystem
Exosystem
Macrosystem
Chronosystem
The most
direct/closest
influences on the child
Microsystems interacting
with each other
Influences at a cultural level
Influences upon
the wellbeing of adul ts
in a child’s life
History
Life Transitions
Development over time
Continuity
Change
Beliefs & Values Individual Rights
Settings that influen ce
the child without their
direct participation
WORKPLACES
PEERS
SCHOOL
FAMILY
MEDIA
ENVIRONMENT
EDUCATION
SYSTEM
Influence of the past
SOCIAL
CONTACTS
Passing of Time
Timing of
significant
events
over time
over time
Laws
ECONOMIC
SYSTEM
LOCAL
COMMUNITY
RELIGION
FAMILY
PEERS
RELIGION
HEALTH
LOCAL
COMMUNITY
SCHOOL
HEALTH
INFRASTRUCTURE
Cultural
Blueprints
Social
Practices
LEGAL
SYSTEM
Human
Mental
Life
Social
Class
Status
National
Policy
Cultural
Values
National
Funding
49
and mesosystem. Therefore, this could include local health services, transport
services, and parents’ workplaces. Next, the macrosystem represents the distant
but still influential elements of a child’s environment, such as cultural norms and
beliefs. Bronfenbrenner also added an additional outer circle called the
chronosystem which represents how the passing of time has influence upon the
different elements within the whole model (Bronfenbrenner, 1977; 1979; 1986;
1994; 1998; 2005).
Throughout his career (1973–2005), Bronfenbrenner refined and adapted his
theories and framework. Other academics have since extended this process by
proposing further interpretations and adaptations (e.g., Swick and Williams, 2006;
Neal and Neal, 2013; Rosa and Tudge, 2013; Tudge, 2016; Tudge, et al., 2016;
Elliott and Davis, 2018; Xia, Li, and Tudge, 2020). Recently several educational
psychology researchers have applied Bronfenbrenner’s framework to support
and extend understanding of SAPs (Nuttall and Woods, 2013; Myhill, 2017;
Browne, 2018; Clissold, 2018; Mortimer, 2019).
Nuttall and Woods (2013) examined two individual case studies of intervention
for ‘school refusal behaviour’, with the aim of providing a dynamic view of factors
associated with ‘successful involvement’. They interviewed young people who
had been considered school refusers, but their attendance had improved. They
also interviewed the parents and practitioners involved in both cases. The
authors concluded that any intervention should consider the range of systemic
interactions and bi-directional influences within each child’s specific context.
Nuttall and Woods (2013, p.357) reported that ‘practitioners suggested that
“parents’ engagement and openness to support and change” would have led to
earlier success’. The context of the two cases also suggested the importance of
factors including ‘further developing parenting skills’ (2013, p.357), ‘collaborative
working between professionals’ and ‘a multi-agency approach’ (2013, p.358).
Nuttall and Woods (2013, p. 359) suggested that a ‘whole school approach’ and
support which focused on the needs of families was vital for a successful return
to school.
50
Nuttall and Woods (2013) observed how their findings related well to the ‘multi-
faceted components of Bronfenbrenner’s (1979) ecological systems theory’
(2013, p. 359), and they proposed a synthesised model influenced by this theory
(see Figure 2.2).
Figure 2.2 Nuttall and Woods (2013) Synthesised Model
Nuttall and Woods (2013, p.360) described how the synthesised model allows us
to see how positive outcomes can be gained through changes made in the
systems contained within the model. This synthesised model aimed to support
further practice and research by suggesting aspects within the contexts of
individual cases where support and intervention could be implemented (Nuttall
and Woods, 2013, p.361).
51
Myhill (2017) considered each of Bronfenbrenner’s systemic levels and applied
findings from SAPs literature to structure a review of factors within a child’s
environment that may affect their attendance. Myhill (2017) combined this with a
review of research evaluating the impact of parents’ involvement in their
children’s education, and interviews with eight parents. The findings focused
upon the mesosystem and the interactions between parents and children, and
parents and school staff. Browne (2018) also utilised Bronfenbrenner’s ecological
model to support her understanding of the interactions between home and
school/professional systems, and the impact of those interactions on the
individual. Mortimer (2019) applied Bronfenbrenner’s model to consider the
connected systems around a child and their family, to help identify the most
effective support intervention. Again, Mortimer (2019) focused upon the
significance of interactions at the mesosystem level after interviewing two
secondary-aged young people and three parents.
In 2019, Melvin et al. presented the Kids and Teens at School (KiTeS)
Framework, stating that it ‘builds on recent calls to apply bioecological systems
frameworks when studying risk factors for school absenteeism and attendance
problems’ (2019, p.1). The KiTeS framework is described as an adaptation of
Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological systems model which utilises the different
systems as a structure to present the wide range of factors which have been
claimed to be influential in cases of SAPs (see Figure 2.3). In terms of parental
factors this includes parenting styles, attitudes towards education, and parent
mental health. Family related factors include family functioning and composition.
Schools are considered influential in regard to school climate, levels of support,
and feelings of safety and inclusion. It is frustrating that more factors are listed in
the article than are included in the framework diagram, which seems to detail
more parent and family factors than school factors in the micro- and meso-
system sections.
The intended purpose of this model is that it provides guidance and context for
researchers when they set out to investigate school absence. Heyne et al. (2019,
p.6) argue that a strength of this framework is that it is relevant to many
disciplines and can therefore ‘inform the development of a multi-disciplinary
52
research agenda for absenteeism and SAPs which the field is currently lacking’.
This is a significant development as it clarifies the wider context of influence
around the child and their home situation.
Figure 2.3 The KiTeS (2019) Bioecological Systems Framework for School Attendance and Absence.
These examples indicate how Bronfenbrenner’s framework can be utilised in
differing ways. For Nuttall and Woods (2013) it offered a way to present their
findings which drew attention to the systemic context of future intervention
planning; whereas for Myhill (2017), Browne (2018) and Mortimer (2019) the
framework helped them to construct their approach to researching SAPs; and for
Melvin et al. (2019) it offered a framework to guide a holistic approach for further
research. A key strength of the framework is that it represents a person as the
central element within a specific context, and then includes a hierarchy of layers
of complex human interactions and environmental factors that impact upon that
person. Equally as Bronfenbrenner noted, the person at the centre can be seen
to impact upon people and elements within their environment at differing levels,
53
which duly reflects the impact a child’s SAPs has on others (Bronfenbrenner,
1977; 1979; 1986; 1994; 2006).
In addition to the need to address the gap in existing literature relating to the
influence of factors in the school and wider environments, some researchers
have noted gaps in terms of the inclusion of the voices and perspectives of
children and parents (e.g., Gregory and Purcell, 2014; Havik et al., 2014; Baker
and Bishop, 2015). This study aims to contribute one of these missing
perspectives by contributing knowledge of the experience of parents who take a
proactive stance. Therefore, the following section will consider how parents have
previously been implicated or involved in SAPs related research.
2.8 Parents and SAPs research
So far, this chapter has explored how the introduction of compulsory education
has impacted upon the lives of children and parents, and how academics and
clinicians have sought to explain SAPs. This section will now reflect upon two
significant aspects of parental inclusion in SAPs related research. Section 2.8.1
explains how parents have been assessed and categorised within SAPs related
research studies. The discussion in Section 2.8.2 then relates to research studies
where the parental voice has been directly facilitated and included. These
aspects are considered significant because they evidence the types of discourse
that have existed and influenced thinking about parents with children who
experience problems with school attendance.
2.8.1 The representation of parents within existing SAPs research
Existing research has attempted to categorise parents according to how they
influence and respond to children’s SAPs. As discussed in Sections 1.2 and 2.6,
the wide range of SAPs terminology reflects the way school absence has been
conceptualised differently over time (Lauchlan, 2003; Pellegrini, 2007; Birioukov,
2016). These conceptualisations have carried with them various evaluations of
parental motivations and influence. Examples of terminology and categorisation
include ‘absence resulting from parental neglect’ (Hiatt, 1915, p.7); ‘a neurotic
and adoring mother is a common figure in the background’ (Warren, 1948,
54
p.266); ‘maternal ambivalence (the mother who gives with one hand and takes
away with the other) and passive and ineffectual fathers’ (Davidson, 1960,
pp.276-277); ‘parents [who] are quite irresponsible where school attendance is
concerned and make feeble excuses’ (Berg, 1997, p.91); ‘enmeshed,
overinvolved relationships which exist between parent and child’ (Place et al.,
2004, p.8). Tyerman (1968, p.76) stated that a parent who cares about their child
will ensure that they are educated, and he suggested that any interested parent
who wants their child to go to school regularly will rarely have any difficulty over
attendance.
In 2005, Dalziel and Henthorne conducted a telephone survey with 2,000 parents
and interviewed 22 parents whose children had been poor attenders, to ascertain
parental attitudes towards school attendance. They found there were no
significant differences in the attitudes examined between parents of children with
good attendance compared to parents of children with poor attendance. These
findings conflicted with the longstanding belief that parents of children with SAPs
do not value education, and do not recognise the importance of their child
receiving a good education. The parents of poor attenders were noted to want
more help, information, and support. They said they had been proactive in trying
to seek help from their child’s school but ‘had not received the necessary support
from either the school or other agencies when it was needed’ (Dalziel and
Henthorne, 2005, p.4).
Heyne et al. (2019) discuss the ways in which parental effectiveness has been
assessed; for instance, some researchers have attempted to evaluate the input
and motivation of parents in securing a child’s return to school. They refer to a
range of observations, including Agras (1959) describing mothers of school
refusing children as overprotective in shielding them from painful experiences;
Davidson (1960) describing mothers who, she claims, subconsciously stop a
child attending because they believe the return to school will fail; and Berg (2002)
suggesting ‘school withdrawal’ reflects an irresponsible permissiveness on the
part of parents, and ‘school refusal’ relates to parents being overprotective
through fear of pressuring the child too much. Each of these evaluations is made
55
by a psychiatrist or psychologist and demonstrates how they have tended to
pathologise parental involvement.
As these examples show, one notable commonality within most SAPs related
studies is that they conceptualise parental and family environments as the cause
of SAPs and then set out to investigate them. However, the findings of some
studies demonstrate that this hypothesis is not always proven. For instance, Berg
et al. (1981) conducted a study based upon the hypothesis that families of school
phobic children would display distinctive features of functioning, and an abnormal
pattern of family life that could be influential. However, they found no evidence to
suggest that family life activities differed in any way from families with no ‘school
phobic’ children. While Carless et al. (2015) explored the role of parental self-
efficacy in adolescent school-refusal and found no connection between the two.
These findings also contrast with dominant clinical narratives and suggest that
judgements and assumptions made about families of children with SAPs may not
be justified in all cases. This, therefore, supports the suggestion that a starting
point in any case should be a careful evaluation of underlying triggers, to build a
holistic understanding of individual situations. This type of approach would
encourage professionals and families to work in partnership more effectively.
2.8.2 Hearing the voices of parents with lived experience of children’s
school absence
There are several studies where parental involvement has been orchestrated by
researchers with a specific aim to better understand parents lived experiences,
and possibly extend understanding of SAPs as a result (e.g., Berg et al., 1981;
Knox, 1990; Fortune-Wood, 2007; Havik, Bru and Ertesvåg, 2014). Knox (1990)
experienced a case of school phobia as a teacher, then after her own child
became school phobic, she contacted other families with children who had
experienced SAPs and then opted to home educate their children. Knox (1990)
collected family case studies and wrote her book to expose what she considered
to be the inhumane treatment of children who experience SAPs. Knox (1990)
argued that because a return to school is deemed a successful outcome, very
few long-term studies have been conducted on the outcomes of different
responses and treatments for SAPs. Knox (1990, p.182) noted two studies which
56
had followed up school phobic children who had been forced back to school.
Firstly, Waller and Eisenberg (cited in Hersov and Berg, 1980) found after 21
years, 74% of forty-nine children were still experiencing psychiatric problems as
adults. Similarly, Berg (cited in Hersov and Berg, 1980) reported on ten school
phobic children who had spent seven months in a psychiatric unit, and three
years later only a third were developing normally. Knox (1990) compares this with
her own follow up of 30 children who had been home educated after experiencing
school phobia, and three years later none of them were experiencing mental
illness, although two were reported to be afraid of people as a result of their
school-based experiences.
Fortune-Wood (2007) also reported upon the lived experiences of parents who
had made contact through his work supporting both home educating families, and
families with children experiencing SAPs. The research involved questionnaire
responses completed by sixty families, and twenty-three full case studies. Both
Knox (1990) and Fortune-Wood (2007) reported that parents told them bullying
was one of the main triggers for SAPs. However, many parents were said to say
the schools involved had denied they had a problem with bullying and instead
argued the problem must lie in the home. Like Knox (1990), Fortune-Wood
(2007) is critical of the common approach of forcing a child experiencing SAPs to
attend school against their will. It is argued that a return to school may be
considered a success, however if the underlying problems have not been
addressed the use of force could create longer-term problems, both with mental
health difficulties and damaged relationships if a child loses trust in a parent to
protect them from the real problems they faced. Fortune-Wood (2007) concurs
with Knox (1990) in that professionals can express concern about families who
opt to home educate as a response to SAPs, yet they have no evidence that it is
the wrong solution because a longitudinal study of various outcomes has not
been conducted.
It is notable that in the most recent decade much of the research involving
parents as participants has been conducted by Educational Psychologists in the
trainee/doctoral student stage of their career (Nuttall, 2012; Aucott, 2014; Myhill,
2017; Clissold, 2018; Browne, 2018; Orme-Stapleton, 2018; Mortimer, 2019).
57
The increased involvement of Educational Psychologists seems significant due to
their knowledge of educational environments and practices, combined with
clinical practice in psychology. Myhill (2017) interviewed eight parents and
Browne (2018) explored the experiences of five parents. Mortimer (2019)
explored the perceptions of two secondary-aged young people and three parents,
while Gregory and Purcell (2014) interviewed five mothers and three young
people. Aucott (2014), Clissold (2018), and Orme-Stapleton (2018) interviewed a
combination of children, parents, and professionals. Mortimer (2019), Myhill
(2017), and Gregory and Purcell (2014) noted the emotional impact of SAPs-
based experiences on parents, including feelings of isolation, desperation, being
judged, and feeling blamed. Myhill (2017) and Mortimer (2019) recognised a
perceived lack of support, and of parents feeling powerless and desperate
because they had no one to turn to.
Myhill (2017) concluded that a successful resolution was dependent upon a
supportive relationship between home and school. However, a key finding for
Browne (2018) was parents’ perception of uneven power dynamics between
themselves and professionals, whereby parents felt ‘their knowledge, experience
and contribution was not valued and held less influence than that of the
professional’ (Browne, 2018, p.119). Aucott (2014) argues that a shared
understanding could be gained by facilitating the input of pupils, parents and
school staff, and this shared understanding could then be utilised to identify
barriers and solutions. Gregory and Purcell (2014, p.44) note how family
accounts highlighted the impact of school environments on children’s behaviour,
which they said, ‘shifts the focus from a within child perspective of extended
school non-attendance, to include the impact of the child’s environment’.
Orme-Stapleton (2018) reports that parents overwhelmingly held negative views
of using a legal route to deal with persistent absence, and it was noted that it had
not helped increase attendance in any of the cases studied. Orme-Stapleton
(2018) argues that non-attendance related to mental health or unmet learning
needs should not invoke a punitive response as families have limited control over
those issues. Furthermore, Orme-Stapleton (2018) suggests that if a child is in a
setting that cannot provide the support they need in these circumstances,
58
alternative provision should be offered, although she makes the following
observation about the systemic implications of this suggestion:
This approach would however put pressure of the local authority
and schools to provide more flexible options to provision and not
assume that standard educational environments are suitable for
all. A further implication of such an approach may also be
increased collaborative working between health, care, and
education, so that the responsibility is not just on the parent but
the system as a whole, to ensure adequate educational provision
is available and accessible to all.
(Orme-Stapleton, 2018, p.119)
Myhill (2017) recognised the significance of what she learned as it had altered
her own perceptions:
The findings of the study initiated a new way of thinking about the factors
involved in ESNA [Extended School Non-Attendance]. Firstly, it changed
the researcher’s perceptions regarding the efforts made by parents to
support their children through ESNA before involving other professionals.
In addition, the parents’ views regarding why they did not involve
professionals, even after the extent of the child’s difficulties had been
realised, highlighted the stigma attached to non-attendance.
(Myhill, 2017, p.90)
This change in perception reflects the observation made by Waller, Farquharson,
and Dempsey (2016) that participant’s interpretations have the potential to
influence or change the researcher’s pre-existing viewpoints.
Myhill (2017) suggested that the increased emphasis on parents’ views within her
study could help to initiate a positive change in attitude towards parents because
people would better understand the supportive factors and the barriers that affect
parents’ motivation to seek help and support. Mortimer (2019) also argued that
an improved understanding of parental experience could inspire a more flexible,
compassionate, and personalised approach to offer support for families.
59
2.9 Chapter summary
This chapter has evidenced how truancy-based political discourses have
constructed school absence as a parenting failure which has been punishable
under criminal law. This understanding is considered alongside the dominance of
clinical research perspectives supporting the notion that children and parents are
to blame for school absence. Both factors have ignored any wider environmental
influences upon a child’s ability to attend school, along with parents’ ability to
influence a resolution for SAPs. It has been argued that this combination of
influences has hindered understanding of the holistic context of SAPs. Political
and clinical discourses have also encouraged the vilification of parents and
children, whilst failing to consider all applicable reasons why children may
struggle to attend school.
However, existing literature is now featuring a broadening range of clinical and
academic interpretations of child and parental involvement in SAPs (e.g.,
Pilkington and Piersel, 1991; Lauchlan, 2003; Southwell, 2006; Davies and Lee,
2006; Pellegrini, 2007; Sheppard, 2011; Nuttall and Woods, 2013; Gregory and
Purcell, 2014; Lees, 2014; Baker and Bishop, 2015; Melvin et al., 2019). This
understanding must be explored and developed further to include a greater range
of parental perspectives, as fundamental contributions to the argument that the
perspectives of all stakeholders are significant.
This chapter has considered various ways that parents have been problematised
as contributors to the creation and maintenance of the various SAP types defined
over time. Nonetheless it is now being acknowledged that ‘parents are of central
importance in understanding and intervening with school attendance problems’
(Gren-Landell, 2021, p.33). This argument is a fundamental driver for this study
with its aim of highlighting the voices and experiences of parents, and more
specifically the voices of parents who actively seek to address and resolve their
children’s SAPs, as this form of parental response has rarely been explored.
This gap in the literature suggests that it is also relevant to better understand
whether existing systemic responses to SAPs offer support to parents in reaching
the resolution for their children’s school attendance difficulties that is required
60
through legislation and social expectation. The aim of contributing towards filling
this gap in the literature sits alongside the researcher’s recognition that the
implementation of a systemic model such as Bronfenbrenner (1979, 1998, 2005)
is necessary to support a more holistic understanding of SAPs.
61
Chapter 3. Methodology
3.1 Introduction
This chapter discusses the researcher’s rationale for her choices and selection of
procedures to develop the study’s research design. The researcher’s ontological
and epistemological perspectives are elucidated, as they underpin the study and
justify the research methodology. The final research design is then described and
explained, to clarify the methods that were utilised for data collection and data
analysis. Following this, the process used to recruit the participants is described,
and related practical and ethical considerations made by the researcher are
discussed. The researcher then explains the methods she used to consider and
maintain the quality of the research throughout the study.
The study pursues answers to four questions which were formulated following the
discussion of the historical and social context, and the academic literature, which
feature within Chapter Two. Bryman (2016) explains that research questions provide
explicit statements to indicate what it is that a researcher wishes to investigate.
Therefore, with the overall aim of the study in mind, the researcher asked the
following research questions to help her understand what parents experience when
they seek to resolve their children’s school attendance problems:
1. What actions do parents take to resolve a child’s difficulties with
attending school?
2. What do parents experience when they engage with various
professionals in the education, health, and local government systems?
3. What barriers do parents encounter in trying to achieve a resolution for
school attendance problems?
4. What is it that assists parents in reaching a resolution for a child’s
school attendance problems?
Here, the first question acknowledges that a contingent of parents do seek to
resolve school attendance problems, and it is those parents who are the focus of the
62
study. This question seeks to understand the actions proactive parents take both to
comply with their legal responsibilities, and with societal expectations that children
attend school. The second question acknowledges that to seek a resolution parents
may need to engage with a range of professionals who work in relevant services.
This question seeks to identify the features of those experiences, and to understand
how participants construct and interpret these experiences. The third question aims
to build an understanding of any factors that might hinder parents as they seek a
resolution for school attendance problems. Then the fourth question seeks to
understand any factors that may assist parents to resolve school attendance
problems. The findings may indicate whether existing systemic responses to school
attendance problems support parents in reaching the resolution for their children’s
school attendance difficulties that is required through legislation and social
expectation.
To answer these research questions the researcher needed to identify the most
suitable methods to gather relevant data, and then to analyse and report on that
data. The following section discusses her first steps, which were to identify the
philosophical assumptions that would guide these methodological choices.
3.2 The philosophical approach underlying the study
Creswell (2007) explains how qualitative researchers need to clarify the beliefs and
assumptions that have influenced the decisions they make about the research
process undertaken. To do this, it is necessary for a researcher to reflect upon and
identify the paradigm of philosophical assumptions that best reflects their worldview.
As Cohen, Manion, and Morrison (2011) explain, a worldview reflects a researcher’s
beliefs about the nature of reality (ontological assumptions), and ways of enquiring
and researching into the nature of reality (epistemological assumptions). This
research design process also leads the researcher to consider the relevance or fit of
various interpretive and theoretical frameworks within their philosophical paradigm,
which help to shape how they conduct their study. The researcher can then consider
the most appropriate methodology and methods that will allow them to collect and
analyse relevant data (Hitchcock and Hughes (1995), cited in Cohen, Manion, and
Morrison, 2011).
63
According to Hammersley (2012, no page), a methodological paradigm can thus be
described as ‘a set of philosophical assumptions about the phenomena to be
studied, about how they can be understood, and even about the proper purpose and
product of research’. A range of differing paradigms have been constructed over
time, and the approach determined by each separate paradigm will provide different
types of explanation, hence the necessity for a researcher to identify the most fitting
paradigm to match their worldview, and answer their specific questions (Cohen,
Manion, and Morrison 2011). Positivism and interpretivism are two key contrasting
paradigms which have been utilised within social research (Cohen, Manion, and
Morrison, 2011; Bryman, 2016; Gray, 2018). To illustrate the contrasts between
these paradigms the methodological assumptions for each are summarised in Table
3.1 below.
Table 3.1 Comparing Positivist and Interpretivist Paradigms
Positivism
Interpretivism
Ontology:
How do we
know what is
real?
§ The world / reality exists
externally to the individual – it is
beyond our influence.
§ There is one objective reality that
we need to discover
§ Natural reality – ‘realism’
§ The world / reality exists however
it is interpreted individually by
people
§ Multiple realities are constructed
and revised by social actors
§ Social reality – ‘relativism’
Epistemology
How is
knowledge
obtained and
justified?
§ Reality is objective
§ Knowledge is gathered through
the senses – by observation and
experiment.
§ Researcher is a detached
objective observer
§ Looking for consistencies in the
data to deduce universal laws of
society and human conduct.
§ Reality is subjective
§ Knowledge is socially constructed,
and understandings are co-
constructed
§ Researcher understands the
subjective world of participants
taking an ‘insider’ stance
§ Meanings are multiple and varied,
so the researcher looks for the
complexity of views
Methodology
How can we
discover and
build
knowledge?
§ Theory testing – a hypothesis is
proposed and then tested
§ Experimental research
§ Abstraction of reality
§ Theory building – inquiry builds on
understanding.
§ Analysis of language and meaning.
§ Representation of reality
Methods
Quantitative methods, e.g.
Qualitative methods, e.g.
64
for data
collection
Quantitative surveys
Statistical analysis
Interviews
Focus groups
Case studies
Textual data collection
A positivist paradigm has a basis in the natural sciences, which contrasts with the
social science basis of an interpretive paradigm. Reflecting upon this difference,
Bryman (2016) argues that ‘the study of the social world therefore requires a
different logic of research procedure, one that reflects the distinctiveness of humans
as against the natural order’ (Bryman, 2016, p.26). Cohen, Manion, and Morrison
(2011) concur, stating that a positivist paradigm will generally be less successful
when applied to the study of human behaviour, due to the complexity of human
nature and social phenomena. Positivist assumptions of universal laws of human
conduct do not correlate well with human variance, as Cohen, Manion, and Morrison
(2011) explain, ‘This difficulty in which positivism finds itself is that it regards human
behaviour as passive, essentially determined and controlled, thereby ignoring
intention, individualism and freedom’ (Cohen, Manion, and Morrison, 2011, p.15).
However, as Bryman (2016) argues, in contrast an interpretive paradigm supports a
strategy that recognises and respects the differences between people. An
interpretive paradigm directs researchers to seek to understand the subjective
meaning of social action. Bryman (2016) further explains that interpretivism
developed through the influence of intellectual traditions such as hermeneutics
(understanding human actions) and phenomenology (understanding how individuals
make sense of the world around them, while putting aside any preconceptions). An
interpretive paradigm supports ontological assumptions that social reality is made
up of varied interpretations constructed by individuals. This then supports a
constructionist epistemology where these versions of social reality are discovered
through analysis of participants use of language, which describes their constructs
and understanding of their world.
In addition to positivism and interpretivism, there are a range of other paradigms, for
instance a post-positive viewpoint sees that reality exists independently of human
65
consciousness, but unlike the positivist view, post-positivists accept that we cannot
have a full understanding of this reality (Waller, Farquharson, and Dempsey, 2016).
With similarity to a constructionist paradigm, a critical paradigm sees reality as a
product of human consciousness. A critical researcher views social realities through
a critical lens, considering a wide range of human biases, assumptions, and values
including gender, ethnicity, or economics. A critical lens would be applicable to the
researcher’s approach to this study as it aims to challenge conventional social
structures (Gray, 2018), however her intended focus upon interpreting participants’
accounts of their experiences drew her towards the constructionist paradigm as
most applicable to this study.
3.2.1 Identifying an Ontology
As Braun and Clarke (2013) explain, identifying our ontological position requires us
to decide how we evaluate reality:
Whether or not we think reality exists entirely separate from
human practices and understandings – including the research we
conduct to find things out – or whether we think it cannot be
separated from human practices, and so knowledge is always
going to reflect our perspective
(Braun and Clarke, 2013, p.27)
A positivist ontology assumes we accept the same rules and beliefs about one
reality. Whereas an interpretivist ontology, as adopted by the researcher in this
study, considers that there are multiple realities, each of which are constructed
through individual interpretations of everyday life (Cohen, Manion, and Morrison,
2011). Any notion of reality can be difficult to discern because of the taken-for-
granted acceptance that our world, as each of us knows it, simply exists without any
deep analysis of how we know what reality is. In terms of social research, Cohen,
Manion, and Morrison (2011) explain that a decision about reality will involve
consideration of ‘the nature or essence of the social phenomena being investigated’
(Cohen, Manion, and Morrison, 2011, p.5).
66
The researcher aligns herself with the view shared by Berger and Luckmann (1966)
whereby this taken-for-granted reality exists through a shared understanding of the
world, influenced by social and cultural contexts. Berger and Luckmann (1966)
describe a process of socialisation which is referred to as internalisation, where
people form an objective reality which enables them to participate within their
society. Within this process, reality is based upon people’s individual interpretations
of their interactions on the world (externalisation). People then internalise their
interpretations and enact them with others through social actions, e.g., verbally, in
writing, or through behaviours. Some interpretations become sustained through
shared social practices (objectivation), until they become taken-for-granted and are
accepted as a part of reality. Then when future generations are born into a world
where these interpretations already exist, they also accept them as a part of reality
(internalisation).
Berger and Luckmann (1966) see this process occurring on two levels, firstly
primary socialisation relates to ‘the socialisation an individual goes through in
childhood’ when they encounter and internalise the social structure and social world
of their significant others as reality. They also describe secondary socialisation as
‘any subsequent process that inducts an already socialised individual into new
sectors of the objective world of his society’ (Berger and Luckmann, 1966, p.150).
This secondary socialisation relates to the internalisation of institutional or
institution-based sub-worlds, which often involve specific roles or knowledge (e.g., a
career role, or as a student in education). Through awareness of how shared
understandings are socially constructed in this way, we can consider how and why
the things we take-for-granted or accept as norms of society – such as school
attendance, or the concept of truancy – have become part of reality. This awareness
also brings into focus the likely impact of a situation where someone finds they are
unable to conform to these societal norms they have internalised. Here it is possible
to see how this may link to the experience of parents if children encounter school
attendance difficulties, through their own reactions along with any responses from
others to their deviation from socially constructed norms.
67
3.2.2 Identifying an Epistemology
Along with an ontology, a researcher also needs to identify her epistemological
assumptions. This requires consideration of what she understands relevant
knowledge to be (regarding a specific study), along with how it could be acquired
and then communicated to other people (Cohen, Manion, and Morrison, 2011).
These epistemological assumptions will then guide which analytic and theorising
approaches are most suitable, and guide how a researcher reports their data
analysis (Braun and Clarke, 2013; Braun et al., 2019).
Braun and Clark (2013) argue that an experiential qualitative research study should
be driven by the participants’ experiences, and the meanings they derive from those
experiences. A researcher will seek to make sense of those experiences, along with
the meanings their participants report as realities. Therefore, the researcher needs
to gather, absorb, and interpret the descriptions and opinions their participants
share with them. Braun and Clarke (2013) advise this will involve the researcher
‘retaining a focus on people’s own framing around issues, and their own terms of
reference’ (Braun and Clarke, 2013, p.24). This suggested approach reflects the
researcher’s objective of constructing knowledge through the voices of her parent
participants, especially in recognition that the parental voice has been restricted in
number, frequency, and range within existing literature and within the wider
understanding of SAPs.
An interpretivist paradigm is closely linked to a constructionist epistemology (Gray,
2018) and the researcher chose to adopt a constructionist approach to investigate
how the actively engaged parents individually construct the problem of school
absence. This constructionist approach guided the researcher’s focus towards
socio-cultural contexts, and towards the structural conditions that are integral within
parental accounts of their experiences (Braun and Clarke, 2013). A constructionist
approach acknowledges that all viewpoints are individual, local, and specific (Waller,
Farquharson, and Dempsey, 2016), meaning that it is relevant to consider how the
data collected will be interpretive and selective. The involvement of the researcher
in designing the study, then analysing and reporting the participant’s interpretations,
will add an additional level of interpretation (Braun and Clarke, 2013). Moreover,
anyone who reads the study report will make their own interpretation of the
68
research, adding to the multiple viewpoints that are possible (Cresswell, 2007). Any
interpretation by the researcher in this study will be formed from an ‘insider’
perspective, which is of epistemological significance as the relationship between the
researcher and participants will impact upon the knowledge they co-create (Griffiths
1998, cited in Hayfield and Huxley, 2015, p.2). The researcher’s position as an
insider is discussed in more detail in Section 3.2.3. below.
Within a social constructionist framework, our epistemological assumptions suggest
that knowledge can be found through the discourses people use (Burr, 2015). As
discussed in Section 2.6, the discourses relating to SAPs have varied over time, and
according to the social actors involved, as they reflect a range of differing
perspectives (e.g., teacher, psychologist, administrator, parent, media journalist,
politician, or student) (Pellegrini, 2007). Braun and Clarke (2013) note how the
evolution of socially constructed reality changes our perceptions of truth over time,
meaning that rather than one truth and one knowledge, there are multiple truths and
knowledges; thus, indicating that we need to consider competing discourses and
conflicting versions of knowledge. Braun and Clarke (2013) argue that ‘knowledges
are viewed as social artifacts, and are therefore seen as social, cultural, moral,
ideological, and political. A critical stance tends to be taken regarding perceived
truths and taken for granted knowledge’ (Braun and Clarke, 2013, p.30). The
researcher therefore aimed to adopt a critical stance to develop an awareness of
underlying influences upon the knowledge we often accept as real, or as social
norms, without questioning why it is accepted by society, or rejected by certain
groups of social actors.
3.2.3 The involvement of the researcher
A researcher makes interpretations of what they observe and find out from
participants, and these interpretations will be shaped by their own experiences and
background (Braun and Clarke, 2013; Bryman, 2016). It is acknowledged that
making sense of meanings others have about the world is a significant aspect of
interpretive research (Creswell, 2007). Therefore, researchers need to ‘position
themselves’ within their research to acknowledge how their interpretations are
influenced by their own personal, cultural, and historical experiences. It is suggested
69
that a constructivist researcher positions themselves as ‘an orchestrator and
facilitator of the inquiry process’ (Guba & Lincoln, 1994, p.114).
In this study the researcher was in the insider position of facilitating the research
process, while also having lived experience of the phenomena being studied.
Although this insider position is not straightforward to navigate, the researcher
recognised that this insider perspective needed to be clarified and discussed in
recognition that it will have shaped the research study (Braun and Clarke, 2013).
Hayfield and Huxley (2015) explore how this ‘insider’ position offers both
advantages and challenges. The suggested advantages include the researcher’s
familiarity with the topic and context, which can assist them with making relevant
research design decisions, interpreting, and analysing data, and through a
heightened awareness of any ethical issues. However, although a shared
understanding can be advantageous as it may lead to richer data, it is also argued
that a challenge may occur if participants do not share useful details with the
researcher because it is taken-for-granted those details are already known by the
researcher.
Hayfield and Huxley (2015, p.4) argue that a degree of commonality does not
guarantee a researcher will understand every participant’s perspective, as their lives
in general may be very different. Moreover, Hayfield and Huxley (2015) observe that
a researcher in an insider position may feel a connection with their participants that
can make it more difficult for them to look at data with a critical stance. It is
suggested that a researcher in an outsider position might interpret participants’ data
in ways that a researcher in an insider position will not consider, however the
opposite argument is equally valid. Interestingly, Hayfield and Huxley (2015)
reflected on their own perspectives of conducting research from insider and outsider
positions. They acknowledged that from either perspective there will always be
subtle ways that a researcher is both an insider and an outsider within the same
study. It is noted that this can lead to feelings of both alienation and empathy for the
researcher in relation to their participants.
After considering these arguments, the researcher’s approach was to recognise her
insider position and take steps to minimise its impact, for instance by emphasising in
70
the email exchanges that she was interested in each participant’s individual
experience and opinions. The researcher also clarified her position in the Participant
Information Sheet (provided when people first enquired about becoming a
participant), where she explained that she understood that having had similar
experiences did not guarantee that all people would hold similar opinions and
beliefs, nor make the same choices, and she was interested in hearing about and
including all points of view and types of experience. The ethical approach to
managing the existing relationship between the researcher and participants is
discussed further in Sections 3.5.1 and 3.6.2.
Creswell (2007) explains that once a researcher has identified their methodological
paradigm, they can then devise a research design or methodology, as they select
the most appropriate practices and methods that will allow them to collect and
analyse data. The following section will discuss the researcher’s choice of data
collection method.
3.3 The research design
The research design for this study was devised to follow the interpretive paradigm
and constructionist epistemology discussed previously. The choice of email
interviewing as a method of data collection is discussed in Section 3.3.1, and the
email interview process is described in Section 3.3.2. The choice and process of
thematic analysis is then discussed in Section 3.4. The research design process
also required the researcher to consider a range of practical and ethical
considerations relating to the needs and involvement of the participants, and these
are discussed in Sections 3.5 and 3.6.
3.3.1 A method of data collection
When deciding about the method of qualitative data collection the researcher
understood that face-to-face interviews are a popular choice as they can provide
rich and detailed data. Conducting interviews, researchers have flexibility to probe
and direct the conversation, or they can take a more unstructured approach,
depending upon their epistemological assumptions (Waller, Farquharson, and
Dempsey, 2016). It is recognised that face-to-face interviewing can be less suitable
71
for discussing sensitive issues, as participants may feel uncomfortable about
disclosing sensitive information in this context (Gibson, 2017; Salmons, 2016). King
and Horrocks (2010, p.28) suggest that researchers ‘think about the different ways
that qualitative interviews can be conducted, rather than automatically taking the
default option of the individual face-to-face option’.
The researcher found that there were some concerns about the use of email-based
interviews rather than face-to-face interviews. Following some discussion and
consideration of the advantages and disadvantages of face-to-face or email-based
interviews. The researcher noted that opinion in the literature recognises the value
of both methods, along with advantages and disadvantages for both. For example,
Burns (2010) compares the use of email and face-to-face interviewing in research
and found email interviews are beneficial in allowing for analysis, reflection, and
extension of thinking for both interviewer and interviewee. They note a disadvantage
of email is the loss of sound, gesture, and spatial setting within the exchange.
However, Burns (2010) states ‘face, body, and room are not the basis of interaction,
but there is still a live quality in the expectation of reading and replying to
somebody's previous conscious effort to explain’ (Burns, 2010, p.7). Burns (2010)
concludes that the best approach is to evaluate how each option would work in any
specific circumstances, and then decide whether face-to-face or email interviews will
offer the most suitable opportunities in relation to the study being planned.
Gibson (2017) suggests that the control and flexibility participants gain through
email interviews makes the data different to those produced in other ways. This is
linked to the opportunity for contemplation, reflection, and editing which participants
have before they submit their responses. Gibson (2017, p.218) argues that this is
especially advantageous when researching people’s past experiences where they
are relying on memory recall. Hawkins (2018) also notes that email interviewing
allows for concurrent interviews with several participants, which aids the process of
thematic analysis because it is possible to simultaneously verify emerging themes
between participants and confirm findings.
The researcher was keen to utilise online methods of data collection because she
recognised that the study participants were already familiar and comfortable with
72
this type of communication, having been recruited from an online social media
forum. This seemed particularly significant as the subject discussed is emotive and
sensitive in nature, and therefore participants might appreciate the flexibility and
familiarity of the online environment, along with a greater degree of anonymity and
less physical intrusion (Hooley, Marriott, and Wellens, 2012; Gibson, 2017). Braun,
Clarke, and Gray (2017, p.19) concur, suggesting that 'as a self-administered tool,
participants can control the pace, time and location of their involvement' with an
online survey or email exchange, which can be especially useful for sensitive
subjects'. Additionally, Gibson (2017) suggests that asynchronous email interviews
offer participants more control in that they can avoid over-disclosure and making
comments they later regret sharing. The researcher was also aware of potential
difficulties in communicating with people who are widely geographically dispersed,
and who can be 'hard-to-reach' due to complex personal circumstances. Her
understanding was that these difficulties could be resolved using asynchronous
email interviews as a more flexible, and convenient method of communication
(Salmons, 2016).
3.3.2 Conducting email-based interviews
The email interviews in this study featured open questions which aimed to explore
parents' perceptions of their experiences. Two or three questions were asked within
each email to facilitate a more conversational style of interaction. An introductory
email shared several points to clarify the aims of the research, the process, and any
expectations for the participants, with the intention of building rapport, familiarity,
and trust. The researcher adopted recommended practices to build rapport and
trust, including disclosing details of her relevant background or personal experience
(Hooley, Marriott, and Wellens, 2012). To achieve this, she included an account of
her own experiences as a parent with a child experiencing significant school
absence within the introductory email.
The initial open interview question at the end of email one was please tell me your
story. This was included as the first question to gather overall accounts of the
participant’s individual experiences. Subsequent interview questions then asked
about more specific aspects of each parent’s overall experience. This included
asking about the impact of the situation, both on parents as individuals, and as a
73
family; asking how other people around them had reacted to their child’s school
absence; and asking how they had developed an understanding of what was
happening to their child and how they needed to respond.
Once the email Interview stage had been completed,
§ 40 participants answered the first question – writing an account of their story.
§ 34 participants answered the second set of questions
§ 33 participants answered the third set of questions
§ 28 participants answered the fourth set of questions
§ 17 participants answered the fifth set of questions
§ An additional set of questions was shared with six participants who worked,
or had worked in a relevant professional capacity/role
3.3.3 Critique of the data collection method
The use of email interviewing allowed the researcher to collect participant accounts
that varied in length from 150 lines to 1208 lines of text, many of which were rich in
detail and reflection about the situations people had experienced. This provided the
researcher with a significant body of data for thematic analysis.
The asynchronous nature of the data collection meant that the period when emails
were being exchanged lasted for six months, as participants varied in how quickly
they returned responses. The researcher had attempted to establish a timeframe for
the turnaround of emails, however she understood that many people were
negotiating complex situations, and she did not feel it was appropriate to pressure
them for responses. For instance, here Parent 1 explained her delay in replying to
the researcher’s email:
Apologies for the delay in responding. My 13-year-old is still off
school and has a diagnosis of chronic fatigue syndrome now after
18 months and I’m battling with the Local Authority to get him a
home tutor. I’ve taken my complaint to the Local Government
Ombudsman now and a national newspaper is running the story in
a week or so, after they heard about my situation from a charity
I’ve used previously, so it’s been pretty hectic.
(Parent 1)
74
As the researcher had expected, the participants fitted in their responses around
their family responsibilities, and the gaps between responses were preferable to a
cancelled face-to-face interview. In addition, some participants appreciated the
space to type responses at convenient times, or space to pace themselves if the
process became emotionally difficult. This is evidenced in this comment from Parent
15:
There’s more I could say but it’s too painful to type out right now.
Maybe later when current circumstances have eased off a bit. I
know you understand. Here are my answers to the 3 questions -
sorry I’ve only been able to answer one so far.
(Parent 15)
The emotional impact of revisiting experiences that had caused trauma was
something that participants needed to negotiate, and again the email exchange
appeared to be supportive in allowing participants to pace their responses (rather
than withdraw from a face-to-face interview if they had become overwhelmed),
which is evident in Parent 37’s comment:
The first email telling the story was the worst, and I tended to write
it before sleeping, so it churned things up and I could not sleep.
So I decided not to do that before sleeping again! I tend to over
analyse things. I wrote as I was feeling at the time. It is I think
helping me to put some of it behind me.
(Parent 37)
Regarding the questions asked through the emails, it is noted that fewer than half of
the participants responded to the fifth set of questions. Gibson (2017, p.228) notes
that a risk with asynchronous email interviews is that participants may lose interest
over the time span. This drop in participation could have occurred due to a drop in
interest, a lack of time, or because some participants found that revisiting their
experiences was too difficult. However, the researcher appreciated that the
responses to her first email meant that she had data from forty full experiential
accounts to analyse. It is also important to note that the received responses to the
second, third and fourth emails also contained rich and useful data.
75
The researcher had planned to use a semi-structured approach to asking questions
in response to individual participant accounts, however she found she relied upon
the pre-prepared email questions more than she had intended. Upon reflection it is
thought that this may reflect a mix of inexperience on the researcher’s part along
with the researcher finding the pre-prepared questions helped her to manage the
forty ongoing email conversations. A range of ethical issues and challenges
regarding conducting the email interviews were considered and addressed, and this
is discussed further in Section 3.6.
The following section will describe and explain the method used to analyse the data
collected during the email interviews.
3.4 The use of thematic analysis
Data were analysed using thematic analysis as described by Braun and Clarke
(2006; 2012; 2022), and by Braun et al. (2019) who discussed their reflexive
thematic analysis approach, developed to ‘emphasise the active role of the
researcher in the knowledge production process (2019, p.848). Thematic analysis
can take a variety of forms depending upon the researcher’s epistemology, however
the overarching feature is ‘an interest in patterns of meaning, developed through
processes of coding’ (Braun and Clarke, 2022, p.4). Thematic analysis was an
appropriate choice as it offered the flexibility to develop inductive analysis and
capture both semantic and latent meanings, to support descriptive and interpretive
accounts of the data (Braun and Clarke, 2022). This method supported the
researcher to subjectively ‘make sense of collective or shared meanings and
experiences’ (Braun and Clarke, 2012, p.57).
Braun and Clarke (2006; 2012; 2022) and Braun et al. (2019) set out six stages for
thematic analysis which involve systematically searching across a data corpus to
find repeated patterns of meaning. The first step involves the researcher reading
through data to build a general impression and understanding of the content, then
reflecting and noting down initial thoughts, ideas, and questions that develop (Braun
and Clarke, 2022). In the second step the researcher begins to engage with the data
in a more systematic and critically engaged way, looking at each sentence, group of
76
sentences or paragraph, and marking them with an initial code to represent the key
features and meanings of what was said.
3.4.1 Generating initial codes
Within this study, the researcher’s intention was to remain as close to the voices of
the participants as possible. Therefore, it was decided that the most appropriate
type of coding would be Process Coding where the codes reflect social actions
taken by the participants (Saldaña, 2016). Therefore, the researcher based the
codes on wording that identified human actions or activity, or what people were
describing or feeling (as shown in Figure 3.2). Saldaña (2016) explains that process
coding often entails the use of Gerunds (words ending in ‘-ing’), for instance
Recognising times of progress; Feeling frustration at the lack of help; and Reflecting
– with hindsight would act differently now are examples of this form of coding used
by the researcher. According to Saldaña (2016) ‘processes also imply actions
intertwined with the dynamics of time’ (Saldaña, 2016, p.111), meaning the coding
can reflect change, or a sequence of actions.
Figure 3.2 A sample of the initial process coding (using TAMS Analyser software)
Having been in the system 19 months and after chasing regularly we were no further
up the list {Experiencing delays due to NHS waiting lists} and I could see [child’s]
mental health failing. At age 6 he was refusing to go to school often, didn’t sleep,
didn’t have an appetite, and had constant headaches & tummy aches. {Observing a
decline of child wellbeing}
I took him to GP, and they agreed anxiety {Consulting GP – supportive response} I
explained this to school, and they said they see no anxiety in school, his t-shirt came
home soaked everyday where he’d chewed the neck of it plus his fingers bled where
he’d chewed the skin and nails off. {Experiencing dispute of diagnosis by school staff}
Once each process code had been created the researcher used it at other times if it
was applicable to another sentence or paragraph. For instance, if more than one
parent wrote about being blamed, the code Experiencing blame for parenting was
applied in each case. According to Braun and Clarke (2022) the aim of this initial
coding of the dataset is to capture specific meanings with relevance to answering
77
the research questions. The process coding used in this study led to mostly
descriptive codes which then aided the researcher’s understanding of what actions
and responses occur as parents take action to resolve SAPs.
This coding process was conducted using a combination of TAMS Analyser (a
qualitative coding and analysis program available at: https://tamsys.sourceforge.io )
and paper and pen-based methods. This initial coding of the participant accounts
resulted in the creation of many initial process codes. The TAMS analyser provided
a count of the frequency that each code had been applied, which the researcher
utilised to identify the dominant codes, and gain an initial impression of the dominant
features and factors.
3.4.2 Generating initial themes
The researcher used the process codes to generate ideas for initial themes, and as
a basis for the coding of the responses to the questions asked in emails two to six.
This allowed the researcher to ‘test’ the validity of the initial themes within the
responses to the more focused questions about parent experiences. The researcher
reflected upon the different processes that had been identified through the
identification of process codes, and she considered the range of actions that had
occurred within parents’ descriptions. These actions were then considered in more
depth, in terms of what the parents were observing and experiencing, and how they
were reacting and responding. The researcher then merged these actions and
factors into six overarching themes which were judged to represent key features of
parent’s experiences:
Parental concern for a child
Professional responses
Systemic failures
Empowerment of parents
Emotional impact on parents
Impacts on family life
78
Taking the first theme, Parental concern for a child as an example, further reflection
upon this group of codes suggested there were steps that parents described taking,
that related to how they responded to their concerns for their children. The
researcher then used this knowledge to form several sub-themes for the main
theme of Parental concern for a child:
Observing child’s distress
Making sense of observations
Identifying child’s needs and difficulties
Observing effects on attendance
Observing/experiencing child’s reactions
Recognising anxiety
Taking action
Identifying own reactions
Reactions of others
Professional Actions
The researcher then combined these initial themes and sub-themes to create a set
of focused codes that represented each theme, along with the common features
within the theme. Braun and Clarke (2020, p.39) describe this process of coding as
the development of ‘patterns of shared meaning underpinned by a central
organising concept’. This same process was carried out in relation to the other five
initial themes, (i.e., Professional responses; Systemic failures; Empowerment of
parents; Emotional impact on parents; Impacts on family life), which created a full
list of focused codes (see Appendix 1). These focused codes were then used to
code the participants responses to the questions asked in emails two to six.
Refinements were made to the focused codes during this part of the process if any
new data did not fit an existing focused code.
3.4.3 Revising the themes
At this stage, the researcher needs to ‘begin to explore the relationship between
themes and to consider how themes will work together in telling an overall story
about the data’ (Braun and Clarke, 2012, p.65). The researcher reflected upon each
79
of the six main themes identified during the initial coding process and considered
how the analysis of responses to the questions asked in emails two, three, four and
five had further informed her thinking. This resulted in some revision to the initial
themes as connected codes were clustered and meanings explored with the aim of
addressing the research questions (Braun and Clarke, 2022). A summary of the
overall themes generated from the data can be seen in Appendix 2.
To achieve a full analytical account and answer the research questions, it was
necessary for the researcher to identify and present a full account of the parental
experiences described. Further analysis and reflection supported the researcher in
capturing a range of common elements as actions, responses, impacts, and
influences those parents had described. This range of elements were defined
through the central organising concept of representing Parents’ Journeys through
school attendance problems and barriers. These Parents’ Journeys are defined
through four linked contexts which are explored in the following order: Chapter 4
explores how parents respond to the emergence of children’s school attendance
problems; Chapter 5 explores parents’ experiences of navigating systems in
response to ongoing attendance problems (e.g., school, NHS, local authority);
Chapter 6 explores parents’ experiences of home-based difficulties and responses
to ongoing difficulties (e.g., child, family, peers, employer); and Chapter 7 explores
how parents respond to these ongoing concerns and difficulties and work towards
identifying a resolution.
3.4.4 Writing up the thematic analysis
Researchers need to make decisions during the thematic analysis process
regarding the claims they want to make about their data set. Braun and Clarke
(2006) suggest researchers may need to make a choice between producing a rich,
thematic description of the whole data set, or a more detailed and nuanced account
of specific themes within the data. In thematic analysis, the aim is not to produce a
summary of topics presented as themes, but instead to discuss themes capturing
shared meaning which are united by a central organising concept (Braun and
Clarke, 2022). The decision may be based in part on the word limits the researcher
has to adhere to, and the depth and complexity of the account the researcher needs
to achieve. For instance, if the researcher intends to report on the whole data set,
80
the resulting account may contain less depth and complexity in comparison to an
account that focuses on several selected themes. Braun and Clarke (2006) advise
that a report of the whole data set may be especially useful if the research topic is
under-researched, or if the perspective of the participants was unknown prior to the
study. The perspectives of this study’s participants were largely unknown, and
therefore an aim for the researcher was to produce a comprehensive thematic
account around a central organising concept, that reported on the whole data set.
The writing up process involves selecting extracts to quote and analyse within a
structure, to form a narrative setting out ‘a story of the data’ (Braun and Clarke,
2012, p.67). The story of the data explains why the chosen extracts are of interest
and discusses how this relates to the research questions and the wider scholarly
context. Braun et al. (2019) position the researcher as ‘a storyteller, actively
engaged in interpreting data through the lens of their own cultural membership and
social positionings, their theoretical assumptions and ideological commitments, as
well as their scholarly knowledge (2019, pp.47-48). Braun and Clarke (2012) advise
that the researcher must decide whether to incorporate this discussion into the
results of the analysis, or whether to have a separate discussion section. This
decision can be guided by the requirements of the researcher’s academic context,
as it was for this study.
3.4.5 Critique of the use of thematic analysis
Thematic analysis was considered the most appropriate method to use for data
analysis in this study because it is a theoretically flexible approach that can
incorporate a range of approaches and frameworks (Finlay, 2021). Therefore, it is a
method which allowed the researcher to adapt a systematic approach to coding and
analysis, and then link the results to broader concepts or theories as their relevance
was identified. This contrasts with other pattern-based analysis methodologies that
are linked to pre-existing theoretical frameworks, such as grounded theory or
interpretive phenomenological analysis (Braun and Clarke, 2006; 2020;2022).
Grounded theory (Glaser and Strauss, 1967) involves identification of categories of
meaning from qualitative data and making links between these categories. It is an
inductive approach, and the literature review is left until after data analysis so that
prior knowledge of the topic influences researcher perceptions as little as possible
81
during the analysis (Charmaz, 2013). The researcher considered this method,
however there was concern that the level of prior knowledge that she had might
impact upon the validity of forming a grounded theory in the expected sense. Braun
and Clarke (2020) also advise that thematic analysis is a better choice if the
researcher does not intend to develop a grounded theory or sample theoretically.
Consideration was also given to the use of Interpretive Phenomenological Analysis
(IPA) (Van Manen, 1990; Smith, Flowers, and Larkin, 2009) as a method of analysis
as it would have offered a similar opportunity to identify the features of parents’
experiences and their understandings of possible underlying beliefs and attitudes
which impact on their experiences (Braun and Clarke, 2020). Both Grounded Theory
and IPA adopt an iterative approach where qualitative data are continuously
compared and assigned to categories developed as the researcher makes links and
comparisons between the categories. It was decided that IPA would not be the most
suitable method of analysis as it is recommended that IPA is conducted with fewer
than ten case studies (Gray, 2018, Braun and Clarke, 2020) as the researcher
needs to conduct in depth analysis of each case, in addition to an analysis of the
whole data set. Braun and Clarke (2020, p.42) also advise that thematic analysis is
chosen over IPA ‘if the analytic interest is on how personal experiences are located
within wider socio-cultural contexts’.
According to Braun and Clarke (2006) using thematic analysis as a constructionist
method of analysis supports the examination of ‘the ways in which events, realities,
meanings, experiences and so on are the effects of a range of discourses operating
within society’ (Braun and Clarke, 2006, p.9). This appeared to correlate most
closely with the researcher’s methodological paradigm.
Once the concept of Parents’ Journeys was constructed during the thematic
analysis process, it became clearer that the study participants were at differing
stages of this journey and an outcome was not clear in every case. This had not
been considered prior to the commencement of the study as the concept of Parents’
Journeys had not been constructed at that point. With hindsight, it could be that a
criterion for selection should have stipulated that all participants would be sharing
82
retrospective accounts to ensure accounts of the complete experience or journey for
each participant.
Having considered and discussed the methods used to collect and analyse data, the
next section of this chapter will discuss the recruitment of the participants in the
study.
3.5 The study participants
The study participants are illustrative of a particular type of social actor – as the
parents of children who experience significant problems with school attendance. As
the study has a particular interest in parents’ experience, perceptions and
knowledge in this specific context, the researcher required a purposive sample of
parents who fitted those criteria (Braun and Clarke, 2013). The researcher therefore
recruited participants who were members of ‘Not Fine in School’ - an online
(Facebook) support group for parents of children experiencing significant school
attendance difficulties. The researcher has been involved in running social media
based, parent peer support groups since 2009, following her own experiences as a
parent in the same situation. This support group was established by the researcher
in November 2017, and by January 2022 it had 22,200 members, with membership
numbers increasing daily.
3.5.1 Recruiting the study participants
Some researchers in the field have described their difficulties in recruiting parent
participants who are willing to be interviewed about their family experiences of
school absence (e.g., Carless et al., 2015; Gregory and Purcell, 2014; Wray and
Thomas, 2013; Orme-Stapleton, 2018). These difficulties with recruitment may
relate to factors discussed in Section 3.3.1, for instance, Gregory and Purcell (2014)
tried to locate families to participate in their study. They asked the Educational
Welfare Service and Home Tuition Service to write to thirty families on their behalf.
Ten families responded and six agreed to be interviewed. One of the six
subsequently dropped out. The researchers deduced that the most likely reason for
this low response rate was ‘children and families experiencing extended school non-
83
attendance are reluctant to discuss this sensitive topic’ (Gregory and Purcell, 2014,
p.39).
Orme-Stapleton (2018) also found that parents were reluctant to participate in her
study, and she observed:
On reflection I feel that my experiences of struggling to engage
with families, is mirrored in other professionals’ experiences and
therefore highlights the challenges that working with such families
presents. If I was to conduct this research again I feel that
alternative methods of recruitment would need to be sought. I
found that recruiting participants from my own caseload was the
most successful and therefore this would be how I would approach
this. While this does present its own challenges, in terms of
possible bias of data, I believe that a pre-existing relationship was
a major factor in engagement and that this may also be the case
for other professionals wishing to work with families experiencing
persistent non-attendance.
(Orme-Stapleton, 2018, p.42)
Similarly, in this study the researcher hoped her pre-existing relationship with the
parents in the peer support group would be significant in terms of recruiting
participants, because she was already recognised and trusted as an ‘insider’ with
shared, lived experience. As discussed in Section 3.2.3, and as Orme-Stapleton
(2018) suggests in the extract above, recruiting research participants from an insider
perspective, and possibly through pre-existing relationships has advantages and
disadvantages which the researcher considered in her ethical evaluation (see
Section 3.6.2).
3.5.2 The recruitment process
A ‘flyer’ (see Appendix 3) was shared within the Facebook support group, inviting
people to email the researcher via her DMU account if they wanted to receive more
information about being involved in the study. Interested applicants were sent the
Participant Information Sheet (see Appendix 4) and invited to ask any further
questions they might have in response.
84
Each applicant was contacted again after seven days to ask if they were willing to
volunteer as a participant. If they were, they were asked to answer an initial
questionnaire (see Appendix 5) to obtain a simple outline of their experience.
There were 56 requests for the Participant Information Sheet, then 53 people replied
and were sent the Initial Questionnaire. Of those, 32 people completed and returned
it to the researcher.
Several participants did not respond to the request to begin the interview stage;
therefore, a second phase of recruitment was undertaken to maintain the target
number of participants at between 35 and 45 people. A second call-out for
participants gained a further 46 requests for the Participant Information Sheet, 30
people returned the Initial Questionnaire, and 25 then returned the Consent Form. In
total forty parents took part in the email interview process described in Section
3.3.2.
3.5.3 Participant selection
The study included every participant who completed the recruitment phase, as the
researcher considered each person who volunteered had a valid perspective and
could offer an account of valid experiences. Therefore, this was a purposive sample
as the participants were existing members of the Facebook parents support group;
that they lived in England; and they had confirmed that they were a parent of a child
who was experiencing problems attending school.
Either currently or previously, nineteen of the participants worked in roles that were
relevant to school absence and attendance barriers: three parents had worked in
early years education settings, four parents were schoolteachers, six parents had
worked in school learning support, one parent worked in higher education, one
parent had worked as a lawyer, one in nursing, one in midwifery, and two in social
work. Therefore, a small number of additional questions were formulated to explore
whether there were any differences in the experience of these parents, when
compared with those of parents who did not work in relevant roles. The findings in
relation to these questions are discussed in Section 5.8.
85
3.5.4 Critique of the recruitment process
The research design formulated by the researcher created some limitations within
the sample, for instance, the use of the Facebook group for recruitment, and email-
based interviews for data collection, meant that any participant needed to be literate
and own or have access to a device with internet access. The researcher made the
decision to recruit through the Facebook support group as it offered a set of
participants she had a unique access to, and the study was specifically designed to
understand the experiences of this group of parents. Their existing membership of
the Facebook support group also indicated that they were literate and had internet
access. It would be necessary to design a follow-up study to seek contact with
parents who try to resolve children’s SAPs but don’t have access to the internet
and/or may have difficulties with literacy.
The researcher considered that the sample of parents who participated in the study
are illustrative of the group of parents who seek to resolve SAPs, rather than being
a representative sample of all parents in England. This means that the sampling
was purposive in that the participants were selected because they had experience
that would enable them to answer the research questions (Waller, Farquharson, and
Dempsey, 2016). Chapter Two indicated how parents of children who experience
SAPs have been assumed to fulfil certain criteria however no extensive official data
exists about the demographics of families with children who encounter attendance
difficulties, therefore it is difficult to identify whether any sample is fully
representative or not.
When designing the research study and recruiting and involving the study’s
participants it was crucial that the researcher addressed all ethical considerations,
and these considerations will now be discussed in Section 3.6.
3.6 Addressing ethical considerations
This study adhered to De Montfort University’s Research Integrity and Ethics, which
provides a comprehensive framework for good research conduct. The British
Psychological Society (2017) Ethical Guidelines for Internet-mediated Research
were consulted regarding the use of email interviewing. The research also adhered
86
to the British Educational Research Association (2011) Ethical Guidelines for
Educational Research; this specifies that all participants are to be treated fairly,
sensitively and with respect for their choice, privacy, and confidentiality. Codes of
conduct stipulate that research participants must be treated fairly, sensitively and
with respect for choice, privacy, and confidentiality. When planning research these
are aspects of the work that researchers need to consider and address. Cohen,
Mannion and Morrison (2011) describe this as the need to achieve a balance
between the professional demands on the researcher to pursue the truth, and the
participants rights and values, that may be threatened by the research. Salmons
(2016, p.73) explains that a researcher needs to consider and explain how they will
protect human subjects; obtain appropriate informed consent from participants;
safeguard participants identities and data and respect the research site.
3.6.1 Emotional distress
There was an awareness that participants may find what they were discussing
upsetting. The researcher ensured that participants did not feel pressured into
answering her questions and they were reminded that they could tailor their
responses to the times they felt able to continue. If a participant wished to withdraw
from the interview process, they were able to do so without needing to give a
reason. As the researcher had previous experience in supporting parents, she was
able to offer participants a list of sources of information and support they could
locate or contact if necessary.
It was also acknowledged that as a parent with lived experience of the topic being
studied, the researcher may experience emotional thoughts and feelings in the
process of conducting the research. The researcher was aware that she could
obtain support and advice from her supervisory team and the welfare services at De
Montfort University or elsewhere if needed.
3.6.2 Researcher and participant familiarity
There was an existing relationship between the researcher and the participants
because they were already shared membership of the Facebook support group.
87
This meant each person may have previously discussed their personal experiences
and opinions within existing group posts. To prevent participants from feeling they
should not express their individual, personal opinions about aspects such as school
attendance practices and children’s mental health or emotional difficulties, the
researcher clarified within the Participant Information Sheet and all pre-interview
discussions that all points of view, experiences and interpretations were relevant
and valid, as they all hold significance in relation to the aims of the study.
To minimise the influence of the researcher’s personal opinions she determined that
she would approach the study with an open mind and with the aim of considering all
viewpoints without making judgements based upon her own experiences.
3.6.3 Informed consent and the right to withdraw
According to Salmons (2016, p.78) informed consent consists of three components
which are adequate information, voluntariness of participation and competence to
sign the agreement. To ensure participants gave their informed consent to take part
in the study, potential participants were provided with a Participant Information
Sheet (see Appendix 4) and were invited to email the researcher if they wanted to
ask any questions about the study. A period of seven days was allowed for the
participant to read the information and respond with any queries. Informed consent
was then obtained when the researcher emailed the consent form to each
participant, and they were invited to type ‘yes’ or ‘no’ as a response to each point
asked on the form and type his/her name as a signature. Participants then returned
the consent form by email to the researcher if they had decided they were willing to
volunteer to take part.
The Participant Information Sheet informed participants that they have the right to
withdraw at any point prior to, or during the interview without them needing to
explain why, and without their role and participation in the Facebook group being
affected in any way. Participants were also informed that if wished to withdraw from
the study his/her data could be removed at any point up to the start of Phase 2
analysis.
88
3.6.4 Confidentiality and data protection
To maintain confidentiality all records were stored on a secure hard drive which was
only be accessible to the researcher. Each interview participant was assigned a
code name (e.g., Parent 1, Parent 2, Parent 3 etc) to protect their identity. These
code names were used in the transcripts and in the analysis write up. All email
interview files were stored on a password protected laptop and backed-up on a
secure hard drive.
Data protection was addressed through the researcher conducting all research
activities on a password protected laptop. All data files and documents were stored
on a password protected USB storage device and back-up device. Online access
took place either through the university WIFI or the researcher’s home WIFI, both of
which use password protected access. Any data held within the study has been
stored securely and will be retained for 5 years following completion of the study,
and then destroyed in accordance with the Data Protection Act 1998 and the DMU
Research Records Retention Policy.
3.6.5 The internet as a site for research
There can be concerns about internet-based research in relation to verification of
participant identity, use of private or public domains, anonymity, data security,
practicability, and quality. These issues have been considered in relation to this
study.
The verification of participant identity can be an area of concern because there are
no face-to-face contact offering visual indicators of identity. Individual identity will be
difficult to fake in this study, as it requires each participant to relay in-depth
knowledge and experiences of the school refusal situation which are difficult to
fabricate (Gibson, 2017).
The participants were recruited from the ‘closed’ (i.e., the contents are not
accessible to non-members) Facebook group where people have already been
questioned about their relationship to the school refusal situation prior to being
granted access. The group tries to restrict membership to parents of school refusing
89
children and administrators enquire about this before allowing a person access to
the group. Once participant recruitment had taken place there was no further
research related contact through Facebook and all correspondence or online data
gathering took place through the researcher’s secure university email account.
The British Psychological Society (2017) Ethical Guidelines for Internet-mediated
Research considers email interviews to be relatively private since data are not
extracted from public forums. A concern can be that hackers and potential fraud can
occur with email accounts, therefore the use of a university email account for all
email correspondence provided encryption back up for security. The use of email
communication and IP addresses could potentially lead to the identification of
participants. However, once the email correspondence has been copied and pasted
into Word files and the emails deleted, any identifying features were removed, and
data used in the study was anonymised from that point.
3.7 Ensuring the quality of the research
Common criticisms of qualitative research are that it is ‘unscientific’ anecdotal and
based upon subjective impression’ (Gray, 2018, p.181). Waller, Farquharson, and
Dempsey (2016) argue that the criticisms of qualitative research reflect a confusion
about what it is that the different types of research are aiming to achieve. Waller,
Farquharson, and Dempsey (2016) suggest that rather than aiming for one objective
and valid version, qualitative research ‘acknowledges that there may be many valid
and objective versions of the research’ (2016, p.24). They argue that trustworthiness
is a more appropriate quality than reliability, and the researcher aimed to achieve
this through the rigorous application of the standards expected within the paradigm
they utilised. Cohen, Manion and Morrison (2011) advise that the solution is to
consider the types of validity and reliability that are applicable to the paradigm in
use. Moreover, they suggest that in qualitative research the notion of validity should
be replaced with notions of authenticity.
Grey (2018) also discusses criteria for validating constructivist research and
suggests that self-reflexive criticality of the researcher is an important factor. This
suggests that a researcher needs to adopt critical and reflexive practices to
acknowledge their own influence upon the construction. In relation to this study the
90
researcher maintained an awareness that her interpretation of the data will be
influenced by her own experience of SAPs. Having this awareness meant the
researcher aimed to balance the impact of her influence by staying as close as
possible to the content of the participant’s accounts in her analysis and reporting,
therefore establishing internal validity (Gray, 2018). One method she used to
achieve this was to use Process Coding during the thematic analysis to focus on the
actions the participants were describing (as discussed in Section 3.4.1). The
researcher also followed suggestions made by Gray (2018) who maintains that
validity can be demonstrated if the researcher actively records, analyses and reports
cases of discrepant data that are an exception to patterns (Grey, 2018, p.183). A
further suggestion adopted involved ‘asking participants to read the analysis report
to check if they have been heard correctly’ (Waller, Farquharson, and Dempsey,
2016, p.26).
Furthermore, within this study, as with the subjective nature of qualitative research
in general, it is recognised there is a likely element of bias in the responses of
participants and in the researcher as parents, and therefore a part of the world being
researched (Cohen, Manion & Morrison, 2011). However, this study was designed
specifically to introduce an unacknowledged parental viewpoint, and an element of
bias is considered both unavoidable and applicable. This indicates that the findings
will only be generalisable in other similar situations or circumstances yet will
‘represent the phenomenon being investigated fairly and fully’ (Cohen, Manion and
Morrison 2011, p.181). Moreover, Clarke and Braun (2021, no page) argue that
rather than thinking in terms of ‘bias’ - as ‘a distortion of objective knowledge’,
qualitative researchers should ‘think in terms of subjectivity […] as an inevitable
component of qualitative research’.
If this study was following a positivist point of view, the research design would aim to
‘conceptualise and measure human behaviour in terms of key variables, and to
discover causal relationships amongst these’ (Hammersley, 2012, no page).
However, the interpretivist point of view has guided the research design to
understand ‘the links between perspectives and actions, and between behaviour
and its effects’ (Hammersley, 2012, no page), which are most likely to lead to
91
statements about relationships which are variable and complex, rather than fixed
and generalisable.
This chapter has explored the researcher’s methodological considerations and her
choices of email-based interviewing as a method of data collection, and thematic
analysis as a method of data collection. The following four chapters will discuss the
results of the researcher’s analysis of the data generated because of these
considerations and choices.
92
Chapter 4. Responding to emerging school attendance problems
4.1 Introduction
This chapter is the first of four chapters that present analysis of the email-based
interviews. First, this chapter sets out a summary of the characteristics of the
parents and their experiences. Following this the chapter considers Parents’
Journeys as the overarching concept through which the analysis is presented.
These Parents’ Journeys are considered through four contexts where key themes
describe the elements of parents’ experiences as they seek a resolution for
children’s SAPs. Chapter 4 explores how parents respond to the emergence of
children’s difficulties; Chapter 5 explores parents’ experiences of navigating
systems in response to ongoing difficulties (involving schools, the NHS, and local
government); Chapter 6 explores home-based difficulties and responses to
ongoing difficulties (involving the child, family, peers, and employers) that
parents’ experience; and Chapter 7 explores how parents respond to these
ongoing concerns and difficulties and work towards achieving a resolution.
These Parents’ Journeys begin when parents first recognise concerns, and they
attempt to make sense of ongoing observations to build a clearer understanding
of their child’s difficulties and needs. When concerns and difficulties continue and
possibly increase, parents begin navigating relevant systems to locate advice
and support. Success in finding useful and appropriate support is influenced by a
range of factors including professional responses; positive and negative working
relationships; systemic failures; and locating sources of support and information.
Within and through their journey parents experience a range of dilemmas, duties,
emotional responses, and elements of empowerment which collectively form a
practical and emotional Parental SAPs Predicament which specifically relates to
a situation where parents are trying to resolve SAPs.
4.2 An overview of parents’ experiences
This first section of Chapter 4 provides a summary of the study participant’s
circumstances and experiences. The details shared here have been collated
93
through analysis of the email exchanges between the researcher and each
participant.
4.2.1 Forty mothers with twenty-nine sons and eighteen daughters
The parent participants in this study were forty mothers who volunteered in
response to a request shared in a Facebook support group (as described in
Section 3.5.2). One parent provided a retrospective account of her daughter’s
difficulties which began eleven years before the interview, while the other thirty-
nine parents described experiences which were ongoing, or which had concluded
within the previous two to three years. The families are located across twenty-five
different counties within England.
Either currently or previously, nineteen parents worked in roles related to
education, health, law and social work, meaning they had existing professional
knowledge of systems with relevance to school attendance problems: three
parents had worked in early years settings (including one who was a SENCo),
one was an Ofsted inspector, four parents were school teachers, six parents had
worked in school learning support, one parent worked in higher education, one
parent had worked as a lawyer, one in nursing, one in midwifery, and two in
social work.
The accounts parents shared featured forty-seven children (as some parents had
more than one child experiencing SAPs). Amongst these children there were
twenty-nine males and eighteen females.
The parents of seven children reported their children struggled to attend early
years settings (nursery, pre-school, or childminder). Seventeen children were
reported to have first experienced attendance problems at primary school (aged
5-11), whereas twenty-four children were reported to have first experienced
attendance problems at secondary school (aged 11-16).
94
4.2.2 The duration of children’s school attendance problems
The parents reported that they had been supporting their children and trying to
resolve their school attendance problems for between one and twelve years at
the point when they took part in this study.
Figure 4.1. Length of time individual children or young people were reported to have experienced SAPs
Figure 4.1 illustrates this range of time and the number of children whose school
attendance problems had lasted for each length of time. This indicates that once
school attendance problems had begun parents struggled to find a quick
resolution and the problems often became entrenched and therefore more
difficult to resolve.
4.2.3 Influences and triggers for attendance problems
The parents who participated in the study reported a range of factors which they
believed had influenced or triggered their children’s attendance problems. These
factors were as follows:
1 year
2 years
3 years
4 years
5 years
6 years
7 years
8 years
9 years
10 years
11 years
12 years
0246810 12
Number of years each child has experienced SAPs
Number of CYP
95
Special Educational Needs and Disabilities
The existence of special educational needs or disabilities (SEND) appears to be
particularly significant, with forty of the forty-seven children who featured within
parents’ accounts having a SEND that had been diagnosed prior to, or during,
the period described in parental accounts. These diagnoses included Autism
(n=22), Pathological Demand Avoidance (PDA) (n=2), Attention Deficit
Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) (n=6), Avoidant/Restrictive Food Intake Disorder
(ARFID) (n=2), Dyslexia (n=5), Dyspraxia (n=3), Dyscalculia (n=1), Dysgraphia
(n=1), Sensory Processing Disorder (SPD) (n=5), Obsessive Compulsive
Disorder (OCD) (n=2), Tourette’s Syndrome (n=2), Mutism (n=2), Sleep Disorder
(n=1) and being identified as Gifted and Talented (n=2). A further seven children
were awaiting diagnostic assessments for suspected SEND.
Autism
For a significant number of children discussed in the study (n=30), parents
expressed concerns about autism either as a suspected or diagnosed influence
upon their difficulties attending school. Of these thirty children:
§ Four children had been diagnosed as autistic before they started school.
§ A further five children were diagnosed as autistic within the period
described in parent responses.
§ Four children were suspected of being autistic and were waiting for
diagnostic assessments to be carried out
§ One child was suspected to be autistic and supported in school as if he
was, without needing a diagnosis.
§ Thirteen parents had tried to raise concerns about a possible link to
autism, and all had their concerns dismissed by school staff, however all
thirteen children went on to receive an autism diagnosis eventually – ten
through the NHS and three through a private assessment. Three parents
suspected Autism traits but had not sought assessments.
§ Five parents described their autistic child as ‘masking’ their autism in
school. Parent 35 has twin boys who are autistic – one twin masked his
difficulties in school, one twin didn’t mask his difficulties. The twin who
didn’t ‘mask’ was supported by the school, while the twin who masked
96
wasn’t supported and the school insisted he was ‘fine in school’ even
when Parent 35 tried to advocate for him.
§ One parent reported that her autistic daughter had explained that she
wanted to be in a school with children who were like her, suggesting that
she felt that she did not fit into, or belong in the mainstream school
environments she had experienced.
Physical Illness
Physical illnesses were also a factor that had impacted upon fourteen children’s
abilities to attend school, either because they were too unwell, or the support
they needed to manage their conditions while in school was unavailable or
inadequate. These illnesses were as follows: Asthma (n=1), Cystic Fibrosis
(n=1), Migraine (n=1), continence issues (n=2), heavy and painful periods (n=2),
Irritable Bowel Syndrome (n=1), Postural Orthostatic Tachycardia Syndrome
[PoTS) (n=1), Ehlers Danlos Syndrome (n=1), hypermobile joints (n=3), Cerebral
Palsy (n=1), Trigeminal Neuralgia (n=1), and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (n=1).
Mental Illness
Regarding mental health difficulties, parents reported that they perceived a main
cause of twenty-six children’s SAPs was a form of anxiety, including social
anxiety (n=5), separation anxiety (n=3) or anxiety triggered by a traumatic
experience (n=4). Parents described their child experiencing a mental breakdown
(n= 3) or a decline in their wellbeing after being forced to attend in a state of
distress (n=16). Ten parents described their child saying they wanted to die,
while two parents reported children making a suicide attempt, and three parents
described a child as suicidal. One parent described their child as ‘terrified of
school’ however the underlying cause was unclear. Some of these children had a
related formal diagnosis:
§ Three children had a diagnosis of depression
§ Fourteen children had a diagnosed anxiety disorder, and
§ Five children were experiencing attendance problems because of
traumatic experiences
97
Parents linked some of these difficulties to children having SEND or physical
illnesses that were not being adequately supported in school, for instance
through the implementation of reasonable adjustments (under the Equality Act,
2010), or SEND support (under the SEND Code of Practice, 2015).
The School Environment
The following aspects of the school environment, climate or ethos were
considered by parents to be contributory factors:
§ Parents reported that twelve children experienced sensory difficulties or
overwhelm within the school environment, which would often be
experienced by those children who are autistic.
§ Four children were reported to have experienced bullying that then
triggered their school absence.
§ Twenty-five parents attributed their child’s difficulties in part to the school
climate or ethos. Parents perceptions of this were related to: children
having a fear of doing something wrong or making mistakes at school and
then being punished or shouted at; children feeling under pressure to
perform well academically; children expressing a fear of doing tests;
children expressing they felt trapped, unsafe, or overwhelmed in school.
§ Five parents linked children’s attendance problems to the transition
between primary and secondary school.
4.2.4 Reported outcomes for the children of the study participants
Within the period of the study, the outcomes parents reported for the forty-seven
children were:
§ Only one out of the forty-seven children discussed by the participants had
been able to return to their mainstream school and re-establish a normal
pattern of attendance. This happened after he spent some time at home
having been signed off as too unwell to attend. This was followed by an
eighteen-month period where he made tiny steps of progress, as he was
allowed flexibility and the focus was on him feeling safe and in control. He
98
then spent a further six months in a medical needs unit, taking further small
steps of progress.
§ Seven children remained enrolled at mainstream school with reduced/low
levels of attendance
§ Six children had a place in a SEND school arranged through an Education
Health and Care Plan (EHCP)
§ Five children were being educated through alternative provision arranged by
their Local Authority such as forms of home-based tuition, online schooling, or
hospital school
§ Seven children were being home educated by their parents
§ Thirteen children were not accessing any type of educational provision
§ Eight children had reached the age of 16; of those, four had gone on to
college, two were being home educated while taking A levels, and two were
too unwell to be involved in any educational activity
These outcomes are not all representative of a finalised resolution, as the
families were at differing stages of their journeys. It can also be the case that an
individual child’s situation is ongoing and develops further as time progresses, for
instance a decision may be taken to try a new type of provision or additional
problems are identified. Within their accounts, parents reflected upon aspects
and factors that they perceived had influenced these outcomes. These included:
§ Fourteen parents who attributed the progress they made in achieving a
resolution to the input of specific professionals who offered advice and
support. The roles of these professionals were: GP (n=1), Private therapist
(n=2), CAMHS therapist (n=3), Educational Psychologist (Local Authority)
(n=2), Educational Psychologist (Independent) (n=2), School staff (n=3),
SENDIASS staff (n=2), Private psychiatrist (n=2), Local Authority SEND
Officer (n=1).
§ Ten parents attributed the difficulties they experienced to inadequate funding
and resourcing of schools and CAMHS
§ Eight parents attributed the difficulties they experienced to a lack of
appropriate teacher training
99
§ Twelve parents attributed the difficulties they experienced to a lack of child
mental health awareness
§ Eleven parents attributed the difficulties they experienced to detrimental
attitudes towards SEND and autism in schools
§ Nine parents attributed the difficulties they experienced to a lack of any
respect for parental input or expertise
It seems relevant to consider that these are factors parents have a very limited
ability to influence, yet they have a significant impact upon their agency and
ability to resolve attendance problems as required by current legislation and
policy.
The following section will explain in more depth how the concepts of Parents’
Journeys and the Parental SAPs Predicament in relation to school attendance
problems and barriers were revealed through the process of thematic analysis
(as described in Section 3.4). Section 4.3 and 4.4 will provide an overview of
these concepts in greater detail. Section 4.5 will then explore the beginning of
Parents’ Journeys when parents respond to the emergence of their children’s
SAPs.
4.3 Parents’ Journeys and the Parental SAPs Predicament
When considering how best to describe the experiences that were common
amongst the accounts shared by parents, the data revealed that some parents
(n=9) referred to being on a journey. They used terms such as “their journey”; “a
long stumbling journey”; “their school refusal journey”; and Parent 10 talked of
the help she received from “fellow parents who are at different stages of their
journey”. These journeys started when parents began to note initial concerns.
They then navigated through a range of similar difficulties and experiences until
they eventually reached a resolution to the school attendance problems. The
resolution individual parents achieved varied depending upon a range of factors
and may or may not have involved children returning to full-time attendance at
mainstream school.
100
It is important to note that the elements identified within Parents’ Journeys did not
always follow the same sequence for individual families with their differing
contexts. Instead, individual elements may have been repeated, backtracked, or
restructured, resembling a game of ‘snakes and ladders’. These variations
occurred due to differing influences and consequences within individual journeys,
for instance, parents may have tried different strategies with varying success; or
mental health service referrals may have been declined or delayed by extensive
waiting lists (n=18) and then attempted again later; or Education Health and Care
Plan applications or reviews were declined, then appealed, or were delayed by
systemic issues (n=16).
Each parent had a direct influence upon how their individual journey evolved, as
progress in every element of their journey was dependent upon them taking
actions, making responses, or making decisions. Furthermore, for every action,
response or decision taken, each parent needed to evaluate all possible
consequences and outcomes and identify what their priorities were, as evidenced
in the following extracts:
Every day somehow, I dug down deep and researched about
what to do, the main driving force was that I was not going to
give up on my son, he deserved a future, and it was becoming
apparent that this was down to me.
(Parent 4)
Basically, having to force my children to go to school has been
a horrendous experience, especially for [son A], as he has little
support in school. You know that you are damaging both their
mental health and your relationship with them, but you feel
under such pressure to "get them in" because "they're fine once
they're here".
(Parent 35)
Chapters 6 and 7 explore how these circumstances created difficult dilemmas as
parents juggled with supporting a distressed child, managing day-to-day family
life, their awareness of the need to comply with legislative duties related to
101
children and education, and their awareness of evaluations of their parenting
being made by people around them. Parents often felt blamed and criticised, and
this range of difficult experiences throughout each journey had an emotional
impact on parents, triggering powerful feelings including shame, guilt, frustration,
and anger. This emotional impact can be gauged in the following extracts from
parents’ accounts:
So, the guilt comes from so many areas: guilt that you did
the wrong things, guilt that you made it worse, guilt that
you didn’t pull the plug on school sooner, guilt about your
other child, guilt that you weren’t strong enough, patient
enough, assertive enough. And even when people tell you not
to feel guilty, clearly you still do.
(Parent 5)
It's made me doubt any skills I might ever have thought I had
as a parent. When she shuts down and refuses to talk to us or
do anything I really don't know what to do. I have read endless
books, googled for hours, and sought advice from all sorts of
people but nothing we have tried has worked. I don't know how
to parent a child like this.
(Parent 13)
I think about whether I'm being judged when I can't get him in
that day, some days I feel utterly sure I am right not to force
him in and others I doubt myself and wonder if I should push
him more (but I know deep down I shouldn't and that I'm letting
others influence me again)
(Parent 40)
The responses and reactions displayed by professionals, family and friends are
key to the development of each parents’ journey in terms of its complexity and
emotional impact. One key aspect of the developing predicament relates to
parents’ attempts to ensure there is a shared understanding of their child’s
needs, along with recognition that their child had a significant difficulty with
school attendance. Another key aspect relates to each parent needing to manage
102
their developing predicament and being in genuine need of information,
guidance, and systemic support as a result.
For the parents in this study, their experiences included their involvement in the
Facebook support group (as this was the site of recruitment). Thirty-two parents
commented upon how this peer contact often influenced their access to common
elements of empowerment within their journeys – with the availability of ongoing
peer support, advice based upon lived experience, and sharing of relevant
information. This peer group empowerment combined with other empowering
sources and influences, to help parents navigate and overcome the difficult
dilemmas they encountered. The following extracts evidence this empowerment:
I have found that Facebook groups have been invaluable, as
what the hive mind doesn't know is miniscule. Plus, there is so
much emotional support as well.
(Parent 35)
The moment we found ‘Not Fine in School’ it all changed. They
were a lifeline for us. Finally, we were surrounded by an online
community shared by parents, carers and professionals who
understood, who could offer advice and empower us.
(Parent 20)
To describe this combined influence of specific duties, dilemmas, emotional
impacts, and empowerment within parents’ experiences the concept of a Parental
SAPs Predicament was chosen as it describes the range of worrying and
confusing difficulties that are not easy for parents to navigate. The situation-
specific legal duties that parents become aware of are combined with the
contextual dilemmas, empowering factors, and emotional impacts that the data
revealed. Each of these elements contribute to create the full Parental SAPs
Predicament that is experienced when children experience SAPs, as summarised
in Figure 4.2.
103
Figure 4.2 The Parental SAPs Predicament
4.4 The elements of Parents’ Journeys
The elements of Parents’ Journeys and the related Parental SAPs Predicament
will be described in further detail throughout this chapter (Chapter 4), and the
following three chapters, with extracts from parent accounts to evidence and
elucidate their experiences. The objective for these four chapters is that they
highlight salient features of parental experience of SAPs, explained in four
contexts. Chapter 4 explores how parents respond to the emergence of children’s
difficulties attending school. Chapter 5 explores parents’ experiences of
navigating relevant systems in response to ongoing difficulties (e.g., school,
NHS, local authority). Chapter 6 explores parents’ experiences of home-based
difficulties and responses to ongoing difficulties in family and social circles (e.g.,
child, family, peers, employer). Chapter 7 then explores how parents respond to
Legal Duties
•Set out in:
•Section 7,
Education Act
1996: The parent
of every child of
compulsory school
age shall cause him
to receive efficient
full-time education
suitable—(a)to his
age, ability and
aptitude, and (b)to
any special
educational needs
he may have,
either by regular
attendance at
school or
otherwise.
•Section 444,
Education Act
1996:if parents
register their child
at a school and the
child then fails to
attend regularly,
the parents may be
guilty of an offence
and may be issued
a penalty notice or
be prosecuted.
Dilemmas
•Consisting
principally of:
•Ensuring the health
and wellbeing of
children in distress
•Ensuring children
receive suitable,
efficient, full-time
education
•Understanding
relevant policies
and laws
•Avoiding fines and
prosecution for
non-attendance
•Fulfilling
commitments -
employment,
family, financial
•Being judged as a
parent in the
community, family
& by professionals.
•Worrying about the
consequences of
being considered a
'bad parent'
•Growing awareness
of current systemic
problems that will
delay or hinder a
resolution
Empowerment
•Influenced by:
•Taking a proactive
approach
•Peer support
•Professional
support
•Third sector
support
•Increased
knowledge of SAPs
•Increased
knowledge of
systems/policy/law
/SEND/health
•Increased self
confidence
•Listening to a
child's opinions
•Identifying
progress of child
Emotional
Impact
•Parents reported
experiencing
feelings of:
•blame; frustration;
guilt; anger;
isolation; being
judged; stress;
regret; failure;
being lost; dread;
resentment;
inadequacy;
despair;
exasperation;
weakness; being
conflicted; fear;
concern;
heartbreak;
intimidation;
overwhelm; hurt;
shame; paranoia;
sadness;
vulnerability;
helplessness;
anxiety; distress;
pressure
•relief; pride;
gratitude; hope;
being lucky
104
these ongoing concerns and difficulties, and how they work towards identifying a
resolution. The predicament that parents encounter throughout their journeys (as
a combination of awareness of legal duties, contextual dilemmas, emotional
responses, and empowering factors) is then explored further within the
discussion chapter (Chapter 8). An overview of the full Parents’ Journeys can be
found in Appendix 6.
The start of Parents’ Journeys concerns the initial triggering of elements of the
Parental SAPs Predicament. Parents’ initial concerns are raised as they observe
their children’s distress and/or reluctance in relation to attending school. Parents
then begin to undertake sometimes complex interpretations and assessments of
children’s difficulties, to identify any underlying triggers or understand any
causes. If difficulties continue, parents respond by raising their concerns with
frontline professionals (most commonly a teacher and/or GP), in the hope of
obtaining advice and arranging appropriate support for their child’s ongoing
difficulties.
Figure 4.3 Responding to emerging school attendance problems
Here, the data reflected the themes Recognising initial concerns, Making sense
of observations, Applying parental knowledge, and Experiencing reactions of
Responding to
Emerging SAPs
Recognising
initial
concerns
Making
sense of
observations
Seeking
professional
advice &
support
Identifying
child's
difficulties
and needs
Coping with
reactions
and
responses of
others
105
others. These contextual elements are illustrated in Figure 4.3 (above), and
Section 4.5 discusses them in greater detail.
Figure 4.4 Navigating the Systemic Context
Chapter 5 then explores how parents navigate the systemic context of finding a
resolution for their children’s attendance problems. The elements of this part of
Parents’ Journeys are represented in Figure 4.4 (above). Here, the data reflected
the themes Professional responses, Working relationships, Barriers to support,
and Systemic failures. These themes relate to parental experiences in accessing
support through the education system, plus relevant health services and local
government services.
Chapter 6 considers the home context and discusses the effects of the SAPs on
children, parents, close family members, and on home life, including problems
fulfilling employment commitments, financial commitments, and changes and
damage to family relationships.
Navigating the
Systemic
Context
Experiencing
professional
responses
Navigating
barriers to
support
Seeking
information
and further
support
Recognising
systemic
failures
Navigating
working
relationships
106
Figure 4.5 Managing the Home Context
Figure 4.5 (above) represents the main elements of this aspect of Parents’
Journeys. The themes Ongoing impact on child, Coping with the emotional
impact, and Family crisis were revealed through thematic analysis of data.
Figure 4.6 Working towards a resolution
Managing the
Home Context
Managing
practical
demands
Experiencing
responses of
family &
friends
Coping with
emotional
impact
Responding
to crisis
points
Observing
ongoing
impact on
child
Working
towards a
resolution
Being
proactive
Peer
support
Reflecting
upon
experiences
and
outcomes
Taking
decisive
action
Professional
& third
sector
support
107
Chapter 7 explores the elements of Parents’ Journeys which led them towards a
resolution. Parents may reach a point where their ongoing concerns; or a crisis
point; a change in priorities; or locating or being offered suitable educational
provision, prompts them to take decisive action to resolve their child’s school
attendance problems. Thematic coding of data revealed the themes Parental
Empowerment and Reflecting upon Experiences which are evidenced in this
chapter. The elements that formed parents’ experiences while achieving this
resolution are illustrated in Figure 4.6 (above).
The peak of the Parental SAPs Predicament often evolves as parents observe
ongoing, escalating, or additional concerns relating to their child and family. This
combines with the ongoing emotional impact upon the parents themselves; any
family consequences; any crisis points; any change in priorities; and any
elements of empowerment they experienced throughout their journeys. The
overall combined effect of these elements influences the decisions they make
regarding the best way to resolve the attendance difficulties, to the benefit of the
child and the family.
4.5 Responding to emerging school attendance problems
When school attendance became problematic, parents were in a key position to
intervene as they were usually the individual most closely involved with their
child; and were directly affected by their behaviour. They may have also been
aware, or were reminded by school staff, that they had a legal responsibility to
ensure their child was attending school full-time. In this key position, parents
instinctively recognised they needed to make sense of any initial concerns or
observations to identify what the underlying triggers or problems were. Through
this investigative and reflective process, parents attempted to develop a clearer
understanding of the situation and identify ways to manage any triggers or
resolve problems. This parental need to understand what is happening to their
child and identify how they can best be supported relates to the development of
the Parental SAPs Predicament, as parents began to understand the initial
implications of the SAPs situation and their role within it.
108
The range of elements that feature within this initial stage of Parents’ Journeys
will now be explored in more depth to describe and evidence how parents
respond when school attendance becomes problematic.
4.6 Recognising initial concerns
At some point in each parent’s account, they described circumstances where
they first noted relevant concerns about their child. Some parents mentioned
identifying concerns with relevance during infancy (n=10), while others began to
feel concerned when issues or difficulties emerged when children were enrolled
at nursery, primary, or secondary school.
Early concerns often related to children’s reactions including getting ready for
school in the mornings, making the journey to school, being left by the parent at
school, reactions after returning home, completing homework, and preparing for
the following day. The more distressed children became about school, the more
significant their difficulties became, and times of disruption and distress in the
home became more extensive. Descriptions of difficult mornings, evenings,
nights, and weekends, all featured in parent accounts and these aspects of
parents’ experiences will now be considered in greater detail.
4.6.1 Difficult mornings
A child’s reactions to preparations for each imminent school day provided strong
indications that they were troubled and distressed about attending school.
Children were often extremely reluctant, or unable to complete morning rituals
such as washing, dressing, or eating breakfast. Leaving the house and making
the journey to school was often difficult and traumatic. The following account
indicates the levels of difficulty some families experienced each morning, as
Parent 8 describes the emotions she felt when observing her daughter’s distress,
and in managing the intense transition between home and school:
Trying to get [my daughter] into school every day was the most
stressful and upsetting experience I’ve ever lived through.
Every day I would dread waking her up for school, knowing
109
she'd be tearful and exhausted from anxiety and lack of sleep.
As soon as she opened her eyes, she'd beg me not to make
her go, but would eventually comply with getting dressed and
leaving the house, I never had to physically force her. We
would do 4-7-8 breathing together in the car all the way. If the
smallest thing went wrong - such as she'd forgotten a piece of
homework or left something at home - her anxiety would rocket
from 10/10 to a 100. It took everything I had to stay organised,
calm, and 'together' - from getting her out of bed to eventually
leaving her at school. The whole thing took intense, careful
coaxing and encouraging, and could sometimes take hours,
depending on the morning. We were more often late than not,
which was stressful for her as well as me. I'd have to go in with
her and stay for a while, which made me late for work, adding
to the pressure. Sometimes the person who was supposed to
meet her wasn't available - especially if we were very late –
which made it more difficult. Seeing the other kids run in,
smiling and laughing without a backward glance, just like [my
daughter] always used to do; was hard too.
(Parent 8)
Parent 8’s final comment is poignant, as seeing the ease with which other
children entered the school triggered memories of her daughter doing the same
and were in such contrast to her present situation.
The mornings Parent 9 experienced preparing for school also exemplified the
frustrating practical struggle encountered by many families as children tried to
delay or resist the journey to school:
The mornings are hard work, up & downstairs all morning trying
to get him up, then it's what do you want for breakfast? Getting
dressed takes a while too. Once downstairs he'll find excuses
not to put shoes on or to leave house. Walking to school he'll
either run off & hide or trail behind, we use to have running in
the road, swearing & kicking things all the way there. He will
also say throughout the morning he wishes he was dead.
(Parent 9)
110
Recognising the distress felt by children as they faced a school day was also a
feature of Parent 9’s account, as she recalled observing her son’s inner battle
with his feelings:
[My son] would force himself to get up and get ready for school,
it was like dragging a heavy weight out of bed. Sometimes he
would sit on the end of the bed dressed for school, tears rolling
down his face – saying he couldn’t go in – he would go back to
bed.
(Parent 9)
Parent 24 also described how her son struggled to face school to the extent that
his personality seemed to change to enable him to cope with the transition from
home into school:
If he got up ok, I would be met with a lot of resistance about
eating and shoes and stuff, lots of swearing and then I would
see his personality change before my eyes from a very volatile,
depressed, and anxious boy to a loud, hyper, silly smiling other
person. He had to change into a different person to cope with
going in.
(Parent 24)
Similarly, Parent 37 described the way her son had to prepare mentally to find
the strength to leave her car and enter the school grounds:
On arriving at school, […] he would hang on to the dashboard
with both hands and deep breathe, sometimes he would bash
his forehead on the dashboard, he would then count, and say
‘ok’ and leave. If he saw a friend outside it was worse, he
wasn’t ready for them and it would set things back. Awful times.
(Parent 37)
Each of these accounts offers insight into the level of concern that parents felt
when observing their child’s mental battles and emotional turmoil. For parents,
111
the personal impact of having to watch and manage their child’s distress, and to
battle to get them to school each morning seemed especially significant. As time
went by parents would struggle with the recognition that the same battles had to
be faced every morning. The accounts indicated how much time parents spent
thinking about these daily events and what could be done to make things better,
or easier the following day. In addition, after each difficult journey to school
parents battled with constant worry and guilt about how their child had coped
during their day at school.
4.6.2 Difficult evenings and night-times
Equally, parental descriptions indicated how time periods after school and in the
evenings were just as difficult as mornings, creating significant struggle and
concern. Parents described children’s reactions upon returning home at the end
of a school day. For instance, following her descriptions of difficult mornings,
Parent 9 noted her son’s reactions after school too:
He would return from school and get undressed and get into
bed. He was struggling to wear clothes. He struggled to sleep,
he was up until the early hours tossing and turning
(Parent 9)
Disrupted nights were common if children were upset about events of the day, or
anxious about the day to come. Parents 28 and 12 described night-time
difficulties their child experienced, involving trouble getting to sleep, fitful sleep, or
nightmares:
Getting the girls settled at night was an extremely challenging
time, feeling poorly, tummy aches etc would start, crying for
hours at a time with the worry of school
(Parent 28)
112
He was waking with nightmares every night, clingy at night and
in the morning and his violent and challenging behaviour a
standard event rather than a surprise.
(Parent 12)
Parents also experienced sleep difficulties themselves because of the worry and
stress they felt. Parent 32 explained how this affected her, along with the efforts
she went to, to hide her emotions from her son:
While [my son] was attending school, I would spend most of the
nights awake; he would not sleep well, and I would not sleep
well either, fretting about how the following morning might go. I
would dread the morning school run. Trying to remain calm for
him was exhausting. Any display of emotion from me made him
react more violently, more distressed, more scared, so I tried to
remain calm and neutral to get us through it.
(Parent 32)
This echoes Parent 8’s earlier description of the mornings with her daughter and
offers insight into the significant effect of the situation on both child and parent.
4.6.3 Difficult weekends
The respite of a weekend was often blighted by the build in tension on Sundays,
induced by impending Monday mornings and another week of school. Parent 37
described an occasion when her son outwardly communicated his anxiety:
Sunday nights where awful, one Sunday he was lying on the
floor rocking from side to side as we tried to get him ready for
the morning.
(Parent 37)
Parent 23 also described the difficulty she experienced, in seeing her daughter’s
distress on Sunday evenings:
113
I used to dread Sunday evenings, her sadness, the begging to
not go to school. I dreaded even more the words, "I don't feel
good, my tummy hurts" and the tears whether they happened
at the weekend or during the week.
(Parent 23)
Parent 7 described her similar concerns:
By now weekends were getting to be a terrible time with anxiety
about going to school on the Monday. I just couldn't believe at
the age of 5 my daughter was already living for the weekend
and much of that was being ruined by worrying about Monday
(Parent 7)
These extracts highlight the impact that thoughts of a new school week had on
children, and the various ways children communicated their feelings of anxiety
and reluctance to attend school.
A dilemma for parents when facing these situations at different times of the day
or week related to them knowing how to respond or intervene to support their
children. Equally their accounts reflected concern about how they would be
judged by others in relation to how they did react. To identify a best course of
action, parents needed to understand what might be causing such an emotional
and physical reaction in their child and identify what options they had for
accessing support.
4.7 Coping with the reactions and responses of others
Whenever any problems first became apparent, parents tended to focus on
maintaining school attendance in the assumption or hope that any distress was
temporary and would diminish over time. For some parents, the overwhelming
reaction was one of panic and fear about their child missing school because it is
something they do not expect would happen. As Parent 5 notes in the following
extract – it is accepted and expected within our society that children go to school.
To then have a child who refuses to do so, triggers a range of overwhelming
114
emotions including shame, panic, and failure (as a parent), which can affect how
a parent initially reacts:
I remember being in complete shock. This didn’t happen.
Children went to school; there was no other option. I remember
thinking (and being told) “I have to get her to school; somehow,
anyhow” We tried everything. We tore her pyjamas trying to get
her dressed. Carried her kicking and screaming to the car.
Activated the child locks to stop her opening the doors (at
which point she put her hands over my eyes to stop me
driving). She simply couldn’t do it, if she had been an adult,
society would have recognised it as a nervous breakdown. At
the time, I was in such a panic I couldn’t step back and see how
important it was that I stayed calm and just showed her how
much I loved her. I only saw that in hindsight, and my panic and
lack of patience definitely made things worse.
(Parent 5)
Parents were highly aware of the expectation that all children go to school as a
normal part of childhood, and they felt significant pressure to comply. In this
situation it was unclear what actions they should take, or where they should go
for help, yet their accounts showed how aware they were of the need to do
something to resolve their child’s school absences. This realisation is mentioned
by Parent 16 as the significance of her son’s distress became clearer to her:
[My son] was in a total mess, his tics had increased, and he
started having odd behaviour. I was so worried about him. After
a few weeks of refusing days each week, I began to realise that
he wasn’t playing up and something quite serious was going on
with him, and we needed to get to the bottom of things.
(Parent 16)
When a child appears defiant, rebellious, uncooperative, or badly behaved it is
common for a parent to feel embarrassed, frustrated, and angry, and to try to
correct such behaviour with reasoning and discipline. Parent 16 went on to
describe how she had initially reacted with anger and frustration at her son’s lack
of compliance, and the effect that reaction had on them both:
115
When [my son] started refusing to go in on certain days, I got
angry with him and shouted at him, stopped him watching TV
and playing on his Xbox. He would get so upset, lock himself in
the bathroom sobbing or sit in the corner of his room shaking
and rocking. I felt very alone, uptight and sad ringing in to
school each morning as felt I had failed yet again to get [my
son] to school.
(Parent 16)
The sense of failure and isolation described by Parent 16 was common for
parents and compounded by having to telephone the school daily to report
absences. Parents recognised that school staff were likely to make critical
judgements of their parenting, with each day of failure to comply with
expectations. Added to their sense of failure and shame, was a sense of fear
about what the consequences would be, with knowledge of possible legal action.
Parent 5 described the range of feelings she experienced in this situation:
How did I feel as a mum? Initially, panic, I think. I had never
known anyone whose child suddenly refused to go to school. I
am an anxious person anyway, so my anxiety levels
instantly went up. Quite quickly, after the first few conversations
with her primary school, I also started to get frightened because
it was clear that this needed to be resolved quickly and I hadn’t
even come to terms with what was happening.
(Parent 5)
In addition to feelings of shame, fear and anger, parents also acknowledged their
guilt, and concern for their child. Parent 8 described how she felt having to
comply with the expectation that she delivered her child to school, when she
knew how much her daughter was struggling:
But the worst part was leaving her there - knowing how she felt.
I would walk away with a wave and a smile (trying my best to
be the calm, positive mum I thought she needed to see) but
with my heart in a million pieces. I still have the image of her
small, pale, pinched face - trying so hard to be brave, not to
show how scared and upset she was - forcing a small smile at
116
me when I left, or some days not even managing that, but
looking at me with these pleading, desperate eyes, silently
begging me not to leave her (she couldn't bear to show her true
feelings or distress in front of anyone at school, which I think
contributed to it going on longer, because she wouldn’t shout,
cry, lash out or cling on to me – she would just, sadly, comply).
(Parent 8)
Parent 8’s description exposes the emotional conflict and dilemma felt by both
parent and child as they felt under pressure to comply with school attendance
expectations, and therefore conceal or mask their true feelings.
4.8 Making sense of observations and applying parental knowledge
The in-depth knowledge that parents build of their children was demonstrated
within the accounts through reflection about links between symptoms,
behaviours, and difficulties. This was an ongoing process throughout the time
each child was experiencing attendance difficulties. During the initial
development of the ‘Parents’ Journeys’ and the ‘Parental SAPs Predicament’
described in this chapter, parents were making initial attempts to understand
what was happening and how they needed to respond to resolve their child’s
attendance problems. Chapters 5, 6, and 7 will discuss how this ongoing process
of analysis and understanding evolved further over time.
As school attendance problems developed, parents tried to make sense of their
observations and experiences through a process of investigation and reflection
(illustrated in Figure 4.7 below).
Parents pieced together relevant evidence in the form of behavioural and
emotional signs and symptoms; their knowledge of their child over time; feedback
and responses from others; and information they had gained through their own
research. Parents then reflected upon this evidence with the aim of building up
an overall picture of their child’s needs, difficulties, and any barriers preventing
their attendance at school.
117
Figure 4.7 Process of investigation and reflection as parents make sense of children’s difficulties
In this study parents identified a range of influences that they perceived were
influential. It was thought that children’s difficulties often related to sensorial
responses within an educational environment, unidentified or inadequately
supported SEND, stress or anxiety, or physical illnesses. Sometimes, concerns
and attendance difficulties developed when children responded to specific events
that triggered trauma or distress. These trauma inducing events involved bullying,
a relative’s death, or seeing something traumatic such as an attempted suicide,
or car accident. For some children their trauma was triggered by a school-related
event such as the loss of a supportive staff member, actions by school staff that
caused a loss of trust or respect, or times of significant academic pressure such
as the lead up to taking SATs; or times of transition such as the move from
primary to secondary school.
Often, parents did not know at first why their children were so reluctant or unable
to go to school. Parent 9 describes how at first, she was unsure what to think, but
after observing her son’s out-of-character reactions, it was clear to her that
something had changed his attitude and reaction towards attending school, and
she consequently responded by trying differing strategies to find a solution:
•Advice/Criticism
•Observations
•Diagnoses
•Provision
•Relevant
knowledge
•Systemic
awareness
•Identifying triggers
•Behavioural clues
•Developmental
clues
•History of
difficulties
Knowledge
of child
Reactions
of child
Responses
of others
Self-
Research
118
Initially when he started to school refuse, I didn’t know what to
think but I could see he was scared and frightened which was
quite unusual for him as he had always embraced primary. I
also tried lots of strategies including involving different people,
but the result was always the same.
(Parent 9)
4.9
Identifying a child’s difficulties and needs
When attempting to identify children’s difficulties and needs, some parents
already had existing concerns about aspects of their children’s development,
behaviour, or wellbeing prior to the beginning of any school attendance problems.
If this was the case, they were able to consider whether those existing concerns
may have relevance and these considerations are discussed in Section 4.9.1. A
further influence upon parents’ attempts to understand what was causing
children’s attendance problems was their instinctual perceptions as parents and
this aspect is discussed in Section 4.9.2. These parental instincts are influential
within the Parental SAPs Predicament as the dilemmas parents faced often
involved a conflict between the actions parental instincts indicated were needed,
and their awareness of systemic duties and social expectations.
4.9.1 Relating longer-term concerns to attendance problems
For many parents, concern about their child had begun prior to the start of the
school attendance difficulties and the experiences they wrote of are summarised
as follows:
§ Fifteen parents had acted upon concerns about their child’s behaviour or
development before their child was school age, but they encountered denial
from teachers when difficulties began at school
§ A further eight parents had acted upon concerns about their child’s behaviour
or development before their child was school age and experienced supportive
school responses when difficulties began at school, but wider system
limitations meant no suitable provision was made available
§ A further seven parents identified early concerns, but being unsure what else
to do, they had continued to monitor their child’s wellbeing and progress to
ascertain whether their concerns would be resolved or continue. Eventually
119
these parents, and in one case a child’s teacher, raised concerns when
difficulties increased, again, systemic issues meant each school involved did
not take action to support them
Other parents had relevant concerns that first developed during their children’s
school years and their experiences are summarised as follows:
§ Three parents raised academic, behavioural, or emotional concerns that had
developed after their child started school, however, they encountered denial
from the school that such difficulties existed, as school staff claimed they had
not observed those same difficulties within the school environment
§ Two parents had experienced SAPs triggered by illness, and one by
traumatic events, however in each case their children’s school refused to
offer any support
§ Three parents experienced SAPs triggered by illness and/or traumatic events
and their schools were supportive, however systemic issues meant no
suitable provision was made available for them.
§ Three parents had noted concerns which did not seem severe enough to act
upon until a later traumatic event triggered children’s attendance difficulties;
in response two schools were unsupportive, and one school was supportive
Parents and professionals (if involved early on), often needed to monitor a young
child’s wellbeing and progress to see how things changed over time. For some
parents the use of hindsight was significant as it allowed them to reflect upon
their child’s developmental history and make sense of early observations, often
by connecting them with later observations and knowledge, or vice versa. Parent
7 illustrated this where she explained:
As soon as she could talk, she was considered a shy child, she
often wouldn't speak to people or answer and if she did need to
talk would cup her hand and whisper in my ear and I would talk
for her. She was like this with her grandparents, aunties and
family friends and strangers - it was only years later I realised it
was selective mutism
(Parent 7)
120
The following statement by Parent 23 offers a similar perspective, demonstrating
how some parents had adapted their parenting approaches to manage early
differences in behaviour:
Initially I was exasperated. As I said before, her reluctance to
go to school appeared to be just that - reluctance/would rather
stay at home/laziness. Because it was something I'd always
experienced with her from nursery age onwards it was just
"business as usual". Annoying and exasperating but just part of
the daily routine.
(Parent 23)
This illustrates how some parents managed earlier difficulties by accepting that
they were ‘normal’ behaviour for their child – a part of their personality or
individual characteristics. Sometimes those difficulties did not seem particularly
significant until later when they escalated, or until less flexibility was possible
within new situations or circumstances (such as going to school). Some parents
described their child as being ‘quirky’, ‘different’, ‘clingy’ or ‘sensitive’ and
described adjusting their parenting in response. Parent 22 made a relevant
observation to explain how families accept or adapt to what seems to be a child’s
individual traits:
When behaviours and difficulties are familiar because they are
NFF (Normal For Family) again, you accept that these things
are nothing to worry about - after all, you/your family members
were ok weren’t they? You / they led ‘normal’ lives as adults,
didn’t they?
(Parent 22)
These accounts indicate that parents may notice differences and individualities in
children that they are able to accommodate at home, possibly because there are
other family members with similar traits. This indicates how some individual
characteristics become more problematic when a child is expected to adapt to
the role of ‘school child’ (as described in section 2.4), but the school environment
is less adaptable and accommodating of difference than the home environment.
121
4.9.2 Parental instincts versus attendance expectations
I knew from when he was 15/18 months old, he was 'different'
but everyone used to tell me he was fine and I went against my
instincts for years.
(Parent 40)
Here, Parent 40 talks of ignoring her instinct as a parent when recognising there
was something ‘different’ about her son. Parents sometimes kept their concerns
to themselves as they were unsure how other people would respond, or they
were not sure if their concerns reflected other factors such as a lack of wide
experience as parents. This situation was reflected in observations by Parent 19
and Parent 37 which demonstrate how some parents adopted a ‘concerned-but-
hopeful-that-things-would-settle-down’ approach:
[Our daughter] didn’t want to go on a few occasions, and her
after-school behaviour was often explosive, but she was young,
she was our first child, and we ploughed on regardless
because, despite her many quirks, she seemed generally ok.
(Parent 19)
My son has always been a quirky child, but he is an only child,
so I had nothing to compare with. He was happy, and we
adapted in the same way I felt all parents adapted to their kids
needs
(Parent 37)
In making these assessments of observations about their children, parents were
weighing up the overall wellbeing of their children, to decide whether it was
necessary to take further action or not. However, parents found these instinctive
decisions became more difficult when attendance difficulties occurred, as even if
it appeared that children’s wellbeing was negatively impacted, parents were
aware of the legal requirements and social expectations related to attending
school. They described the turmoil this inner conflict provoked as they faced
122
these difficult dilemmas each day. Here, Parent 10 describes her dilemma in
feeling under pressure to force her son into school, even though it went against
her instincts as a parent which told her that she needed to protect him from harm:
Trying to get [my son] into school every day is like an emotional
rollercoaster. It goes against everything my motherly instincts
tell me I should be doing, I should be protecting him, and
instead I’m doing what feels like the equivalent of somebody
locking me in a room full of spiders and telling me I’ll be ok!
(Parent 10)
Similarly, Parent 36 describes her dilemma in relation to the inner conflict
between her knowledge of legal (systemic response) obligations and the need to
protect her child’s deteriorating mental health (parental instinctual response):
As a mum I felt completely torn between my legal obligations as
a parent (both the school had made it clear to myself and my
daughter that prosecution was possible if she was viewed as
not attempting to attend school) and my responsibility to protect
my daughter’s deteriorating mental health. My memories of this
time are that it felt very much like I was colluding with the
school system to participate in the torture (albeit legal) of my
daughter. This pressure and the enormous amount of guilt that
accompanied it felt like a huge and ever-present weight around
my neck. I felt that I was being placed in an impossible
situation, alone with no one by my side, where I either
cooperated with the system or trusted my gut instincts to
support my daughter’s health and face the wrath of the school
system, a fine and potential prosecution.
(Parent 36)
Parent 27 offered a description of how it felt to contend with this dilemma of
choosing whether to conform to societal expectations or respond protectively to
her child’s distress. Parent 27 also had to manage the additional awareness that
she had no support to follow her parental instincts as everyone around her
prioritised school attendance, making her scared of the consequences of not
conforming:
123
Although I suspected [my son] was autistic from infancy, I didn’t
understand things enough to stand up for him in the way I
should have. Instead, I tried to make him conform, hide his
differences (not intentionally though). I made him attend school
places that clearly traumatised him. That was one of the worst
parts, making him go somewhere that caused him to not want
to live anymore. At the time, I was just trying to do my best, do
what was expected of us as parents. Society, schools, mental
health workers, Drs, friends, family etc expect you to send your
child to school. So you take them. But nobody sees the deep
distress. What they might occasionally witness is a young child
who is upset being carried across the park to school, but as
soon as they cross the school gates the child’s head goes
down, the shoulders slump, they stop crying and they might
walk in defeated. Occasionally they might witness the child
being restrained by staff to stay in school. But that is
occasionally. And when in school, 99% of the time they see a
quiet child, who follows rules, gets on with work, then leaves to
go home. [My son] tells me he was too terrified to do wrong,
speak out, ask for help or draw attention to himself in anyway at
all. That’s why school see him as ‘fine in school’.
(Parent 27)
In facing these dilemmas, parental accounts highlighted the recognition that their
role was to advocate for their children, as there was an urgent need to resolve
the attendance difficulties. To advocate effectively, parents needed to identify
who to approach within the relevant systems, what they needed to say to them,
and what requests for support might be applicable. Even when parents did
advocate for their child in this way, they often found that they faced opposition
from their child’s school. For instance, Parent 1 encountered this when her son
was diagnosed with anxiety by his GP. The school staff disagreed with this
medical diagnosis as they said that they did not ‘see his anxiety in school’ (even
when signs were apparent):
At age 6 he was refusing to go to school often, didn’t sleep,
didn’t have an appetite, and had constant headaches & tummy
aches. I took him to GP, and they agreed anxiety. I explained
this to school, and they said they see no anxiety in school, his
T-shirt came home soaked everyday where he’d chewed the
124
neck of it plus his fingers bled where he’d chewed the skin and
nails off.
(Parent 1)
This type of response from school staff was representative of the difficult working
relationships between school staff and parents that are explored in greater detail
in Chapter Five. When parents experienced these barriers to obtaining support
they needed to identify how best to respond, especially if there was no reduction
in the difficulties the child and family were experiencing.
As time went on, the combined effects of anxiety, stress, practical difficulties,
disrupted sleep, and systemic pressure, increased in significance for children and
parents. This often meant that difficulties at home and school escalated and more
time each day was taken up trying to manage emotions, behaviours, and
practical aspects of family life. As an example, Parent 19 described how difficult
times with her daughter before school, had escalated to impact upon family life
after-school, in the evening, and at bedtime:
It was extremely upsetting for me to try to take [my daughter] to
school, some days she would cry and hang on to me and beg
me not to send her. After school she would meltdown and the
whole evening would often be difficult. We had periods of time
where she didn’t sleep and wouldn’t want me to leave her in her
room. I couldn’t go out in the evening because she would get
so upset. She was extremely clingy.
(Parent 19)
For Parent 19 this indicated how much her daughter was struggling, and her
description indicates how much of an impact the situation had on Parent 19’s
own life too. Parent 29 also wrote about the significant affect her sons’ difficulties
had on the family as the situation escalated:
The struggles to get the boys to school were terrible. Mostly so
with my eldest as we just couldn’t understand why he wouldn’t
go and didn’t know what to do. He became so angry with us. It
125
was quite frightening and very distressing. We felt very out of
control. We had never met anyone at that point whose child
wouldn’t go to school. The battles between my husband and my
son were huge. My husband would refuse to go to work until
[our son] had gone to school. He was often there all day. My
husband and I also disagreed on how best to handle the
situation and we were increasingly falling out. When I look back
at how much stress we caused [our son] in those early days it
breaks my heart. We didn’t have a clue! It wasn’t until he was
severely depressed and suicidal when he was obviously too
unwell to attend school that we stopped trying to get him in and
the pressure eased.
(Parent 29)
Similarly to Parent 5 previously, Parent 29 was influenced by her awareness of
the expectation that all children attend school, and of being unaware of anyone
who did not comply with this expectation. This increased the pressure on the
family to prioritise their son’s attendance at school, leading to additional conflict
between parents as they disagreed about the best approach to take. This
highlights the dilemma that parents experienced in making their choices between
prioritising attendance or recognising their children’s distress needed to be taken
seriously as a sign that significant problems might need addressing.
These collective descriptions illustrate how even when parents tried to implement
strategies to keep children attending school, they often failed because the
underlying triggers and influences were too powerful and continued to cause
difficulties while they were not being addressed. These experiences suggest that
provision of guidance and a comprehensive assessment of children’s needs and
difficulties in the early stages of SAPs could help prevent the escalation in
difficulty that occurs while families struggle to access early recognition and
support.
4.10 Seeking professional advice and support
Initially when a child shows signs that they are unhappy or unwilling to go to
school or in some cases in earlier days, to be left at nursery, parents described
feeling uncertain how to react. It could have been valid for parents to assume that
126
the child’s anxiety and distress was temporary and would soon be resolved.
Once similar difficulties were experienced repeatedly over time, parents needed
to decide what action to take. Parental accounts showed that this decision was
not easy to make, as the following extracts illustrate:
I also felt completely lost. I am analytical person - I problem-
solve and I do desk research as part of my job. But with this
there were so many variables that could indicate an underlying
cause (an intrinsic condition e.g., PDA, trauma, diet?) that it
was impossible to know where to start.
Did I need a clinical psychologist? Educational psychologist
(what’s the difference even?), a psychiatrist, a nutritionist? You
can’t get help until you know what you’re dealing with, so I felt
completely stuck. I remember really wishing there was
someone who could advise on who you should seek for expert
help, but there isn’t such a person (health visitor maybe?)
(Parent 5)
I felt completely isolated as I was embarrassed to speak to
anyone about my situation how do you explain that your son
simply won’t go to school.
(Parent 4)
These extracts epitomise the parental dilemma in identifying the point where it
was appropriate to involve others. These decisions were influenced by concern
about how people would respond to their child’s situation. They were also
influenced by recognition that without a clear understanding of the problem, it
was difficult to identify who they should turn to for help. Commonly, parents
would approach either their GP, or their child’s teacher to establish whether they
had concerns too. In doing so, parents hoped to work as a team with
professionals to establish why the child was struggling and what could be done to
help. The following extracts from Parent 37’s account illustrate how parents try to
identify what actions they should take.
127
Parent 37 described the inner conflict she initially experienced as she tried to
identify how to respond to her son’s school absence. At first, she assumed her
parenting was at fault:
I just didn't understand it. I had never come across this before. I
presumed it was my fault, I had been too soft/kind on him as he
had grown up. Letting him get away with things
(Parent 37)
Parent 37 then noted how the responses she encountered in her social circle
reflected a general acceptance that children must go to school even if they don’t
like it:
Friends I spoke with, didn't quite say that but hinted it. People
said things like 'I hated school' but followed it up with the fact
that they did go in because they had to.
(Parent 37)
Then Parent 37 explained how she had expected that professionals would know
what to do to help them. However, she found that the school’s advised approach
did not make sense to her, although she tried to comply with their expectations:
An educational psychologist had advised school to allow him a
reduced timetable, but they wouldn't do it. I just was bewildered
and feeling that they are the professionals, they should know.
They just kept repeating, 'get him in to school and we can help,
we can't help if he isn't in school', but that didn't make sense to
me as it was obviously school that was causing him angst. I will
admit that I sometimes ignored his pain because I felt I had to
get to work as well. I think that's one of the things that most
upsets me now. How could I have done that???
(Parent 37)
Parent 37 explained how lost and conflicted she had felt without access to what
she considered was appropriate advice and support. The extract below illustrates
128
the range of reactions many parents reported as they tried to respond to the
emergence of their child’s attendance problems:
I was lost and panicking, trying to be a good gentle mum, trying
to be a reliable employee, trying to be seen to be the sensible
mum to the outside world. I just wanted someone to tell me
what to do, I think some friends probably thought I handled it
very badly, and I did. […] But I kept talking to my son, listening,
and hugging, never lying. Tried bribing but that was pointless.
But I was also shouting.
(Parent 37)
Parent 37’s experience illustrates some of the dilemmas that parents
encountered that contribute to the Parental SAPs Predicament. There is a
complex mix of decisions that need to be made daily about what is best for the
child involved (along with any siblings), along with worry about how the child will
react to attempts to get them to school each morning. This is combined with
awareness of the judgements that will be made about parenting capacity by
family members, peers, and professionals, and any implications that may arise
from these judgements. Parents also needed to consider any implications for
their own work or other practical commitments if a child did not go to school as
expected. Furthermore, parents also needed to manage their own emotional
responses to this combination of dilemmas and experiences.
4.11 Chapter summary
This chapter introduced the concept of a journey experienced by parents when
their child encountered SAPs. The chapter also described the initial stages of the
related predicament for parents, where a range of concerns were triggered by a
child’s reaction towards school, combined with awareness of the practical, and
legal implications. Parents observed their children’s reactions and reflected upon
the development of the SAPs to try to better understand each child’s needs,
strengths, and difficulties. Some parents identified concerns with possible
relevance before a child began school and may already have sought professional
input and advice to help identify underlying reasons for those concerns. If
problems arose during school years, parents looked for clues to aid
129
understanding of what was happening to their child and tried to identify triggers
and underlying reasons for any difficulties. They applied this in-depth knowledge
of their child to identify strategies and solutions to overcome problems or barriers
to attendance. If these strategies failed and/or concerns continued, parents
recognised the need to take further action to seek help and advocate for their
child. Parents therefore involved professionals such as teachers and GPs in the
hope that their responses would reflect relevant knowledge, training, and
expertise, combined with helpful policies and if applicable, suitable provision that
could met the needs of their child.
Chapter 5 will now discuss how the data revealed that parents struggled with
similar difficulties and barriers in accessing support, and experienced similar
attitudes expressed by professionals working within the systems they needed to
navigate.
130
Chapter 5. Navigating the systemic context of school attendance
problems
5.1 Introduction
Chapter 4 described the beginning of Parents’ Journeys through school
attendance problems and considered how parents respond to emerging school
attendance problems. Chapter 5 will now consider what parents experienced
when they contacted professionals and attempted to navigate relevant systems
to seek advice and support.
In Section 1.5.1 the relevance of systems within society was discussed and this
chapter holds most relevance to this concept. In England the systems that
become most relevant when school attendance problems occur are the education
system, the health system, and the local government system. In terms of this
study, reference to the education system relates to mainstream primary and
secondary school settings as they provide education when it is compulsory (for
children between the ages of 5 years and 16 years).
The National Health Service (NHS) often becomes involved when school
attendance problems occur as under The Registration (Section 6, 2(b), Pupil
Registration) Regulations, 2006) the main defence parents can use for a child’s
absence is that the child is too unwell to attend. Furthermore, following a
combination of DfE guidance (DfE, 2020a) and local school and LA policy,
parents are commonly instructed to obtain medical evidence to prove that
ongoing school absences should be authorised. Therefore, a GP assessment of
possible physical and/or mental health difficulties is required; although it is also
problematic as GPs argue that it is not in their remit to assess whether a child is
too unwell to attend school (LWMC, 2017). A further service within the NHS that
children experiencing attendance problems are often referred to for assessment
is CAMHS (Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services). Some children may
already be under the care of various NHS services if they have illnesses,
conditions, or diagnoses that have been previously identified, and these services
may become further involved in response to the attendance problems.
131
The English system of local government is involved when school attendance
problems occur because local authorities are responsible for monitoring
attendance at schools in their area. Local authorities are responsible for
enforcing school attendance by issuing fines and prosecutions for school
absence (section 444, Education Act, 1996). Local authorities also have duties
under legislation to arrange alternative educational provision if children cannot
access school-based education (section 19, Education Act 1996). Local
authorities are also responsible for funding and arranging SEND provision if a
child has needs that require an EHCP (Education Health and Care Plan).
Once parents recognised the need for further professional input, they began to
navigate the education, health, and local government systems. Initially if they had
not already done so, this involved discussing concerns with a teacher (or other
appropriate member of school staff) and/or their GP (or another medical
practitioner already involved with the child). Parents expected that as education
and health professionals, the people they approached would know what actions
to take to help their children, as exemplified by Parent 5, who recalled:
I had thought the professionals would step in, tell us what was
going on with [child] and draw up a plan to help her get better.
(Parent 5)
It was apparent that parents expected the professionals they approached would
have ‘frontline’ experience of school attendance problems and be aware of
policies, pathways, services, or provisions that may help. This chapter considers
whether the accounts shared by parents indicated that these expectations of
professional awareness and expertise were fulfilled. Parents’ overall experiences
of professional responses within the relevant systems of education, health and
local government will each be considered in turn. The chapter then explores
more in-depth features of these experiences by referring to themes that were
revealed through thematic analysis which included Professional responses,
Positive and negative working relationships, and Systemic failures.
132
5.2 Experiences within schools
Parents reported both positive and negative experiences of contact with schools;
however, by far the greater part of parents’ accounts consisted of negative
experiences. The positive responses that were experienced related to schools
empowering children and parents by offering help at an early stage. Parents
appreciated help provided by professionals who were knowledgeable about
school attendance problems, SEND, mental and physical health, navigating
policy and legislation. Parents looked for kindness, empathy, and support which
allowed children a degree of control within their attendance context, so that they
had some flexibility to make small steps of progress with minimal pressure. To
facilitate this, schools needed to manage their own expectations around
attendance data and policies, and parents found that this could be a significant
barrier to achieving a positive resolution.
Positive experiences with schools were mentioned by five of the forty parents and
this related to children’s difficulties being recognised, with responses that
demonstrated empathy and kindness, and the reliable provision of appropriate
individualised support. Parent 33 and Parent 39 wrote of relevant experiences:
The school staff we dealt with initially were in student
support and they were fantastic, nothing was too much trouble,
and they were extremely helpful and never once made me feel
bad about ringing them or emailing them when the problems
first began. […] [child’s] form tutor was also fantastic, nothing
was too much trouble, and she regularly rang us to check in.
(Parent 33)
School are great, we have meetings. They have pushed for
help from a specialist teacher. They have put things in place to
help [my daughter] and have an excellent SENCo unit where
she can go anytime.
(Parent 39)
Parent 34 also experienced an empathetic response, however she stated:
133
School were very good and gentle and kind to us both but they
admitted they did not know what to do with him.
(Parent 34)
This evidences how the emotional elements, and the practical elements of
school-based responses might differ, as although Parent 34 perceived the staff
were gentle and kind, they were unable to offer any help on a practical level.
In contrast, most of the participants described negative school-based
experiences. This included Parent 20 who tried to take a proactive approach by
sharing her concerns and asking for referrals to appropriate services:
School: I am not even sure where to begin. There were so
many missed opportunities. I was crying out for help. I reported
every incident. I shared with them my concerns for [my son] […]
I asked for family support. It took almost a year for school to
make this referral.
(Parent 20)
Parent 20’s despair at missed opportunities and slow responses that hindered a
resolution is clear. Her frustration is also apparent in the following extract where
she considered how the school had failed to respond appropriately by assessing
his needs, as specified in the SEND Code of Practice (DfE & DfHSC, 2015):
Playground discussions with teachers escalated to written
letters requesting clarity and information. In the meantime, [my
son] continued to attend a school that was not capable of
assessing him adequately, could not recognise his needs,
ignored his signs of struggle, continued to use strategies that
were not effective.
(Parent 20)
In a further observation, Parent 20 expresses regret that she did not
follow her intuition and instincts when the school failed to act on her
134
concerns. This reflects the discussion in Section 4.9.2 about the
dilemma parents faced in deciding between following their instincts, or
complying with systemic expectations and prioritising attendance at
school, even if it seemed detrimental to a child’s wellbeing:
We shamefully and regrettably bowed to the pressure that was
placed upon us from all those services that were there to “help”
... we ignored our parental instincts, ignored our intuition, and
placed pressure on [our son] to go to the place that caused him
so much anguish.
(Parent 20)
Parent 40 also described how her concerns were dismissed by her son’s schools:
[My son’s] two primary schools were both dismissive and again
sometimes patronising. I would get told he'd grow out of things,
he was fine when he was there, they didn't see anything, lots of
'oh yes but loads of kids do that’.
(Parent 40)
The intention behind these school-based responses seemed to be to offer
reassurance, however to parents with concerns it also demonstrated a reluctance
to listen to their concerns, and a lack of recognition of potential clues indicating a
problem exists. For the parents in this study, it was frustrating to hear these
dismissive comments when they were experiencing significant difficulties at home
and needed further input and advice. Parent 12 found her son’s school also
denied that there was a problem, even when she had the backing of other
professionals who recognised her family needed additional support:
As the school refusal escalated, we had a family support
worker involved, who tried to negotiate with school to make
some adjustments and to acknowledge [our son’s] needs. The
school persisted with their opinion that [our son] was making
good academic progress and was always fine in terms of his
behaviour and what they witnessed. Once the Occupational
135
Therapist had been in and testified that she saw signs of
anxiety, I began to lose confidence that the staff at school were
able to meet his needs and became quite frustrated and angry
that it was constantly placed back in the family and home, in
terms of managing him - even though the support services who
were coming to us from Early Help had assessed me at home
and agreed that we already had everything in place that they
would recommend.
(Parent 12)
This frustration at the lack of support was also echoed by Parent 6 who, as a
teacher, was aware of what her colleagues could do to help her son. However,
she related their lack of action to a change in the school’s culture as they had
recently converted to an academy:
I was dismayed to find that there were only brick walls, despite
working with people who should have had the power to support
my child, but the change of culture only had room for academic
and data issues.
(Parent 6)
The perception of whether the professionals who became involved held the
power required to intervene in a practical and effective manner was something
which was also observed by Parent 36 who wrote of her frustration in finding:
Those that seemed to have some level of empathy appeared
powerless to act.
(Parent 36)
It was therefore possible that school staff dismissed parental concerns because
of an awareness that they lacked the power or capacity to act in response to
children’s difficulties. These extracts might also suggest that school staff
attempted to downplay the seriousness of the problems parents reported. This
may indicate that school staff defined or interpreted each situation in a different
way to the parents, reflecting the different ways that parents and professionals
136
have been noted to construct SAPs in the research literature (as discussed in
Section 2.6.).
From the perspective of parents, their experiences mostly indicated a lack of
empathy, compassion, and little interest in supporting them and their children.
Responses appeared critical, punitive, and hostile, and a general feeling of
indifference was apparent. Parents questioned why these attitudes might prevail,
and whether they might reflect a lack of relevant training; issues with the funding
of support in schools; or were reflective of dominant narratives around
attendance, absence, and truancy (such as those discussed in Chapter 2).
There were elements of school-based experiences that parents wrote about
which appear to create significant barriers to accessing support and achieving a
resolution that will now be explored in the following two sections.
5.2.1 School senior leadership priorities
It became apparent within the accounts parents shared that the lack of empathy
or support offered to children in schools was often driven or influenced by school
senior leadership. The following extracts offer evidence of this observation:
In year 3 her form teacher whispered to me at parents evening
that she thought she might be dyslexic, she couldn’t act on it
because the head didn’t believe in SEN and she would risk
losing her job(!) In year 5 I paid for a private Educational
Psychologist assessment. The head refused to allow the school
or any teachers to participate so the report was limited and
inconclusive.
(Parent 3)
In our case it was clear the SENCo knew that senior leadership
would have zero tolerance of school refusal, to the point where
I was told “let’s just keep this between us for now”. She was
later banned from talking to me.
(Parent 5)
137
I think senior members of staff are generally more concerned
with the school's overall performance and how a child who is
struggling to attend will affect their attendance figures, plus the
impact on limited resources (for support) in school.
(Parent 8)
The assistant head told me “We can't have parents dictating to
us" when I asked for a minor change - very reasonable
adjustment
(Parent 8)
I still don’t trust the senior management, but I am no longer
afraid of them. I did complain to their faces, and went to the
governors, but the senior management tried to push my
children out of the school. I printed lots of legal documents and
pointed out what they did wrong, what they should have done
for a child with medical needs, mental health needs etc. The
governors swept the whole thing under the carpet. I have since
learnt that they systematically do this to children with special
needs who don’t conform. Others have moved area because of
what senior management put them through.
(Parent 27)
The issues highlighted here are complex and could reflect a range of factors that
might influence the actions of senior management in schools, including a need to
maintain power and conformity; school funding deficits; the pressure to maintain
high attendance rates and account for attendance data during Ofsted
inspections; a lack of adherence with relevant legislation; a lack of training and
awareness of relevant factors such as SEND and mental health; and a lack of
understanding of how to effectively respond to attendance problems. Parent 12
made the following observation which suggests that the responses of school
senior leadership are governed by the needs of the school as an institution, and
this will have an impact on how teachers respond and how support is managed:
Power dynamics: professional versus layperson. It is to do with
institutional thinking, and how a school is a body or entity, with
its own value system, needs and social agenda. Teachers
138
seem rarely allowed to act on their own initiative but are always
managed from above.
(Parent 12)
5.2.2 Threats of legal action used to manipulate children
Some participants described how they believed threats of fines and prison terms
for parents, and of children being ‘put into care’ were used by school staff to
frighten and intimidate children, for example Parent 20 stated:
They told him he was breaking the law and that mommy could
get into very big trouble. She told him some parents even go to
jail ‘and then who would care for you? When our son sat there
with no words, she added, “if you don’t go to school, mommy
can’t go to work...and if mommy can’t go to work, she won’t be
able to pay for you to live in this house...and then where would
you live?
(Parent 20)
Similar comments were made to Parent 28 and Parent 22, as they reported:
The Education Welfare Officer proceeds to tell me I will get
fined and sent to prison, all the while [my daughter] was
listening, great this will really help her anxieties.
(Parent 28)
Together with the LA, [school] repeatedly threatened both [my
daughter] and myself that she would be put into care, and I
would go to prison if she didn’t improve her attendance.
(Parent 22)
Parent 8 also described how she felt her daughter was emotionally manipulated
while in school to frighten her into attending:
Whilst waiting for CAMHS to see her, we requested that [my
child] be allowed to attend school for as much or as little as she
139
could cope with, with no pressure. However, school did
pressure her when she was there, including the Learning &
Behaviour Mentor telling her, on a day when she couldn’t
manage more than an hour in school, that if her attendance
didn’t improve ‘mummy and daddy could go to prison.’
(Parent 8)
Parents questioned whether using such an approach was conducive to resolving
school attendance problems, or whether it was more likely to exacerbate
children’s feelings of anxiety and guilt, and consequently make attendance more
difficult for them. As discussed in Section 2.5 this punitive legal discourse was
established to punish parents for truancy, but it is now viewed by many as
ineffective in resolving school absence as it fails to consider more current
understandings of factors that influence attendance.
5.3 Experiences within the health system
Positive support was offered by NHS professionals who recognised that the child
and family needed help, and they then advocated for families in attempts to
source further support. For example, Parent 23 expressed gratitude to her GP,
Paediatrician, and Accident & Emergency staff who she found were supportive
and non-judgemental as they responded in ways that:
Didn't make me feel as though [child] wasn't important and
didn't make me feel like a failure in way.
(Parent 23)
Parent 20 also expressed gratitude for her GPs attempts to help, even while
experiencing systemic barriers to accessing support, whereby no service wanted
to take ownership of the problem leading to a cycle of signposting elsewhere:
Our GP surgery is amazing. The GP’s have gone above and
beyond to support us as a family. They have witnessed the ping
pong of referrals, where numerous agencies returned the
referral signposting to another agency only for that agency to
140
do the same. They wrote several letters explaining [child’s]
needs and advocated for an EHCP.
(Parent 20)
Similarly, Parent 39 explained how her GP tried to help, but also noted that there
were few options available for him to try other than to write to the school:
Firstly, our GP has been brilliant, very understanding but other
than referring to CAMHS it doesn't feel like there is much else
he can do. (Also, he wrote to school, explaining more about
[child's] problems to them)
(Parent 39)
Parents accounts of negative experiences within the NHS mostly related to staff
who had demonstrated unhelpful and obstructive approaches. An example was
provided by Parent 3 who described her GP as:
Very unhelpful and unknowledgeable in relation to Autism and
school refusal. Wouldn’t do a referral to home tuition team
saying CAMHS had to do it, even though they knew an
appointment for CAMHS would take months to organise. No
subsequent follow-up even though they knew the extreme
nature of the situation.
(Parent 3)
Parent 26 expressed her gratitude for the support from her daughter’s
paediatrician but also noted:
She got bogged down with the system a few years ago and
took early retirement. Her replacement was nice but totally
worn down and overwhelmed and maybe even depressed by
the lack of services
(Parent 26)
141
This suggests that some negative experiences were linked to systemic issues
such as low staff wellbeing; a lack of clarity about referral options and referral
pathways; a lack of clarity regarding the responsibilities and scope of an agency’s
work; a lack of capacity both in terms of staffing, and in term of the numbers of
patients who can be cared for within different parts of the health system.
5.4 Experiences within CAMHS
Some parents recounted valuable input from CAMHS, this included Parent 19
who was grateful for her CAMHS worker’s respect for her as a parent and for her
acknowledgement of her daughter’s difficulties:
The CAMHS caseworker who saw us when [my daughter] was
9 was amazing. She could see the distress that [my daughter]
was in and also appreciated that I was doing everything I could
to try to support her. She took self-harm and suicidal ideation
very seriously and didn’t dismiss it as childish manipulation or
hysteria.
(Parent 19)
Parent 23 also felt reassured by the empathetic and non-judgemental feedback
she received from CAMHS:
The CAMHS anxiety and depression team staff we saw were
lovely, didn’t try to make us feel we were at fault, really clear
about how common anxiety is and reassured us that the steps I
was taking to secure alternative education provision were the
right steps.
(Parent 23)
Parent 29 found the support and understanding offered by CAMHS through a
home visit, medication, a care co-ordinator, and a medical sign off provided the
respite from pressure to attend school that her son needed:
142
CAMHS visited us at home within a month and he was started
on Fluoxetine and Melatonin, but we still had to wait a further 3
months for a care co-ordinator. They told us that he was not
well enough for school and signed him off. This took the
pressure off and allowed him time to start to recover.
(Parent 29)
These extracts indicate that parents’ interactions with professionals were judged
to some degree on how they were made to feel by the response of the
professional. It was important for parents to find that their child’s difficulties were
taken seriously by the professionals they met with. The notion of blame was also
significant for parents who often felt judged and vulnerable in the context of
school absence. Professionals who acknowledged the validity of a parent’s
definition of the situation became empowering by promoting the parent’s sense of
self-worth, as their integrity was not being threatened by blame and dismissal.
However, in contrast, other parents described negative experiences, including
Parent 1 who described CAMHS as ‘one of the most frustrating services in this
whole battle’. This opinion was the result of CAMHS initial refusal to see her son
as they decided his difficulties related to him being autistic, meaning he was not
considered eligible for help. Parent 20 also experienced CAMHS refusal to work
with children with neurodevelopmental differences including autism:
CAMHS? After battling for an appointment (and I mean battling)
our son was turned away as he was not mentally ill but had
neurodevelopmental difficulties (ASD). His self-harming and
severe anxiety and depression were not enough for him to
receive a service.
(Parent 20)
Parents expressed their disappointment at delays in being offered appointments
with CAMHS, for instance, Parent 29 explained, ‘I was told repeatedly of the
extensive waiting list for children that are chronically in need’. Further problems
within CAMHS included the lack of capacity for long-term support, and a focus
upon skewed priorities, as described by Parent 33:
143
CAMHS were initially helpful, but we felt they were too keen to
get her signed off and despite her self-harming they didn’t see
this as an issue because she was “coping” i.e., being in school
even though she wasn’t actually attending lessons.
(Parent 33)
Parent 6 found that CAMHS were supportive of her son and recognised his
difficulties, however again, they could not offer any practical help:
CAMHS staff again reinforced the fact that I was doing the right
thing, they supported his absence but again, they couldn’t offer
any practical support – I felt abandoned again.
(Parent 6)
Parent 39 shared her thoughts on a range of problems following her CAMHS
experiences:
They are grossly underfunded and under-experienced and
undertrained. Again, you have an overworked staff who have a
poor understanding of diversities. There is often a blatant lack
of respect or willingness to help or be useful. Staff morale is
rock bottom. They don’t seem to be helping anyone as
everything is long into crisis before they agree to see you.
(Parent 39)
These extracts from parents’ accounts indicated perceptions that there is a
disparity between the help that CAMHS need to provide for children, and the
practical capacity that exists to provide that help due to underinvestment, a lack
of resourcing, and the impact of low staff morale. Overall, this situation impacted
upon parents’ abilities to achieve a resolution by preventing or delaying access to
services. It also limited children’s access to support through the restricted criteria
for access, or by signing them off too quickly, especially when problems had
become entrenched by the delay in access to help.
144
5.5 Experiences within local authorities
There was one single mention of positive experiences with local authority staff or
services, which was Parent 4’s comment about verbal support she received:
I did get support from the LAs specialist service we had
countless meetings and phone calls nothing was ever initiated
by them, but they were there for me to talk too, a support
worker was assigned to [child] but it was sporadic, and he failed
to make a connection.
(Parent 4)
Otherwise, parents described their frustration and anger at the lack of support,
communication failures, and deliberately obstructive tactics used by local
authorities, mostly to avoid or delay arranging and funding provision for children
with additional needs. Local authorities were reported to regularly fail to follow
relevant legislation (e.g., section 19, Education Act, 1996; section 100, Children
and Families Act, 2014) which should ensure that any child who needs it is
offered appropriate support or alternative provision. Parent 35’s account
exemplifies these experiences:
As for the LA, don't get me started! With [my child] it was
horrendous from the start. First, they refused to assess for an
EHCP because his needs were "well documented and
understood". They caved before tribunal. Then they refused to
actually do any of the assessments needed, even though they
were perfectly reasonable. They used out-of-date private
reports they knew weren't suitable. Then they refused to
acknowledge my private SALT report because it stated
specialist school. There was a massive lack of communication,
even after several formal complaints to the Director of
Children's services. I was blatantly lied to and even when I
corrected them they claimed ignorance, saying they could only
go by local policy. […] It took 49 weeks and 3 threats of Judicial
Review to get a final plan. Which named his current junior
school who had already said they couldn't meet needs.
(Parent 35)
145
Parent 29 summed up the way many parents felt about their experiences with
local authority staff:
How do I feel about the LA? Angry! And I'm not an angry
person. But I am so angry that they have such disregard for my
sons needs and don't seem to care that whilst they have
refused to provide a suitable provision for my son, that his
mental health has steadily deteriorated. It’s like a bizarre game
that we have all been playing and my son is the one suffering.
Angry is still the word!
(Parent 29)
Parent’s accounts indicated a range of problems within their interactions with
local authorities which acted as barriers to achieving a resolution. These
problems included a refusal to conduct assessments of needs; a lack of effective
communication; dishonesty and a misuse of information; a failure to provide
suitable provision; and the failure to follow relevant legislation.
This range of parental experiences highlights how working relationships between
families and professionals are of great significance, especially in terms of how
successful parents can be in achieving a resolution and fulfilling their duty to
ensure children receive an education. When parents were engaging with
professionals within the education, health and local government systems, certain
features of their experiences were widely shared, and it is to these we now turn.
These features related to the nature of the working relationships parents were
able to establish with the professionals they encountered (which is explored in
Section 5.6), and the problematic character of the systems as a whole, which
obstructed a satisfactory resolution (which is explored in Section 5.7).
5.6 Working relationships between families and professionals
Professional responses featured heavily within parent accounts, and they were
often described by parents as negative, judgemental, dismissive, and
intimidating. Parents recognised the significance of these working relationships
between families and professionals. Parent 18 construed how influential the
approaches of both individual practitioners and systemic cultures can be:
146
Constantly wading through the unhelpful people in order to find
someone who does help is tiring. While adults who are
employed to work with our children continue to blame the
children for not “coping” instead of looking at their practice and
working out how to help vulnerable children to stay in school
nothing will change. This has to come from the top and the
current system which continually puts vulnerable people down
and blames them for being vulnerable is making everything
worse.
(Parent 18)
Here, it is suggested that the helpful professionals are those who recognise the
possible impact of systemic factors, and who reflect upon whether it would be
beneficial to alter their professional approaches, rather than insist that children
adapt to environments they find distressing and overwhelming.
The relationship between schools and families was central to the Parents’
Journeys, as school is the site of children’s difficulties and therefore the focus of
many interventions. It was therefore crucial for parents and school staff to work in
partnership to identify and overcome the barriers stopping each child attending.
The success or failure of these working relationships depended upon the beliefs,
knowledge, and approaches implemented by those involved. Thematic Coding
revealed five instances where Positive Working Relationships were described,
which centred around empathy, flexibility, a willingness to listen and learn from
each other, and a willingness to work in partnership to find a solution for the child.
Whereas instances of Negative Working Relationships were coded fifty-five times
within parent accounts, and these involved the perceived breaking of trust; poor
communication; not following through on agreed actions; and being dismissive of
information provided by families.
5.6.1 Positive working relationships
Parents recognised the benefits gained from the input of school staff who did
demonstrate an understanding of SAPs and supported beneficial practices such
as offering patience and flexibility. One such professional was acknowledged by
Parent 16 who recalled:
147
[My son’s] SENCo was very understanding and is experienced,
and she has seen it many times. She said some children
managed to come back, some do not. She said she is there,
when he is ready to return, and he can go back in on a reduced
timetable at his own pace.
(Parent 16)
The approach taken by the SENCo here may reflect her experience of working
with numerous children experiencing attendance problems. The SENCo also
indicates how she had learnt what works or doesn’t work, and that children need
time, space, and flexibility to be able to have some control over their return to
education.
School staff who responded with empathy and positivity, and demonstrated
appropriate knowledge and understanding were often individual staff members in
pastoral roles, such as the support worker Parent 13 encountered:
The best professional was [my daughter’s] Support Worker at
her second school. We call her Saint Nicky! She not only
supported [my daughter] but she made me feel that I was
actually a good parent. She always told us how brilliantly we
were doing and constantly told us that she would always be
there for [my daughter]. I remember her saying 'You haven't
given up on her and nor will I.' She made me cry because she
was so kind.
(Parent 13)
The benefits of a positive working relationship between parent and professional
are clarified in Parent 13’s account. There was recognition and acceptance that
there was unlikely to be a ‘quick fix’, yet the school was still willing to offer
ongoing support without resorting to threats of legal action and excessive
pressure to always force attendance. The mutual respect that is apparent in
Parent 13’s experience is something that many parents had hoped to experience
but then struggled to find. According to Parent 12, this mutual respect could be
148
achieved through positive acknowledgement of, and respect for parental
knowledge and input:
Some practitioners seem to be open to accepting parents as
experts. I know there will always be things I can learn but I also
know my stuff. I am qualified and experienced in this area of
work and have a good understanding of [my child’s] needs.
When practitioners have responded to this, I felt hopeful that
services might move forward to support [my child] - after all, if I
give a detailed account of his needs, haven’t I reduced
someone’s workload?
(Parent 12)
Parents often noticed the impact of the individual personalities and approaches of
teachers. Some families found that their children coped better at school during
the academic years when they had a specific teacher, or the support of a specific
member of staff. However, attendance problems would then increase during
other years when different staff members were involved. For example, Parent 19
noted that in pre-school:
Although [my daughter] had refused a couple of times her
teacher was amazing, had 30 years’ experience and was loving
and supportive, so soon made her feel secure and happy to go
in again.
(Parent 19)
Here again we can see mention of the elements of extensive professional
experience and a loving and supportive manner. Parent 14 also noted that her
son benefitted from relationships with specific professionals:
He started in a small primary school where he felt safe and
formed a strong relationship with the head teacher who took
him under his wing. He was a lovely kind man and made [my
son] feel safe and whom he trusted. However, in Year 5 the
head retired and another key TA who he really liked died
suddenly. […] He started to get lots of stomach aches, sickness
and his behaviour started to change.
(Parent 14)
149
Parent 14’s observations highlight the importance of children feeling safe and of
feeling a sense of belonging through the relationships they have access to in the
school environment. It is also apparent from the extracts in this section that for
parents, positive working relationships involved empathy and respect for
children’s feelings; acknowledgement that their difficulties were valid; and
acceptance that resolving attendance problems would involve the school and
family working in partnership, rather than through forcing children to attend and
threats of punitive action, criticism, and dismissal of concerns.
5.6.2 Negative working relationships
Negative working relationships dominated parent experiences. The features of
negative working relationships included school staff ignoring concerns and
diagnoses; not honouring plans and agreements; and breaking children’s and
parent’s trust. An example is offered by Parent 27 whose son was under medical
investigation for ongoing severe pain and had been absent for two weeks. When
he returned, he was still in pain, however school staff were unsympathetic, and
decided his absence reflected learnt behaviour because his brother was also
absent in relation to a different type of difficulty. Parent 27 explained:
When [my son] was in year 5, he had a terrible time of
continuous stomach pains, day and throughout the night for
months non-stop. The school didn’t believe him. They said they
knew what a child in pain looks like, and he is not a child in
pain. He had the stomach issues investigated but this took
months of referrals and appointments with different
doctors/hospitals. Meanwhile, the school offered a phased
return with [my son] in control but as soon as he was in, they
went back on everything they had promised him.
(Parent 27)
Similarly, Parent 12’s son had long-term difficulties and was extremely anxious
and scared about returning to school for a new term. Parent 12 had negotiated
with her son and school staff that he would have a gradual return and stay until
morning break on his first day. She explained:
150
When I came back at breaktime they told me he had been
absolutely fine, nothing to worry about - so I went away until the
end of school - when I finally picked him up, he was emotionally
in pieces, and furious with me for not fetching him. I explained
that I had come but had been told he was fine. He broke down
and said that the school were liars, they lied to him, he can’t
trust them, he’s never going back. I was also angry and hurt by
the deception: not only had they not cooperated with me or
believed me, or [my child], they had made things so much
worse in doing so.
(Parent 12)
A further example of broken trust was shared by Parent 14 who explained:
[Our son] then went on the residential and on the first day had a
migraine and we realised after, a panic attack. A teacher - head
of year - from the school rang us and said she could manage
him if we were happy for him to stay, and we said if he was ok
then we didn’t want him to miss out. Unfortunately, she wasn’t
totally honest, and he was actually really struggling. She lied to
him and said our car had broken down, the bridge was broken
etc, so he felt we’d abandoned him, and he really struggled for
5 days and was absolutely exhausted and depressed when he
got back.
(Parent 14)
Almost a third of parents in the study (n=14) mentioned that when they reported
concerns to school staff, they were told the same thing – that their child was ‘fine
in school’. Although school staff may have intended to reassure parents, this
response acted to invalidate and dismiss their concerns rather than acknowledge
and explore what might be going on. Parent 10 experienced this scenario in a
succession of settings, beginning in nursery:
Each morning on arrival my son, who was 3 years old would
cling to me or his dad. He had to be pulled away from us
kicking and screaming. The nursery always assured us he was
‘fine’ 5 minutes after we left.
151
He then started at primary school, and she observed:
We noticed an instant decline in his behaviour at home, but
school consistently reported he was ‘fine’ in school.
As time went on her son was being restrained each morning to keep him in
school, he was also self-harming and being violent towards family members, yet:
School was still reporting that [child] was fine in school.
(Parent 10)
Similarly, Parent 35 described her son being seen by four professionals from
different disciplines, who each expressed ongoing concerns about his school-
related trauma and deteriorating mental health; yet his school consistently
insisted he was ‘fine’, ignored medical opinions, and continued to do so even
after he was diagnosed with autism, dyspraxia, sleep disorder and severe
anxiety.
The frustration parents described feeling when school staff insisted a child is fine
in school was triggered by the disparity between what the school staff said, and
what parents were seeing and hearing from children at home, for instance,
Parent 27 explained:
School always said he was fine once in, but I knew he wasn’t.
They said he didn’t need any help as he was so able, yet I saw
the struggles with attending school, mental health and his
struggles with homework and any academic tasks. I was also
told he was so quiet and well behaved at school
(Parent 27)
Again, this indicates that there are differences in the ways that parents and
professionals understand or interpret what they experience and observe. Equally
some parents believed that children’s distress was often missed within classroom
settings, especially if a child ‘masked’ or hid their feelings, to avoid drawing
152
attention to themselves, being teased, or getting into trouble at school. Parent 5‘s
account illustrated how different a child can appear at school, in comparison to
how they appear at home:
Along with the blame was quite a bit of disbelief because [our
daughter] masked so well. We even went to a parents’ evening
when one of the teachers thought she had the wrong child’s
details because the [child] they knew at school was so different
from the [child] we knew at home (stubborn, challenging,
defiant, never slept, etc).
(Parent 5)
This lack of recognition from school staff that anxious children, and autistic
children can often hide and ‘mask’ their difficulties while in school often created
significant difficulties. Conflicting opinions about a child’s state of mind
contributed to misunderstandings and breakdowns in communication and trust
between school staff and parents. When these differing interpretations and
conflicts of opinion occurred, it created situations where professional judgements
of parents were reported during systemic administration processes, and then
challenged or disputed by parents. As a professional and a parent, Parent 13
wrote of her frustration about the way that professional judgements can be
problematic when they are based upon an individual practitioner’s interpretation
of a situation:
The Deputy Head at the school [daughter] is registered at now
has been very supportive but when I insisted on seeing a
CAMHS referral that she had completed I found she had
said: [Daughter’s] parents have co-operated fully with the
school but we have to repeatedly revisit principles relating to
the management of [daughter’s] (and their own) anxiety in order
for strategies to be effective and they are in need of some
intervention in order to move forwards with [daughter’s]
attendance.' I think this is a good example of how
professionals can 'judge' parents (and I say this as a
'professional' myself who gives parents advice and attends
‘Team Around the Child’ and ‘Children in Need’ meetings about
other families etc). Although this woman has been really helpful
and sympathetic in many ways, she still obviously thinks we are
overanxious, don't always take her advice and need further
153
professional advice in order to help our own child. It's hard for
professionals not to judge and therefore it's hard not to feel
judged as a parent of a child involved with them.
(Parent 13)
It was also noted that attitudes towards mothers specifically could seem
problematic. Three parents shared their frustration at the common professional
practice of referring to them as ‘mum’ in meetings, rather than using their formal
name (as used for other attendees), this included Parent 12:
I absolutely hate being referred to as Mum - my identity has not
been stripped by my child’s existence!! Many of the services do
not take time to understand my position and make
assumptions. It has led me to be very circumspect about what I
reveal and now have a tendency to hold back my opinions and
observations. Overall, it has felt that I am not trusted to be
objective, and there is rarely any possibility that I might even be
better informed, trained, or experienced than the practitioners.
(Parent 12)
Referring to someone as ‘mum’ can feel disrespectful, and this was viewed by
some parents as a tactic to disempower mothers in meetings, especially when all
professionals were referred to by their formal names. Similarly, Parent 40 noted
the difference in the way she was treated in comparison to her husband:
One thing I have noticed though, is that if my husband comes
to meetings people hang off his every word. It infuriates me
because if I say the same thing I'm ignored! I don't know if this
is a common thing, I imagine it's mostly mums who do all the
advocating. A prime example was my daughter had some
playtime removed. School were a bit non-committal about
dealing with the person who removed it when I mentioned it.
When we had a meeting and my husband brought it up, they
were falling over themselves to sort it. It's the second time it's
happened, misogyny is still alive and kicking!
(Parent 40)
154
These observations again reflect the often-complex working relationship between
professionals and parents, indicating underlying conflicts relating to power,
gender, and perceived expertise. It was apparent within parents’ accounts that
these factors also influenced approaches and attitudes towards the management
of SAPs and Chapter 8 includes further discussion of these influences.
5.7 Systemic failures
Parent accounts featured a spectrum of experiences regarding the problems they
encountered navigating the education, health, and local government systems.
This spectrum ranged from being completely ignored by any services they
contacted, to facing the overwhelming involvement of numerous services, and
threats of prosecution and child protection proceedings. For example, Parent 4
described how she struggled to find anyone who was willing to become involved
in offering help or support:
I would go round in circles every few months I would try the GP,
Paediatrician. CAMHS to help with his mental health. I was
usually fielded with an understanding ear but told that [child]
was on a waitlist, he wasn’t a priority, he would need to attempt
to take his life a couple of times, if we got really desperate take
him to A&E and get him sectioned […]. On the news parents
were being fined for taking their children out of school to go on
holiday, mine wasn’t going, nobody checked it was like he
didn’t exist or anyone cared. I did wonder if I wasn’t fighting and
he was neglected whether anyone would of bothered with him. I
came to the conclusion that it was down to me. I was put out of
my comfort zone and made to feel like I was a nuisance and
[child] was not eligible for any help.
(Parent 4)
In contrast, Parent 22 faced the ongoing involvement of school staff, social
services, services within her local authority, GP, and CAMHS with ongoing
threats and intimidation:
The family coach and social worker repeatedly threatened us
both, putting me in the position of having to submit to their
control. Autonomy was taken away from us both. I felt helpless
and afraid for [my daughter’s] life. As the forced attendance
155
continued, her mental and physical health deteriorated. Medical
and CAMHS reports made no difference to the relentless
harassment, gaslighting and abusive behaviour of school and
LA staff.
(Parent 22)
These variations may reflect the lack of a standard policy or pathway to access
support for SAPs. It often appeared to be ‘pot luck’ whether a family encountered
indifference or intense scrutiny, and this seemed to relate to the attitudes of the
individual professionals involved; the policies enacted in local areas; and how the
family circumstances and school attendance problems were interpreted by those
who worked within the services involved.
Other parents shared thoughts about the systems and services they encountered
which offered further insight. Parent 34 noted a lack of understanding of ‘invisible
disabilities’, and a lack of appropriately trained health service staff with enough
time to spend with children, and she suggested there was a ‘one-size-fits-all’
expectation that hinders the provision of individualised support. While Parent 7
observed ‘a massive elephant in the room’ which was a failure by schools to
admit they could not meet the needs of all children. Furthermore, Parent 19 and
Parent 24 shared their evaluations of systemic issues:
Overall though, my faith in our society and our education
system has been obliterated, despite, or even because of my
victories with [my child]. I believe there are still very good,
dedicated professionals working in mainstream education and
health, but they are fighting within a system that is
fundamentally broken, dangerous and corrupted
(Parent 19)
I am flummoxed at the aggressiveness of services and schools,
their obstructiveness, the fact that professionals will give
opinions that amount too lies to stop children getting the
support they need. The services club together to gaslight us
parents.
(Parent 24)
156
Analysis of accounts such as these contributed to the creation of codes which
were combined within the themes of Systemic failures and Barriers to support.
These themes therefore identified influential features which were apparent within
education, health, and local government systems, and these will now be
discussed in turn.
5.7.1 A lack of effective guidance to access support
I didn’t find anyone with a knowledge of this situation for years.
I searched, googled, phoned, emailed every professional
body/organisation I could think of. No one would help.
(Parent 22)
As Parent 22 highlights, many parents found their attempts to resolve their
children’s attendance problems were hindered by the lack of official guidance, or
policies that informed them (and others) how to access help. Parent 5 perceived
that she struggled to find help because no one knew how to help, but she also
noted how damaging the lack of help was for the children involved:
It really felt (and still feels) as though no one knew what to do -
such a danger when it’s left untreated for so long as [my
daughter] was busy building a brick wall around herself so the
longer it was left, the harder it was to get her to engage (she
never did).
(Parent 5)
These observations indicating that it is difficult for parents to find help for SAPs
echoes the situation professionals also experienced, (as evidenced in Section
5.2.). Even when individual practitioners were supportive and wanted to help,
there was nothing they could signpost families to that made a significant
difference to their situation.
157
Parent 24 surmised that the reason it is difficult for parents to find help is that
professionals working within the systems can find themselves in positions where
they need to avoid taking on the responsibility for helping children and families:
On the whole, I am appalled that we really had no real help and
have been ignored. I waited for someone to say this is bad, it is
not right, and the right thing to do is this.... but I realise now no
one can say that and they are all covering their own backs and
their budgets, and actually they have no duty of care.
(Parent 24)
Some parents attributed the lack of appropriate guidance or services to a lack of
funding. The following observations made by Parents 1, 4, 18, and 22 argued
that the reasons different services and systems deny children access to support,
or try to direct blame towards the child and family as the cause of their problems
is to save their resources in terms of time and finances:
I think the reason behind the mainstream school not wanting to
help with support is financial, being a small school of only 68
kids at the time they had no budget to do this, so it was easier
to say neither child needed help
(Parent 1)
When I started engaging with the SENCo we had meetings, but
nothing was done. I felt like I was imposing on their time that
they were far too busy to be here. The TAF meetings that
followed felt much the same, they were too busy, school had no
money, and they wanted [my son] off rolled ASAP, which I
refused to do.
(Parent 4)
It’s all about money and gatekeeping, hard to reach kids are
expensive but if they say “Will not engage with the service” they
can remove them from the list with no negative impact on data.
(Parent 18)
158
Local authorities similarly do not want these children because
they don’t want to pay the additional funding they are legally
obliged to, nor do they want lower academic grades in their
schools as it may affect their funding from Central Government.
Government directives condone the unlawful practices, which
invariably centre on blaming the parent, denying the children’s
difficulties, and pushing the child out of the school.
(Parent 22)
Moreover, Parent 3 expressed frustration about the false economy of systemic
avoidance of funding support, especially at an early stage before problems
become entrenched and possibly more costly to resolve:
Why do our kids have to reach crisis before anything is
done? Does no-one see that providing early support saves
money in the long-term as it avoids crisis? Yet another fight [...]
Sadly I believe much of this comes down to
resourcing. Schools don’t have the money or time to really try
to understand the struggles of individual children who become
a burden to them, and who affect their figures, which ultimately
reflect badly on the school. HOWEVER, it costs nothing to
listen to parents and be supportive and ultimately neglecting
the needs of children at an early stage will only create the need
for additional support later on.
(Parent 3)
Although parents were proactive in terms of seeking help, they often came to a
realisation that they could not rely on the systems to provide a suitable solution.
Instead, parents concluded they might need to identify a solution to help their
child without professional assistance, as Parent 6 reflected:
I have quickly learned that I could access more information
than [professionals] knew and that my gut instinct was the one
to follow – which I always have done. Initially there was the
suspicion that it was a family issue – easy conclude when
professionals did not know family dynamics. The GP I saw was
very sympathetic, she had a close GP friend in exactly the
same situation, however, there was little that she could do.
Family Support Workers were supportive to a degree but could
159
only call on the same people / services that I had already tried,
and they experienced the same closed doors. In reality, they
had no training, recognised that I was trying my best, but they
couldn’t offer any other solutions. At no point did anyone say
that actually it might just be a question of taking the pressure
off and waiting for things to improve.
(Parent 6)
The suggestion offered by Parent 6 that sometimes the best solution is to remove
the pressure to attend and allow the child space to recover and improve is one
that is difficult for professionals to suggest in their official role, because they are
required to follow policies and legislation that are strongly focused upon full
attendance.
5.7.2 A lack of working partnerships between services and systems
There is a legislative expectation that different services will work in partnership to
support children (e.g., Children and Families Act, 2014). Parents noted the
problematic nature of this expectation, for instance Parent 13 found that CAMHS
and her child’s school had no effective working partnership, and the lack of
respect and cooperation between them became a barrier for her and her child in
making any progress:
It's often felt to us that CAMHS staff despaired of some of the
stuff that the school did with [my child] but they didn't have the
power to change anything. The school could ignore advice from
a psychologist with no come back. Both services need to work
in genuinely close partnership to support children, young
people, and families.
(Parent 13)
Parent 19 described a similar situation, whereby her child’s school was
dismissive of a CAMHS professional’s attempts to help:
[The CAMHS caseworker] was very supportive of [child] and of
me, she put things in place that gave me evidence to present to
the school, she came to meetings with me and was
160
subsequently treated absolutely abominably by the head
teacher, SENCo, and class teacher of my daughter's second
school. It was shocking to see the way a fellow professional
was treated by my daughter’s school, but it was also eye-
opening. I realised after that meeting that the school would do
or say ANYTHING to defend their position even if it meant
behaviour that was totally unprofessional towards medical staff.
(Parent 19)
Parent 22 was grateful for a Paediatrician’s efforts to inform the school and local
authority of her child’s needs and difficulties, although she noted that rather than
act upon this information the school and local authority ignored his report:
Paediatrician was helpful, wrote a lengthy report confirming the
physical health issues (migraine, IBS, mobility issues, tip toe
walking) as being very real physical outcomes of severe
anxiety, triggering by sensory issues, all relating to school
attendance. His opinion was that CAMHS should assess her
and would be best placed to help her. School and LA totally
disregarded his report.
(Parent 22)
Parent 40 also found that her son’s school acted as a barrier to him accessing
help, as they dismissed the input of an Educational Psychologist:
We had a recent Educational Psychologist report saying
[child’s] voice needs to be heard. It hasn't been heard by the LA
because when school get his views, they dismiss them
because it's not what they want to hear.
(Parent 40)
A similar situation was described by Parent 18, with the school SENCo
influencing the input of a speech and language therapist:
We have met so many professionals over the years, the ones
who let us down mostly were the school staff and those who
were influenced by them, for instance a speech and language
161
therapist who was supposed to monitor [my daughter] in school
but only ever spoke to the SENCo and never observed her. The
SENCo kept telling her that [my daughter] was “fine” when
clearly, she wasn’t. We eventually got a verbal apology from
the manager of the Speech and Language Therapy service.
(Parent 18)
The extracts shared here appear to indicate a lack of effective and respectful
working practices between education and health system staff, especially
regarding school staff choosing to ignore or dismiss medical opinion and
diagnosis. This can create significant barriers for parents and children in being
able to access the support they might need to resolve SAPs.
5.7.3 A lack of child mental health awareness and support
The ways that people understand and respond to children experiencing
anxiety and other mental health difficulties was seen by parents as a
barrier for children to access support. As Parent 8 describes below, this
can relate to common beliefs about anxiety and irrational fears:
I think a common view of anxiety (and I used to share this view)
is that if you face the fear it will diminish, if you avoid what
causes you anxiety you will never get over it and it will get
worse. The problem is it depends on what someone is anxious
about. Sometimes it's an irrational fear, sometimes it's very
rational, e.g., bullying, fear of failure, SEN not being met, etc.
And in all cases, people who are overwhelmingly anxious need
the right support if and when they take steps to expose
themselves to their fear. Above all, they need to feel in control,
but schools cannot accept children being put in control or
having their own power - their whole system relies on THEM
being in control, and children doing what they're told without
question.
(Parent 8)
When these common beliefs are combined with the power dynamics
within school-based relationships it can create situations where
162
children’s anxiety is dismissed because it is considered inconvenient to
acknowledge or is viewed as a normal part of life. Parent 23 observed:
There seems to be a general lack of acknowledgement or
concern about children experiencing anxiety in schools and
CAMHS – it is quickly dismissed as ‘just anxiety’ or assumed
that a child will learn to cope, or will just manage, if they are
struggling with anxiety. I would like to understand why this is
the case. This point is most frustrating. And also, the thing at
the heart of why we (society) struggle with mental health
issues. I think we're still hard-wired to fall into the trap of
thinking "everything is hard/we all had it hard/you know nothing
about anything." That sense that because the generations
before us "put up with" terrible things we shouldn't talk about
how hard it is to leave the house, go to work or school or
socialize.
(Parent 23)
Parent 13 offered the theory that an underlying problem is that children’s mental
health and wellbeing is not a priority for schools:
I am not sure schools feel accountable. They feel accountable
for educating children. They are therefore obsessed with
grades and attendance as part of achieving the results they
want. They don't feel responsible for children who don't attend
school other than for trying to get them into school to achieve
those results. I think school talk the talk about mental health
and wellbeing but, in our experience, they haven't embraced it
as central to everything they do. Policies on websites mean
nothing if senior leadership don't completely buy into those
policies and ensure that everybody else in the school does too.
(Parent 13)
Frustration was also expressed by parents about the apparent failure of health
services to assess and identify the underlying reasons why children were anxious
and then respond appropriately:
163
Social misconception over what anxiety is, how it occurs in
children. Absolute lack of resource to investigate properly and
even if they could assess and diagnose, no facility to support
and treat. I am on a low income and have had to sacrifice a lot
to be able to pay for play therapy and psychology assessments
for my children. They haven’t ever met thresholds for support
via CAMHS or other statutory or even charitable services.
(Parent 12)
The situation described by Parent 12 illustrates how some parents were forced to
fund their children’s mental health assessments and therapies themselves,
because they found a barrier to their child accessing CAMHS or other services
was the very high thresholds for access.
5.7.4 A lack of inclusivity in schools
Parents reflected upon the concept of inclusivity and legislation requiring schools
to make reasonable adjustments to support individual needs and disabilities.
Parent 13 pointed out how schools appear to struggle to accommodate children
who require more individualised support:
I think schools can only operate successfully if all children fit
the required mould. They are underfunded and understaffed so
it's very hard to support children who don't fit
(Parent 13)
Parent 12 used a metaphor to express her concerns about the way she
perceived that the children who do not fit comfortably within our education system
are those that become anxious and unable to participate:
“Our education system is clearly failing society in multiple ways.
The children who end up with anxiety are the grains that sit in
the sieve. Nobody knows what to do with them - they won’t fit
through the usual route into the dish, you can keep on shaking
the sieve and with force, a few more grains might be
assimilated. But what happens to the rest?”
(Parent 12)
164
Parents therefore queried why the current education system appears to adopt a
‘one-size-fits-all’ approach that fails to respond appropriately to differences in
children’s needs, abilities, and circumstances. For instance, Parent 23
commented on the discriminatory practice of rewarding high levels of attendance:
Yep. I personally hate the lip service paid to addressing
inclusivity (including mental health needs) that is then swept
aside by awarding treats and rewards to children with 100%
attendance.
(Parent 23)
5.7.5 A lack of compliance with DfE guidance and legislation
Parents reported that guidance and legislation relating to the support a child
should receive, or how their attendance and absence were recorded, was not
always followed correctly. For instance, Parent 40 found that her son’s absences
were not coded correctly or consistently in the school attendance register:
With [child] they were fairly good about his difficulties attending
school and absences were mostly authorised until we appealed
his EHCP then they stopped authorising them. His head of year
got very flustered when I said it hadn't gone unnoticed when
they stopped doing so. I don't know why they did that, the EWO
sorted it out in the end. But since then, they've been okay.
(Parent 40)
Parent 20 also had ongoing difficulty with her son’s absence being coded
correctly, until the last day of term when the headteacher had a change of heart:
The head approached me and gave me a revised attendance sheet “on
reflection, we recognise that [your son] has been unwell, so we have
changed all his unauthorised absences to illness”. This was on the last
day of term!!!!!!
(Parent 20)
165
Parent 2 identified difficulties which were created for her son because his primary
school had failed to follow the SEND Code of Practice (DfE & DfHSC, 2015)
correctly. This led to him being inadequately supported during the transition to
secondary school, triggering attendance problems:
At the end of primary school however it was clear what the way
they had managed [son’s] differences was to accept him as he
was. Which I know is 100% a good thing but it didn’t set him up
to go into Secondary successfully when he didn’t have a
diagnosis.
(Parent 2)
Parent 13 found that the headteacher at her daughter’s school had no awareness
of The Equality Act 2010:
At the beginning we listened to staff at the school, who I now
know didn't have a clue! Their lack of knowledge is scary really.
They were especially ignorant about unlawful discrimination
against a child with a disability. When we met with the Head
she really had no idea about the law on this.
(Parent 13)
Good practice recommendations suggest schools maintain contact with absent
children, keep them informed of their class’s activities and news, and provide
work for them to do at home to prevent additional anxiety building up about
missed work. It is thought that this helps keep children connected to their school
and encouraged to accept help and keep trying to overcome their difficulties.
Parents found this rarely happened in practice because school staff viewed this
support as ‘condoning absence’, when seemingly they assumed children were
making choices not to attend, and were misbehaving or lazy, and therefore
deserved to be punished rather than supported. The following extracts indicated
the reluctance of school staff to assist children while unable to attend school,
even when government guidance suggests they do so:
166
We requested school send work out, [my daughter] still wanted
to learn, but they refused saying it meant they were agreeing
with [my daughter] being off school and they thought she was
perfectly well enough to attend.
(Parent 28)
School refused throughout to provide any alternative
educational support, despite repeated requests from me to
send work home. Their response was “she had to attend school
to access her education”. I provided a copy of the legislation
‘Providing an education for children unable to attend school’
and pointed out their legal obligation to provide appropriate
educational support. They pretended never to have heard of
this legislation and then dismissed it.
(Parent 22)
We tried to do schoolwork at home, but the school wouldn’t
give us anything (we were on unauthorised absence so that
would apparently have constituted endorsing the absence)
(Parent 5)
These examples demonstrate the apparent variation in awareness of legislation
and how individual settings apply or ignore DfE guidance and government
legislation. The extracts also illustrate how children and parents can be thwarted
in their attempts to maintain educational activity and progress by the influence of
professional’s attitudes towards absence from school.
5.7.6 A lack of accountability
Some parents believed that what they saw as lies, misinformation and
unprofessional conduct suggested many of the professionals they encountered
were not adequately held to account or appeared to be accountable to no-one.
The following extracts evidence these perceptions of parents:
167
The level of lies, misinformation and outright illegal practice
across the board is shocking and is only exposed when parents
find the energy, headspace, and finances to fight it.
(Parent 5)
The loss of any trust in the system, or in people that are
supposed to be public servants is mind blowing. To be lied to
and misled purely in an attempt to get you to shut up and go
away and stop costing them money is dreadful. If these people
worked for anywhere else they would be sacked and or sued.
But it seems there is no accountability.
(Parent 35)
Accountability would be a game changer. If these
heads/teachers/LSA’s had to be held accountable for their
words and actions, it would at the very least make them think. If
they could challenge and change the way they thought of
diversities, children, parents, and their roles in other people’s
lives, they might just change their opinions and actions.
(Parent 27)
When parents found themselves in situations where it appeared that a lack of
accountability was hindering them in helping their children, they were frustrated
and angered because there are few ways they could take action if professional
practices did not comply with legislative expectations. This lack of accountability
can therefore lead to children missing out on access to the help they need.
5.7.7 Differing interpretations of school attendance problems
As revealed within this chapter, a factor that seemed to significantly influence the
ability of parents and professionals to work together was that they had differing
interpretations and understandings of children’s’ behaviours and the reactions
they observed (which could be different in the home and school settings). These
differences in perception were then exacerbated by other factors which have
been discussed in this chapter such as the lack of a pathway or guidance for
168
school attendance problems. Parent 3 recognised this and pointed out that many
parents don’t have the answers either, however she went on to say:
I do however know that working collaboratively is much more
likely to create a successful outcome. Blaming and prosecuting
parents (most of whom are desperate to get their kids into
school) is never the answer.
(Parent 3)
Through her job as a social worker, Parent 20 noticed her colleagues were:
“supportive (theoretically)” of her attempts to seek help for her son and his
attendance difficulties, however she noticed that:
There was not one professional however that could relate or
appreciate the barriers in my son’s way to accessing an
education that was suitable for his needs.
(Parent 20)
Parents thought the lack of understanding of the child and family perspective,
along with the dominant expectation that all children must be in school,
influenced the common practice of pressuring parents to physically force children
to attend school, as evidenced in the following extract:
I was told to ‘drag her into school in her pyjamas and we will
deal with her’.
(Parent 3)
Parent 13 exemplified parents who found that physically forcing a child into
school did not lead to an improvement in attendance:
The advice from the school was to get her in every day. They
reassured us that once she was in, she was fine. So, we forced
her to go, holding her hand and pulling her to school. As time
went on, she got more and more hysterical, and we had some
horrendous times when she would run away from us and one
169
particular day when she ran out of school and several members
of staff ran after her. […] Some days she would go in ok, some
days she ended up staying at home and sometimes we forced
her in. Our relationship with her fell apart and at Easter we told
the school we were no longer prepared to force her in.
(Parent 13)
Parent 2 was advised to take a punitive approach by not allowing her child to do
things they enjoyed while unable to attend school:
One of the things school staff told me to do to ‘encourage’
[child] to come to school included not allowing him to go to
Rock School - a Saturday band practise he did regularly attend.
I couldn’t believe they would suggest taking away his only time
he got out of the house and enjoyed himself.
(Parent 2)
These approaches reflect the dominant underlying assumption that children who
do not attend school are misbehaving or truanting and therefore need to be
punished to teach them to conform. The following comments made by
professionals to parents indicated that they believe the children concerned were
making a choice about attendance at school. They also imply that they think it is
important for adults to maintain a level of control over children and enforcing
attendance is a part of this dominance over children:
“He’s choosing to behave that way.” (School staff)
“Your son needs to be in school and he needs to know he doesn’t have
a choice about this.” (School staff)
“You can’t set a precedence.” (Pastoral manager)
“You can’t give your son the message it is Ok not to go to school.”
(Social worker)
“It’s a phase” (Pastoral manager)
These differences in perception and approach could be representative of the
differing levels of understanding of individual children’s underlying needs,
170
difficulties, and triggers for school attendance problems. For instance, in the
situation Parent 2 describes (above) the school staff might assume that if the
child can attend Saturday band practice, they should be able to attend school
too, however Parent 2 argues that this fails to recognise that the attendance
problems relate specifically to the school environment.
5.7.8 A lack of knowledge and awareness of SEND
In Section 4.2.3 it was stated that the existence of special educational needs or
disabilities (SEND) appears to be particularly significant within this study as forty
of the forty-seven children who featured within parents’ accounts have a SEND
that had been diagnosed prior to, or during, the period described in parental
accounts. In addition, fourteen children have a diagnosed physical health
condition, and twenty-two children have a diagnosed mental health condition. A
systemic failure that exists as a barrier to support, and that may impact upon the
differences in understanding of children’s attendance difficulties between
professionals and parents is the lack of knowledge and awareness of SEND in
schools, along with a willingness and knowledge of how to support children with
physical and mental illness, as noted by Parents 40 and 13:
I think schools don't have the knowledge or training when it
comes to Special Educational Needs and have a lot of catching
up to do. It astounds me how little they know when schools are
full of kids with Special Educational Needs.
(Parent 40)
It's interesting at the moment as my son is in being assessed
for SEN and we have been very lucky with some of the
professionals involved, but some of his teachers lack even
basic knowledge of what it's like for a child like him and I find
that terrifying. All those who work in education should have
basic SEN and mental health training, otherwise they can end
up taking decisions about children that can have massive
implications.
(Parent 13)
171
As demonstrated by the study participants, when children experience difficulties,
their parents often must take a proactive approach. This can mean they gain a
significant amount of knowledge about their children’s specific needs, difficulties,
diagnoses, or conditions because they need to research and understand how to
help and support their child on a daily basis. In comparison, Initial teacher
training courses include a bare minimum of training in SEND and any further
knowledge is gained through experience and Continued Professional
Development, so is therefore variable. These varying levels of knowledge and
experience may have an influence upon the differing interpretations of individual
children’s difficulties and support needs that has been apparent throughout this
chapter. If this was a factor in individual cases it created further problems for
parents who found their agency was diminished because their input was less
valued than the input of professionals. Parent 5 observed:
I think there’s an element of not having to listen to parents, plus
an attitude that whilst a parent may be the expert on their own
child, a professional will have their specific area of expertise
which often ’trumps’ the parent’s. And where there are several
professionals involved, the parent view is marginalised further,
so 1 against 3 or 4 or 5 ‘experts’.
(Parent 5)
5.8. Parents working in related professional roles
Six parents answered questions about their experiences of resolving their
children’s SAPs while also working as teachers or in social work. None of these
six parents found their professional standing or experience helped them to find
support or achieve a resolution. They all reported extended periods of difficulty,
systemic failings, and negative school responses. Senior colleagues were
judgemental and displayed little willingness or knowledge of how to help them.
Parent 6 explained:
They [senior staff] take a very subjective view of the situation,
which is counterproductive and even undermines parents
further, there is an assumption that parents are not doing all
that they can to help their child. Few colleagues really
understood the stress involved in dealing with a child who
172
cannot get into school. I suspect some felt that I was a ‘soft
touch’ – difficult to justify, however, when they knew my other
very academically successful children.
(Parent 6)
All six parents stated their professional training had not included supporting
children with anxiety, attendance difficulties, or SEND. Four teachers noted how
their professional knowledge helped them in that they could use the correct
terminology - what Parent 6 referred to as ‘school speak’. Knowing how the
systems work and what support should be available was seen as a positive in
aiding negotiations, but also a negative because it added to levels of personal
frustration.
As a social worker, Parent 20 found that her professional training empowered
her, as she explained:
My profession has enabled me to have the confidence,
experience, capacity, and insight to challenge/question/argue
and fight for our son at every stage. Without my professional
experience, I truly believe we would not have achieved positive
outcomes we have. My familiarity in chairing/attending
meetings/presenting in court, with many multi-disciplinary
professionals gave me the confidence to apply this as a parent
during the meetings/tribunals we attended for him.
(Parent 20)
All six parents compared their own experience to the experiences of other
parents in the support group, and expressed concern about how those parents
would be at even more of a disadvantage, for instance, Parent 24 explained:
I didn’t feel confident, but I knew the front I had to put on from
the off. The stuff I read about mothers being cut off from school
communication because they challenged something or said
something is unbelievable. I was often quite challenging and
demanding more so than many, perhaps I did it in a
professional manner, it's hard to say. I feel that knowing
secondary schools so well, and the teacher characters that you
173
encounter, and the different teaching styles, enabled me to get
a very clear picture of what was happening to my son.
(Parent 24)
While Parent 20 observed:
The Local Authority relies heavily on the naivety and ignorance
of parents and many parents, who do not have the capacity,
ability, understanding, curiosity to question, are ultimately at a
distinct disadvantage.
(Parent 20)
There was also recognition of professional benefits gained through their
experiences:
I would also say that what I have gone through with both my
children has made me a better professional as I have a real
insight into what it's like on 'the other side. […] Equally with
what's happened with our daughter, I would never judge
somebody else's parenting.
(Parent 13)
However, five of the six parents made career changes because of their
experiences of the systems as parents. Parent 20 needed to take sick leave and
then resigned from her job as a social worker to be at home while her son was
unable to attend school. Parent 6 explained that she handed in her notice from
her teaching job saying, ‘I could not reconcile my role as a parent and that of
being a teacher’ and ‘I am bitter that we have had to fight to be believed’. Parent
24 found that her experiences changed her opinion of the education system and
CAMHS, as she explained:
It was a curse knowing what was going on. Very distressing for
me. I have left a job in mainstream secondary, and I don’t think
I could ever go back.
(Parent 24)
174
These experiences suggest that any systemic barriers that hinder a resolution for
SAPs are significant enough to impact upon parents even if they have an inside
knowledge of those systems.
5.9 Chapter summary
This chapter explored parents’ experiences when they attempted to navigate
relevant systems in search of advice and support. Within each journey, parents
needed to negotiate with professionals in education, health, and local
government, and in doing so, they experienced a range of mostly negative
attitudes and beliefs. These experiences suggest that when parents do take a
proactive approach and seek to resolve SAPs, the systems they engage with are
not structured or prepared to support their efforts.
Chapter 6 will now explore the difficulties that parents experienced in the context
of the family and home setting. These difficulties relate to practical aspects of
family life, along with the interactions that occurred between the child, family
members, peers, and employers. Although the systemic and home contexts are
being explored in separate chapters it is important to highlight that parents were
managing both contexts simultaneously.
175
Chapter 6. Managing the home context while experiencing school
attendance problems
6.1 Introduction
Following the exploration of parents’ experiences of navigating the education,
health, and local government systems to seek a resolution in Chapter 5, Chapter
6 now explores parents’ experiences in managing various aspects of family life
whilst also coping with the ongoing SAPs.
6.2 The impact on family life
Family life continued while parents supported children and navigated relevant
systems, however parents described difficulties in coping with their regular
responsibilities including employment obligations and household management
tasks. Extended difficulties each morning or throughout the day meant some
parents had to reduce working hours or leave employment to be at home with
their child or children. Financial pressures increased for many if they stopped
working, worked fewer hours, or had additional costs to cover funding private
provision or assessments for a child. The stress of trying to manage all these
difficulties affected relationships within families. Individual parents reported
feeling resentful that they shouldered all responsibility for managing the SAPs
situation while their partner was at work or was unsure how to help. The situation
was often made more difficult by the reactions of other people if they made
critical or judgemental comments. Analysis of parents’ accounts revealed codes
clustered into the themes: Family Disruption, Family Relationships, Employment
and Finances, and Reactions of Others, which will now be explored in more
detail.
6.2.1 Family disruption
Daily family routines were disrupted if a child who would normally have been at
school remained at home for extended periods of the day. Making plans and
keeping to schedules became problematic due to difficulties leaving home or
transporting and leaving a distressed child at school. Parent 27 described the
176
problem encountered by many parents who had to remain in the school building
for extended periods if their child was too distressed to be left, or if they were
called in to meetings with staff, as she found that:
Nothing could be planned as every plan was at risk of being
scrapped due to having to support children in school
(Parent 27)
Parent 27 also explained the complexity of her home situation when children
made conflicting demands of her:
It was particularly difficult on the practical side when you have
one child clinging to you, pleading with you, threatening things
etc, but other siblings who needed support or transport
themselves.
(Parent 27)
Time at home was often taken up with accommodating children’s specific needs
in the SAPs context, which often disrupted the schedules and needs of other
family members, for example Parent 19 described her daughter’s distress and
the impact it had:
Our whole lives revolved around [our daughter’s] anxieties
about school, from the moment she woke up in the morning
until she went to sleep (which was usually after 11.30 because
she was so anxious she couldn’t sleep, and we would spend
hours trying to get her to sleep. She also frequently wet the
bed and so was either up in the night with that or had to be
carried into the bath first thing in the morning exhausted, upset,
and angry.
(Parent 19)
These difficulties often created a negative atmosphere within the home, as family
members tried to cope with complex daily events and emotional responses.
Parent 5 described how people were affected in her family:
177
[Our daughter] didn’t sleep so life at home became very difficult
– it was rarely calm and [Husband] struggled to keep his cool
when he was tired from yet another day at work on no sleep. I
would start every day promising to be patient and calm, only to
find that most days I would descend into anger and frustration.
(Parent 5)
Similarly, Parent 20’s account described the unpredictability, uncertainty and
heightened anxiety that were features of their home-life:
Often, home was a scene of chaos. We stopped talking, it was
just too much to relive the events that had unfolded and as we
had no answers or support available, there was nothing to be
said. We just knew we had to keep going, doing the best we
could each day.
(Parent 20)
Parent 24 offered some insight into her family life and the impact of the pressure
to achieve a resolution:
Just incredibly difficult for me to make sure the whole family
was ok let alone myself and the regular school meetings and
dealing with CAMHS. The whole situation has put enormous
pressure on the marriage. All we ever talk about is stress and
dealing with all this nonsense.
(Parent 24)
Accounts such as these projected a sense of families in crisis, where they were
struggling to function, with everyone coping as best they could.
6.2.2 Family relationships
The parents who participated in the study reported an unequal division of
responsibility. There would often be one parent who held the main responsibility
for supporting the child to attend school, for communicating with professionals,
178
attending meetings, and trying to navigate and manage the situation. If there was
a second parent they would often be less involved, possibly because they were
the main wage earner, or had less engagement in morning routines. The parent
that held the main responsibility often became resentful and struggled not to feel
envious of the parent who was able to ‘escape’ from the situation at home and
school. Parent 40 explained how she felt in this situation:
I get really resentful of my husband if I'm honest and wish I
could go to work and come home and not deal with any of
it! He often gives me advice which winds me up as he doesn't
actually know what he's talking about and tells me what to do
when he does nothing! He has no idea what I'm on about half
the time, he doesn't research anything himself. He has Autism
too. It makes me feel like I might as well be on my own as I do
it all on my own 99% of the time.
(Parent 40)
The resultant stress affected the dynamic of the adult relationships as parents
struggled to communicate or agree how to manage their children. Parent 13
shared her frustration about such difficulties:
It’s also affected my relationship with my husband, at times it
has put a big strain on us. He is supportive and empathetic but
doesn’t really get anxiety, so I won’t discuss her feelings with
him. On the odd occasion when she has, he doesn’t know what
to do or say, and has often said the wrong thing by mistake.
This has led to him detaching himself to some extent and
leaving me to deal with it all.
(Parent 13)
There would often be an impact upon the relationship between parents as they
struggled to agree upon a coping strategy, such as the experience Parent 24
shared:
All this stress and never really knowing what to do for the best
had our marriage in tatters and stress often manifested in
179
arguments or one of us would get defensive if the other
said don’t do this technique on him try this.
(Parent 24)
Siblings often remained in the background as parental attention was focused
mostly on the child experiencing SAPs. In some cases, siblings became directly
involved in supporting, or coping with the behaviour of their brother or sister, such
as Parent 16’s son:
My oldest son who is 16 seem to take everything in his stride.
He was given less attention at the time as all the focus was on
[his brother] and his behaviour. He was at college so still had
his routine. I would often ask him to look after the dog in his
room when [his brother] was having a meltdown. He has been
helpful in trying to get [his brother] out by walking round the
shop with him. [His brother] is unpredictable and can bolt home
if he gets scared. [Sibling] would have to turn around and follow
him home.
(Parent 16)
Parents described how for some siblings the situation triggered feelings of
resentment, as Parent 3 found:
Her elder sisters were initially sympathetic but now do resent
the fact that they have to go to school and work hard and she
doesn’t. We all struggle to understand to be honest. One
sister is doing A’ levels and her relationship with [her sister] is
now becoming very strained. She blames me for not forcing
[her sister] to school and trying hard enough to sort out the
situation. This is really hurtful as obviously I would give
anything to get [her sister] well and back to school and I do my
best.
(Parent 3)
180
Some siblings expressed their bewilderment as they struggled to understand
what was happening to their brother or sister and in some cases, why they felt
differently about school, as described by Parent 10:
Our daughter couldn’t understand why her brother got to stay
home some days, but she didn’t, she also couldn’t understand
why he didn’t like school as she loved it.
(Parent 10)
For some parents, the situation triggered feelings of guilt because their attention
was focused upon the child experiencing SAPs, to the detriment of their siblings.
Sometimes, as Parent 20 realised, this meant that the impact on siblings went
unrecognised for a while:
The impact on our younger son, [sibling] was huge. Sadly, we
were so consumed with [his brother’s] needs and behaviour
that we didn’t recognise the impact it had on [sibling].
(Parent 20)
Parent 13 noted the reaction of her younger son which indicates how much
resentment he felt:
He is very angry with her, and their relationship is difficult. He
often throws insults at her about not going to school. He says
that she ruined our family etc. So much of our attention was on
her that I feel guilty that he got neglected for a long time.
(Parent 13)
Because parents time was often subsumed with supporting individual children,
siblings had to adapt how they managed their daily activities, which was
something Parent 6 reflected upon:
Siblings had to become very independent very quickly and
regardless of them perhaps needing support, would have to
181
problem-solve for themselves. Siblings have all been resentful
at one time or another of the way that their brother is treated,
and allowances are made.
(Parent 6)
Some siblings were negatively affected by family environments with such high
levels of stress. Parent 24 found this, as she explained:
The little one was brought up in a house with lots of stress, we
tried to shield him from it as much as possible, but the little
brother became highly anxious at 3 years old - the same time
as my eldest was unable to go into school. The little one
became really manic and also began refusing. It was incredibly
difficult to get him into nursery and he wouldn't get dressed and
screamed and cried and didn’t want to go and cried when he
was there. He was fine before that. I had to pull him out of
nursery for a term because he was too distressed.
(Parent 24)
Parents indicated that the impact upon all members of the immediate families
was often significant. Relationships between parents were often under great
strain, possibly reflecting differences in opinions and approaches. Relationships
between siblings in the family, and between parents and siblings of the child
experiencing SAPs were also under strain as each person held a personal
viewpoint about school attendance and opinions concerning how the family
should respond to the situation. These personal viewpoints often seemed to
conflict with the viewpoint of the child and the parent at the centre of the SAPs,
meaning that parent had to act as a mediator or advocate for the child within the
home context as well as in the systemic context.
6.2.3 Employment and finances
Parents expressed sadness and frustration at needing to reduce working hours
or give up jobs and careers if the SAPs were not resolved quickly through early
intervention. In some cases, the impact upon a parent’s life was significant, as
indicated by Parent 8’s experience:
182
The biggest impact, other than on [child], has been on me. I've
had to change my work to a lower paid role with less hours. I
am partway through studying to qualify as a counsellor /
psychotherapist and it's likely I will have to put the next stage of
my studies on hold now.
(Parent 8)
In some cases, the impact came through the loss of stability and increased
likelihood of future career impacts, because of the detrimental effect upon a
parent’s professional record and reputation:
My time off and reduced hours has made me particularly
vulnerable at work with redundancies to be announced over the
next few months.
(Parent 36)
Sometimes the impact was more wide-reaching than the immediate family, as
parent 22 explained:
I had to give up my work as a carer for a 98-year-old, who I had
looked after for 12 years, thereby forcing him to go into a home,
something he had always dreaded. This added to my feelings
of guilt and failure.
(Parent 22)
Parental concern about the financial costs in relation to SAPs and the difficulties
encountered when navigating systems was apparent within the accounts they
shared. The following extracts demonstrate some of the financial impacts
parent’s experienced:
I had paid out thousands of pounds in private reports and going
to tribunal for education needs. […] I’m also livid my children
receive little to no support unless I pay out privately each time.
(Parent 1)
183
We were lucky to have the money to pay for a private
psychologist and solicitor, which many don’t have. But it cost us
(probably - never dared to add it up) 40K in psychologist, tutor
(for about a year?) and solicitor.
(Parent 5)
My mum was very supportive financially. She has had to bail us
out many a time and pay for assessments. This situation has
financially cost her a fair bit, I think we would have lost the
house without her.
(Parent 24)
These experiences demonstrate how the financial cost of supporting a child
experiencing SAPs is borne by the family. Moreover, the constraining of public
budgets to support such children in education resulted in more of the cost being
borne by the family because assessments of child’s difficulties and needs
sometimes had to be funded privately due to problems accessing services within
the education, health, and local government systems (as discussed in Chapter
5).
6.2.4 Reactions of others (wider family and friends)
The code Reactions of Others (wider family and friends) was the second most
frequently allocated code, being used 78 times within the accounts of 33
participants. Therefore, it became clear that the reactions of others had a
significant impact because people had strong opinions about the need for
children to be in school and were mostly judgemental about participants’
parenting abilities and their management of SAPs. This is apparent where Parent
27 reflected upon her experience:
Relationships with other family members were ok but very
strained at times as there was lots of judgements made during
the time and even afterwards. Parenting skills (or lack of) have
been blamed, mainly from the school but also from those close
family members, Most now understand, but it has been tricky,
some relationships have changed perhaps permanently.
(Parent 27)
184
Parents reported a range of comments about their child’s school attendance
problems which were shared by a mix of friends and family members. These
comments illustrated the beliefs people have about the importance of schooling;
a need to control children’s behaviour; and the judgements which are made
about families and children in this situation. Responses tended to reflect a mix of
concern, bewilderment, annoyance, and discomfort at the suggestion that
children ‘choose’ not to go to school, rather than empathy and curiosity about the
reasons why a child might find school attendance problematic and distressing.
The comments made by a range of people were discussed by parents and they
noted that Grandparents appeared to show a strong belief that attending school
is not optional and must be enforced by parents. The use of force was condoned
by some grandparents as they appeared to view the attendance problems as
misbehaviour, and the following comments were experienced by participants:
“Don’t be silly, you need to go to school”
“He has to go to school. You just need to make him.”
“School is not optional”
“You have to break her”
“I think you just need to be more forceful...he doesn’t have a choice.”
Parent 13 considered why grandparents may feel or think in this way and she
observed:
I think it's harder for the older generation because they were
very much of the 'stiff upper lip' generation who grew up during
WW2. My Mum finds it hard to talk about her feelings and
therefore can't quite accept the anxiety that her granddaughter
experiences.
(Parent 13)
Comments made by friends of parents indicated that they believed they would
take a firmer stance than they perceived was being taken, and enforce a child’s
attendance if they were in a similar situation:
185
“You are such a good mom, there is no way I would allow my child to
miss school” (Friend. Age 42. Nurse)
“What do you mean, he won’t go to school? If it was me, I would make
him. He wouldn’t have a choice. (Friend. Age 40)
“I always send my kids to school even if they say they have a stomach-
ache - they soon learn they have to go”
Other general comments made by friends, family and professionals included:
“She is playing you”
“He’ll grow out of it.”
“It’s down to the family dynamics”
“Oh, he’s putting it on”
“Just make him go to school”
“You’re too soft on him”
“He’s manipulating you”
“I wouldn’t have that going on in my house”
These comments imply that people thought there was a parenting-based
problem, and the solution was for parents to be firmer with their child and
implement stricter, more consistent, boundaries and expectations for behaviour.
This advice was also offered to Parent 19 by support workers she had contact
with, and she also found her husband believed a similar approach would be
effective, by saying they:
Just had to "push on through” and present a firm, united front to
[their daughter] and she would then “get over it” and accept our
boundaries.
(Parent 19)
The suggestions that children who experience SAPs need to be ‘broken’ seems
significant because it mirrors the systemic no-tolerance approach that is seen to
be appropriate and necessary in schools. In Section 5.7.7 professionals were
reported to suggest the use of physical force to make children attend, and Parent
186
3 found that friends and close family also thought physical force and punishment
for non-compliance were appropriate ways to respond:
Numerous people have suggested I should just drag her to
school in her pyjamas and asked why I didn’t – including school
secretaries, educational welfare officers and some close
friends. A number have also said I should be tougher on her
e.g. withdrawing electronics (including her 17-year-old sister)
suggesting punishing her for mental health problems is the
answer!
(Parent 3)
Here, Parent 3 disagreed with these suggestions because she interpreted her
daughter’s reactions as signs she had problems with mental health, rather than
displaying bad behaviour that should be punished.
This range of reactions and comments parents encountered indicated a general
assumption that the child or home was the cause of the problems, reflecting the
dominant discourse around school absence discussed in Section 2.6. Fewer
people tended to question or even consider whether there were other underlying
reasons for a child’s difficulty with attending school. These thoughts were evident
in Parent 20’s reflections about people’s responses:
It was very hard to discuss with family and friends as they
couldn’t possibly understand the trauma that our son had
experienced at school. They could not understand that his
behaviour was his way of telling us, when the words failed to
come, that he just couldn’t cope. I do not feel it is possible for
anyone to understand unless they have experienced this
themselves, or know of and can empathise with another
person. The responses we received varied greatly, from the
smiles and nods of sympathy that hid their unspoken words, to
those that spoke openly and freely, causing so much anguish.
(Parent 20)
However, some parents did find people who demonstrated or developed this
recognition of the difficulties being experienced. This was because they had
187
personal experience themselves, or they recognised that rather than
misbehaving, children had a genuine problem with attendance at school, as the
following extracts suggest:
Friends and family did not understand the difficulties that we
were having. That said, one person did, my Mum, who had
found school very difficult herself. She left school with few
qualifications, couldn't tell the time at 16 and had been made to
repeat a year at school as she was underperforming, her twin
was very academic. She has talked more about this in the light
of my son's problems.
(Parent 6)
I discussed with my mum whose advice was not to take [my
daughter] in when she was stressed and to wait until she was
calmer. I don’t know how I could have coped through all of this
without my mum. She has been incredibly supportive and non-
judgmental.
(Parent 19)
Parent 10 found that her mother’s views changed when she saw how real her
grandson’s difficulties were:
My mum had initially thought that children who struggled with
attendance were ‘skiving’ or that parents couldn’t be bothered
to take them. When [son] began having difficulties she instantly
got that his difficulties were real, seeing videos of [son’s]
distress and seeing him have a meltdown after school
completely changed her view. She no longer automatically
assumes that a child not in school is skiving, she sees the
bigger picture.
(Parent 10)
The reality parents perceived was that many people did make assumptions and
failed to consider the wider context of the situation, and this lack of understanding
and empathy contributed to the isolation many parents felt. Often parents
188
described how their experiences prompted them to withdraw or distance
themselves from contact with friends and family:
Family/friends don’t understand, and I am now feeling very
isolated and have withdrawn from many of my friends. It is
easier that way.
(Parent 3)
I have spoken to loads of family and friends over the last two
and a half years but the circle of those I speak to about it has
got smaller and smaller. People just don't understand. People
judge. I now find that I confide in those who 'get it' and just
don't mention it to others. I worry about boring people with it
too.
(Parent 13)
Furthermore, parents noted that people around them avoided talking about their
child’s school attendance difficulties, as Parent 24 explained:
[…] generally no-one wants to discuss it, we have no friends in
the community now because of it, they just cleared off, ignored,
walked to the other side of the street. No one was there for me
in this difficult time. I feel a great sadness in society generally
now. It has changed the way I view people for the worse.
(Parent 24)
Similarly, Parent 36 shared her experience:
All of my daughter’s friends’ parents very much distanced
themselves from us as [her] school refusal became worse and
worse, and her friends distanced themselves more and
more. Any friends I spoke in confidence to about what we were
going through also looked very much uncomfortable and out of
their depth.
(Parent 36)
189
These extracts indicated parents perceived how uncomfortable people felt at the
thought of children not attending school, and parents considered whether this
general difficulty understanding, accepting, and empathising with children when
school attendance is a problem has an impact upon the support that was, or was
not provided for them.
6.3 Observing the impact of attendance problems on children - “we
watched his spark go out”
As the complexity of identifying triggers and needs, and sourcing appropriate
support meant each family’s SAPs often took many years to reach any sort of
resolution or conclusion, their circumstances evolved over time (Figure 4.1 shows
participants had spent between 1 and 12 years trying to resolve SAPs).
Educational provision could alter as different strategies or types of provision were
organised and tried: children may have attended school with difficulty; been on
roll at a school with reduced attendance; or not attended school at all; they may
have been home educated for periods of time or accessed alternative provision.
For children who were unwell mentally or physically, their symptoms may have
improved or worsened as circumstances changed. Parents watched for signs of
improvement or deterioration, recognising that they needed to be ready to react
in response to new difficulties. Parents wrote of their concern for children
regarding the ongoing impact of this evolving journey. Analysis of their accounts
revealed several codes that reflected these ongoing concerns: Child wellbeing,
Child withdrawal and isolation, Child loss of motivation & ambition, and Child fear
of the future, which will now be discussed in more detail.
6.3.1 Child wellbeing
Parents observed how being unable to attend school had a detrimental impact
upon their children and seeing the consequential changes in their children had an
emotional impact upon them too. Parent 19 conveyed how watching her
daughter’s wellbeing deteriorate impacted upon her as a parent:
As a mum it's been hell, it’s been harder than anything I’ve ever
faced in my life, including life-threatening illness. Watching
your beautiful, enthusiastic, funny, clever, and creative child
190
deteriorate in front of your eyes over a period of time is
absolutely heart-breaking.
(Parent 19)
Other parents also noticed their child’s demeanour had changed significantly,
strongly indicating that they were struggling mentally and emotionally, for
instance Parent 20 stated:
We watched his behaviour deteriorate, his mental health
suffer...we watched his spark go out.
(Parent 20)
When describing the impact upon her son, Parent 11 stated:
His light dimmed is the only way to put it
(Parent 11)
Parent 24 made a similar observation when she reflected upon the way her son
was affected by the attendance problems he experienced:
He wasn't in there anymore. It's like he was gone, nothing left.
(Parent 24)
These observations indicated how profound the changes were in some children,
as the positive aspects of their personality appeared to diminish, and their
behaviour appeared very different to how it had been before their attendance
problems developed. These changes were echoed in other accounts, such as
Parents 5, 13, and 19 who explained:
She became a completely different child. As a toddler she was
a real extrovert, had no fear and was very strong-willed. When
the school attendance difficulties started, she became very
frightened, withdrawn and fought like a tiger when we tried to
make her attend.
(Parent 5)
191
[My daughter’s] whole personality changed. She had always
been a happy child who liked school. She was easy going and
popular amongst her peers. She got very low and very anxious
after starting secondary school though.
(Parent 13)
This has mirrored my daughter’s decline from a very sporty,
active little girl who loved swimming, diving, and climbing trees
to a child who became afraid and overwhelmed by everything.
(Parent 19)
This loss of self-confidence and a positive outlook and enjoyment of life was
clearly noted. Furthermore, parents identified a range of negative emotional
reactions, including:
Sadness:
Sad all the time, never smiling or laughing.
(Parent 28)
Fear:
My child described himself as ‘scared’ all the time.
(Parent 34)
Anxiety:
He was more anxious and just wanted to be at home where he
felt safe.
(Parent 10)
Anger:
He became irritable and very angry with us about everything.
(Parent 29)
Aggression:
He was aggressive, smashed furniture, smashed his wardrobe,
doors.
(Parent 37)
192
[My son] became very physical and this was directed at me and
his younger brother. This resulted in numerous injuries (broken
rib, black eye, strangulation etc).
(Parent 20)
In some cases, parents observed how children appeared to shut down
emotionally, or appeared to ‘freeze’, or stop communicating verbally, possibly
because they felt overwhelmed by difficult emotions:
He shut down one day and swore never to go back. He went
into instant depression and had three weeks off school. He
didn't go in much after that.
(Parent 24)
The most emotionally challenging times were when [my son]
froze. He would appear vacant, unable to speak,
expressionless.
(Parent 20)
By the time we removed her from the system in 2015 she was
selectively mute all day at school most days. She was shut
down and was surviving. She was 12.
(Parent 18)
Parents also noted changes in children’s sleep patterns, for example Parent 22
stated:
[My daughter] was awake most of the night.
(Parent 22)
Some parents indicated that children struggled to sleep at night because of their
emotional distress:
193
Every evening she was terribly anxious and unable to sleep
which meant both she and I were exhausted.
(Parent 3)
Some physical changes were also observed, with children appearing to be
physically unwell or generally unhealthy because of their emotional distress, for
instance, Parent 15 stated:
[My son] often would look very pale and started saying he was
ill some mornings and wouldn’t get up and ready for school.
(Parent 15)
While Parent 12 assessed her son’s physical decline:
Pre-school he was a fit and healthy child - since his difficulties
in school began and he has been depressed and seemingly
unaware of his appetite - just keeps eating - he has become
quite unhealthy.
(Parent 12)
The descriptions shared by parents often mentioned a combination of signs and
symptoms indicating a decline in children’s wellbeing. For instance, Parent 9
described the impact she saw in her son’s emotional and physical wellbeing:
He now seems to suffer with low moods, selective mutism, his
eating has not been good. Sleeping more too. Not wanting to
leave the house just not interested in anything.
(Parent 9)
Children were affected in multiple ways, both mentally and physically, which
indicated the significant impact of ongoing SAPs. Parents shared their sadness at
how their children had become affected by their experience of school, and of
being unable to attend school. Parents also expressed frustration at how their
194
children’s difficulties had not been recognised, or supported in ways that
improved their situation:
I hope the damage cause by the school can be reversed, but
sadly I fear this is too late, my daughter is left a broken girl.
(Parent 28)
Not coping in secondary school completely destroyed him. It's
not like it’s just one thing in your life and everything else is just
fine. It destroyed him. Took a long while after de-registering to
begin to build his self-esteem up again. It’s like the school
broke him as a human.
(Parent 24)
The use of wording such as ‘damaged’, ‘broken’ and ‘destroyed’ is notable if we
think back to Section 6.2.4 where it was suggested that children’s perceived
defiance needed to be ‘broken’ to make them attend school. Parent 28’s
comments also reflect her concern that the damage to her child was permanent.
Furthermore, Parent 24 highlighted how the significant impact of SAPs extended
beyond school into all aspects of her son’s life. This became apparent in the
accounts of other parents too, when it was observed that children isolated
themselves from family life, hobbies, and out-of-school activities, and become
socially isolated with the loss of friendships and peer contact (discussed in
Section 6.3.2).
Children often could not verbalise any reasons why they could not attend school
as expected, as Parent 29 observed:
[Our son] was unable to explain to us why or how he was
struggling.
(Parent 29)
Similarly, Parent 5 explained how her daughter avoided talking about school or
her difficulties attending:
195
She couldn’t talk about school or her difficulties at all – she
would hold her hands over her ears and shout so she couldn’t
hear us, turn, and face the wall, or hide under the duvet. In
public (because she wasn’t naughty) she’d just pretend she
hadn’t heard it if someone asked her about school.
(Parent 5)
Parent 13 explained the effect on her daughter of having to talk about her
difficulties:
Various professionals got involved. […] [My daughter] had to
talk to all of them and she gradually shut down. She said ‘Why
would I want to talk about the thing that I most hate about
myself?
(Parent 13)
A difficult aspect that parents reported was times when a child or young person
displayed self-harming behaviours. Within parent accounts there was mention of
eleven children who had self-harmed, including those of Parents 10, and 36:
[My son] soon started to threaten to harm himself in order to not
have to go to school, he has gone for knives, wrapped things
around his neck, threatened to jump from windows and throw
himself off the dining room table in attempt to injure himself.
(Parent 10)
[My daughter] began self-harming regularly.
(Parent 36)
Nine parents reported that their children would say that they wanted to die, or
that they didn’t see the point in being alive. This included Parents 15, 19, and 36:
He became very sad and said ‘I want to die’ all the time.
(Parent 15)
196
She eventually said that she didn’t want to live anymore
because school went on for so long and therefore, she didn’t
see any point to being alive.
(Parent 19)
[My daughter] talked of ending her life just to stop the torture of
having to go to school.
(Parent 36)
Parents found it very difficult emotionally to hear their child say they want to die.
Parents 36 and 20 expressed how distressing it was for them:
To hear my daughter tell me that she would rather die than face
this ongoing situation destroyed me completely.
(Parent 36)
For me, it was excruciating. My first-born son was so
traumatised he wanted to die rather than go to school. All of a
sudden I felt very scared and alone.
(Parent 20)
Two parents described their experience when their children attempted suicide.
Parent 23 experienced her daughter making two suicide attempts following an
extended period of SAPs, and she observed:
On the day she tried to take her life everything became more
charged.
(Parent 23)
It is clear how much this adds to the dilemma for parents who are aware they
have a legal duty to ensure a child receives an education, yet the prospect of
being in a school is one a child cannot face. Three additional parents also
identified that their child felt suicidal or had suicidal ideation. For Parent 29 it was
197
this knowledge that triggered a change in priorities, and empowered them to end
their attempts to maintain school attendance:
It wasn't until he was severely depressed and suicidal when he
was obviously too unwell to attend school that we stopped
trying to get him in and the pressure eased. I feel we lost our
boy then for a while and it has taken many months to get him
back.
(Parent 29)
Parent 22 described how difficult the situation was for her in trying to protect her
daughter, and cope with becoming the target for her feelings of frustration, anger,
and distress:
I was on suicide watch for over a year - I slept only two to four
hours because [my daughter] was awake most of the night. She
was no longer speaking to me except to scream and shout she
wished she was dead, she wished I was dead, she hated her
life, she hated me.
(Parent 22)
Experiencing and observing these significant signs of deterioration in wellbeing of
children added to the impact of the Parental SAPs Predicament. Parents faced
further dilemmas in deciding how to respond to their children’s distress and
protect their wellbeing, especially with awareness of the ongoing systemic and
social pressures to prioritise attendance and protect a child’s education.
6.3.2 Child withdrawal and isolation
Parents reported that their children felt the need to hide from the world and
isolate themselves from people they know. Children showed much less interest in
family life and avoided interaction with their family, and they often retreated to
their bedrooms for extended periods of time:
198
[My daughter] became extremely detached from the family, life
and it appeared the whole world, isolating herself spending all
her time alone in her bedroom, not communicating
(Parent 28)
[Our son] became more withdrawn, he spent less time with us
as a family and more time alone in his bedroom.
(Parent 10)
The following two extracts suggest that children felt unsafe or threatened and
attempted to avoid contact with anyone and withdraw from life outside their
bedroom:
She locked herself in her room, pulled the blinds down and
often barricaded herself in so we couldn't get into the room.
(Parent 13)
He built a tent in his room and retreated to this whenever he felt
threatened.
(Parent 20)
If they could not retreat to their bedroom, some children tried to hide under
blankets or clothing, again suggesting that they felt ashamed and wanted to
avoid any interaction with other people:
He would lie on the sofa with his hoody up or hide under his
covers.
(Parent 15)
At secondary school when we had to drop [her sister] at the
same school [our daughter] would wear her coat back to front
with the hood over her face. Sometimes she would hide in the
footwell of the car.
(Parent 5)
199
Parents also noted another type of withdrawal and avoidance where children
stopped taking part in activities, hobbies and interests they had previously
enjoyed:
She stopped taking part in hobbies she loved, like horse
riding. I remember one occasion when she sat sobbing outside
the riding stables because she couldn't go in. She wanted to
give up piano but her wonderful teacher persuaded her to stick
with it.
(Parent 13)
Slowly anything and everything that he once liked or was
interested in was no longer, he stopped doing everything,
looking at books, drawing, photography. We tried to keep the
rugby going but it eventually fizzled out.
(Parent 24)
For a while she took refuge in playing guitar, singing, and
drawing but towards the beginning of year 9 she stopped
having any interest in these things and by the time she was
suicidal was finding everything a struggle.
(Parent 23)
For parents these acts of withdrawal were further signs that something was
wrong, which triggered further dilemmas about what to do to help their children. A
further aspect parents expressed concern and sadness about was observing
their children withdraw from social contact with their friends and peers, and
seeing them become increasingly isolated, as evidenced in the following extracts:
She stopped going out and interacting with friends.
(Parent 13)
Friends that turned up at the door he could not see, he
felt too bad.
(Parent 24)
200
She is now isolated and withdrawn, and her friends no longer
contact her.
(Parent 3)
These observations illustrate how children’s absence from school became a
barrier to maintaining friendships. Their physical absence was compounded by
the emotional absence parents saw their children needed to establish, as they
felt they no longer fitted in with peers and did not know how to respond to
questions about their absence at school.
For the child and for parents, when school attendance stopped, they often
became ostracised from their school community, both because they were no
longer there physically, and because others reacted critically and the family felt
judged and uncomfortable. The wider consequences of this perceived rejection
were reflected in Parent 34’s account:
No card from the class saying they were missing him, nothing.
We received a request to donate for the Leavers Party, but
nobody actually asked him to go. That was very hard. I can’t
imagine how he felt. I had no parents contacting me to ask how
we were doing. Not one.
(Parent 34)
Parent 34 recognised how both she and her son became ignored or ostracised
by the school and school community. Her son’s difficulties with attending school
meant they were no longer included in the community, and there was little effort
made to maintain contact with them, adding to the isolation they felt.
6.3.3 Child loss of motivation and ambition
Parents observed changes in children’s relationship with education, through their
negative attitudes towards school, learning, and education. Their aversion to
school-like activities extended into the home environment where children were
201
reluctant to do anything that reminded them of school. Parents 29, 34, and 3
reported how they perceived their children had communicated their feelings:
He said he didn’t care about school and there was no point to
anything, such was the stress that he was experiencing.
(Parent 29)
He would say ‘I don’t like school’ in a particular tone of voice. It
was very quiet and devoid of any emotion.
(Parent 34)
She has a phobia of education and professionals and struggles
to come out of her bedroom for her home tuition lessons
refusing them more often than not.
(Parent 3)
Parent 24 described her son’s extreme reaction to words he associated with
school:
The school he was in destroyed his human will and need to
learn. Saying the words, learn, school, education, teach,
teacher, GCSE, exam, would lead to instant meltdown, like
violent house trashing meltdown. I still can’t say those words
now to him or in any part of my life and I am a teacher, saying
teacher makes me squirm now.
(Parent 24)
Parents sometimes noted specific aspects of school that children found difficult to
face following negative experiences, such as a mistrust of both teachers and
students as noted by Parent 28:
But then school/teachers became something she no longer
trusted and wouldn't talk about, they told lies and let her down”
[…] she said school would be manageable if there were no
other students there!
(Parent 28)
202
As a result of their negative experience, some children experienced a loss of self-
belief, self-esteem, and self-confidence in relation to education and their learning
abilities, as noted by Parents 6 and 24:
He has a very low opinion of his abilities in ‘traditional’
education. He’s really reluctant to put himself in that situation.
(Parent 6)
He thought he could do nothing, was thick and was told by
teachers he would not get any GCSE's. He is tested to have
mid to high intelligence.
(Parent 24)
Some parents considered how their children had abandoned previously held
ambitions, including Parent 31 who explained:
He'd got to 11 assuming he would go to university. He began
refusing at 11, and is now 14, out of education for almost three
years, and knows he is unlikely even to get to college and will
never get to university.
(Parent 31)
Parent 28 also recognised how her daughter’s ambitions were less likely to come
to fruition because of the negative effect of their school-related experiences:
[My daughter] is an extremely intelligent girl with aspirations to
be an engineer, unfortunately how she has been mistreated
has resulted in total fear, extreme anxiety around education
and schools.
(Parent 28)
6.3.4 Child fear of the future
Parents found that as the attendance related difficulties continued children lost
hope that anyone would help them. Parents reported that their children had
203
become increasingly despondent about their value as people, and about their
future, as recounted by Parent 5:
She felt she was a burden, I’m quite sure she felt hopeless and
I doubt she could see any future worth living for.
(Parent 5)
Similarly, Parent 13 noted that her daughter avoided thinking or talking about her
future:
She stopped planning for the future at all and still finds that very
difficult. She gets upset if we talk about any future plans.
(Parent 13)
Parent 8 expressed her concerns for her daughter’s future and wellbeing in
recognition of the extent of her unhappiness:
Will she ever get over it? Will she ever be happy in herself? Will
she ever stop feeling like she doesn't want to be here
anymore? Will she ever do the unthinkable, as she frequently
tells me she wants to? And if she does, how will I possibly
survive it?
School pales into insignificance alongside these worries, but at
the same time I worry about that too: Will she ever get back to
school? If not, how will she get her education? What will she do
when she's grown up? Will she fulfil her potential, of which she
has so much?
(Parent 8)
Each child’s ongoing difficulties also led parents to question their prior
expectations regarding what their children would achieve. Parent 4 provided an
example of this when she reflected upon her sadness at being unable to
celebrate the normal milestones of childhood and watch her son progress
through the education system and into employment:
204
The future did not look bright it looked unclear. Most parents
can enjoy the little normal milestones, of primary school,
secondary, GCSE’s, college, employment. My son struggled to
leave the house.
(Parent 4)
This highlights the impact in terms of loss of identity as the parent of a school
child. When parents enrol a child in school, they expect to watch them progress
through Key Stages, and take part in the traditional aspects of school life such as
assemblies, nativity plays, school trips and parent’s evenings. Parents often
value being part of school communities and do not expect this ‘membership’ to
end, especially in circumstances where a child becomes too anxious to step foot
in school; or equally because there is little help offered if their child experiences
difficulties attending. Parent 20 expressed her thoughts on this situation:
We never realised this could happen, that a child can just ‘not
go to school’. That schools can fail to recognise need, support
needs, and acknowledge the reasons behind school anxiety.
My opinion now is one of empathy for any child who is
experiencing such acute anxiety that they are not able to attend
school. Deep sadness for all the children who have reached
this point where they just can’t go on any longer. Anger at the
local authority’s response, or lack of it and shame that, in 2019,
there are so many children without an education.
(Parent 20)
This reflection illustrates the emotional impact which was triggered when parents
reflected upon their lived experiences and recognised that there are many
families in similar situations, which was apparent through their access to peer
support (described in Section 7.2.2). The features of parents’ experiences
discussed in this section illustrate the ongoing legacy of school attendance
problems which had potentially long-term impacts for parents and their children.
6.4 The emotional impact upon parents
The accounts parents shared explicated the powerful emotional impact of their
experiences. This was conveyed through data analysis as Emotional impact
205
became the 5th most frequently allocated focused code. This code represented
parent descriptions of the emotional affects they recognised in themselves and
others. Furthermore, a wide range of feelings and emotions were identified and
coded including frustration (n=55), judgement (n=39), anger (n=29), blame
(n=28), isolation (n=27), stress (n=26), guilt (n=23) conflicted (n=18), distress
(n=15), anxious (n=13), intimidated (n=13), worried (n=13); heartbreak (n=12),
fear (n=11), pressure (n=11), regret (n=11), desperation (n=9), overwhelm (n=9),
gratitude (n=8), relief (n=8), helplessness (n=7), lucky (n=6), pride (n=5), hope
(n=4), shame (n=4), sadness (n=3) and paranoia (n=2). The following extracts
are representative of the mix of intense emotions that parents described as their
journeys evolved:
It was heart-breaking, frustrating, and terribly upsetting. I felt
as if I was failing as a Mum […] I felt the school blamed me
which made me feel even more guilty. There were no answers
on what to do to change the situation which made it even
harder. I felt I dreaded every evening and morning and felt
anxious myself as to what I would face every morning. But my
overriding feeling was sadness that she was so very upset and
out of control and I couldn’t do anything to help her.
(Parent 3)
I felt guilty that we were in this situation, his condition was my
fault was it my genes and the struggles he would have and I
struggled everyday with whether I should go to work I felt I was
letting my work colleagues down and my son for not being with
him 24/7 and not being able to engage him. I blamed my
husband that he couldn’t make things right and mine and
husbands’ family for not supporting [our son] by trying to
engage him in anything. As my time was completely absorbed
with appointments, work, etc I felt guilty for not giving my other
children the time.
(Parent 4)
Parent 30 described the emotional impact of forcing her son to attend school,
along with the lasting damage it caused to their relationship:
206
The school said [my son] needed tough love (but this goes
above and beyond tough love) my child blamed me and still
does for sending him to school. It has destroyed his trust in
me. I am trying to build that trust back up. It has destroyed my
relationship with my son. I would take him to school, and I will
never forget the fear on his face and him begging me so
desperately first of all and then gradually hitting out at me. I felt
like I was sending him to a prison and turning my back on my
child. My emotional state went into major depression. Since
taking him out of school the relief I felt was absolutely
tremendous, but still I question myself that I have let him down.
(Parent 30)
In the following extract Parent 13 analysed the impact of seeing her daughter’s
emotional distress on her confidence and approach as a parent:
It's made me doubt any skills I might ever have thought I had
as a parent. When she shuts down and refuses to talk to us or
do anything I really don't know what to do. I have read endless
books, googled for hours, and sought advice from all sorts of
people but nothing we have tried has worked. I don't know how
to parent a child like this. We have lost all sense of appropriate
boundaries because of what we went through when she said
she wanted to die. If she gets really upset, she still tries to
barricade herself in her bedroom sometimes and I can't face
going back to the days when she wouldn't get out of bed and
lay in a dark room for hours. Sometimes I feel like she controls
us, manipulates us, while at other times when she sobs and
gets in a panic, I see how anxious she really is. However, she
copes with that by having to be in control and that makes
parenting her very difficult.
(Parent 13)
Although negative emotions dominated parents’ accounts, positive emotions
were expressed too, particularly in relation to what had been achieved in finding
a resolution. For example, in Parent 19’s statement below, the successful
application for an Education Health and Care Plan (EHCP) and the successful
complaint to the Ombudsman’s would have helped to validate Parent 19’s
definition of her situation:
207
Gaining the specialist place with the EHCP and the
Ombudsman fining our LA did go a long way to making me feel
resilient and capable, I am proud of what I’ve achieved for my
daughter and our family.
(Parent 19)
6.5 Chapter summary
Parents accounts highlighted their concern for their children as they observed the
impact of ongoing SAPs on their wellbeing. These concerns for children
combined with frustration regarding the lack of help and support that could be
accessed through education, health, and government systems. These two factors
combined with the practical and emotional impact of SAPs on the family, and
critical responses of others in family and social circles to impact upon many
aspects of family life. This created additional stress for parents and increased the
isolation and emotional impacts they experienced.
Chapter 7 will now explore in greater detail how the resolving elements of
Parents’ Journeys were achieved. A resolution was sometimes decided upon
during the peak of the Parental SAPs Predicament which evolved as the full
impact of SAPs on the child, parents and family became clear. However, within
their journey certain resources and experiences also empowered parents and
this experience of empowerment influenced the decisions parents took to secure
the best outcomes they could for their children.
208
Chapter 7. Working towards a resolution for school attendance
problems
7.1 Introduction
Chapter 4 explained how parents respond to the emergence of children’s school
attendance problems. Chapter 5 then explored parents’ experiences of
navigating systems in response to ongoing difficulties with school attendance.
Chapter 6 explained the home-based difficulties parents needed to manage,
along with the responses parents experienced in their social circles during their
interactions with family, peers, employers. Chapter 7 now explores the stage of
Parents’ Journeys where parents try to reach a resolution, having considered the
ongoing impacts of their children’s SAPs. These considerations may have
involved parents evaluating the likelihood they will gain support through the
school, health, and local government systems, and find an educational setting
that meets their child’s needs. These considerations may have been influenced
by knowledge they gained about alternative pathways to a resolution, and their
experience of possible resolutions that had been attempted during the journey so
far.
Analysis of parents’ accounts revealed codes clustered within the theme of
Parental Empowerment and it may be useful first to consider the concepts of
empowerment and learned hopefulness. These constructs support understanding
of how parents who participated in this study appeared to navigate through the
Parental SAPs Predicament that developed because of their experiences within
both the systemic context (described in Chapter 5) and the home context
(described in Chapter 6). Rappaport (1987, cited in Zimmerman, 1995, p.581)
defined empowerment as ‘a process by which people, organizations, and
communities gain mastery over issues of concern to them’. According to
Zimmerman (1990, 1995), individual empowerment occurs when people learn
skills, develop a perceived sense of control, and become motivated to act.
Moreover, psychological empowerment occurs when in addition to these
cognitive features people also develop a critical understanding of related socio-
political, contextual factors. Individual and psychological empowerment is
209
considered significant as it helps people to find solutions for stressful problems in
their personal lives. Furthermore, ‘Learned hopefulness’ is the process whereby
individuals learn and utilise skills that enable them to develop a sense of
psychological empowerment (Zimmerman, 1990, p.73). This process can be
particularly relevant to any social involvement people have within community
organisations, including mutual support groups, which helps them to problem
solve and make decisions. Empowerment processes and outcomes vary
according to contexts and populations (Perkins and Zimmerman, 1995). In the
context of this study, these empowerment processes are related to participant
contact with others within social media support groups, and other forms of peer
contact, which supports people to develop resource mobilisation skills and
situation specific perceived control.
Further themes were also revealed through analysis of data, and they related to
parents’ Reaching a Resolution, and parents’ Reflection upon the journey, which
will also be explored in more detail throughout this chapter.
The resolutions that were reported by the participants within their accounts were
summarised in Section 4.2.4. where it was noted that these outcomes were not
necessarily representative of a finalised resolution, as the families were at
differing stages of their journeys, and it was possible that further developments
occurred after data collection ended. To recap:
Only one out of the forty-seven children discussed by the participants had been
able to return to their mainstream school and re-establish a normal pattern of
attendance. This happened after he spent some time at home having been
signed off as too unwell to attend. This was followed by an eighteen-month
period where he made tiny steps of progress, as he was allowed flexibility and
the focus was on him feeling safe and in control. He then spent six months
attending a medical needs unit, taking further small steps of progress.
Seven children were still enrolled at a mainstream school however their
attendance remained lower than expected.
210
Some children had been able to access an education after their parents had
negotiated a place for them in a different setting. This included six children who
were attending a SEND school arranged through an Education Health and Care
Plan (EHCP); five children who were being educated through alternative
provision arranged by their Local Authority (such as forms of home-based tuition,
online schooling, or hospital school).
Seven children were being home educated by their parents after being removed
from the roll of the school they had attended.
Thirteen children were not able to access any type of educational provision due
to their poor mental and/or physical health.
Eight children had reached the age of 16; of those, four had gone on to attend
college, two were being home educated while taking A levels, and two were too
unwell to be involved in any educational activity.
Although parents had set out on their journey with the aim of resolving whatever
issue they thought had triggered their child’s problems with school attendance,
the lack of support many of them encountered as their journey progressed meant
the resolution they ultimately had to achieve was to arrange or choose an
alternative form of educational provision for their child. This chapter will now
discuss the range of factors that influenced parents as they came to the
realisation that the resolution their child needed was different to the resolution
they had set out to find.
7.2 Parental empowerment
Parents’ accounts featured instances where they experienced a range of factors
that contributed to a sense of empowerment that helped them to feel more in
control of the situation. This gradual empowerment enabled families to gain a
better understanding of their situation; recognise unhelpful approaches;
recognise any mistakes made; identify options available to them to achieve a
resolution and identify any steps they needed to take to try to achieve a
211
resolution. The factors that contributed to this sense of empowerment were
revealed through the coding process as: Being Proactive; Access to peer
support; Professional support and validation; Third sector support; Listening to
the child’s voice; Rethinking priorities; Listening to parental instincts, and Self-
confidence as a parent. These codes will now be explained in more detail.
7.2.1 Being proactive
Chapter Four discussed how parents observed children’s difficulties and
attempted to make sense of those observations to assist them in identifying what
the underlying issues were, and how best to resolve them. This process was
ongoing as the situation evolved and the search for support triggered new
demands and contexts to navigate. Parent 35 explained the approach she had
taken involved two types of action, as she sought knowledge and information,
and advocated for help for her sons within the systems:
I have been very proactive in trying to get help for both boys. I
have educated myself as much as possible, and made as much
noise at school and with the local authority as I can.
(Parent 35)
Parent 24 also recognised the need for a proactive approach having realised
there was no one else willing to offer help to her children:
No one has taken charge with either of my boys’ difficulties. I
have had to hunt everything out myself.
(Parent 24)
Parents described how they developed a greater understanding of school
attendance problems:
It was a case of researching school refusal, just learning along
the way, the more I researched it became blatantly obvious my
daughters had these issues, headaches, stomach-ache,
212
anxiety, separation anxiety, meltdowns, shutdowns, refusing
school due to emotional distress.
(Parent 28)
Parents often needed to learn more about their child’s specific difficulties so that
they were better informed, for example Parent 18 explained how she increased
her knowledge:
I went on courses and two conferences to learn about [my
daughter’s] autism, demand avoidance and selective mutism so
that we could begin to support her better
(Parent 18)
In being proactive, parents undertook a range of activities to search for helpful
information and sources of advice and support:
Research! Hours, days, weeks spent at the laptop, finding
organisations that could offer support.
(Parent 20)
I searched and searched for any articles I could find on school
refusal and anxiety in every spare moment I had and read as
much as I could on the subject. I purchased book after book
and downloaded article after article.
(Parent 36)
Google – articles, research, books. I did buy A LOT of books on
anxiety etc. […] But it felt like a blind man’s stumble through
cliffs. No plan, no strategy, the occasional ‘find’ and lots of dead
ends.
(Parent 5)
Parent 5’s mention of ‘dead ends’ highlights how difficult it was to locate
information when parents were unsure what information they needed, or where
213
they needed to search. When parents were searching for information and support
they were often doing so alone, however, during their online searches and face-
to-face or telephone enquiries and discussions the study participants located
support groups on social media, and this enabled them to contact other parents
in similar situations.
7.2.2 Finding peer support
In locating support from peers on social media, parents often expressed their
relief in contacting others who understood how they felt and sympathised with
what they are experiencing, as Parent 28 explained:
Finding groups on social media has helped, connecting with
people who are going through similar experiences, being able
to reach out and not be judged. Learning so much more along
the way. Support and understanding is highly important
(Parent 28)
Peer contact was helpful in allowing parents to exchange advice and information,
however it also benefitted them in other ways. The impact of contacting peers
with lived experience can be profound in terms of the sense of isolation that
builds up, especially if, up until that point a parent has only experienced criticism
and blame from professionals and friends or family members. Parent 13
expressed how contact with peers with shared experience was meaningful
because they saw that their family was one of many in the same situation, rather
than being an isolated or unusual case:
Just knowing that we are not the only family going through this
has meant so much
(Parent 13)
Peer support also facilitated the exchange of practical information that parents
needed to understand how to navigate relevant systems, such as appropriate
legislation and links to sources of specialist advice:
214
However, the knowledge and information in respect of the law
has been essential as we have battled for our son. The
Facebook support group files contain so much information that
has helped us advocate for our son, it has informed us of the
appropriate legislation that we have needed to refer to and has
given us so many helpful templates (saving many hours of our
time).
(Parent 20)
Parent 8 explained how contact with peers on social media taught her strategies
for managing meetings with professionals – situations that were necessary but
difficult for parents who often reported feeling inadequate and intimidated in such
meetings:
As a result of reading people's experiences and advice in the
Facebook group, I have always made sure I'm super-
professional, calm, and almost detached when dealing with
professionals, taking notes, following up meetings with emails,
quoting the law, when necessary, etc. and I think that's why
they have mostly responded to me respectfully, or should I say
'carefully', even if they haven't agreed with how I was handling
things.
(Parent 8)
Peer support groups offer inspiration and information through shared, lived
experiences. Parent 37 evidenced this in her answer to the question: ‘Did you
find any people who had a good knowledge or understanding of school refusal?’
when she wrote:
Only really mums. You have to have lived it to understand it.
(Parent 37)
This mention of mums in particular reflects the dominance of mothers in the
social media groups, (for instance in the ‘Not Fine in School’ group the
membership is 96% female). The crucial point being made by Parent 37 is that
having lived experience of school attendance problems gives parents insight into
215
the specific and related issues and feelings that cannot be fully understood by
people without lived experience. For instance, Parent 10 explained how the
information other parents shared about their experiences gave her additional
insight, which helped her to understand her son’s difficulties:
It was through the experience of others that I began to join the
pieces together along with snippets of information or ‘worries’
that [my son] was able to share. It was then I realised that [my
son’s] refusal was directly related to unmet needs and a lack of
working together between myself and his school - They
wouldn’t accept he wasn’t fine, and I wouldn’t accept he was.
(Parent 10)
Similarly, Parent 19 accessed advice about following her instincts, and about
being persistent that she found insightful and empowering:
Other parents seemed to have the best understanding of
school refusal and it was their advice to “trust my gut” and not
take the advice of professionals who didn’t understand my child
that I found most empowering. It was also the advice to not
give up with services that kept me going back to CAMHS
despite getting very little help at first.
(Parent 19)
Likewise, Parent 36 gained information that helped her to identify alternative
educational provision and recognise the choice she needed to make between
waiting for support through the relevant systems, or self-funding online schooling:
It was there that I discovered the possibility of withdrawing my
daughter from school and self-funding online schooling which
was a huge turning point for my daughter. After reading
through so many parent’s experiences I realised that it may be
years until my daughter received any meaningful support and I
would have to take things into my own hands if I didn’t want to
further sacrifice her health or education.
(Parent 36)
216
Parent 37 found that she could not discuss her situation with existing friends as
they did not understand the impact of the SAPs. Instead, she found support
through contact with other parents with similar experience:
Kept away from friends because it was too painful talking to
someone who did not understand. I had tried to talk to friends, I
felt that by talking I could make sense of it all, but they would
tell me all kids react like this, or similar, I felt they thought I was
exaggerating, I tried to explain, but then when I went home I
would think over what I had said and what they had said. I felt I
must sound mad!! so stopped talking to them. I phoned the
Samaritans, useless. But I did find help. PDA society, although
I had to book the phone call in advance. I was starting to meet
other mums locally, Facebook pages, DIAS (Devon Information
and advice service).
(Parent 37)
These extracts from Parents 10, 19, 36 and 37 evidence the shared definitions
and constructions of the school attendance problems that informed parents that
their opinions were valid. This shared understanding also helped them to identify
information and strategies that might be helpful as they could learn from the
experiences of others.
7.2.3 Finding third sector support
In addition to the benefits gained through peer support, parents also described
the help they received from charities including IPSEA (Independent Provider of
Special Education) and Young Minds (which focuses on child mental health), as
mentioned by Parents 4 and 36:
IPSEA were a lifeline in advice and getting the EHCP and into
the correct school.
(Parent 4)
When my daughter first became ill (with both depression and
anxiety and was often miserable at school) I called the Young
Minds information line. They were extremely helpful and
217
arranged for a mental health professional to phone me
back. They listened to me and gave me some really useful
advice about a request for a referral to CAMHS via my GP.
(Parent 36)
These charities offered specialised advice to parents and were found to be better
informed about attendance difficulties than schools and other related services.
However, this was not universal and criticism of some third sector organisations
was expressed by parents, including Parent 16 who expressed her frustration at
the support offered to her family:
The Barnardo’s Buddy made me feel annoyed and I lost my
faith in CAMHS. She was putting some blame on my parenting
and telling me to punish [my child]. She didn’t really understand
what [my child] was going through.
(Parent 16)
This suggests that sometimes the support offered by charities was not beneficial
if the underlying approach was not as well-informed as parents hoped. This
tended to occur, as Parent 16 indicated (above) if it was apparent to parents that
they and the support workers did not share the same understanding of the child’s
difficulties. The involvement of support workers could also create more difficulties
for parents if those differing constructions of the situation led to additional
criticism and possibly referrals to social services and more pressure to force
attendance.
Although it is not a charity, SENDIASS (Special Educational Needs and Disability
Information, Advice and Support Service) is a network of local services funded by
the Department for Education to offer impartial advice and support to children
and young people with SEND and their parents. Parent 23 expressed her
gratitude for the practical support she received which was empowering because it
reflected her own beliefs about what her daughter needed:
SENDIASS staff, particularly the case worker I had were
amazing. Supported me all the way to gain a place with the
218
PRU, pointing out to school that [my daughter] should be in
their SEN register (we got blank looks every time that came
up), attended all but one meeting with me and assured me
along the way that alternative education was the right thing to
push for. In my first conversation with my case worker she
said, "I think your daughter has made a very strong statement
about how she feels about school, you all obviously need more
support than you're currently getting and if she were my
daughter I would make sure she never went back there." I cried
with relief at that.
(Parent 23)
Parent 24 also found SENDIASS were helpful as they provided the systemic
backing she needed to influence the approach the school adopted:
The school had just turned nasty on me but when SENDIASS
came in they were nice as pie and said they had to admit they
needed advice on this from their communication and interaction
team.
(Parent 24)
7.2.4 Finding professional support
Chapter Five indicated that professional support was not easy to locate, however,
some parents reported encounters with professionals who offered support that
contributed towards or enabled them to achieve a resolution. Parent 5 listed a
mix of seven school and private practitioners she considered had supported her
family to achieve a positive resolution for her daughter. These practitioners were:
A Teaching Assistant who built a close relationship and a support plan with
Parent 5’s daughter. Parent 5 said:
I just felt huge relief and gratitude that here was someone who
was supportive and trying to help, and it took the heat off us
since it was 'a plan’.
219
A SENCo who tried to be supportive put the family in touch with a Tutor who was
described by Parent 5 as a saviour. Parent 5 explained:
The tutor was equally experienced in dealing with children who
had a whole range of problems, having run PRUs and taught
several children with ‘special needs’. She spent most of the first
year gaining [my daughter’s] trust, helping her separate herself
from me and getting her out of the house and interacting with
the world again.
A Private child psychologist who was said to have helped enormously. Parent
5 explained:
‘The psychologist visited for several months before telling us
that [my daughter’s] walls were so high, so deep and so strong
that she really couldn’t help her anymore. However, it was
incredible to see someone who knew what they were doing.
[…] I think the overriding feeling when you find someone who
gives you confidence and you think you can trust is relief and
gratitude.
A counsellor. Parent 5 said she did not agree with the counsellor’s approach
however she pointed out the effect that her own anxiety was having on her
daughter and explained: “Waves of calm must come from you!”
A solicitor who helped them get a Statement and that supported Parent 5’s
daughter to access education with a home-based tutor linked to a school.
A Deputy Headteacher who allowed Parent 5’s daughter to enrol at the school
but work at home (and take exams at home) with a tutor.
I will never forget what the Deputy Headteacher said to me
when he offered to take [my daughter] on roll: “If she never sets
foot in my school, that’s OK”. Like a great black cloud being
lifted off my shoulders. I think I just broke down and wept.
(Parent 5)
220
This support meant that Parent 5’s daughter was able to complete her school-
based education, and she then went on to attend college and university. The
input of these seven people provided professional input that Parent 5 stated was
beneficial to the family. There was a range of factors that combined to create the
outcome where the resolution protected the child’s wellbeing and allowed her to
access a suitable education. Between them, the professionals provided
reassurance, and inspired the family’s trust and confidence. The professionals
used their skills and knowledge to build a greater understanding of the SAPs and
helped to create a plan to resolve them. The professionals were prepared to
‘think outside the box’ and to follow a child-centred approach, to achieve this. The
outcome was achieved while prioritising the child’s wellbeing and attendance was
not forced.
Professional validation also came through the assessment and confirmation of
diagnoses that validated parent’s concerns. When Parent 22 and her daughter
received her diagnoses from a psychiatrist, she described their reaction:
He was direct and professional. I finally felt vindicated. [My
daughter] finally felt validated. We both felt a huge sense of
relief.
(Parent 22)
A further form of validation came when professionals recognised and recorded
the views of children. This was valuable for parents as it offered evidence that
was additional to their own descriptions and opinions and provided by a
professional. Parent 40 described her experience of this:
CAMHS have been the only ones who managed to get him to
talk, and he was quite clear about how school made him feel
and why. Our CAMHS report is the only independent record of
his views that we have and I'm so glad he spoke to them so we
have it all recorded by someone other than me.
(Parent 40)
221
These examples indicate that parents felt empowered by professionals who
shared a recognition of the problems that parents had identified and therefore a
shared understanding of the context and required actions was established.
7.2.5 Listening to a child’s voice
Some parents were empowered to act and make decisions when they recognised
that it was important for them to take notice of what their child was
communicating to them either through their behaviour or verbally. This may have
occurred after the parent had spent time trying to conform with the dominant
narratives shared by adults, insisting upon school attendance as a priority, but
without success. Parent 8 described how she felt when she realised that she had
not taken notice of her daughter’s voice:
So many times, I wanted to run back and put my arms around
her, reassure her, take her home with me. I'm still heartbroken,
knowing the damage it caused her in the long run - I'm not sure
I'll ever get over it. Rationally, I know that I only did it because I
thought it was what was needed to help her face and overcome
her anxiety, and I know it’s not helpful to blame myself; but at
the same time, I feel I will never fully forgive myself for not
understanding or realising sooner that it was the wrong thing to
do. [Child] and I have talked about it a lot since then, and she
mostly understands and forgives me, but out of everything that
has happened on this journey - making her keep on going when
she told me over and over how she felt, and eventually had so
little resilience and ability left to cope - is by far my biggest
regret.
(Parent 8)
Parent 18 also recognised how she had failed to acknowledge what her daughter
was trying to communicate to her:
When [my daughter] was screaming and begging me not to
send her she was trying to tell me that the system was harming
her. […] We invalidated her voice because we did not listen to
her, we kept sending her to the places that were breaking her.
Although we did do it for the right reasons.
(Parent 18)
222
Here, Parent 18 strongly demonstrates a dilemma represented within the
Parental SAPs Predicament as she recognised, they had failed to hear what their
daughter was communicating, but they had done so for what she felt were the
right reasons.
It was noted by Parent 20 that her understanding of what her son was
experiencing did not begin to form until she really took the time to listen to him:
We first began to understand what was happening to our son
when we stepped back and listened to him.
(Parent 20)
It is apparent through these observations that where some professionals had
invalidated the parents’ voices by not responding to their concerns, some parents
realised that they had invalidated their children’s voices by prioritising the
opinions of adults, possibly including their own.
7.2.6 Rethinking priorities
Some parents reached a point in their journey where they had developed a
clearer understanding of what they needed to prioritise, or they felt they had a
better understanding of their child’s difficulties, and/or the systemic context. It
was possible that any sense of empowerment they had gained then assisted
them to make difficult choices which could reflect a realisation that a different
approach was needed, or a focus upon recovery was needed. Two extracts from
Parents 27 and 24 offer examples of this:
We no longer push her in to school like school is the most
important thing and we have to conform. We know that it isn’t,
and there are other options. We have told her that we will home
school her, and she can choose. But we think about it carefully
and weigh up the pros and cons much more pragmatically. I no
longer have respect for our education system (or CAMHS) in
the way I had before and realise that we have to listen to and
respect our children much more.
(Parent 27)
223
I have learnt that connection to your children and love comes
before any of societies pressures and demands.
(Parent 24)
Sometimes this related to making choices between conforming to expectations
within society concerning how children receive an education; or prioritising the
relationship between parents and children; or prioritising respect for a child’s
opinions and needs.
7.2.7 Following parental instincts
As discussed previously in Section 4.9.2 it often became apparent to parents at
some stage that they needed to pay more attention to their parental instincts
when deciding what action they needed to take. Parent 19 recognised that she
had been ignoring her ‘internal voice’ that recognised her daughter was genuinely
struggling:
It was only when she started to make herself physically sick in
the mornings aged 8 that I started to listen to my internal voice
that had been telling me for years that something was very
wrong and that she was not playing us, but desperately trying
to communicate with us and we were not listening.
(Parent 19)
Parent 40 explains how she learnt to listen to her instincts and challenge things
she did not agree with:
I now have the courage to follow my instincts and stick to my
guns, I know my kids best and I learnt (the hard way) my
instincts are usually right. I’m less afraid to ask questions or
challenge school/professionals if I think they’ve got something
wrong.
(Parent 40)
224
7.2.8 Self-confidence and recognition of expertise as a parent
The sense of empowerment and growing confidence in themselves as parents,
helped participants feel more able to voice their opinions and fight for what they
believed was right for their children. Often this was through necessity, but also
because parents had recognised where their priorities lay. Some parents had
also learnt that they offered valuable input as experts in their own child’s
difficulties and needs, as demonstrated by Parents 8, 35, and 20:
I think it has made me a stronger person, more able to stand up
and fight for what I believe is right and necessary. I'm a
naturally conflict-avoidant person, and not demanding or
assertive by nature - but with all the meetings, phone calls and
email-writing I've had to do to explain / request / demand /
follow up / nag / advocate, etc, I've become much more
confident in myself and my dealings with the full range of
professionals. I no longer care what they think of me, it really
doesn’t matter if I’m a nuisance to them, or if they think I’m
misguided. I know that I probably know a LOT more than they
do about ‘school refusal’, and certainly more than they can ever
know about what's best for my daughter.
(Parent 8)
The one positive I can take out of the situation is that I'm not
afraid of taking on authority, I'm ready and willing to fight for my
children and if that means taking on some hugely expensive
barrister the Local Authority has hired, by myself, then so be it.
(Parent 35)
I have become a warrior! I have a strength and resilience I
never knew existed! I will fight for my children with every breath
in my body. Always, no matter what barriers we face.
(Parent 20)
As a result of their experiences, parents such as Parents 3, 12, and 20 were
inspired to offer support to other parents, and to become involved in bringing
change and improvements to the systems they had encountered:
225
I now represent parents and carers in ****** and sit on various
leading-edge groups and CAMHS boards so feel I can use our
experiences to bring about positive change for all. This at least
makes me feel as if some good will come out of the situation.
(Parent 3)
It has made me want, with even more passion, to set up a
county wide parents union, not just for parent carers of SEND
and to also become a school governor.
(Parent 12)
I have embraced learning with a passion, for knowledge is
power. I feel able to help others and willing do so, even if just
signposting. Especially those at the start of their journey.
(Parent 20)
The extracts in this section and this chapter suggest that some parents were
altered possibly permanently by their experiences, and they have become much
more confident and assertive people as a legacy of the process they have been
through.
7.3 Reaching a place of resolution and reflection
The Parental SAPs Predicament revolved around parents observing the negative
impact the school attendance problems context had on their child and family.
While advocating for their children and coping with the conflict and frustration
which often ensued, parents needed to make difficult decisions linked to relevant
legal duties and societal expectations, while they also coped with their own
emotional reactions. This predicament was managed through the application of
relevant knowledge and the self-confidence gained through research and peer
support; factors which often led to an increased sense of empowerment and
changes in priorities. As parents’ sense of empowerment increased, they
reflected upon aspects of SAPs such as the focus upon a one-size-fits-all system
of educating children; the impact of academic pressure brought about by a
constant focus on measuring attainment; and the lack of appropriate SEND
provision. The combined influence of observing ongoing impacts on the family,
recognising systemic failure, and gaining knowledge about alternative options
226
and the lived experience of others, often influenced families to reach a place of
resolution. A range of factors were influential in this decision-making process,
depending upon each child and family’s situation. The following extracts evidence
how parents experienced changes in their perception of the situation and
changes in their thinking which then led them to make decisions which helped to
resolve the situation.
Parent 5 found she had to develop an acceptance that her child was genuinely
unable to attend a school at that time:
There was a turning point when I saw a counsellor and she
helped me see that my anxiety was making things worse, and
we finally accepted that what we were being advised to do was
counter-productive, [our daughter] couldn’t do school and she
couldn’t explain why. We told her we believed that she couldn’t,
and she couldn’t explain why either.
(Parent 5)
There was an element of acceptance of the situation for Parent 5, which is also
apparent for Parent 30 who realised that she needed to accept that appropriate
help was not available and to continue fighting for it was going to be too
damaging:
I gave up fight, not worth all the stress it caused. We have
been much happier with that acceptance.
(Parent 30)
Parent 16 also realised that she needed to accept the need to prioritise her son’s
health and wellbeing in his best interests at the time:
I know I have got to do what’s best for [my son] so feel less
stressed right now. He is not ready to go back to school so
haven’t got that stress every morning. Just the worry of getting
him well.
(Parent 16)
227
While Parent 20 reached an acceptance that they needed to ignore the pressure
to physically force their son to attend school:
We stopped bowing to the pressure that was placed upon us to
‘drag’ him to school and stopped. Just stopped.
(Parent 20)
Parent 29 explained how they needed to accept her son needed to be supported
to be himself, rather than try to change to fit traditional expectations:
He now knows that we understand his needs and he no longer
is expected to comply with traditional expectations. He knows
we love him just how he is and will do everything we can to
support him.
(Parent 29)
Similarly, Parent 27 described how they had to accept that they needed to focus
on educational alternatives to mainstream school:
It was seeing the total breakdown of his mental health that
made me realise that we didn’t have to follow what society
expected of us and that school didn’t mean education. Once we
realised that, and offered my first child an alternative, (that he
had been asking for all his life) his SEN officer and teachers,
and a CAMHS psychiatrist all supported us (and then got rid of
us!!!).
(Parent 27)
While Parent 4 explained that her friend had advised her that she needed to
accept her son could not go to school:
My friend who was going through the same thing, she said that
you would start to feel better if you accepted that he was not
going to go to school, which was kind of correct.
(Parent 4)
228
Parent 28 accepted that she needed to prioritise wellbeing on days when anxiety
levels were too high:
Eventually deciding against sending them to school if they were
completely anxiety ridden days, forcing, and dragging them to
school wasn't working and I just didn't agree with it. School
didn't agree with me but tough, I was doing what I knew was
best for my girls and their mental health.
(Parent 28)
Protecting her daughter’s wellbeing also became a priority for Parent 17, as she
accepted that how she was judged as a parent was less important:
As a parent I felt stressed and anxious, knowing that I would be
judged for not getting my daughter into school. But at the same
time I knew that my daughter felt more stressed and anxious
than I did and so it wasn't right to force her in.
(Parent 17)
Parent 13 found that she needed to learn to accept that academic success was
not the only way for her daughter to be successful and happy, and that academic
success can be achieved outside of mainstream schooling:
She is bright and creative. She doesn't fit the school box but
maybe she will eventually find a place where she does
fit. She's a gifted musician, great at photography and art, she
is imaginative and dreamy. She is a great baker and talented
at make-up. She wants to be a photographer or a professional
make-up artist at the moment and I think that she will end up
doing something creative.
(Parent 13)
While Parent 24 realised that her experiences had changed her thinking and
beliefs about education and schooling, and she had to accept that she could no
longer work as a teacher:
229
I have had to reconsider all that I thought I knew about
education as a teacher which has been interesting. […] I know I
could never work in a mainstream school again. Professionally
as a creative teacher of the arts I feel this experience has
changed the direction of the work I will do in the future. I feel
like I have been through a massive ordeal and education
shouldn't have to feel like this.
(Parent 24)
7.4 Chapter summary
The parents who participated in this study gained access to peer support which
helped them to develop a shared meaning of SAPs which helped validate their
experiences. However, this was at odds with the shared reality and
understanding of school staff and other professionals. These differences in
perception were reflected in the difficult working relationships between parents
and school staff, where child and parent blame and shame were dominant
features, and school staff were often reluctant to acknowledge parental concerns
about children’s SAPs. Parents shared meaning of SAPs was also at odds with
the understanding and perception of other family members and people in their
social circles, sometimes leading to criticism and isolation.
Parents became empowered by their own proactive approaches and activities
and inspired and influenced by peers with lived experience. The insights and
knowledge gained through these activities improved their ability to navigate
systemic difficulties and to identify, understand, and respond to their children’s
SAPs. Parents also became better able to recognise unhelpful or damaging
approaches, thus leading to reflection and a re-evaluation of priorities and
decision making about the best courses of action for children’s wellbeing and
educational progress. As time passed, parents experienced changes in their
perception of the situation, and changes in their thinking which led them to make
decisions which helped them to resolve the situation to the best of their abilities.
The following chapter will explore the findings discussed in Chapters 4, 5, 6, and
7 through the lens of Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological systems theory (1979; 1989;
2005).
230
Chapter 8. Discussion: “They wouldn’t accept he wasn’t fine, and I
wouldn’t accept he was”
8.1 Introduction
As discussed in Chapter 1, if any child experiences problems attending his or her
school their parents are expected to comply with existing attendance policies
drafted by individual schools and local authorities based upon government
legislation and DfE guidance documents (e.g., DfE, 2020a; DfE, 2017). These
policies expect parents will enforce a child’s attendance or provide specific
medical evidence which states their child is ‘unfit to attend school’. If these
existing policies and legislation are not complied with, parents can be fined
and/or prosecuted under criminal law for their child’s absence from school.
Section 2.8.2 described how aspects of parental lived experience of the SAPs
situation have recently been explored and discussed within doctoral research
conducted by Educational Psychologists, Myhill (2017); Clissold (2018); Browne
(2018); Orme-Stapleton (2018); and Mortimer (2019), and by law and human
rights researchers Epstein, Brown and O’Flynn (2019) regarding the prosecution
of parents. However, it was noted that this body of work had not yet included an
in-depth exploration of the experiences and perspectives of parents who take a
proactive approach to resolving SAPs, and therefore this study aimed to fill this
gap in the literature. The findings of this study indicate that parents in this
situation are hindered by the systemic responses and barriers they encounter (as
described in Chapter 5), which frustrates their agency when they try to resolve
SAPs. The parents who participated in this study described how they needed to
engage in long and complex battles to seek a resolution. Chapters 6 and 7
described how the impact of these experiences often led to a range of negative
consequences for the child, for parents, and for other close family members.
Although the forty parents in this study had set out to seek a resolution whereby
children were able to return to attending their school as expected, with any
difficulties resolved or needs supported, only one parent in the study was able to
achieve this during the period discussed. As discussed in Section 4.2.3, a range
of SEND, and mental or physical health problems were influential in most cases
231
of SAPs in the study, however Chapters 4 and 5 shared evidence of parental
experiences that suggest suitable support for these difficulties was hard to
arrange. This indicates that, as discussed in Section 2.6, there are within-child
factors that influence SAPs. However, the medical model approach to viewing
problems as ‘within-child’ is shown to be problematic in the SAPs context when
the support needed by children is not forthcoming from schools and local
authorities. This study indicates that the systemic responses to within-child
factors can become barriers in terms of resolving SAPs, and this aspect is not
being acknowledged in existing SAPs literature, nor in policy or legislation. This
may suggest that the social model approach is more applicable in the SAPs
context, however Guldberg (2020, p.18) highlights the need to move away from
the linear social or medical models of understanding as they ‘create a sense of
cause and effect and blame’ which hinders thinking about disability, impairment,
and diversity. Instead, Guldberg (2020, p.19) suggests a focus on a bio-psycho-
social model supports a more holistic consideration of ‘how the medical,
psychological and social interact in a person’s life’.
This study supports previous findings that indicate that SAPs are constructed
differently by the different social agents involved (e.g., Malcolm et al., 2003;
Torrens Salemi, 2006; Baker and Bishop, 2015). Section 2.6 discussed the
longstanding academic debate regarding the varied conceptualisation of
absenteeism and SAPs. Heyne et al. (2019, p.3) argue that this lack of a shared
understanding of SAPs is problematic ‘because inconsistencies and ambiguity
are obstacles to the advancement of assessment, intervention, and scientific
knowledge surrounding SAPs’. This study evidenced how these differing
constructions and perceptions of the problem of school absence also creates
obstacles in the ‘field’. When different social agents around the child construct
different understandings of the problem, and then respond based upon their own
perceptions. This leads to situations where conflicting perceptions of the problem
create a ‘stalemate’, such as Parent 10’s observation:
‘They wouldn’t accept he wasn’t fine, and I wouldn’t accept he was’.
(Parent 10)
232
This study found that parents who seek to resolve school attendance problems
find themselves in a catch 22 position whereby they are required to take active
responsibility for their child’s education, but when they seek to do this, they find
their agency frustrated. The ability of parents to fulfil this duty requires a fit
between the child and the environment within which the child is educated (Lerner
et al. 2006). This works adequately enough for many children, but not all. For
instance, DfE (2021a) data indicates a current persistent absence figure of
916,131 (or 13% of all pupils) suggesting for a significant number of children this
fit with the learning environment doesn’t work. While traditionally the SAPs
discourse has sited the ‘problem’ and therefore the solution within the child or
family unit, there is growing recognition that the wider environment, including the
school setting and, beyond that, the wider welfare context are equally significant
in shaping this ‘fit’, and this wider environment around the family can be deficient.
To support these arguments, Section 8.2 demonstrates how an adapted version
of Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological systems framework (1979; 1998; 2005) allows
us to apply the wider systems approach to the experiences of parents who seek
to resolve school attendance problems. This adaptation of Bronfenbrenner’s
bioecological systems framework conceptualises the experiences of this study’s
participants in a way that allows us to gain a new holistic understanding of the
parental perspective of school attendance problems. Where the dominant belief
has been that absence from school is indicative of parenting failure and/or
children’s disaffection from education, this adapted model illustrates how when
parents take a proactive approach to fulfil their legal duty to ensure children
access an education, there are a wide range of factors and influences that act as
barriers to hinder a successful outcome. In a wider context, this is problematic
because these factors and influences preventing a successful outcome are
unrecognised or unacknowledged in legal, clinical, and academic discourses.
Any policies, legislation, treatment plans, or theories that do not account for these
factors as barriers to successful outcomes are likely to be less effective as a
result.
233
8.2 Incorporating parents’ journeys within a bioecological systems
framework
As discussed in Section 2.7.1, researchers have applied systemic models within
studies of SAPs, to help them view individuals holistically within their cultural and
social context (Nuttall and Woods, 2013; Myhill, 2017; Browne, 2018; Mortimer,
2019; Melvin et al., 2019). This has directed attention towards the influence of the
school environment, and other factors (e.g., socio-economic influences). This
study aimed to contribute to this growing body of thought in recognition of the
potential it offers to extend understanding of SAPs, as suggested by Place et al.
(2000):
An understanding of the interaction between environmental
factors and school non-attenders is necessary to promote
effective and lasting change and generate alternative
discourses around this issue.
(Place et al. 2000, p. 67)
8.2.1 Selecting Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological model (1979; 1998;
2005)
The contextual perspective on human development focuses upon cultural and
social influences upon development, and the interplay between an individual and
the cultural context of their world (Lerner et al., 2006). As a tool to support the
holistic understanding of the contextual perspective, Bronfenbrenner’s widely
utilised bioecological model (1979; 1998; 2005) was selected over other
contextual or ecological models because it offers an inclusive structure and
incorporates proximal processes which acknowledge the significance of
interactions between people. In making this decision, the researcher drew upon
the work of Lerner et al. (2002; 2006), who discuss the relevance of parenting
(which involves multiple interdependent relationships), to developmental systems
theory (which ‘focuses on the dynamic, or fused, and changing relations between
developing people and their contexts’ (Lerner et al., 2002, p.316)). Lerner et al.
(2002) consider two models within the developmental systems theory family -
Lerner’s developmental contextual theory, and Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological
systems theory, in terms of how they support understanding of parenting
processes and pay close attention to the parent-child relationship. These models
234
were of interest as they each offer a visual theoretic model which can be adapted
to illustrate the context in a graphic form.
Figure 8.1 Lerner’s Developmental Contextual view of human development (Lerner et al. 2002)
Lerner’s developmental contextual model (Figure 8.1) considers how ‘the actions
of people in and on their world and the actions of the world on people shapes the
quality of human behavioural and psychological functioning’ (Lerner et al., 2002,
p. 318). The model has a focus upon studying the actions of the child, and the
actions of the parent, over time and in their broader context. Application of this
model involves the study of how the behaviour and development of an individual
are influenced by dynamic interactions between nature and nurture.
Although there are many similarities with Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological systems
model, Lerner’s model has a closer focus upon the child – parent relationship and
the influences upon this relationship. The researcher therefore decided that this
235
made it less appropriate for presenting and supporting understanding of the wider
systemic context of parents’ experience of SAPs.
Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological systems model (1979; 1998; 2005) is especially
useful in relation to this study because rather than focus simply on the child,
parents, and family as the crux of the problem, it supports consideration of all
social, systemic, and cultural factors which influence their experiences (Melvin et
al, 2019). The environmental contexts around the individual are viewed as
systems nested at different levels, with interactions taking place within and
between them. These contexts comprise the microsystem where the components
are the direct influences on the person at the centre of the model, then the
mesosystem represents interactions between these components
(Bronfenbrenner, 1977). The exosystem contains sites with an indirect influence
upon the person at the centre (Bronfenbrenner, 1977), the macrosystem
represents laws, and social and cultural norms and beliefs (Bronfenbrenner,
1978), and time-based events are represented in the chronosystem
(Bronfenbrenner, 1986). Therefore, Bronfenbrenner’s model can represent the
complex context of an individual person. As discussed in Section 2.6, this holistic
approach has been highlighted as a missing factor in many existing SAPs related
studies.
A further significant feature this framework supports is a focus upon proximal
processes which Bronfenbrenner identified as the drivers of interactions between
the parent, child, family, peers, school, and health services (Bronfenbrenner and
Ceci, 1994; Bronfenbrenner, 1995). Proximal processes are integral to the
context of SAPs as it involves a range of actors with differing perspectives and
priorities, who need to communicate and negotiate to achieve a resolution to
each child’s difficulties. As Chapters 4, 5, 6 and 7 evidenced, these interactions
were central to parental experiences in terms of social responses and
professional working relationships, as they often determined the complexity and
trajectory of each parent’s journey through school attendance problems.
Application of a comprehensive model such as this supports the following
observation made by Sugrue, Zuel, and LaLiberte (2016) which acknowledges
the complexity of the school absence context:
236
Practitioners and policymakers attempting to address chronic
absenteeism would benefit from applying an ecological approach
(Bronfenbrenner, 1979) and developing intervention models that attempt
to address issues in multiple ecological levels by combining direct
services to individual families with macro practice activities, such as
community organizing, capacity building, and policy advocacy.
(Sugrue, Zuel, and LaLiberte, 2016, p.144)
8.2.2 Representing parents’ experience within Bronfenbrenner’s model
Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological systems model was introduced within this thesis
in Section 2.7.1 and is reproduced again here in Figure 8.2, to allow a
comparison to be more easily made with the researcher’s adapted model (Figure
8.3) to allow the novel adaptations to be more easily seen.
Figure 8.2 Bronfenbrenner’s (1979; 1998; 2005) Bioecological Systems Framework
CHILD
Microsystem
Mesosystem
Exosystem
Macrosystem
Chronosystem
The most
direct/closest
influences on the child
Microsystems interacting
with each other
Influences at a cultural level
Influences upon
the wellbeing of adul ts
in a child’s life
History
Life Transitions
Development over time
Continuity
Change
Beliefs & Values Individual Rights
Settings that influe nce
the child without their
direct participation
WORKPLACES
PEERS
SCHOOL
FAMILY
MEDIA
ENVIRONMENT
EDUCATION
SYSTEM
Influence of the past
SOCIAL
CONTACTS
Passing of Time
Timing of
significant
events
over time
over time
Laws
ECONOMIC
SYSTEM
LOCAL
COMMUNITY
RELIGION
FAMILY
PEERS
RELIGION
HEALTH
LOCAL
COMMUNITY
SCHOOL
HEALTH
INFRASTRUCTURE
Cultural
Blueprints
Social
Practices
LEGAL
SYSTEM
Human
Mental
Life
Social
Class
Status
National
Policy
Cultural
Values
National
Funding
237
The researcher’s aim was to adapt Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological systems
model to represent dimensions of the participants experiences. To achieve this
aim, the researcher considered the features of participant’s experiences which
were revealed through thematic data analysis and then located them within the
appropriate systemic levels of Bronfenbrenner’s model. The adapted model also
features elements that were discussed in Chapter 2, to incorporate social,
historical, and political factors of relevance to the study findings.
Figure 8.3 A Bioecological Systems Model of Parents’ Journeys through School Attendance Problems
Microsystem
Mesosystem
Exosystem
Macrosystem
Chronosystem
Access to child
mental heal th
support
Evolution of
Life Transitions
Development
Learning
Political change
EHCP,
EOTAS &
Alternative
Provision
Fulfilling
work
commitments
Reactions
within social
circles
Financial
Costs &
Losses
Tradition
Access to
Information
& Advice
Peer
Contact &
Support
Damage to
Relationships
Disruption
to Family Life
Consensus of
understanding of
SAPs?
Accountability
Conformity
Judgement of
Parenting
practice
Timing of
significant
events
over time
Changing
Priorities
over time
Assumptions
Children are
‘fine in school’
Bronfenbrenner’s Bioecological Systems Framework
education
Extended
Family
CLOSE
FAMILY
PEERS HEALTH
SERVICES
SCHOOL
Social
Media
Legal
System
Government
Local
Authority
Sites of
Work
EWO or
Social Services
Involvement
Local
Community
Teacher
Training
Academia
Threats of
Fines &
Prison
Social
Isolation
Inclusion
Truancy-based
Discourses
Attendance
Data
Emotional
Impact
Network of
personal
settings
Interactions & impacts
within the Microsystem
Values Beliefs
Opinions
about
Education
Timetable &
Year
Education =
Schooling
Compliance
with
Legislation
Larger Institutions which may influence
adult wellbeing & the child indirectly
Influences at a cultural level
PARENT
CHILD
School
Structure
Differing
Constructions of
School Attendance
Problems
Child
Evolution of
legislation
Context specific roles
(child & adult)
Learned
Hopefulness
Parity of Esteem:
physical/mental
health
National
Policy & Law
Access to
support for
SEND
Recognition of
school-related
harm
‘Best interests
of the child’
Sites of Conflict
Sites of Resolution or Conflict
Dilemmas –
Education or
Wellbeing
Laws Rights
Systemic Context
Social Context
National Fu nding
of Services
Marketisation
of Schooling
238
This adapted version of Bronfenbrenner’s model represents the viewpoint of the
parent who is sited centrally as the principal advocate for, and agent on behalf of
the child. The key features and aspects of the parental experience are shown at
relevant systemic levels. In viewing the findings of this study through this
bioecological systems lens, the stages and contexts of the Parents’ Journey
described in Chapters 4, 5, 6, and 7 have a reciprocity with the features and
systemic levels of Bronfenbrenner’s model that will be explained throughout this
chapter. Although it is not possible to discuss every contextual aspect and factor
here, the aim is to draw attention to significant elements of the perspective of
parents who participated in this study. A further aim is to extend understanding of
the difficult aspects of seeking a resolution and highlight existing barriers that
hinder parents’ agency in fulfilling their duties relating to children’s education.
The role of the parent as represented in the adapted model will now be
discussed, and this is followed by a discussion of how each level of the model
represents aspects of the parental experience that combine to build a holistic
picture of the complexity of their position. This has not been possible before
because the experiences of parents who seek to resolve SAPs have not been
considered before.
8.3 The role of the parent
During the development of this adapted model, early versions followed
Bronfenbrenner’s lead and incorporated the parent as one component of the
microsystem alongside the school, health service, peers, and close family, with
the child in a central position (see Figure 8.2). However, upon reflection it was
decided to site the parent centrally with the child in this adapted model. This
decision reflects the importance of what is often a role undertaken by one specific
parent within the family unit, where they take responsibility for arranging support
for the child’s educational and health needs in the SAPs context. Here, as
described in Section 5.2 the parent becomes the agent acting on behalf of the
child, forming a bridge between the child and the components of the system. In
this position, the parent advocates for the child in negotiations within the
education, health, and political systems, and can also become the focus of any
accusations of being responsible for the SAPs and/or punitive action.
239
The parents who took part in this study also took on the role of advocate or
mediator for the child within the home environment, as described in Section
6.2.2., where members of the immediate family struggled to understand their
child or siblings’ reaction to attending school and may have been critical and
resented the disruption brought about by the SAPs. Although the welfare of the
child remains central to the SAPs, the context both at home and in navigating
systems creates an essential but stressful role for the parent, who is significantly
impacted emotionally and practically through their involvement. Therefore, this is
represented through the placement of the parent in a shared central position in
the adapted model. The adapted model then highlights through the mesosystem
how the parental experience is dominated by dilemma and conflict with others.
It seems appropriate here to draw upon the writing of Arendell (1997) to consider
a social constructionist perspective of parenting. This perspective considers that
human parenting activities are not simply biological or instinctive responses;
instead, they are dynamic and complex social processes that are learned and
influenced through participation within a social community. These cultural
meanings regarding parenting are grounded in tradition and ideology. The
influence of the social community upon parenting practices is situated in time and
place, meaning practices are shaped by historical events and transformed by
developments in the structure and context of society at any given point in time.
Consideration of school attendance and absence from this perspective suggests
that any parental involvement is influenced by knowledge of cultural norms and
values, especially in terms of what are considered good or bad parenting
practices. A parent condoning or supporting a child’s absence from school is
therefore considered a ‘bad parent’, however this reflects the Parental SAPs
Predicament, as examples of good parenting include parents protecting a child
from harm and prioritising their health and wellbeing. This paradox creates a
significant dilemma for parents when a child experiences SAPs.
The parental perspectives reported in this study were shaped by competing and
conflicting social constructions of roles, processes and rules that relate to school
attendance. If parents opt to educate their child by enrolling them at a
mainstream school, they take on the role of ‘parent of a schoolchild’ (as
240
discussed in Section 2.6). In doing so, they are expected to conform to a site-
specific range of socially constructed scripts, rituals, and behaviours (David, et
al., 1993; 1995). Section 2.2 described how the introduction of mass compulsory
education led English society to develop a belief that children must access a
school-based education to become functioning adult members of society.
The responses of others in the family, school community and social circles,
reported in Chapters 5 and 6, suggest these beliefs and attitudes remain
widespread. Furthermore, most experiences described by parents (Section 6.2.4)
confirm how uncomfortable many people feel if they hear that a child is not
attending school. Parents observed how school staff also demonstrated little
empathy for children with attendance problems. School staff were reported to
dismiss the distress children display about attending school and claim they were
‘fine in school’. Parent 7 believed this response reflected an acceptance that not
all children like going to school but they have no other choice but to get used to it,
and therefore any distress is viewed as an inconvenient part of this process.
Parent 7 described this as a ‘rite-of-passage’ for the child, (which correlates with
the suggestion in Section 2.4) that children need to make the transition from
child-of-the-family, to become a schoolchild (Dockett and Perry, 2012, p.59).
Bronfenbrenner (1979) described starting school as an ecological transition
which requires a person to navigate a change in role. This change in role
includes learning to conform with expectations for behaviour which are
associated with the new role.
The impact of role changes may also correlate with the conflict between parents
and professionals within this study. The roles of both parents and teachers are
challenged when a child ceases to attend school, with each person needing to
either accept responsibility or direct blame at the other person in their
corresponding role. Bronfenbrenner (1979, p.85) notes how both parents and
teachers are expected to provide guidance to children, with parents in Western
society having authority over a broader segment of a child’s life than teachers do.
Within a school-related context, parents have less authority because the potential
negative legal consequences are one-sided. Essentially as the findings of this
study evidence, while parents have a legal duty to ensure attendance if a child is
241
enrolled at a school, they have little power to influence how schools respond to
their child. There was a perceived loss of agency for parents in this study when
they recognised that despite their attempts to advocate, their child’s difficulties
would not be acknowledged or supported by the school as they had hoped or
expected.
8.3.1 A focus upon mothers
Regarding this study, and school attendance problems in general, it is relevant to
discuss how responsibility for managing a child’s daily care, school attendance
and education falls mostly to mothers. Mothers often accommodate these roles
due to a combination of cultural expectations, gendered stereotypes, and
sometimes practical family decisions regarding salary levels and availability
(Walkerdine, et al. 2001; Cooper and Rodgers, 2015; Goodall, 2021). This
prevalence of maternal responsibility is reflected in the participant demographics,
where all participants are female, and in the site of recruitment, as 96% of the
22,200 (January 2022) ‘Not Fine in School’ group members are female.
In legal terms, more mothers than fathers are prosecuted for their child’s school
absence. For instance, in 2017, 16,400 parents were prosecuted for failing to
send their children to school, and 74% of those convicted were mothers. 80% of
the 110 people given a suspended sentence of imprisonment were women. 83%
of the 500 people given a community order were women. Nine out of the ten
people sent to prison were women (Epstein, Brown and O’Flynn, 2019). This is
not a new development, for instance, in 2003 Kendall et al. reported on 86 Local
Education Authorities who provided data on the gender of parents prosecuted for
a child’s school absence between September 2001 and July 2002. The
breakdown was 75% female and 25 % male. Responding to data such as this,
Donoghue argued that:
The consequences of Government policy on truancy have
impacted disproportionately upon women and that the use of
the law regulating the prosecution of parents under section 444
of the Education Act 1996 in effect imposes an unfair burden
upon mothers.
(Donoghue, 2011, p.219)
242
In relation to the significant levels of SEND within the children in this study, it is
also noted that mothers are in the majority as primary carers for children with
SEND. In disability research studies mothers make up the majority of participants
and report similar experiences of negative working relationship with schools to
those found in this study (Todd and Jones, 2003; Browne, 2018; Runswick-Cole
and Ryan, 2019; Epstein, Brown and O’Flynn, 2019; Goodall, 2021). This
involvement of mothers means they are often implicated in and considered
responsible for their child’s difficulties and disabilities. This suggests mothers are
destined to share the stigma of their child’s absence from school, and face
judgements of good or bad parenting through responses from the practitioners
they encounter (McKeever and Miller, 2004; Reay, 2004).
This study’s participants demonstrated how some parents do react against the
disempowerment they perceive if they encounter systemic barriers preventing
children with needs accessing the help they need. This ‘push back’ has led to the
application of labels such as ‘warrior parents’, ‘difficult parents’, ‘toxic mothers’
and ‘bad mothers‘(Blum, 2007; Lamb, 2009; Douglas, et al., 2021). Some parents
embraced these identities which arose directly from the interaction they as
parents had with different components of the system. In Section 7.2.8, Parent 20
was quoted as saying she had become ‘a warrior’ because of her experiences.
Fourteen other parents also wrote about similar impacts their experienced had
had on them personally in terms of becoming an activist, an advocate, and
feeling more courageous; more assertive; more willing to fight, question,
disagree, complain, defend children’s rights, object to ableism, and stand their
ground.
Parent 22 exemplified the severe consequences some parents face if they fight
the power imbalance by questioning professional actions or decisions.
Professionals refused to believe Parent 22’s daughter’s illnesses and learning
needs were genuine and valid reasons for her attendance problems. As a result,
both were subjected to intimidation and harassment by school and local authority
staff; bullying, gaslighting, and threats of imprisonment, being placed in social
care, and accusations of Fabricating and Inducing Illness (FII). Both mother and
daughter’s mental and physical health and wellbeing were permanently damaged
243
because of their treatment by school and local authority staff. Retrospectively, the
Local Government Ombudsman investigated the case and found in favour of the
family, awarding them compensation for their unjust treatment (LGO, 2018).
Although most parents did not report this extreme intimidation, this case indicates
it does exist within the current systems.
8.4 The Microsystem and Mesosystem
The mesosystem comprises the interactions within the microsystem which
Bronfenbrenner referred to as proximal processes (Bronfenbrenner and Ceci,
1994; Bronfenbrenner, 1995). Proximal processes were significant as they
reflected the impact and influence of various interactions that featured within
parent accounts. Through these interactions with peers, family, and
professionals, access to further sources of support and help could be assisted,
blocked, or delayed. Through the representation of the study findings in the
adapted model it is apparent that for parents, the mesosystem primarily became
a site of conflict and managing practical difficulties as they mediated on their
child’s behalf, both with family members and professionals.
As Burr (2015) explains, the theory of social constructionism argues that a
person’s identity is formed through and within the social interactions and
discourses experienced by individuals daily. The discourses surrounding SAPs
reflected a range of perspectives which often conflicted (including teacher,
psychologist, psychiatrist, sociologist, and parent). Discourses are sited within
social interactions and vary over time as beliefs and opinions evolve. The
discussion of relevant literature in Section 2.6 included studies of SAPs which
have explored the differing perspectives and discourses of children, parents, and
professionals (e.g., Nuttall and Woods, 2013; Aucott, 2014; Clissold, 2018;
Orme-Stapleton, 2018; Mortimer, 2019). Although English society has
constructed a collective understanding of the concepts of school attendance and
why it is significant, the findings here suggest that children, parents, and
professionals apply differing characteristics and definitions, and construct
differing truths or beliefs about absence from school.
244
One common finding has been that parents and professionals make sense of
SAPs by directing the focus of blame upon each other (Malcolm et al., 2003).
These differing discourses are significant as they compete, and the strongest
voices become established as the truth. The relevance of this is reflected in the
dominant discourse which has sited the blame for SAPs in the child and family.
The differing constructions of SAPs meant that professionals appeared to view
them as a parenting failure and/or sign of problems in the home setting. This was
indicated by practices such as responding to parents’ reports of concerns with
recommendations for parenting courses, or referrals to social services. In
contrast, parents viewed SAPs as a sign that their child was encountering school
related problems, and they looked for evidence of academic or learning
difficulties, bullying or friendship difficulties, or signs of physical or mental health
problems. This parental approach reflects the recommended practices expressed
in DfE guidance documents included in Figure 1.4 (page 12). Parents attributed
the lack of professional interest in these possible triggers to deficiencies in
teacher training and awareness, or to the influence of senior leadership
discussed in Section 5.2.1.
8.4.1 Working relationships
The study findings indicated how parents are effectively ‘silenced by words’
through threats and unsupportive systemic responses. When parental concerns
were shared with professionals they were often dismissed with “they are fine in
school” or “we don’t see that in school” type responses, which contradicted each
parent’s definition of the situation and, with it, their self-confidence and identity as
a perceived equal in the home/school working relationship. Parents opinions
were often overruled or diminished by professionals during conversations or
meetings, especially where they were referred to as ‘mum’ or their comments
recorded as ‘mum says ….’. Nimmo (2019) argues that these types of response
trigger a power-based relationship which creates additional barriers because
parents feel disrespected and invisible as people with valuable knowledge to
contribute.
This reflects the concept of ‘othering’ as ‘a way of distinguishing ‘us’ from ‘them’
(Goodall, 2019, p.3). This happens when people construct a group they identify
245
with, which consequently also creates a group who they do not identify with.
Goodall (2019) explains how this creates a deficit discourse which is reflected in
language related to education, where there are staff viewed as ‘professionals’
and there are ‘parents’. Similarly, a literature review by Hughes and Mac
Naughton (2000) identified ‘constant ‘othering’ of parental knowledge by staff’
(2000, p.242). The othering was viewed within instances where teachers
considered parental knowledge of their own child was inadequate,
supplementary, or unimportant in comparison to their own. Where ‘othering’ is
taking place, it contributes to power imbalances where one group has a voice
that is considered more valid and carries more weight than the other. This was a
visible problem within parents’ accounts of their interactions with professionals.
Section 2.4.1 drew attention to the notion of parents and professionals working in
partnership or co-production to support children and this is promoted as best
practice (Warnock, 1977; Sheldon, 2007). However, the findings of this study
suggest the likelihood of it becoming a genuine working practice in the SAPs
context seems remote. The participants’ experiences suggest that an underlying
reason for this is the difficult power dynamics between professionals and parents,
which echoes the findings of Clissold (2018), Browne (2018), and Mortimer
(2019). Within the SAPs context there are various relationships where power is
experienced differently by individuals, and this then influences how they can
respond. Progress throughout the Parents’ Journeys was determined by human
interaction, where individual responses determined outcomes. This was
significant as it was only education and health professionals, or employees of
local government who had the power to make decisions and judgements, which
then impacted upon both parental agency and children’s access to support and
educational provision.
One example relates to how prior to 2006, parents were able to decide whether
children were well enough to attend school or not. However, The Pupil
Registration Regulations (2006) gave headteachers the discretion to decide if a
child’s absence due to illness was valid (and authorised) or invalid (and
unauthorised). This significantly disempowered parents because it removed a
decision making right related to their children and passed it to schools instead.
246
The significance of this for parents was clarified within analysis of the process
mothers undertake in deciding if their child’s claims of illness are genuine or not
(Prout, 1988). Prout (1988) observed that mothers make such decisions based
upon their intuition and knowledge of their child, which they weigh-up against
testing for feigning and recognising the need to encourage stoicism. This reflects
the process of making sense of observations and difficulties described in Section
4.4.4, where parents decided how to respond to their child’s emerging SAPs.
Prout (1988) claimed the decision to send a seemingly unwell child to school or
not is one that is complicated by a range of emotions and concerns that formed
‘certain implicit and virtually insoluble difficulties’ (1988, p.780). This was
explained further in terms of maternal competence and judgements made by
school staff, suggesting that negotiating over a child’s attendance problems is
also a site where mothers attempt to manage others’ impressions of their
parenting competence and moral character, but where they eventually lose and
must accept others will possibly define them unfairly.
Furthermore, a power imbalance exists in various ways throughout the systems
of relevance, which further impacts upon parents’ sense of agency. As a further
example, in 2020 a high court ruling featured an observation which evidences the
imbalance of power between families and local authorities:
Local authorities have huge powers over the lives of families
with children who have special needs, making decisions with
potentially lifelong consequences. Where parents are unhappy
with those decisions, there is a fundamental and frightening
inequality of power.
(Mrs Justice Collins Rice in L Kumar v LB of Hillingdon (2020) EWHC 3326)
Although this study is focused on a specific problem and not on all aspects of the
professional-parent relationship, it does reveal the existence of an underpinning
power imbalance which is likely to underpin wider professional-parent
relationships even if it not always visible. Some professionals also lack power in
terms of the budget and resources they are provided. This can be linked to the
power of government, at the macrosystem level, to shape all component parts of
247
the system and to help establish the parameters for the interactions and conflict
which then ensue when resourcing is inadequate (Section 8.6 discusses how the
adapted model reflects the influence of government at all systemic levels).
Parents reported how some professionals supported the use of threats and
emotional/physical force over children to enforce their attendance, demonstrating
the importance assigned to attendance. However, it also seems morally
questionable, especially if consideration is given to the UN Convention on the
Rights of the Child (UNICEF UK,1989) which sets out the rights that all children
are entitled to enjoy in countries where it is ratified, (including the UK). These
rights include:
Article 3 (best interests of the child)
The best interests of the child must be a top priority in all
decisions and actions that affect children.
(UN, 1989, Article 3)
The concept of the best interests of the child is especially difficult to reconcile in
this situation. Parents were aware that both wellbeing and educational progress
are important for their child. However, if children struggled to attend school one of
these aspects needed to take precedence over the other. This created a conflict
between a child's educational-best-interests versus their health-best-interests.
This conflict between wellbeing and education is reflected within the mesosystem
as an aspect of the interactions between parents and education staff (or more
widely between a family and the education, health, and political systems),
regarding who has the power to decide which actions are in the 'best interests' of
the child?
According to Porter (2006, p.290) ‘relationships between teachers and parents
are often ones of concealed power’. While parents argue that they are ‘experts in
their children’s and family’s needs and have experience at resolving their issues’
(2006, p.292). Porter asserts that a teacher’s power is created ‘by virtue of their
expertise’ and ‘being part of the system’ (2006, p.290). In this context they each
manoeuvre to maintain a sense of individual agency and control of the situation,
248
whilst still requiring the input and support of the other. In a practical sense,
teachers generally have more power than parents because they have a range of
available options to take punitive action against a parent if they disagree with
their choices and actions (Epstein, Brown and O’Flynn, 2019).
Moreover, it seems important to recognise that there is a limit to what parents
can do to enforce school attendance, especially if they are dealing with a
teenager who cannot be physically carried or forced into school. Mortimer (2018)
noted how the parents of a teenager resorted to calling the police to intervene, in
desperation. This action did result in his return to school; however, it was noted
that although the strategy appeared successful, he was attending unhappily
through fear, suggesting his voice and rights were not being respected and
attendance was prioritised over wellbeing.
These examples reflect the complexity within the mesosystem which is created
by the variations in constructions of SAPs and the differing perspectives and
responses of those involved. Regarding the parental experiences that are the
focus of this study, the mesosystem in the adapted model represents multiple
sites of conflict and dilemma which the parent at the center needs to navigate.
This navigation will often be undertaken without advice or guidance, especially in
the early stages of SAPs or before each parent has located sources of support.
8.5 The Exosystem
During each parent’s journey to seek a resolution for SAPs, the mainly negative
experiences at the mesosystem level of the model meant parents resorted to
exploring components in the exosystem. The exosystem while framing some of
the difficulties – through legislation and through resourcing – also held the means
for resolution through peer support, charities, and for some parents, successful
negotiation with local authorities. Therefore, the exosystem in the adapted model
becomes a mix of sites of systemic barriers, sites of potential support, and sites
of resolution.
249
The interactions represented within the mesosystem were influenced by the
institutions within the exosystem, and by government within the macrosystem as
they determine and enforce laws, policies, and practices such as those related to
attendance discussed in Section 2.4, and school-based data monitoring. As such
the exosystem in the adapted model represents increased relevance for parents
in their role acting as the bridge between a child’s difficulties and sites of wider
relevance. Consequently, an adaptation made to Bronfenbrenner’s model is that
‘government’ is represented at a bigger size than the other institutions, and each
systemic level of the model is bordered with circles of the same colour to
represent the widespread influence of government in this context.
The self-help aspect of their pro-active approach is a step towards resolution for
some parents, but peer support becomes important for many parents in achieving
a resolution because of the sharing of knowledge and information, and because
of the effects of validation or shared understanding. The adapted bioecological
systems model includes social media in the exosystem as this was a significant
site of support for the parents in this study. Through social media parents could
access new social encounters where their situation became defined differently,
as they learned from the lived experience of other parents and shared a social
identity. The impact of this peer contact could be related to the idea of ‘learned
hopefulness’ (Zimmerman, 1990, p.72) (discussed in Section 7.1.) as ‘the
process of learning and utilising problem-solving skills and the achievement of
perceived or actual control’. The peer contact provided opportunities for parents
which helped them to feel more in control of a situation they had experienced
little control over previously through their systemic experiences. Zimmerman
explains how ‘perceived control will help individuals cope with stress and solve
problems in their personal lives’ (1990, p.72). Elements of self-help, peer support,
and learned hopefulness were of particular importance due to the lack of
guidance or a systemic pathway parents could access to help them resolve
children’s SAPs.
Section 8.5.1 will now discuss some of the key systemic barriers that parents
encountered, and Section 8.5.2 will discuss peer support as a means of
achieving a resolution.
250
8.5.1 Systemic barriers
In considering the current response to SAPs in England the background context
relates to the larger institutions sited within the exosystem, the widespread
influence of government in the macrosystem, and the cultural and historical
influences sited within the macrosystem and chronosystem, some of which were
considered in Chapter 2. Components in the macrosystem frame the nature and
parameters of some of the components of the mesosystem, including the
significant impact of systemic crises regarding funding for schools (NAHT, 2021)
(and other services), SEND provision (House of Commons, Education
Committee, 2019), and CAMHS provision (House of Commons, Education and
Health and Social Care Committees, 2018).
According to a letter from the Government Legal Department (2020) on behalf of
the Department for Education, existing attendance related legislation (section 19,
Education Act 1996) provides what they describe as a ‘safety net’ to ensure
children who are unable to attend school can access a suitable education via
local authority intervention. However as mentioned in Section 8.5.1 the findings
of this study demonstrate how ineffective this intended ‘safety net’ is in practice.
Instead, parents’ success in locating relevant support for children was often
hindered by a range of systemic barriers including inadequate funding for schools
and services; long waiting lists for access to services; a lack of accountability if
schools and local authorities fail to adhere to legislation; a lack of parity of
esteem between mental and physical health; and inadequate professional
knowledge and training.
The combination of truancy-related discourses and systemic barriers appears to
further direct the professional focus towards locating blame within the family and
home to avoid responsibility for funding support or alternative provision for
children who need the DfE supposed ‘safety net’. The impact of existing systemic
problems on working partnerships between schools and parents, and outcomes
for children was highlighted by Browne (2018) in reference to the parental
experiences she studied:
251
Schools need to be supported to ensure that they follow the
legislative guidance from the SEND Code of Practice (2015)
and ensure that the child and the family remain at the centre of
any collaborative, multi professional work. The lack of the term
‘we’ in my research highlights the lack of positive, collaborative
involvement that parents had with professionals and suggests
that professionals should consider ways in building more
positive and balanced relationships with parents. However, the
current pressures on schools and support services also needs
to be considered, especially in the current political climate of
‘austerity’. Public services are under increasing strain,
particularly in the NHS, which includes CAMHS, which affects
the accessibility of support from the service. Schools too are
under increasing pressure to ensure high whole school
attendance figures which are monitored by Ofsted, which may
result in pressure on attendance being passed through to
students and families. The priority becomes the attendance
figure which possibly means the needs of the child can be lost.
(Browne: 2018, p.124)
These are significant observations from Browne (2018) which will now be
discussed further in relation to their relevance within the exosystem of the
adapted model.
Parental experiences evidenced the ongoing failure to effectively implement the
SEND reforms of 2014 (Ofsted, 2021a), and fund suitable educational provision
for children with SEND (Hutchinson, 2021). These examples of systemic failure
continue to be significant barriers to attendance as noted in the Education
Committee First Report of Session (2019–20). The following observations and
feedback from the Committee echo the complaints made by this study’s
participants:
There is too much of a tension between the child’s needs and
the provision available. The significant funding shortfall is a
serious contributory factor to the failure on the part of all
involved to deliver on the SEND reforms and meet children’s
needs.
252
We have found a general lack of accountability within the
system.
We recommend that parents should be able to report directly to
central Government when local authorities fail to follow
processes set out in statute and guidance. The Department
should create a mechanism specifically for parents and carers
of children with SEND, beyond what currently exists. The
distance between young people’s lived experience, their
families’ struggles and Ministers’ desks is just too far.
Parents and carers have to wade through a treacle of
bureaucracy, full of conflict, missed appointments and despair.
We want to see greater joint working between the health and
education sectors, beginning firmly with the development of a
joint outcomes framework to measure how the health aspects
of support for children and young people with SEND are being
delivered locally.
(House of Commons, Education Select Committee, 2019, pp.3-4)
These observations of funding shortfalls, a lack of accountability, communication
failures, poor joint working practices, and unclear pathways to support all feature
in the accounts of this study’s participants as systemic failures which create
barriers to resolving attendance problems (see Chapters 5 and 7).
There are various systemic problems which act as barriers to achieving a
resolution for SAPs, including the following observations:
School attendance related legislation has afforded local authorities with freedom
to implement their own attendance policies and practices. The accounts of
parents in this study suggest that in practice this means local attendance policies
often do not correctly comply with legislation. This creates a variety of difficulties
for parents, as evidenced by 939 Local Government Ombudsman investigations
between May 2010 and January 2022, where in 672 cases the Ombudsman
253
upheld complaints against local authorities who failed to comply with their duties
under section 19 of the Education Act 1996.
Furthermore, the lack of standardised policies for attendance coding and
authorisation, combine with the crisis in CAMHS provision (Office of the
Children’s Commissioner, 2020; 2020/21). This often means parents are unable
to obtain medical evidence demanded by schools and local authorities through
their local policies, without long delays. Consequently, many absences become
increasingly entrenched, the family difficulties escalate, and this leads to
increased risks of fines and prosecution for parents. At the same time, children
are left in limbo without education or support (Myhill, 2017; Clissold, 2018;
Epstein et al., 2019). These systemic problems mean that the ‘safety net’ the
Department for Education argue will ‘catch’ children who are unable to attend
school, through local authority organised provision under section 19 of the
Education Act, 1996, fails to materialise (Parish et al., 2018). Local authorities
seemingly do all they can to avoid having to fund provision for children (Mortimer,
2018). These barriers to attendance were reflected in the parents’ expressions of
anger and frustration at local authority staff reported in Section 5.5.
Moreover, the lack of an effective complaints procedures (Clements & Aiello,
2019), and few mechanisms of accountability when relevant policies and
legislation are not followed, mean parents have few ways of seeking redress,
unless they can obtain funding to initiate Judicial Review proceedings. The
impact of this situation is compounded by common societal, academic, legal, and
professional assumptions and beliefs that if a child or family experiences
difficulties such as these, existing systems will provide support. Realising that the
support you expect to find does not exist and instead as a parent you will be
blamed and threatened with fines and legal action can be devastating, as
reflected in Parent 12’s description of how her experiences left her feeling:
‘disempowered, victimised, persecuted and punished’.
Cullen and Lindsay (2019, p.170) investigated parents experiences of
disagreement resolution arrangements relating to SEND, following the SEND
legal reforms introduced through the Children and Families Act (2014). One
254
aspect was an increased focus on partnership working which aimed to prevent
disagreements between local authorities and families. However, it was found
there remained a minority of disagreements which were difficult to resolve and
‘were experienced by parents as intensely emotional and stressful’. Cullen and
Lindsay (2019, p.180) referred to Bronfenbrenner’s theoretical framework to
interpret data gathered through interviews with seventy mothers and eight
fathers. Their findings showed that disagreements mostly reflect a belief that a
child’s SEND are going unmet, and one main reason for complaints was ‘delays
and role dissonances experienced while seeking to ensure the child’s needs are
met’. Two role dissonances were identified:
One was realising that not all staff were competent in the roles
they held; the other was that staff could behave in ways
perceived by these parents as unexpectedly unpleasant and
unprofessional.
(Cullen & Lyndsay, 2019, p.176)
The competency of school staff in relation to SEND was perceived by parents in
this study to reflect a lack of training in SEND. Teacher training is therefore
included in the exosystem of the adapted model, as it reflects a lack of adequate
professional training and understanding of SAPs in addition to SEND. The
parents in the study who worked in professional roles reported that they had not
received any training in relation to understanding and managing attendance
problems.
Section 4.2.3 described the triggers for SAPs reported by the study participants,
and being autistic held significance for thirty of the forty-seven children involved,
both in terms of recognition and acknowledgment of autism, and the provision of
appropriate support for autistic children within school environments. School staff
often failed to recognise or accept children were autistic, especially in terms of
recognising when children were masking their difficulties (Beardon, 2019;
Pearson and Rose, 2020). This could be linked to many instances where children
were said to be ‘fine in school’ but at home it was clear the children had problems
attending school. The need for workforce development via improved autism
255
knowledge for teachers is discussed by Guldberg (2020), who recommends a
variety of improvements in training and practice. This includes an emphasis on
engagement and partnership with parents, creating an inclusive culture, and
making reasonable adjustments to remove barriers to participation.
The following section discusses how parents attempted to navigate these
systemic barriers, with the assistance and support of other parents. This aspect
of the parent experience indicates that the exosystem contained sites of
resolution, sites of conflict, and systemic barriers.
8.5.3 Peer support
The most significant support that parents in this study were able to locate was
self-sourced through internet-based peer-support groups, local peers with lived
experience, and SEND charities or parent-targeted services. As the participants
in the study were recruited through an internet-based peer support group it is not
unexpected to find they benefitted from online peer support. However, some
parents stated that online peers were their only support source. In addition,
parents reported that they found someone within their social circle who had
similar lived experience, which was disclosed when they began to discuss it with
people they met face-to-face. Myhill (2017) found parents in her study expressed
the view that they would have appreciated contact with other parents going
through the same difficulties they were, as they thought it would reduce their fear
of professional judgement.
Some parents appeared to mourn the effective loss of their membership of a
school community because they felt isolated and no longer had a sense of
belonging once their child stopped attending. Membership of a peer support
group online offers membership of a new community or ‘new tribe’ where similar
lived experiences mean that you do ‘belong’ somewhere again. In terms of the
adapted model, parents lost a source of belonging and support within the
microsystem, but they found a new source in the exosystem, which shows how
the model can helps us to view things differently and identify contextual changes.
256
Opportunities to share peer support and lived experience empowered parents in
a range of ways. The exchange of information helped to encourage parents to
keep fighting for systemic help, as they learned whether information provided by
professionals was accurate or not. Section 7.2.2 also indicated the significance of
peer contact in that it offered evidence to parents that their family was one of
many in the same situation, rather than being an isolated or unusual case. Some
parents had been led to believe they were unusual in experiencing SAPs,
suggesting it reflected something they had done as parents that was the cause. If
parents later learned they were one of many experiencing similar difficulties and
barriers to finding support, they questioned whether the problem was more
systemic, rather than within-family. This empowerment encouraged some parents
to resist the pressure to comply with professional expectations and act against
the interests of the child as they saw them.
Runswick-Cole and Ryan (2019) considered how mothers who become engaged
in these battles with professionals become increasingly compelled to share their
story with others:
Crucially, in England, as in many other Global North contexts,
parenting roles are socially constructed in ways that demand
that it is mothers of disabled children who take primary
responsibility for the fight for their children. They are
simultaneously valorised and vilified as ‘tiger mums’, ‘warrior
mums’ or ‘angels’, with fathers or other family members erased.
(Runswick-Cole & Ryan, 2019, p.16)
The battle mothers encountered involved persuading professionals and others in
‘authority’ to alter their definition of absence-as-truancy and alter their approach
towards ongoing school absence in recognition of the impact of current systemic
barriers. If mothers succeeded in doing that, or if they were able form their own
definition of SAPs, whereby they felt less compelled to aim for a re-entry to
school, they regained some sense of power and ability to ‘move forward’. Parents
found resources at the exosystem level such as greater knowledge and self-
confidence, which they then took into their interactions in the mesosystem level;
with the irony that the exosystem is the level at which many components are
framed but also the level at which aids to resolution are found.
257
8.6 The Macrosystem
The macrosystem is influential throughout the parents’ journey, as it represents
subjective psychological states such as the beliefs and opinions of members of
society, and its broader cultural and institutional norms, structures, and
constructs. This therefore relates to Chapter 2 and the widespread acceptance of
a mass education system and its impact upon social practices, with expectations
that all children attend school. The macrosystem in the adapted model
represents all the social practices, beliefs and values, and the human mental
processes that feature in chapters 4, 5, 6, and 7.
Cultural influences are of relevance throughout the different levels or systems,
just as they were throughout the Parents’ Journeys. Bronfenbrenner represented
these subjective states in the macrosystem and recognised how they influenced
the inner systems of the model. This is because they determine how a culture
functions, and consequently how people in similar circumstances experience
similar things (Rosa and Tudge, 2013). Regarding experiences of SAPs
described in this study, this helps to explain why forty parents described similar
difficulties and outcomes. This recognition of common cultural beliefs also helps
to support any statements of generalisation that might be made in relation to the
study findings.
The macrosystem acknowledges the significance of government, legislation, and
politics. For Bronfenbrenner, government is one of the institutions within the
macrosystem. In relation to the SAPs context the model recognises the
significance of governmental influence upon all aspects by showing government
as part of the macrosystem and exosystem, with additional reach into all levels.
Political narratives have promoted the belief that school attendance is vital to
maintain democracy and ensure economic success. This has then influenced the
discomfort people feel about children’s absence from school (Lees, 2013; 2014).
It has been argued that policies implemented by successive governments since
compulsory education was introduced have reflected efforts to control working
class families (Ball, 2017). Some argue that governments have achieved this by
encouraging blame cultures and moral panics about the impact of school
258
absence, and truancy as deviance, damaging both society and the economy
(McIntyre-Bhatty, 2008; Furedi, 2008).
As suggested in Chapter 1, it seems relevant and significant to acknowledge that
there are negative aspects to school environments that offer understandable
reasons why children may feel unable to attend school. The argument that school
environments can be toxic and cause children injury and harm has been shared
by various writers including Holt, 1964; Knox, 1990; Harber, 2004; Fortune-
Wood, 2007; Robinson and Aronica, 2018; Gray, 2020; and Fisher, 2021. It is
noted by Lees (2014) that school-based harm is created in several forms,
including social humiliation, sexual abuse, various types of bullying, human rights
abuses, neglect of basic needs and ‘more tacit abuses of an individual sense of
self’. Lees (2014) argues that as school attendance has been promoted as
beneficial to children, their safety and wellbeing should be better protected and
guaranteed. Given that these forms of harm caused by, and within, our systems
of schooling are recognised, this knowledge should support suggestions that
children sometimes have valid reasons to avoid school, and equally, that school
environments can become barriers to attendance.
In recent years this has become increasingly apparent through various reports
expressing concern about the impact of systemic failures, and school-based
factors which are detrimental to children’s wellbeing in relation to mental health
(Mind, 2021); bullying (Ditch the Label, 2020); sexual assault in schools (Lloyd et
al., 2021; Ofsted, 2021b); provision and support for long-term physical illnesses
(No Isolation, 2021); provision and support for pupils with SEND (House of
Commons, Education Committee, 2019); and provision and support for autistic
pupils (Totsika et al., 2020; Truman et al., 2021).
It is clear from these reports and others like them, that there are many reasons
why children and young people find attending school is a difficult and traumatic
experience. In relation to school-belonging and safety, Stroobant and Jones
(2006) interviewed university students who had previously experienced SAPs at
school. Within their analysis they suggest that ‘school refusal behaviour’ may be
a perfectly rational response to a disturbing school environment. They argued
259
that rather than the usual response of exploring why a child or young person is
‘school refusing’, a more relevant question should be ‘why assume that the child
should want to attend school?’ (Stroobant and Jones, 2006, p.213).
Moreover, Lees (2014) argues that although the concept of education should
relate to a variety of possible approaches and practices, as a society we struggle
to accept education as a valid practice unless it involves attendance at a
mainstream school. Lees refers to this as a kind of ‘educationism’ or ‘prejudice
against forms of education that are outside of the standard model’ (2014, p.14).
This prejudice has contributed to circumstances where children who find
mainstream school an adverse and injurious environment are considered flawed
or maladjusted. This prejudice continues to contribute to the dominating belief
that children simply must go to school even if the circumstances or impacts are
detrimental to them, and possibly their family too.
8.7 The Chronosystem
Finally, the outer layer represents the Chronosystem which acknowledges the
influence of time across a variety of domains, incorporating aspects such as life
transitions, changes in attitudes, policies, systems or environments over time, or
the influence of family or cultural traditions. Bronfenbrenner and Morris (2006)
defined human development as:
The phenomenon of continuity and change in the
biopsychological characteristics of human beings, both as
individuals and as groups . . . over the life course, across
successive generations, and through historical time, both past
and future.
(Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 2006, p.793)
In this context, the Chronosystem recognises the development of family
experiences and outcomes over time and acknowledges the historical aspects of
school attendance. This is echoed in Chapter 7 through recognition of parents’
reflection upon their experiences and observations. This reflection often led to a
deeper recognition of the cultural and historical influences upon current
260
understanding and management of school attendance/absence. Considering the
Chronosystem in reference to this study’s findings it suggests the response to
SAPs should no longer simply follow the historical model of absence as truancy,
phobia, and refusal. Instead, recognition that our truancy-related legislation is
outdated is needed, as our understanding of absence from school has surpassed
the assumption of truancy. It is also necessary to acknowledge that fines and
prosecution of parents do not lead to a resolution of SAPs, especially when they
have a systemic basis (Sheppard, 2012).
The inclusion of the Chronosystem as an influence within the SAPs context
suggests that society should learn from experience, especially in terms of
experience that occurs repeatedly over time. The evidence presented in this
thesis suggests there has been a failure to learn from the failure of political action
to reduce persistent absence, and a failure to learn from the experiences of
children and families who struggle with school attendance. For over one hundred
years the social constructions of related terminology, discourses, practices,
research and legislation around school attendance and absence have focused
upon punishing families for truancy, with very little success in resolving
attendance problems. Instead, it seems these social constructions have built
more and more barriers for families to overcome.
8.8 Chapter summary
This chapter has presented and discussed an adaptation of Bronfenbrenner’s
bioecological systems model which offered a framework that supported the
researcher in presenting a visual representation of the social, cultural, political,
and systemic context parents are situated within when they have a child
experiencing SAPs. The adapted model offers an interpretation of the study
findings shared in Chapters 4, 5, 6, and 7, by locating them within the systemic
levels of Bronfenbrenner’s framework to offer a new way of understanding the
complexity of the parental position when both fulfilling their legal duty and
complying with the social expectation that parents ensure children attendance at
school. This highlights the varied barriers hindering parents’ agency in achieving
a resolution for children’s SAPs.
261
The adapted model helps us to understand the phenomenon of SAPs anew in
the following ways:
The significance of the parents’ role
Siting the parent in a central position with the child, along with the inclusion of
home based and systemic factors, and the impacts of each, demonstrates that
the parent is the agent of the child. In this role, the parent acts as a bridge
between the child and other components of the system and mediates the
relationship between the child and these components. The parent also needs to
mediate between the child and other members of the family in the home context.
Sites of Conflict and Sites of Resolution
The mesosystem is mostly the site of conflict for parents, while the exosystem is
mostly the site of resolution in the context of parents seeking to resolve SAPs.
The Influence of Government
In the context of this study there is a greater acknowledgement of the significant
influence of government, and political policies and actions throughout the
systems of the adapted model.
Variations in Perceptions and Constructions of School Attendance
Problems
There is recognition of the tensions created by differing social constructions of
school attendance problems by the various social agents involved.
A greater understanding of the interaction between environmental factors
and school absence.
The adaptation of Bronfenbrenner’s model provides an overview of the most
significant contextual components that parents need to navigate to achieve a
resolution. It appears that the many systemic factors of the SAPs context may not
always be taken into consideration when judgements have been made about the
adequacy of parental efforts to ensure children’s attendance at school.
262
In summary, the adapted model supports a greater understanding of the
complexity of parents’ position specifically in England, created by the
combination of legislation; systemic barriers; the different constructions of SAPs
by different agents; and the lack of specific guidance or a pathway to assist
parents and professionals when they seek to resolve school attendance
problems.
263
Chapter 9. Conclusions and Recommendations
This concluding chapter revisits the research questions listed in Section 3.1 to
discuss how the findings of this study have addressed them. This is followed with
a discussion of the practical and methodological considerations and limitations of
this study. Next, conclusions that have been drawn because of this study’s
findings are explained. Several recommendations will then be discussed
regarding changes that could be made to policy and practice to reflect these
findings and conclusions and potential future work that could be developed from
the findings of this study.
9.1 Answering the research questions
Within the research paradigm, the researcher and the study participants have
together constructed data about the perspectives of parents who seek to resolve
school attendance problems (SAPs). The answers to the study’s four research
questions, as determined through thematic analysis of data generated, are as
follows.
9.1.1 What actions do parents take to resolve a child’s difficulties with
attending school?
When each parent recognised that attending school was becoming problematic
for their child they began a process of observation, application of existing
knowledge of the child, investigation, and reflection, to help them identify any
underlying reasons and triggers as a first step towards achieving a resolution.
Parents may or may not have had existing and possibly long-term concerns
about aspects of their child’s development, behaviour, or wellbeing when the
SAPs began. Parents often discussed their concerns with other family members,
and at some point, consulted their child’s teacher and/or GP to request their initial
advice. When the SAPs continued parents extended this investigative process of
self-directed research to try to access more advice, practical support, and
information that might help them understand and identify what they needed to do
to resolve the situation.
264
Most parents took on this role solely, as although the study did not ask
specifically about the reactions of partners and spouses, it was evident that some
parents acted with the support of their partners, while others had conflicting
opinions and approaches. In either case, one parent usually held responsibility
for delivering their child to school each day or spending time with them at home if
they were unable to go to school. In this position these parents developed an
awareness of how powerful and significant their child’s reaction to attending
school was becoming. It was usually the same parent who took on the process of
investigation, who needed to communicate with school staff and other
professionals, and who attended meetings and appointments.
This parent with the most in-depth involvement is represented in the adapted
version of Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological systems model discussed in Chapter 8.
The positioning of this parent in a central role within the adapted model
acknowledges their role as agent acting on behalf of the child, forming a bridge
between the child experiencing SAPs and the other components of the system. In
this role, the parent advocates for the child in negotiations within the education,
health, and political systems, and can also become the focus of any accusations
of being responsible for the SAPs and/or punitive action.
This role of advocate or mediator for the child is also relevant within the home
environment, as other members of the immediate family often struggled to
understand the child or siblings’ reaction to attending school and may have
resented the disruption brought about by the SAPs.
9.1.2 What do parents experience when they engage with various
professionals in the education, health, and local government systems?
The findings of this study indicated that a lack of appropriate systemic support for
school absence, SEND, and mental or physical illness can have a significant
impact upon children’s ability to attend school, and impact upon parental efficacy
in resolving SAPs. The accounts provided by the study participants evidenced
how in England, parents who seek resolutions for SAPs are often hindered and
disempowered by the systemic responses and barriers to support they
encounter. These responses often related to school staff being dismissive of the
265
existence of any problems perceived within the school environment. This was
combined with a tendency to suggest that any difficulties reported by parents
reflected deficiencies in their parenting and/or problems in the home. This
suggests that the differing perceptions and constructions of SAPs that have been
identified through clinical and academic research involving children, parents, and
professionals are influential in the field, as they act as barriers to a shared
understanding, and therefore hinder attempts at working in partnership to resolve
SAPs.
9.1.3 What barriers do parents encounter in trying to achieve a resolution
for school attendance problems?
Participants described how a combination of systemic factors including:
discourse directing blame at children and parents; truancy-related cultural
narratives; professional lack of compliance with policy and legislation (with no
accountability or repercussions); a lack of relevant professional understanding of
SAPs, SEND, and child mental health; inflexible policies and practices; and the
current underfunding of education, health, and local government services,
diminished their power and agency to achieve a resolution. This made it difficult
for parents to comply with their legal duty to ensure children access a full-time,
suitable education. This lack of power and the reduction in agency forced some
parents to engage in complex battles, some lasting for more than ten years,
which sometimes ended with them removing children from school rolls altogether.
These observations are significant and somewhat ironic, as the very system and
legislation designed to ensure compliance with attendance requirements itself
obstructs this compliance in the case of children who experience anxiety in
relation to attending school.
9.1.4 What is it that assists parents in reaching a resolution for a child’s
school attendance problems?
Parents who took part in this study became empowered by their own proactive
approaches and activities. In the case of these parents, recruited through an
online self-help group, peer contact through social media was one source of
parental empowerment that influenced outcomes, as parental awareness of
systemic issues developed, and they reflected upon alternative solutions. The
266
resultant insights improved their ability to identify, understand, and respond to
SAPs, along with the triggers that may have been a factor. One significant aspect
of empowerment was learning about relevant legislation, and consequently,
understanding what professionals should and shouldn’t be doing in response to
children’s SAPs. Parents also became better able to recognise unhelpful or
damaging approaches, thus leading to reflection and a re-evaluation of priorities
and decision making about the best course of action for the child and their
educational progress. In effect parent peers provided some of the information
and support that was not offered within the systems concerned.
Parents began their journey with the aim of supporting their child’s needs and
seeking help to overcome any difficulties they had in relation to attending school.
Parents then discovered that to do this they needed to satisfy the requirements
and needs of the education system. However, they encountered a range of
systemic barriers that hindered or prevented them from meeting these education
system-based needs. Contact with peers in similar situations provided shared
support and information. Hearing many other similar stories also prompted
recognition that rather than individual families being isolated or unusual cases, as
many had been led to believe, it was more the case that it was the education
system and the wider systemic response to SAPs that was problematic, and they
were all fighting similar battles. As a result of these experiences parents come to
a realisation that their first duty had to be to their child, and not to the education
system. For many families the resolution they achieved was not the one they had
hoped for at the outset of their journey, but it was a resolution that reflected a
change in their perception of the problem and their altered priorities as a result.
9.2 Conclusions
The conclusions reached by the researcher in response to the findings of this
study are as follows:
1. Existing research and existing discourses which frame official responses to
school absence have largely overlooked the experiences of parents who actively
seek a resolution to their children’s school attendance problems and have
consequently overlooked the experiences of these children too.
267
2. The underlying construction of school attendance problems as ‘truancy’,
understood as a failure of parents and children to conform to cultural norms and
expectations in relation to children gaining education through school attendance,
remains dominant in shaping official responses to situations of school absence
despite research in the past two decades pointing to problems within the school
environment.
3. Differing constructions of school attendance problems by the different social
actors involved act as barriers to a shared understanding which hinders attempts
at working in partnership to resolve SAPs.
4. Joint working and professional-parental collaboration is not occurring – it exists
as a policy statement of good practice but is not being lived out or implemented
in practice.
5. There is no recognised and effective ‘pathway’ for parents (or professionals)
who are actively seeking to resolve their children’s school attendance problems.
9.3 Recommendations
The Perspective of Parents who seek to resolve their children’s school
attendance problems
When evaluating parental involvement and efficacy, the findings of this study
strongly suggest that professionals must keep in mind that some parents will be
doing all they can to resolve their children’s SAPs. However rather than
preventing or hindering a resolution, these parents will be encountering systemic
issues and factors outside their control or influence that act as barriers to
achieving a resolution.
The Bioecological Systems Model
This study has found that school attendance problems can be better understood
by viewing the individual child and her or his parents within their full context,
using an ecological systems framework to identify barriers that might hinder a
268
resolution. The adapted model could be further developed as an analytical tool to
support discussion and build understanding of individual contexts. An analytical
tool such as this could help to develop new perceptions of SAPs and discourage
the contrasting and conflicting perceptions that hinder the process of resolving
SAPs.
Legislation: Attendance
When parents attempt to resolve attendance problems they may fail because
existing policies, systems and attitudes are not supporting their efforts. Therefore,
it is inappropriate and ineffective to continue to enforce legal expectations which
appear to be largely unachievable in the current context. Instead, it would be
more appropriate to establish a different response which acknowledges the
complexity and heterogeneity of school attendance problems. This approach
should recognise that many SAPs reflect instances where our current education
system is failing to support the needs of individual children. Where this is the
case the punitive response to ‘truancy’ is clearly inappropriate.
Research: The influence of school-based support upon SAPs
Existing studies investigating underlying cause of SAPs have tended to focus
upon within-child and within-family factors. However, the adequacy and impact of
systemic and school-based support for SEND, or long-term physical illness
seems to be overlooked within existing studies of SAPs. This study also notes
the lack of informed and appropriate school-based support for autistic children
which impacts upon their attendance and wellbeing. The literature also
recognises other school-based factors influencing SAPs, including bullying, and
transitions between primary and secondary school. The adequacy of school
provision and responses to this range of factors needs to be evaluated in terms
of their impact upon the development of SAPs, and the resolution of SAPs.
A triage pathway for parents and professionals
To address the lack of a pathway for parents and professionals to follow if they
seek support for SAPs, a suggested triage pathway administered by a specialist
key worker is set out in Figure 9.1 below. Appendix 7 also illustrates how this
269
pathway relates to the different systemic levels of the adapted Bronfenbrenner
model (Figure 8.3).
Figure 9.1 SAPs Triage Key Worker Service
The SAPs Triage Key Worker Service would be implemented by a neutral,
independent, trained key worker who mediates with the family and the school to
begin, and then administrate a process of initial assessment, possibly leading to
referrals to specialist assessments if appropriate.
The process could be triggered by requests from families or schools. The
resulting assessment process may lead to a plan of support and provision to
meet the child’s education and healthcare needs. The plan would either be
permanent, or temporary and reviewed at regular intervals to assess whether
reintegration to mainstream school is appropriate.
During the triage assessment process ‘holding codes’ would be used to authorise
absence and prevent the threats of fines and imprisonment for parents while the
causes of the school absence are investigated and resolved. The holding codes
would also protect the school from any detrimental impact upon their attendance
data as it would be recognised that a process was underway to resolve the
absences.
SAPs
identified
•SAPs identified by
Parent, school or GP
•Contact made with
Key Worker service
•Key Worker
mediates and
administrates the
Triage process
Holding Code
Triggered
•Holding code A is
applied as an
attendance code in
the register (an
authorised code)
Temporary
Provision
Arranged
•Alternative provision
to be centrally
designed following
the National
Curriculum
•Schools can
supplement the
centrally-designed
provision if they wish
to
Triage
Assessment A
•A = Use of ‘light
touch’ assessment
tool, based on recent
academic research
Triage
Assessments
B
•B = Referrals -
CAMHS,
Paediatrician,
Educational
Psychologist, SaLT,
EHCP assessment,
etc.
•Holding Code B is
triggered when the
need for
assessment/referral
is identified
Support Plan
Implemented
•Holding Code B only
ends when child’s
needs have been
identified, assessed,
and the right type of
support and/or
provision arranged
•Child has a degree of
input into the pace
and content of any
reintegration process
•Key Worker checks
ongoing progress at
regular intervals
•Key worker can re-
trigger Holding Code
A or B if further
problems emerge
270
The Key Worker would remain in place to support the family, guide any referrals,
act as a point of contact for agencies, and keep the school updated on progress.
Their independence means they can ensure practices remain lawful (saving the
legal costs of parental challenge).
Co-production and mutual respect would be crucial to the success of this
initiative. This new approach acknowledges that there are parents, schools and
local authorities who do everything possible to resolve a child’s difficulties, but
equally there are others (on all sides) who do not respond in the ways they
should.
The Key Worker role could sit within the sphere of services supporting school
attendance which includes educational welfare, educational psychology, CAMHS
and SENDIASS. This study has evidenced how educational psychologists are
already working to better understand the challenges around support for SAPs
and therefore it would seem most appropriate to sit this Triage Key Worker
service as an extension to educational psychology services.
A Triage Key Worker service would require targeted funding to address the cuts
to Education Services Grants in 2017 (which local authorities had used to fund
services including attendance officers). There would also need to be funding to
increase the capacity of educational psychology services. As a balance to these
costs, the Triage Key Worker service could help to reduce the costs involved in
the ineffective practice of prosecuting parents for truancy and could help reduce
the numbers of children needing funding through an EHCP to access the support
they need in schools.
Resolving persistent absence is again a current area of concern for the DfE, who
announced a scheme to introduce ‘attendance advisors’ to focus on the use of
enforcement measures (DfE, 2021b). The DfE also formed an ‘attendance
alliance’ of experts whose task was to improve school attendance (DfE, 2021c).
In January 2022, the DfE also opened a consultation with the aim of investigating
how to improve support for families experiencing attendance difficulties. Within
271
these initiatives the focus remains on schools holding the primary responsibility
for acting to resolve pupil absence, yet the findings of this study suggest how
problematic that can be. The implementation of a Triage Key Worker service
could offer a new approach to resolving absence.
9.4 Methodological considerations
The researcher’s role
The researcher was in the position of being a woman who had had experiences
of SAPs herself as a parent, a woman who was active in fostering peer support
for SAPs, and a woman in the position of conducting research in a professional
capacity. Therefore, she was a researcher who was already part of the field in
which she was conducting her research.
The researcher was emersed in the context before and throughout the study and
so had a deep awareness of what parents were experiencing. This meant that
the analysis wasn’t simply based upon the researcher’s interpretation of data
gathered through a limited number of hours of interaction. This was a strength in
terms of the in-depth knowledge the researcher has of the SAPs context as an
acknowledged element of the co-construction of the study findings involving the
participants and the researcher.
It may be argued that the position of the researcher meant she had less
objectivity when interpreting data, however the researcher took steps to support
the reliability of her analysis. As explained in Section 3.7, she aimed to balance
the impact of her influence by staying as close as possible to the content of the
participant’s accounts in her data analysis (using process coding), analysis, and
reporting, therefore establishing internal validity (Gray, 2018).
The researcher’s connection with the participants of the study came through their
membership of the peer support group that she runs, which was also the site of
recruitment. The participants therefore had existing awareness of the
researcher’s knowledge and experience of SAPs, which gave them confidence
that the researcher understood their experiences and positions as parents. This
272
helped both to facilitate recruitment and instil confidence in the participants to tell
their stories in some detail, since they were likely to have perceived the
researcher would be sympathetic of their perspectives and opinions.
The recruitment method
The use of the Facebook peer support group as a site of recruitment was
intended to enable the researcher to find participants with the specific experience
she wished to investigate. The use of the Facebook support group limited the
recruitment to parents who were members of one specific group, who used
Facebook, and who had access to the internet, and were literate and comfortable
communicating online, using a keyboard. This suggests that further research
could be carried out that facilitates the input of parents who seek to resolve SAPs
but are not members of the Facebook support group, who don’t have access to
the internet, and who prefer to communicate verbally, or in other ways.
Recruitment of participants with relevant experience was achieved successfully,
although there were aspects of the recruitment method that the researcher found
created limitations to her analysis as she progressed through the study. Initially,
the researcher decided she wanted to include everyone who volunteered to
participate as she believed every volunteer would have a story that would
contribute to the understanding of parents’ experiences of resolving SAPs. As
analysis progressed and the concept of the Parents’ Journeys was established,
the researcher noted how the participants were at different stages of their journey
when they took part in the interview process some had reached a resolution, and
others were at an earlier stage of the journey. This meant that she did not learn
about the complete journey of all parents who participated. Therefore, the
researcher concluded that it would have helped if she had focused on recruiting
participants who had reached a resolution for their child’s SAPs, so that a full
account could be analysed in each case.
The researcher did not gather certain types of information from her participants
which, with hindsight, could have been useful to extend her analysis of
participants experiences. This relates to information about the profile of
participants and their households, especially indicators of class such as
273
employment, income, or educational attainment. This may have limited the voices
that have been heard as it is not possible to fully assess what types of
experience have been included or missed out. Therefore, further studies of
parents’ experiences of resolving SAPs could be conducted whereby the
influence of factors such as socio-economic status are considered and included
in the data analysis.
The data collection method
The researcher intended to use semi-structured interview questions within the
email exchanges with participants so that she could tailor the questions in
response to the content of each participant’s emails. However, in practice
managing this process for forty participants meant that she relied upon the set of
structured questions she had devised as a guide prior to the data collection
process to a greater degree than first intended. This meant that the researcher
did not tailor each ‘conversation’ to the individual parents’ experiences, which
was a limitation to the study.
The data collection method was structured around six sets of questions that
asked about different aspects of parent’s experiences. These questions did not
ask specifically about parent’s understandings of wider constraints around SAPs
until the fifth set. However, by the fifth set, the number of participants who
responded to the email was seventeen out of the forty who originally agreed to
take part. This meant there was a smaller amount of data to analyse in relation to
those questions, but some parents had provided accounts or opinions that had
relevance in earlier email responses.
9.5 Potential future work
The findings of this study suggest some potential future work that would extend
understanding of the concept of Parents Journeys through SAPs, the Parental
SAPs Predicament, and the application of a systemic model to support a
comprehensive understanding of the SAPs context and the barriers that might
hinder a resolution for SAPs. Aspects that require further study include:
274
§ A longitudinal study to understand complete Parents Journeys from the
beginning of SAPs to the point when a child reaches the end of compulsory
education.
§ As the participants in this study were all mothers, it would be useful to study
the experiences of fathers to better understand how they are similar and how
they might differ.
§ Further development of the adapted bioecological model to identify how it can
be utilised as a tool to help understand the influences upon individual SAPs
cases
To work towards scientific publication and dissemination of this research I plan to
explore opportunities to share this research and the findings through the
International Network for School Attendance (INSA) https://www.insa.network.
INSA was formed and is supported by many of the leading researchers in the
field, with connections to several journals with relevance. The INSA website lists
research about school attendance and absence, and shares resources and
details of practice and activities in a range of countries.
I will also explore opportunities to share these research findings and explore
practical and policy impact work related to this research, through the activities
and network of contacts built up by the organisations I am closely involved with.
This activity is aimed at raising awareness of the issues families experience and
encouraging policy change. These networks include a range of organisations and
services supporting families and young people, academics, alternative education
providers, clinicians, national charities, politicians, parliamentary bodies, and the
Department for Education.
275
References
Agras, S. (1959) ‘The relationship of school phobia to childhood depression’. The American Journal of
Psychiatry, 16(6), pp. 533-536. https://doi.org/10.1176/ajp.116.6.533
Aldrich, R. (ed.) (2002) A Century of Education. London: Routledge Falmer.
Alexander, R. (ed.) (2010). Children, their World, their Education. Final report and recommendations of the
Cambridge Primary Review. London. Routledge.
Apter, B. (2017) ‘School Attendance, exclusion and persistent absence’. British Psychological Society behaviour
change briefings. Available at: https://www.bps.org.uk/news-and-policy/behaviour-change-school-
attendance-exclusion-and-persistent-absence (Accessed 27 March 2018).
Archer, T., Filmer-Sankey, C., & Fletcher-Campbell, F. (2003) School phobia and school refusal: research into
causes and remedies. Slough. National Foundation for Educational Research.
Arendell, T. (1997) ‘A Social Constructionist Approach to Parenting’, in Arendell, T. (ed.). Contemporary
Parenting: Challenges and Issues: 9 (Understanding Families series). Thousand Oaks CA: SAGE Publications Inc.
Argent, K. (2007) ‘Every Child Matters: change for parents/carers and families? Can schools work with families
to promote knowledge and understanding of government expectations?’, Education 3–13, 35(3), pp. 295-303.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03004270701467317
Arthur, R. (2005) ‘Punishing Parents for the Crimes of their Children’. The Howard Journal. 44(3), pp.233-253.
Available at: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1468-2311.2005.00370.x (Accessed: 21 October
2020).
Arthur, R. (2015) ‘Troubling times for young people and families with troubles – responding to truancy, rioting
and families struggling with adversity’, Social & Legal Studies, 24(3), pp.443-464. Available at:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0964663914559239 (Accessed: 21 October 2020).
Aucott, C. (2014) ‘An exploration of pupils', parents' and teachers' perceptions of the causes of pupil non-
attendance and the reasons for improvements in attendance. PhD thesis. University of Birmingham. School of
Education. Available at: https://etheses.bham.ac.uk//id/eprint/5337/ (Accessed: 30 June 2019)
Bacon, V.R. & Kearney, C.A. (2020) ‘School climate and student-based contextual learning factors as predictors
of school absenteeism severity at multiple levels via CHAID analysis’. Child and Youth Services Review. 118
Article 105452. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105452
Ball, S. J. (2017) The Education Debate. 3rd edn. Bristol: Policy Press.
Ball, S. J. (2018) ‘The tragedy of state education in England: Reluctance, compromise and muddle – a system in
disarray’. Journal of the British Academy, 6, pp. 207 – 238. DOI https://doi.org/10.5871/jba/006.207
Beardon, L. (2019) ‘Autism, Masking, Social Anxiety and the Classroom’ in Lawrence, C. (ed). Teacher Education
and Autism: A Research-based Practical Handbook. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers, pp. 29-36.
276
Benn, M. (2012) School Wars: The Battle for Britain’s Education. London: Verso.
Beresford, P., Nettle, M., & Perring, R. (2010) Towards a social model of madness and distress? Exploring what
service users say. York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation.
Berg, I., Nichols, K., & Pritchard, C. (1969) ‘School phobia: Its classification and relationship to dependency’.
Journal of Clinical Psychology and Psychiatry, 10(2), pp. 23–41. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-
7610.1969.tb02074.x
Berg, I., Butler, A., Hullin, R., Smith, R., & Tyrer, S. (1978) ‘Features of children taken to juvenile court for
failure to attend school’. Psychological Medicine, 8(3), pp. 447–453. DOI: 10.1017/s0033291700016123
Berg, I., Butler, A., Fairbairn, I., & McGuire, R. (1981). ‘The parents of school phobic adolescents - a preliminary
investigation of family life variables’. Psychological Medicine, 11(1), pp. 79 - 83.
DOI: 10.1017/s0033291700053290
Berg, I., Casswell, G., Goodwin, A., Hullin, R., McGuire, R., & Tagg, G. (1985) ‘Classification of severe school
attendance problems’. Psychological Medicine. 15(1) pp. 157–165.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291700021024
Berg, I., Brown, I., & Hullin, R. (1988) Off School, In Court: An Experimental and Psychiatric Investigation of
Severe School Attendance Problems. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Berg, I. & Nursten, J. (1996) Unwillingly to school. 4th edn. London: Gaskell.
Berg, I. (1997) ‘School refusal and truancy’. Archives of Disease in Childhood. 76(2), pp. 90–91.
https://doi.org/10.1136/adc.76.2.90
Berg, I. (2002) ‘School avoidance, school phobia, and truancy’ in M. Lewis (ed.) Child and adolescent psychiatry:
A comprehensive textbook, 3rd edn. pp. 1260–1266. Sydney: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
Berger, P. & Luckman, T. (1991) The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge.
London: Penguin Books Ltd.
Bernstein, G.A. & Borchardt, C.A. (1996) ‘School Refusal: Family Constellation and Family Functioning’. Journal
of Anxiety Disorders, 10(1), pp. 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1016/0887-6185(95)00031-3
Birioukov, A. (2016) ‘Beyond the excused/unexcused absence binary: classifying absenteeism through a
voluntary/involuntary absence framework’, Educational Review, 68(3), pp. 340-357,
DOI: 10.1080/00131911.2015.1090400
Blum, L. (2007) Mother-blame in the Prozac nation: Raising kids with invisible disabilities. Gender &
Society, 21(2), pp. 202– 226. https://doi-org.proxy.library.dmu.ac.uk/10.1177/0891243206298178
277
Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2006) ‘Using Thematic Analysis in Psychology’. Qualitative Research in Psychology,
3(2), pp. 77 – 101. Available at: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
(Accessed: 10 September 2020).
Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2012) ‘Thematic analysis’. in Cooper, H. (ed.) APA handbook of research methods in
psychology, Research designs, Vol. 2. Washington, DC: APA books. pp. 57–71.
Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2020) ‘Can I use TA? Should I use TA? Should I not use TA? Comparing reflexive
thematic analysis and other pattern-based qualitative analytic approaches’. Counselling and Psychotherapy
Research. 21(1), pp. 37 – 47. doi.org/10.1002/capr.12360
Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2022) Thematic Analysis: A Practical Guide. London: Sage Publications Ltd.
Braun, V., Clarke, V., & Gray, D. (2017) Collecting Qualitative Data: A Practical Guide to Textual, Media and
Virtual Techniques. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.
Bridges, D. (2010) 'Government’s Construction of the Relation Between Parents and Schools in the Upbringing
of Children in England: 1963–2009', Educational Theory, 60(3), pp. 299-324. DOI: 10.1111/j.1741-
5446.2010.00360.x
Broadwin, I. T. (1932) ‘A Contribution to the Study of Truancy’. The American Journal of Orthopsychiatry. Vol.
2. pp. 253-259. https://doi.org/10.1016/0272-7358(87)90016-X
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1974) ‘The Origins of Alienation’, Scientific American, 231(2), pp. 53-61. Available at:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/24950143 (Accessed 5 March 2020).
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1977) ‘Toward an experimental ecology of human development’. American Psychologist.
32(7), pp. 513–531. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.32.7.513
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979) The ecology of human development: Experiments in nature and design. Cambridge
MA: Harvard University Press.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1986) ‘Ecology of the Family as a Context for Human Development: Research
Perspectives’. Developmental Psychology, 22(6), pp. 732-742. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.22.6.723
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1989) ‘Ecological systems theory’. Annals of Child Development, Volume 6, pp. 185–246.
Bronfenbrenner, U. & Ceci, S.J. (1994) ‘Nature – Nurture Reconceptualized in Developmental Perspective: A
Bioecological Model’. Psychological Review. 101(4), pp. 568-586. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-
295X.101.4.568
Bronfenbrenner, U. & Morris, P. A. (1998) ‘The ecology of developmental process’, in R. M. Lerner (ed.),
Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 1. Theoretical models of human development, 5th edn. pp. 993–1028. New
York: Wiley.
278
Bronfenbrenner, U. (2005) Making human beings human: Bioecological Perspectives on human development.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Brooks, F., Klemera, E., Chester, K., Magnusson, J. & Spencer, N. (2020) HBSC England National Report:
Findings from the 2018 HBSC study for England. Hatfield, England: University of Hertfordshire. Available at:
http://hbscengland.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/HBSC-England-National-Report-2020.pdf (Accessed: 16
October 2021).
Browne, R. (2018) ‘Exploration into the parental experience of Emotionally Based School Non-Attendance
(EBSNA) in young people – An Interpretive Phenomenological Analysis’. PhD Thesis. University of Essex and
Tavistock and Portman NHS Foundation Trust. Available at: http://repository.essex.ac.uk/23477/ (Accessed: 1
January 2021).
Bryman, A. (2016). Social Research Methods. 5th edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Burns, E. (2010) ‘Developing Email Interview Practices in Qualitative Research’. Sociological Research Online,
15(4) p. 8. Available at: http://www.socresonline.org.uk/15/4/8.html (Accessed: 23 April 2018).
Burr, V. (2015) Social Constructionism. 3rd edn. Hove: Routledge.
Burr, V. (2019) ‘Social Constructionism’ in Liamputtong, P. (ed.) Handbook of research methods in health and
social sciences, pp. 843-860. Singapore: Springer.
Burt, C. (1925). The Sub-normal Schoolchild. Volume One: The Young Delinquent. London: University of London
Press, Ltd. Available at: https://archive.org/details/youngdelinquent001158mbp/page/n17/mode/2up
(Accessed: 12 September 2021).
C. A. M. (1898). ‘Wastrel Children. What shall we do with them?’ Charity Organisation Review, 4(21), pp. 132–
148. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43787092 (Accessed: 28 August 2021).
Carlen, P., Gleeson, D., & Wardhaugh, J. (1992) Truancy: The Politics of Compulsory Schooling. Buckingham:
Oxford University Press.
Carless, B., Melvin, G.A., Tonge, B.J., & Newman, L.K. (2015) ‘The Role of Parental Self-Efficacy in Adolescent
School Refusal’. Journal of Family Psychology, 29(2), pp. 162-170. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/fam0000050
Cartmell, K.M. (2017) An Ethnographic Exploration of the Starting School Transition within an English School.
PhD thesis. Liverpool John Moores University. Available at:
http://researchonline.ljmu.ac.uk/id/eprint/8522/1/2017CartmellPhD.pdf (Accessed: 15 July 2020).
Charmaz, K. (2013) Constructing Grounded Theory, 2nd edn. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
Chazan, M. (1971) ‘The role of the educational psychologist in the promotion of community mental
health’. Community Development Journal, 6(3), pp. 173–182. Available at:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/44255490 (Accessed: 5 January 2018)
279
Children Act 1989. Available at: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1989/41/contents (Accessed 5 June
2021).
Children & Families Act, 2014. Available at:
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2014/6/pdfs/ukpga_20140006_en.pdf (Accessed 2 June 2021).
Chitty, C. (1992) ‘The changing role of the state in education provision’. History of Education, 21(1), pp. 1-13
doi.org/10.1080/0046760920210101
Clarke, V. & Braun, V. (2013) Successful Qualitative Research: a practical guide for beginners. London: Sage
Publications Ltd.
Clarke, V. and Braun, V. (2021) ‘Tips on writing a qualitative dissertation or thesis, from Braun & Clarke – Part
2’, edpsy.org.uk, 9th June. Available at: https://edpsy.org.uk/blog/2021/tips-on-writing-a-qualitative-
dissertation-or-thesis-from-braun-clarke-part-2/ (Accessed 10th September 2021).
Clarke, V., Braun, V., Terry, G & Hayfield N. (2019) Thematic analysis. In Liamputtong, P. (Ed.), Handbook of
research methods in health and social sciences, pp. 843-860. Singapore: Springer.
Clements, L. & Aiello, A.L. (2019) Unacceptable delay: Complaints procedures for disabled children and their
families. School of Law, the University of Leeds and Cerebra. Available at:
http://www.lukeclements.co.uk/unacceptable-delay/ (Accessed: 21 October 2021).
Clements, L. & Aiello, A.L. (2021) ‘Institutionalising parent carer blame: The experiences of families with
disabled children in their interactions with English local authority children’s services departments’. School of
Law, the University of Leeds and Cerebra. Available at: http://www.lukeclements.co.uk/publications/
(Accessed 9 December 2021).
Clissold, K. (2018) A qualitative exploration of pupil, parent and staff discourses of extended school non-
attendance PhD thesis. University of Birmingham. Available at: https://etheses.bham.ac.uk//id/eprint/8817/
(Accessed: 4 January 2021)
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2011) Research Methods in Education. 7th edn. London: Routledge.
Coles, B., Godfrey, C., Keung, A., Parrott, S., & Bradshaw, J. (2010) Estimating the life-time cost of NEET: 16-18
year olds not in Education, Employment or Training. Available at:
https://www.york.ac.uk/inst/spru/research/pdf/NEET.pdf (Accessed: 15 August 2020).
Cooper, L. and Rogers, C. (2015) ‘Mothering and ‘insider’ Dilemmas: Feminist Sociologists in the Research
Process’, Sociological Research Online, 20(2), pp. 14–26. DOI: 10.5153/sro.3584.
Coolidge, J.C., Willer, M.L., Tessman, E. and Waldfogel, S. (1957) ‘School phobia in adolescence: A
manifestation of severe character disturbance.’ American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 30(3), pp. 599 – 607.
Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1939-0025.1960.tb02075.x (Accessed: 7 March 2018).
Coram Children’s Centre (2022) Mental health in schools. Available at:
https://childlawadvice.org.uk/information-pages/mental-health-in-schools/ (Accessed: 4 January 2022)
280
Cowburn, A. & Blow, M. (2017) Wise Up to Wellbeing in Schools. London: Young Minds and National Children's
Bureau. Available at: https://www.readkong.com/page/wise-up-prioritising-wellbeing-in-schools-7256446
(Accessed: 8 April 2019).
Crenna-Jennings, W. & Hutchinson, J. (2018) Access to children and young people’s mental health services –
2018. London: Education Policy Institute. Available at: https://epi.org.uk/publications-and-research/access-to-
camhs-2018/ (Accessed 10 September 2021).
Creswell, J.W. (2007) Qualitative Inquiry & Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches, 2nd edn.
California: Sage Publications Ltd.
Cullen M.A. and Lindsay G. (2019) ‘Special Educational Needs: Understanding Drivers of Complaints and
Disagreements in the English System’, Frontiers in Education. 4(77). https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2019.00077
Cunningham, I. (2021) Self-managed Learning and the New Educational Paradigm. London: Routledge.
Dalziel, K. & Henthorne, D. (2005) Parents’ / carers’ Attitudes Towards School Attendance. DfES Publications.
Available at: https://dera.ioe.ac.uk/5548/1/RR618.pdf (Accessed: 19 September 2019).
David, M., Edwards, R., Hughes, M. & Ribbens, J. (1993) Mothers and Education: Inside Out? Basingstoke: The
Macmillan Press Ltd.
David, M. E. (1995) ‘Parental wishes versus parental choice’, History of Education, 24(3), p. 267-276.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0046760950240306
Davidson, S. (1960). ‘School Phobia as a Manifestation of Family Disturbance: Its Structure and Treatment’.
Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry. Vol. 1. pp. 270 – 287. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-
7610.1960.tb02000.x
Davis, J. D. & Lee, J. (2006) ‘To attend or not to attend? Why some students choose school and others reject
it’. Support for Learning. NASEN. 21(4), pp. 204-209. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-
9604.2006.00433.x
Department for Education (DfE) & Department for Health and Social Care (DfHSC) (2015) SEND Code of
Practice: 0-25 Years. London. HMSO. Available at:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/398815/
SEND_Code_of_Practice_January_2015.pdf (Accessed: 21 August 2020).
Department for Education (DfE) (2011) ‘A profile of pupil absence in England’ Department for Education
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/183445/
DFE-RR171.pdf (Accessed: 2 November 2021).
Department for Education (DfE) (2013) ‘Ensuring a good education for children who cannot attend school
because of health needs’. Department for Education. Available at:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/941900/
health_needs_guidance_accessible.pdf (Accessed 3 December 2018)
281
Department for Education (DfE) (2013) ‘Alternative Provision: Statutory guidance for local authorities’.
Department for Education. Available at:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/942014/
alternative_provision_statutory_guidance_accessible.pdf (Accessed 3 December 2018)
Department for Education (DfE) (2015a) ‘Supporting pupils at school with medical conditions: Statutory
guidance for governing bodies of maintained schools and proprietors of academies in England’. Department for
Education. Available at:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/803956/
supporting-pupils-at-school-with-medical-conditions.pdf (Accessed 3 December 2018)
Department for Education (DfE) (2015b) ‘School attendance parental responsibility measures: Statutory
guidance for local authorities, school leaders, school staff, governing bodies and the police’. Department for
Education. Available at:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/581539/
School_attendance_parental_responsibility_measures_statutory_guidance.pdf (Accessed 4 December 2018)
Department for Education (DfE) (2016) The link between absence and attainment at key stage 2 and key stage
4: 2013 to 2014 academic year. Department for Education. Available at:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/509679/
The-link-between-absence-and-attainment-at-KS2-and-KS4-2013-to-2014-academic-year.pdf (Accessed 3
November 2021)
Department for Education (DfE) (2017) School attendance parent responsibility measures: Statutory guidance
for local authorities, school leaders, school staff, governing bodies and the police. Available at:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/parental-responsibility-measures-for-behaviour-and-
attendance (Accessed 2 November 2021)
Department for Education (DfE) (2017) Preventing and tackling bullying: Advice for headteachers, staff and
governors. Available at:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/623895/
Preventing_and_tackling_bullying_advice.pdf (Accessed 1 September 2020)
Department for Education (DfE) (2018a) Mental health and behaviour in schools. Available at:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/755135/
Mental_health_and_behaviour_in_schools__.pdf (Accessed 1 September 2020)
Department for Education (DfE) (2018b) Pupil absence in schools in England: autumn 2017 and spring 2018.
Available at:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/749352/
Absence_2term_201718-Text.pdf (Accessed 11 November 2021)
Department for Education (DfE) (2019a) Pupil absence in schools Department for Education (in England:
autumn 2017 and spring 2018. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/pupil-absence-in-
schools-in-england-autumn-term-2017-and-spring-term-2018 (Accessed 12 June 2019)
Department for Education (DfE) (2019b) A guide to absence statistics. Available at:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/787314/
Guide_to_absence_statistics_21032019.pdf (Accessed 12 June 2019)
282
Department for Education (DfE) (2020a) School Attendance: Guidance for maintained schools, academies,
independent schools and local authorities. London. HMSO. Available at:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/school-attendance (Accessed 19 May 2021)
Department for Education (DfE) (2020b). Pupil Absence in schools in England: 2018-19. Available from:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/875275/
Absence_3term.pdf (Accessed 11 June 2021)
Department for Education (DfE) (2020c). Pupil Absence in schools in England: autumn term 2019 -2020.
Available from: https://explore-education-statistics.service.gov.uk/find-statistics/pupil-absence-in-schools-in-
england-autumn-term/2019-20-autumn-term (Accessed 11 June 2021)
Department for Education (DfE) (2021a) Pupil absence in schools in England: autumn term 2020/21 Available
at: https://explore-education-statistics.service.gov.uk/find-statistics/pupil-absence-in-schools-in-england-
autumn-term#dataBlock-bef435db-6ac3-4761-ed56- (Accessed 12 June 2021)
Department for Education (DfE) (2021b) New measures to reduce pupil absence. Available at:
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-measures-to-reduce-pupil-absence (Accessed 2 January 2022)
Department for Education (DfE) (2021c) Education Secretary launches new attendance alliance. Available at:
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/education-secretary-launches-new-attendance-alliance (Accessed 15
December 2021)
Department for Education (DfE) (2021d) Keeping children safe in education 2021. Available at:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1021914
/KCSIE_2021_September_guidance.pdf (Accessed 4 December 2021)
Department for Education (DfE) (2022a) Improving school attendance: support for schools and local authorities
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/school-attendance/framework-for-securing-full-attendance-
actions-for-schools-and-local-authorities (Accessed 18 January 2022)
Department for Education and Skills (DfES) (2007) Every Parent Matters. London: HMSO.
Department for Health and Social Care (DfHSC) and Department for Education (2018) Government Response to
the Consultation on Transforming Children and Young People’s Mental Health Provision: A Green Paper and
Next Steps. London. HMSO. Available at:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/728892/
government-response-to-consultation-on-transforming-children-and-young-peoples-mental-health.pdf
Ditch the Label (2020). The Annual Bullying Report 2020. Ditch the Label. Available at:
https://www.ditchthelabel.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/The-Annual-Bullying-Survey-2020-2.pdf
(Accessed 16 June 2021).
Dockett, S., & Perry, B. (2007) Transitions to school: Perceptions, expectations, experiences. Sydney: UNSW
Press.
283
Donoghue, J. (2011) Truancy and the Prosecution of Parents: An Unfair Burden on Mothers? Modern Law
Review, 74(2) pp. 216 - 244. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.2011.00844.x
Douglas, P., Runswick-Cole, K., Ryan, S. & Fogg, P. (2021) ‘Mad Mothering: Learning From the Intersections of
Madness, Mothering, and Disability’, Journal of Literary & Cultural Disability Studies, 15(1), pp. 39–56.
https://doi.org/10.3828/jlcds.2021.3
Education Act 1902, c. 42. Available at: http://www.educationengland.org.uk/documents/acts/1902-
education-act.html (Accessed 4 June 2021).
Education Act, 1918, c. 39. Available at:
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1918/39/pdfs/ukpga_19180039_en.pdf (Accessed 5 June 2021).
Education Act, 1944, c. 31. Available at:
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1944/31/pdfs/ukpga_19440031_en.pdf (Accessed 4 June 2021).
Education Act, 1980, Available at: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/20/contents (Accessed 10 June
2021).
Education Act, 1996, c. 56. Available at:
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1996/56/pdfs/ukpga_19960056_en.pdf (Accessed 5 June 2021).
Education Act, 2002. Available at: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2002/32/section/175 (Accessed 5
June 2021).
Education and Inspections Act, 2006. Available at: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/40/contents
(Accessed 4 June 2021).
Ekstrand, B. (2015) ‘What it takes to keep children in school: a research review’, Educational Review. 67(4), pp.
459 – 482. Available at: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00131911.2015.1008406 (Accessed 3
June 2019).
Elementary Education Act 1870, c. 75. Available at:
http://www.educationengland.org.uk/documents/acts/1870-elementary-education-act.html (Accessed 4 June
2021).
Elementary Education Act 1876, c. 79. Available at:
http://www.educationengland.org.uk/documents/acts/1876-elem-educ-act.html (Accessed 4 June 2021).
Elementary Education Act. 1880, c. 23. Available at:
http://www.educationengland.org.uk/documents/acts/1880-elementary-education-act.html (Accessed 4 June
2021).
Elementary Education Act 1891, c. 56. Available at:
http://www.educationengland.org.uk/documents/acts/1891-elementary-education-act.html (Accessed 4 June
2021).
284
Elementary Education Act 1897, c. 16. Available at:
http://www.educationengland.org.uk/documents/acts/1897-elementary-education-act.html (Accessed 4 June
2021).
Elliott S. & Davis J.M. (2018) Challenging Taken-for-Granted Ideas in Early Childhood Education: A Critique of
Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Systems Theory in the Age of Post-humanism, in Cutter-Mackenzie A., Malone K.,
Barratt Hacking E. (eds) Research Handbook on Childhood Nature. Springer International Handbooks of
Education. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-51949-4_60-1
Elliott, J. G. (1999) ‘School refusal: Issues of conceptualisation, assessment and treatment’, Journal of Child
Psychology & Psychiatry, 40(7) pp. 1001 – 1012. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/1469-7610.00519
Elliott, J.G. & Place, M. (1998) Children in Difficulty: A Guide to Understanding and Helping. Abingdon:
Routledge.
Elliott, J. G. & Place, M. (2019) Practitioner Review: School Refusal: developments in conceptualisation and
treatment since 2000. The Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry. Available at:
https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.12848
Epstein, R., Brown, G. & O’Flynn, S. (2019) Prosecuting Parents for Truancy: who pays the price? Coventry
University. Coventry. Available at: http://covrj.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/PROSECUTINGParents.pdf
(Accessed: 2 December 2019).
Equality Act, 2010. Available at: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/contents (Accessed 12 June
2021).
Evans, L. D. (2000) Functional school refusal subtypes: Anxiety, avoidance, and malingering. Psychology in the
Schools, Vol. 37(2), pp. 183–191. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1520-6807(200003)37:2<183::AID-
PITS9>3.0.CO;2-5 (Accessed 17 November 2021).
Finlay, L. (2021) “Thematic Analysis: The ‘Good’, the ‘Bad’ and the ‘Ugly’”. European Journal for Qualitative
Research in Psychotherapy, 11, pp. 103–116. Available at: https://ejqrp.org/index.php/ejqrp/article/view/136
(Accessed: 22 November 2021).
Fisher, N. (2021) Changing Our Minds: How children can take control of their own learning. London: Robinson.
Fortune-Wood, M. (2007) Can’t Go Won’t Go: An Alternative Approach to School Refusal. Blaenau Ffestiniog.
Cinnamon Press.
Frydenlund, J. H. (2021) ‘How an Empty Chair at School Becomes an Empty Claim: A Discussion of Absence
From School and Its Causality’. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research,
https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2021.1897883 (Accessed 12 September 2021).
Furedi, F. (2008) Paranoid Parenting. London: Continuum.
285
Gibson, H. & Simon, C.A. (2010) ‘Every Parent Matters: Reflections from England upon New Labour’s Parent
Policy’, Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy, Issue #114. Available at:
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ910136.pdf (Accessed: 5 September 2020).
Gibson, L. (2017) ‘Type me your answer’: Generating interview data via email’, in Braun, V., Clarke, V., & Gray,
D. Collecting Qualitative Data: A Practical Guide to Textual, Media and Virtual Techniques, Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Giddens A. & Sutton, P.W. (2017) Essential Concepts in Sociology, 2nd edn. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Gillard, D. (2018) Education in England: a history. Available at: www.educationengland.org.uk/history
(Accessed 25 November 2018).
Girlguiding (2021). ‘Research briefing: It happens all the time. Girls’ and young women’s experiences of sexual
harassment’. London: Girlguiding. Available at: https://www.girlguiding.org.uk/globalassets/docs-and-
resources/research-and-campaigns/girlguiding-research-briefing_girls-experiences-of-sexual-
harassment_june2021.pdf (Accessed 11 September 2021).
Goffman, E. (1963) ‘Stigma’. London: Penguin Books Ltd.
Goodall, J. (2019) Parental engagement and deficit discourses: absolving the system and solving parents,
Educational Review, 73(1), pp.98-110. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2018.1559801
(Accessed 4 August 2021).
Goodall, J. & Montgomery, C. (2014) ‘Parental Involvement to Parental Engagement: A Continuum.’
Educational Review, 66(4), pp. 399–410. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2013.781576 (Accessed 6 August
2021).
Gove, M. (2011) Michael Gove to the Durand Academy. Department for Education.
https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/michael-gove-to-the-durand-academy (Accessed 17 February
2019)
Government Legal Department (2020) ‘Letter to Polly Sweeney, 15 January’. Available at:
https://notfineinschool.co.uk/nfis-resources (Accessed 10 June 2021).
Gray, D.E. (2018) Doing Research in the Real World, 4th edn. London: SAGE Publications Inc.
Gray, P. (2020) The Harm of Coercive Schooling, Cambridge, MA: The Alliance for Self-Directed Learning.
Gren-Landell, M. (Ed) (2021) School Attendance Problems: A Research Update and Where to Go. Stockholm.
Jerringfonden. Available at: https://jerringfonden.se/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/202101-Jerringfonden-
Antologi-A5-sammanslagen.pdf (Accessed 8 November 2021)
Gregory, I.R. & Purcell, A. (2014) Extended school non-attenders’ views: developing best practice. Educational
Psychology in Practice, 30(1), pp. 37–50, Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02667363.2013.869489
(Accessed 12 April 2019).
286
Guba E.G. & Lincoln Y.S. (1994) ‘Competing paradigms in qualitative research’, in Denzin N.K. & Lincoln Y.S.
(Eds) Handbook of qualitative research, pp. 105-117. California: Sage, Thousand Oaks. Available at:
https://eclass.uoa.gr/modules/document/file.php/PPP356/Guba%20%26%20Lincoln%201994.pdf (Accessed
14 March 2021).
Guldberg, K. (2020) Developing Excellence in Autism Practice: Making a Difference in Education. London:
Routledge.
Hammersley, M. (2012) Methodological Paradigms in Educational Research, British Educational Research
Association on-line resource. Available at: https://www.bera.ac.uk/publication/methodological-paradigms-in-
educational-research (Accessed: 28 August 2021)
Hampden-Thompson, G. and Galindo, C. (2017) ‘School–family relationships, school satisfaction and the
academic achievement of young people’, Educational Review, 69(2), pp. 248–265.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2016.1207613 (Accessed 2 June 2019).
Hanley, T., Winter, L. A., & Burrell, K. (2017) Supporting Emotional Wellbeing in Schools in the Context of
Austerity. University of Manchester. Available at:
https://www.research.manchester.ac.uk/portal/files/61749263/HSIF_Report_FINAL.pdf (Accessed 27 October
2021).
Harber, C. (2004) Schooling as Violence: How schools harm pupils and societies. London: Routledge Falmer.
Harper, D. (2021) Online Etymology Dictionary. Available at: https://www.etymonline.com/word/truancy
(Accessed: 27 December 2021).
Havik, T. Bru, E. & Ertesvåg, S.K. (2014) ‘Parental perspectives of the role of school factors in school refusal’,
Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties, 19(2), pp. 131-153. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632752.2013.816199
Hawkins, J.E. (2018) ‘The Practical Utility and Suitability of Email Interviews in Qualitative Research’. The
Qualitative Report, 23(2), pp. 493-501. Available at: https://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/vol23/iss2/15 (Accessed:
19 May 2019).
Hayfield, N. & Huxley, C. (2014) ‘Insider and Outsider Perspectives: Reflections on Researcher Identities in
Research with Lesbian and Bisexual Women’, Qualitative Research in Psychology. 12(2), pp. 91 -106.
Henderson, M., Cheung, S.Y., Sharland, E. & Scourfield, J. (2016). The outcomes of educational welfare officer
contact in England. British Educational Research Journal, 42(3), pp 399 – 416. Available at:
http://sro.sussex.ac.uk/id/eprint/55886/ (Accessed: 18 October 2021).
Hersov, L. A. (1960) Refusal to go to School. Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 1: 137-145. doi:10.1111/j.1469-
7610.1960.tb01988.x
Hersov, L. & Berg, I. (1980) Out of School: Modern Perspectives in Truancy and School Refusal. Chichester: John
Wiley & Sons.
Heyne, D., Rollings, S., King, N. and Tonge, B. (2002) School Refusal. Oxford: BPS Blackwell.
287
Heyne, D., Gren-Landell, M., Melvin, G. & Gentle-Genitty, C. (2019) Differentiation Between School Attendance
Problems: Why and How? Cognitive and Behavioural Practice, 26(1), pp. 8-34.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cbpra.2018.03.006 (Accessed 7 February 2020).
Hiatt, J. S. (1915) ‘The truant problem and the parental school’, Bulletin of the Bureau of Education, 29, pp. 7–
35. Available at: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED541858 (Accessed: 17 August 2019).
Hodge, N. and Runswick-Cole, K. (2008). Problematising parent– professional partnerships in education.
Disability & Society, 23(6), pp. 637-647. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687590802328543 (Accessed 1 November
2021).
Hodge, N. & Runswick-Cole, K. (2017) “you say... I hear...": Epistemic gaps in practitioner-parent/carer talk, in
Runswick-Cole, K., Curran, T. and Liddiard, K. (eds.) The Palgrave Handbook of Disabled Children's Childhood
Studies. Palgrave Macmillan UK, pp. 537-555. Available at: http://shura.shu.ac.uk/27329/ (Accessed: 28
November 2021).
Holt, J. C. (1964) How Children Fail. New York: Pitman Publishing Company.
Hornby, G., & Lafaele, R. (2011) ‘Barriers to parental involvement in education: An explanatory model’.
Educational Review, 63(1), pp. 37–52. Available at:
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00131911.2010.488049 (Accessed 23 October 2020).
Hooley, T., Marriott, J. and Wellens, J. (2012) What is online research? London: Bloomsbury.
Hope, M.A. (2019) Reclaiming Freedom in Education: Theories and Practices of Radical Free School Education.
Abingdon. Routledge.
House of Commons Committee of Public Accounts (2005) Department for Education and Skills: Improving
school attendance in England. Eighteenth Report of Session 2005–06. Available at:
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmselect/cmpubacc/789/789.pdf (Accessed 23 April 2020).
House of Commons Committee of Public Accounts (2020) ‘Support for children with special educational needs
and disabilities. First Report of Session 2019-21’. Available at:
https://committees.parliament.uk/publications/941/documents/7292/default/ (Accessed 3 February 2021).
House of Commons, Education & Health Committees (2017) Children and Young People's Mental Health - The
Role of Education. Available at:
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmeduc/451/45102.htm (Accessed: 23 February
2018).
House of Commons, Education and Health and Social Care Committees (2018) The Government’s Green Paper
on mental health: failing a generation. Available at:
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmhealth/642/642.pdf (Accessed: 10 September
2018)
288
House of Commons, Education Select Committee (2019) ‘A ten-year plan for school and college funding’,
Available at: https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmeduc/969/96902.htm. (Accessed
28 September 2021)
House of Commons, Education Committee (2019) Special educational needs and disabilities. Available at:
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201919/cmselect/cmeduc/20/20.pdf (Accessed 18 November 2019)
House of Commons, Women and Equalities Committee (2016) Sexual harassment and sexual violence in
schools. Third Report of Session 2016-17. Available at:
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201617/cmselect/cmwomeq/91/91.pdf (Accessed 26 May 2021)
Hughes, P., & Mac Naughton, G. (2000) ‘Consensus, dissensus or community: The politics of parent
involvement in early childhood education’. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 1(3), pp. 241–258.
Available at: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.2304/ciec.2000.1.3.2 (Accessed 1 September 2020).
Hutchinson, J. (2021) Identifying pupils with special needs and disabilities. London: Education Policy Institute.
Available at: https://epi.org.uk/publications-and-research/identifying-send/ (Accessed 1 September 2021).
Hutchinson, J. & Crenna-Jennings, W. (2019a) Unexplained pupil exits from schools: A growing problem?
London: Education Policy Institute. Available at: https://epi.org.uk/publications-and-research/unexplained-
pupil-exits/ (Accessed 11 September 2021)
Hutchinson, J. & Crenna-Jennings, W. (2019b) Unexplained pupil exits from schools: Further analysis and data
by multi-academy trust and local authority. London: Education Policy Institute. Available at:
https://epi.org.uk/publications-and-research/unexplained-pupil-exits-data-multi-academy-trust-local-
authority/ (Accessed 11 September 2021).
Hyndman, M. (1978) Schools and Schooling in England and Wales. A Documentary History. London: Harper and
Row.
Ingul, J. M., Havik, T. & Heyne, D. (2019) ‘Emerging School Refusal: A School-Based Framework for Identifying
Early Signs and Risk Factors’, Cognitive and Behavioral Practice, 26(1): 46–62. doi:10.1016/j.cbpra.2018.03.005
Kahn, J. H., & Nursten, J. P. (1962). ‘School refusal: A comprehensive view of school phobia and other failures
of school attendance’. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 32, pp. 707–718. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1939-
0025.1962.tb00320.x (Accessed 2 July 2018).
Kearney, C.A. (2001) ‘School Refusal Behaviour in Youth: A Functional Approach to Assessment and
Treatment’. American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/10426-000 (Accessed 24 May 2018).
Kearney, C.A. (2002). Identifying the function of school refusal behaviour: A revision of the School Refusal
Assessment Scale. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioural Assessment, 24, pp. 235–245.
https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020774932043 (Accessed 21 May 2018).
Kearney, C. A. (2003) ‘Bridging the gap among professionals who address youths with school absenteeism:
Overview and suggestions for consensus.’ Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 34, pp. 57–65.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7028.34.1.57 (Accessed 9 June 2018).
289
Kearney, C. A. (2007) 'Forms and functions of school refusal behaviour in youth: an empirical analysis of
absenteeism severity', Journal of Child Psychology & Psychiatry, 48, 1, pp. 53-61. Available at:
DOI:10.1111/j.1469-7610.2006.01634.x (Accessed 19 June 2018).
Kearney, C. A. (2008a) ‘An interdisciplinary model of school absenteeism in youth to inform professional
practice and public policy’. Educational Psychology Review, 20, pp. 257–282. Available at:
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-008-9078-3 (Accessed 19 June 2018).
Kearney, C. A. (2008b) School absenteeism and school refusal behaviour in youth: A contemporary review.
Clinical Psychology Review, 28, pp. 451–471. Available at: DOI: 10.1016/j.cpr.2007.07.012
Kearney, C. A. & Silverman, W. (1990) A preliminary analysis of a functional model of assessment and
treatment of school refusal behaviour. Behaviour Modification, 14, 340-366.
Kearney, C.A., Gonzálvez, C., Graczyk, P. A., and Fornander, M.J. (2019) Reconciling Contemporary Approaches
to School Attendance and School Absenteeism: Toward Promotion and Nimble Response, Global Policy Review
and Implementation, and Future Adaptability (Part 1). Frontiers in Psychology.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02222 (Accessed 18 August 2021).
Kendall, S., White, R. & Kinder, K. (2004) School attendance and the prosecution of parents: perspectives from
education welfare service management. Slough: National Foundation for Educational Research.
Khan L. (2015) Missed Opportunities: A review of recent evidence into children and young people’s mental
health. London. Centre for Mental Health. Available at:
http://www.centreformentalhealth.org.uk/Handlers/Download.ashx?IDMF=37cccf4c-c86b-4e64-ba8c-
e7774cac66c7 (Accessed: 28 April 2019).
King, N. & Horrocks, C. (2010) Interviews in Qualitative Research. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
Klein, E. (1945) ‘The Reluctance to Go to School’. The Psychoanalytic Study of the Child, 1(1), pp. 263-
279, DOI: 10.1080/00797308.1945.11823137 (Accessed 12 June 2021).
Knage, F.S. (2021) Beyond the school refusal/truancy binary: engaging with the complexities of extended
school non-attendance, International Studies in Sociology of Education,
https://doi.org/10.1080/09620214.2021.1966827 (Accessed 29 August 2021).
Knox, P. (1990) ‘Troubled Children: A fresh look at school phobia’ 2nd edn. Worcester. Billing & Sons Ltd.
Lamb, B. (2009) Report to the Secretary of State on the Lamb Inquiry Review of SEN and Disability Information.
London: DCSF. Available at:
https://dera.ioe.ac.uk/9042/1/Lamb%20Inquiry%20Review%20of%20SEN%20and%20Disability%20Informatio
n.pdf (Accessed 18 January 2018).
Lamb, N. (2013) Achieving Parity of Esteem Between Mental and Physical Health. UK Government, Department
for Health & Social Care. (Speech) Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/achieving-parity-
of-esteem-between-mental-and-physical-health (Accessed 19 February 2018).
290
Lauchlan, F. (2003) Responding to chronic non-attendance: A review of intervention approaches. Educational
Psychology in Practice, 19, pp. 133–146. https://doi.org/10.1080/02667360303236 (Accessed 1 November
2017).
Lawson, J. & Silver H. (1973) A Social History of Education in England. London: Routledge.
Lees, H.E. (2013) Is the idea of Compulsory Schooling Ridiculous? In Papastephanou, M. (ed) Philosophical
Perspectives on Compulsory Education. Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 143-156.
Lees, H.E. (2014). Education without schools: Discovering alternatives. Bristol: Policy Press.
Lees, H.E. (2019) ‘Home Education or schooling – a paradigm shift’. Management in Education, 33(4), pp. 188-
190. DOI: 10.1177/0892020619862185 (Accessed 28 September 2021).
Lerner, R.M., Rothbaum, F., Boulos, S., & Castellino, D.R. (2002) ‘Developmental Systems Perspective on
Parenting’ in Handbook of Parenting. Volume 2 Biology and Ecology of Parenting. 2nd edn. M.H. Bornstein
(ed). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
Lerner, R.M., Lerner, J.V., Almerigi, J. and Theokas, C. (2006) ‘Dynamics of Individual <- -> Context Relations
in Human Development: A Developmental Systems Perspective’ in Comprehensive Handbook of Personality
and Psychopathology Volume 1 Personality and Everyday Functioning. J.C. Thomas and D.L. Segal (eds). New
Jersey: John Wiley & Sons Inc. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Wyndol-Furman-
2/publication/232485435_Parenting_siblings/links/0deec53c5811fda61d000000/Parenting-siblings.pdf
Accessed 29 December 2021).
L Kumar v LB of Hillingdon (2020) EWHC 3326 Available at:
https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2020/3326.html (Accessed: 21 September 2021).
Lloyd, J., Walker, J. & Bradbury, V. (2020) ‘Beyond Referrals: Harmful sexual behaviour in schools: a briefing on
the findings, implications and resources for schools and multi-agency partners’. University of Bedfordshire.
Available at: https://uobrep.openrepository.com/bitstream/handle/10547/625043/Beyond-Referrals-Two-
Harmful-Sexual-Behaviour-in-Schools.pdf (Accessed: 18 May 2021).
Local Government Ombudsman (LGO) (2018) Westminster City Council (16 006 642). Available at:
https://www.lgo.org.uk/decisions/education/special-educational-needs/16-006-642 (Accessed 25 January
2022)
London Wide Medical Council (LWMC) (2017). School sickness absence requests Emergency Guidance.
Available at: https://www.lmc.org.uk/visageimages/Campaigns/GPSoE16/schoolabsencegpsoeaug17.pdf
(Accessed: 12 December 2021).
Lyon, A. & Cotler, S. (2007), 'Toward reduced bias and increased utility in the assessment of school refusal
behaviour: The case for diverse samples and evaluations of context', Psychology in The Schools, 44(6), pp. 551-
565. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20247 (Accessed 12 November 2021).
291
Malcolm, H., Wilson, V., Davidson, J., Kirk, S. (2003) Absence from school: a study of its causes and effect in
seven LEAs. Nottingham: Queen’s Printers. Available at: https://dera.ioe.ac.uk/8655/1/RR424.pdf (Accessed 12
February 2018)
Mann, G., Hodges, N., Runswick-Cole, K., Gilmore, L., Mavropoulou, S., and Fleming, K. in Graham, L. (Ed)
(2020). Inclusive Education for the 21st Century: Theory, Policy and Practice. London: Routledge.
McCulloch, G. (ed) (2005) ‘The Routledge Falmer Reader in History of Education. London: Routledge.
McIntyre-Bhatty K. (2008) ‘Truancy and coercive consent: is there an alternative?’ Educational Review, 60(4),
pp. 375-390. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131910802393407 (Accessed 21 November 2021).
McKeever, P. & Miller, K.L. (2004). Mothering Children who have disabilities: a Bourdieusian interpretation of
maternal practices. Social Science & Medicine, 59(6) pp. 1177-1191, Available at:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953603007135 (Accessed 27 August 2021).
Melvin, G.A., Heyne, D., Gray, K.M., Hastings, R.P., Totsika, V., Tonge, B.J. and Freeman, M.M. (2019). The Kids
and Teens at School (KiTeS) Framework: An Inclusive Bioecological Systems Approach to Understanding School
Absenteeism and School Attendance Problems. Frontiers in Education. 4:61.
https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2019.00061 (Accessed 3 September 2021).
Miller, P. & Rose, N. (2008) Governing the Present. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Mills, C.W. (1959) The Sociological Imagination. Oxford: Oxford University Press
Mind (2021) Not making the grade: why our approach to mental health at secondary school is failing young
people. Available at: https://www.mind.org.uk/media/8852/not-making-the-grade.pdf (Accessed: 23
November 2021).
Mortimer, E. (2018) Going back to school following a period of extended school non-attendance: What do
secondary-aged young people and their parents find supportive? An Appreciative Inquiry. PhD thesis. University
of Bristol. Available at: https://research-information.bris.ac.uk/en/studentTheses/going-back-to-school-
following-a-period-of-extended-school-non-at (Accessed: 12 January 2021)
Morton, J. (2010) ‘Home Education: Constructions of choice.’ International Electronic Journal of Elementary
Education, 3(1). Available at: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1052483 (Accessed 9 December 2021).
Myhill, A. (2017) Parents' views of their involvement during extended school non-attendance PhD thesis. Cardiff
University. Available at: http://orca.cf.ac.uk/105163/ (Accessed 6 December 2020)
National Association for Head Teachers (NAHT) (2021) ‘A Failure to Invest: The state of school funding in 2021’.
London: NAHT. Available at:
https://www.naht.org.uk/Portals/0/PDF's/Funding/NAHT%20Funding%20report%20(A%20Failure%20to%20In
vest)_WEB.pdf?ver=2021-09-07-173735-743 (Accessed 14 September 2021)
Neal, J.W. and Neal, Z.P. (2013) ‘Nested or Networked? Future Directions for Ecological Systems Theory’. Social
Development, 22(4), pp. 722-737. https://doi.org/10.1111/sode.12018 (Accessed 15 September 2021).
292
Nimmo, S. (2019) ‘Please don’t call me mum’. British Medical Journal, 367: l5373 doi: 10.1136/bmj.l5373
(Accessed: 11 April 2021).
No Isolation (2020) ‘The Invisible Children’ Available at: https://www.noisolation.com/research/the-invisible-
children/ (Accessed: 28 July 2021)
Nuttall, C. and Woods, K. (2013) ‘Effective intervention for school refusal behaviour’. Educational Psychology in
Practice, 29(4), pp. 347–366. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02667363.2013.846848 (Accessed 11 March 2020).
Office of the Children’s Commissioner for England (2020) The state of children’s mental health services.
Available at: https://www.childrenscommissioner.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/cco-the-state-of-
childrens-mental-health-services.pdf (Accessed 18 August 2021).
Office of the Children’s Commissioner for England (2020/21) The state of children’s mental health services.
Available at: https://cco-web.azureedge.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/cco-the-state-of-childrens-mental-
health-services-2020-21.pdf (Accessed: 2 September 2021).
Ofsted (2019) Exploring moving to home education in secondary schools. Available at:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/exploring-moving-to-home-education-in-secondary-schools
(Accessed 10 September 2020).
Ofsted (2021a) SEND: old issues, new issues, next steps. Available at:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/send-old-issues-new-issues-next-steps/send-old-issues-new-
issues-next-steps?fbclid=IwAR0ikjXyi0JnfcOr-NEXLpKMabGeXje_05bpxq6j9tnoFV9G7duc8w-15C0#print-or-
save-to-pdf (Accessed: 21 October 2021).
Ofsted (2021b) Review of sexual abuse in schools and colleges. Available at:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/review-of-sexual-abuse-in-schools-and-colleges/review-of-
sexual-abuse-in-schools-and-colleges (Accessed: 8 September 2021).
Ofsted (2021c) School inspection handbook. Available at:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/school-inspection-handbook-eif/school-inspection-handbook
(Accessed: 4 January 2022).
Parish, N., Bryant, B. and Swords, B. (2018) Have we reached a ‘tipping point’? Trends in spending for children
and young people with SEND in England IPSOS/LGA. Available at: http://bit.ly/2kWi16M (Accessed: 25
November 2021).
Pearson, A. & Rose, K. (2020) ‘A Conceptual Analysis of Autistic Masking: Understanding the Narrative of
Stigma and the Illusion of Choice’. Autism in Adulthood, 3(1), Available at:
https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/full/10.1089/aut.2020.0043 (Accessed: 10 April 2021).
Pellegrini, D.W. (2007) 'School Non-attendance: Definitions, meanings, responses, interventions', Educational
Psychology in Practice, 23(1), pp. 63-77. https://doi.org/10.1080/02667360601154691 (Accessed 19 January
2018).
293
Perkins, D.D. & Zimmerman, M.A. (1995) ‘Empowerment Theory, Research and Application’. American Journal
of Community Psychology, 23(5). pp. 569-579. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02506982 (Accessed 19 October
2021).
Peters, M., Seeds, K., Goldstein, A., & Coleman, N. (2007) ‘Parental Involvement in Children’s Education’.
Research Report DCSF-RR034. London. DCSF. Available at: https://dera.ioe.ac.uk/8605/1/DCSF-RR034.pdf
(Accessed: 17 October 2021)
Pilkington, C. L., & Piersel, W. C. (1991) ‘School phobia: A critical analysis of the separation anxiety theory and
an alternative conceptualization’. Psychology in the Schools, 28(4), pp. 290–303. Available
at: https://doi.org/10.1002/1520-6807(199110)28:4<290::AID-PITS2310280403>3.0.CO;2-K (Accessed 3
March 2019).
Place, M., Hulsmeier, J., Davis, S., Taylor, E. (2000) ‘School refusal: a changing problem which requires a change
of approach?’ Clinical Child Psychology & Psychiatry 5, pp. 345–355.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1359104500005003005 (Accessed 9 March 2018).
Plowden, B. (1969) ‘Children and their Primary Schools. Vol.1’. London: Central Advisory Council for Education.
HMSO. Available at: http://www.educationengland.org.uk/documents/plowden/plowden1967-1.html
(Accessed 10 November 2021).
Porter, L. (2006) Behaviour in Schools: Theory and Practice for Teachers. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Prout, A. (1988) ‘‘Off School Sick’: Mothers’ Accounts of School Sickness Absence’, The Sociological Review,
36(4), pp. 765–789. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-954X.1988.tb00707.x (Accessed 12 May 2020).
Public Accounts Committee, (2020) Support for children with special educational needs and disabilities, First
Report of Session 2019–21, HC 85. Available at:
https://committees.parliament.uk/publications/941/documents/7292/default/ (Accessed 8 December 2021).
Reay, D. (2004) ‘Gendering Bourdieu’s Concepts of Capitals? Emotional Capital, Women and Social Class’, The
Sociological Review, 52(2_suppl), pp. 57–74. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-954X.2005.00524.x. (Accessed 26 July 2019).
Reay, D. (2008) 'Tony Blair, the promotion of the 'active' educational citizen, and middle-class hegemony',
Oxford Review of Education, 34(6), pp. 639-650. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/03054980802518821
(Accessed 13 February 2019).
Reid, K. (2002) Truancy: Short and long-term solutions. London: Routledge.
Reid, K. (2008) 'Behaviour and attendance: the national picture; a synopsis', Educational Review, 60(4), pp.
333-344. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131910802393365 (Accessed 11 May 2019).
Reynolds, D., Jones, D., St. Leger, S. & Murgatroyd, S. (1980) ‘School factors and truancy’, in Hersov, L. & Berg,
I. (eds) Out of School. New York: Wiley.
Robinson, K. & Aronica, L. (2018). You, Your Child and School: Navigate Your Way to the Best Education.
Chichester. London: Penguin Books Ltd.
294
Rothermel, P. (2000) 'The Third Way in Education: Thinking the Unthinkable'. Education 3-13, 28(1), pp. 3-13.
Staffordshire: Trentham Books. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004270085200091 (Accessed 10 September 2021).
Royal College of Nursing (2017) The Best Start: The Future of Children's Health: Valuing school nurses and
health visitors in England. Available from: https://www.rcn.org.uk/professional-
development/publications/pub-006200 (Accessed 23 October 2020).
Runswick, C. K. (2008) ‘Between a rock and a hard place: parents’ attitudes to the inclusion of children with
special educational needs in mainstream and special schools’, British Journal of Special Education, 35(3), pp.
173–180. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8578.2008.00390.x (Accessed 7 September 2021).
Runswick-Cole, K. & Ryan, S. (2019) ‘Liminal still? Unmothering disabled children’, Disability & Society, pp.
1125-1139. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2019.1602509 (Accessed 7 September 2021).
Ryan, S. and Runswick-Cole, K. (2009) ‘From Advocate to Activist? Mapping the Experiences of Mothers of
Children on the Autism Spectrum’, Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 22(1), pp. 43–53.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-3148.2008.00438.x (Accessed 10 September 2021).
Saldana, J. (2016) The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers, 3rd edn. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
Salmons, J. (2016) Doing Qualitative Research Online. London: Sage Publications Ltd.
Sheldon, N. (2007) School Attendance 1880 -1939: a study of policy and practice in response to the problem of
truancy. Thesis. Oxford University.
Sheppard, A. (2010) ‘Raising School Attendance’. The Psychologist, 23(6), pp. 482-484. Available at:
https://thepsychologist.bps.org.uk/volume-23/edition-6/raising-school-attendance (Accessed: 14 February
2018).
Sheppard, A. (2011) 'The non-sense of raising school attendance', Emotional & Behavioural Difficulties, 16(3),
pp. 239-247. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632752.2011.595087 (Accessed 13 February 2018).
Shilvock, G.G. (2010). Investigating the Factors Associated with Emotionally-Based Non-Attendance at School
from Young People’s Perspective. PhD thesis. The University of Birmingham. Available at:
https://etheses.bham.ac.uk//id/eprint/1142/ (Accessed: 12 May 2018)
Silverman, D. (2017) Doing Qualitative Research, 5th edn. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
Smith, J., Flowers, P., & Larkin, M. (2009) Interpretive Phenomenological Analysis: Theory, Method and
Research. London: Sage Publications Ltd.
Southwell, N. (2006) ‘Truants on truancy – a badness or a valuable indicator of unmet special educational
needs?’ British Journal of Special Education. 33(2), pp. 91-97. DOI:10.1111/j.1467-8578.2006.00420.x
(Accessed 22 September 2021).
295
STEM4 (2019) The Failure of Children and Young People’s Mental Health Services 2019 Another year in decline.
London: STEM4. Available at: https://stem4.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/The-Failure-of-Childrens-
Mental-Health-Services-2019-FINAL-31-12-19-1.pdf (Accessed 11 November 2021)
Stroobant, E. & Jones, A. (2006) 'School Refuser Child Identities', Discourse: Studies in The Cultural Politics of
Education, 27(2), pp. 209-223. https://doi.org/10.1080/01596300600676169 (Accessed 15 March 2018).
Sugrue, E. P., Zuel, T. & La Liberte, T. (2016) ‘The Ecological Context of Chronic School Absenteeism in the
Elementary Grades’, Children & Schools, 38(3), pp. 137–145. https://doi.org/10.1093/cs/cdw020 (Accessed 2
July 2020).
Swick, K. J. & Williams, R. D. (2006) An Analysis of Bronfenbrenner’s Bio-Ecological Perspective for Early
Childhood Educators: Implications for Working with Families Experiencing Stress, Early Childhood Education
Journal, pp. 371–378. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-006-0078-y (Accessed 28 August 2021).
Taylor, C. (2012) Improving attendance at school. Department for Education. Available at:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/improving-attendance-at-school (Accessed 19 January 2018).
Thambirajah, M.S. Grandison, K.J. & De-Hayes, L. (2008) Understanding School Refusal: A Handbook for
Professionals in Education, Health and Social Care. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
Time-to-Change (2012) Children and young people's programme development: Summary of research and
insights. Mind & Rethink Mental Illness. Available at: https://www.time-to-
change.org.uk/sites/default/files/TTC%20CYP%20Report%20FINAL.pdf (Accessed: 31 January 2018).
Todd, S. and Jones, S. (2003) ‘“Mum’s the Word!’’: Maternal Accounts of Dealings with the Professional
World”’, Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 16(3), pp. 229–244. DOI:10.1046/j.1468-
3148.2003.00163.x (Accessed 19 August 2021).
Toplis, R. (2004) Parents’ views on emotionally based school refusal. Work at a policy level. In West Sussex
County Council EPS (Eds.). Emotionally based school refusal, guidance for schools and support agencies (pp.54-
73). West Sussex, UK: West Sussex County Council EPS.
Torrens Salemi, A.M. (2006) The social construction of school refusal: An exploratory study of school
personnel's perceptions. PhD Thesis. University of South Florida. Available at:
https://digital.lib.usf.edu//content/SF/S0/02/57/64/00001/E14-SFE0001445.pdf (Accessed 24 November
2018).
Totsika, V., Hastings, R.P., Dutton, Y., Worsley, A., Melvin, G., Gray, K., & Tonge, B. (2020) ‘Types and correlates
of school non- attendance in students with autism spectrum disorders’. Autism. 24(7), pp. 1639-1649.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361320916967 (Accessed 23 March 2021).
Tudge, J. (2016) ‘Implicit versus Explicit Ways of Using Bronfenbrenner’s Bioecological Theory: Commentary on
Jaeger’. Human Development, 59(4), pp. 195-199. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1159/000449453 (Accessed
1 October 2021).
296
Tudge, J. R., Payir, A., Merçon-Vargas, E., Cao, H., Liang, Y., Li, J., & O’Brien, L. (2016). ‘Still misused after all
these years? A re-evaluation of the uses of Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological theory of human development’.
Journal of Family Theory & Review, 8(4), pp. 427–445. https://doi.org/10.1111/jftr.12165 (Accessed 1 October
2021).
Truman, C., Crane, L., Howlin, P., & Pellicano, E. (2021) ‘The educational experiences of autistic children with
and without extreme demand avoidance behaviours’. International Journal of Inclusive Education.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2021.1916108 (Accessed 12 June 2021).
Tyerman, M. J. (1968) Truancy. London: University of London Press.
UNICEF UK (1989) The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. Available at:
https://downloads.unicef.org.uk/wp-
content/uploads/2010/05/UNCRC_united_nations_convention_on_the_rights_of_the_child.pdf (Accessed: 8
July 2020)
Van Manen, M. (1990) Researching Lived Experience: Human Science for an Action Sensitive Pedagogy. Albany:
State University of New York Press.
Wade, B. (1979) ‘School Refusal and Aspects of Language’. Educational Review, 31(1), pp. 19-26.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0013191790310103 (Accessed 19 August 2021).
Waller, V., Farquharson, K. & Dempsey, D. (2016) Qualitative Social Research: Contemporary Methods for the
Digital Age. London: Sage Publishing Ltd.
Walkerdine, V., Lucey, H., and Melody, J. (2001) Growing up girl: explorations of gender and class. Basingstoke:
Palgrave.
Waller, D. & Eisenberg, L. (1980) ‘School refusal in childhood—a psychiatric-paediatric perspective’ in Out of
school: modern perspectives in truancy and school refusal. Hersov L, Berg I. (eds). Chichester: John Wiley &
Sons, pp 209–230.
Wardhaugh, J. (1991) Absent Without Leave: state responses to school non-attendance, International Studies
in Sociology of Education, 1(1-2), pp. 209-223. https://doi.org/10.1080/0962021910010112 (Accessed 12 May
2019).
Warren, W. (1948) ‘Acute neurotic breakdown in children with refusal to go to school.’ Archives of disease in
childhood. 23(116), pp. 266-72. Available at:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1988193/?tool=pmcentrez&report=abstract (Accessed 12
May 2019)
West Sussex County Council Educational Psychology Service (2004/2022) Emotionally based School Refusal:
guidance for schools and support agencies. West Sussex County Council EPS. Available at:
https://schools.westsussex.gov.uk/Page/10483 (Accessed 16 September 2019).
Williams, H. D. (1927). ‘Truancy and delinquency’. Journal of Applied Psychology, 11, pp. 276–288.
https://doi.org/10.1037/h0073589 (Accessed 16 August 2021).
297
Wray, A. & Thomas, A. (2013) 'School Refusal and Home Education', Journal of Unschooling and Alternative
Learning, 7(13), pp 64 - 85.
Wyness, M. (2020). ‘The responsible parent and networks of support: A case study of school engagement in a
challenging environment.’ British Educational Research Journal. 46(1), pp. 161 – 176.
https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.3573 (Accessed 28 July 2021).
Xia, M., Li, X. and Tudge, J. R. H. (2020) ‘Operationalizing Urie Bronfenbrenner’s Process-Person-Context-Time
Model’, Human Development (0018716X), 64(1), pp. 10–20. https://doi.org/10.1159/000507958 (Accessed 21
August 2021).
Zhang, M. (2004), 'Time to Change the Truancy Laws? Compulsory Education: Its Origin and Modern Dilemma',
Pastoral Care in Education, 22(2), pp. 27-33. DOI:10.1111/j.0264-3944.2004.00260.x (Accessed 15 March
2018).
Zimmerman, M. A. (1990) Towards a Theory of Learned Hopefulness: A Structural Model Analysis of
Participation and Empowerment. Journal of Research in Personality, 24(1), pp. 71-86.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0092-6566(90)90007-S (Accessed 11 December 2021).
Zimmerman, M. A. (1995) Psychological Empowerment: Issues and Illustrations. American Journal of
Community Psychology, 23(5), pp. 581-599. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02506983 (Accessed 12 December
2021).
298
Appendices
Appendix 1. The process codes used in stage 2 of the data analysis
CONCERN FOR CHILD
Short code (Used in TAMS)
Observing child’s distress
Concern>child_distress
Making sense of observations
Concern>observations
Identifying child’s difficulties
Concern>difficulties
Understanding child’s needs
Concern>needs
Observing effects on attendance
Concern>attendance
Observing / Experiencing Child’s Reactions -
Recognising Anxiety
Concern>child_reaction
Taking Action
Concern>parent_action
Identifying Own Reactions
Concern>own reaction
Professional Actions
Concern>professional_action
Reactions of Others
Concern>others_reaction
SCHOOL MANAGEMENT
Professional attitudes/practices
School>practices
Difficult Working Relationships
School>difficult_WR
Positive Working Relationships
School>positive_WR
School Priorities
School>priorities
Policy
School>policy
Lack of Relevant Training
School>training
Beliefs
School>beliefs
SYSTEM FAILURES
Legal Action
System>legal_action
EHCP Difficulties
System>EHCP
Lack of Help
System>no_support
Professional Responses
System>professional_responses
Financial Implications
System>finance
CAMHS Failures
System>CAMHS
CAMHS Support
System>CAMHS_support
NHS Failures
System>NHS
NHS Support
System>NHS_support
System Failure
Systemic_failure
LA Difficulties
System>LA
Compliance with Legislation
System>compliance
SEND Awareness
System>SEND
Needing Legal Advice
System>advice
School System Issues
System>education
Impact on Children
System>impact_on_child
EMPOWERMENT
Increased Knowledge
Empowered>knowledge
Being proactive
Empowered>proactive
Acknowledgement
Empowered>acknowledged
Support from professionals
Empowered>professional_support
Change in priorities
Empowered>priorities
Increased Self-confidence
Empowered>confidence
Listening to child
Empowered>child_voice
Peer support
Empowered>peer_support
299
Relevant Support
Empowered>support_service
Identifying progress
Empowered>progress
EMOTIONAL IMPACT
Blame
Emotion>Blame
Feeling impact
Emotion>Impact
Overwhelm
Emotion>Overwhelmed
Isolation
Emotion>Isolation
Frustration
Emotion>Frustration
Guilt
Emotion>Guilt
Violence
Emotion>Physical_hurt
Distress
Emotion>Distress
Regret
Emotion>Regret
Anger
Emotion>Anger
Worry
Emotion>Worry
Desperation
Emotion>Desperation
Judgement
Emotion>Judgement
Conflicted
Emotion>Conflicted
Concerned
Emotion>Concern
Ashamed
Emotion>Shame
Intimidation
Emotion>Intimidation
Helplessness
Emotion>Helplessness
Afraid
Emotion>Fear
Paranoid
Emotion>Paranoia
Pressured
Emotion>Pressure
Stressed
Emotion>Stress
Sad
Emotion>Sad
Heartbroken
Emotion>Heartbreak
Unsure / Lost
Emotion>Unsure
Vulnerable
Emotion>Vulnerable
Grateful
Emotion>Grateful
Hope/ Optimism
Emotion>Hope
Pride
Emotion>Pride
Relief
Emotion>Relief
Lucky
Emotion>Lucky
IMPACT ON FAMILY LIFE
Family disruption
Family>disruption
Family wellbeing
Family>wellbeing
Family relationships
Family>relationships
Family finances
Family>finances
Employment
Family>employment
Marriage
Family>marriage
Knowledge
Family>knowledge
300
Appendix 2. Overall themes generated from the data
HOW DO PARENTS RESPOND WHEN A CHILD EXPERIENCES SCHOOL ATTENDANCE PROBLEMS AND BARRIERS?
THEMES
Concern for Child
“Watching your child’s
spark go out”
Parents observe and
support their child’s
development over time,
and recognise their child’s
strengths and difficulties.
When problems arise
parents
• look for clues
• try to understand what
is going on
• try to identify the
triggers
• consult professionals
• apply their in depth
knowledge of their
child, to identify
strategies and
solutions to help their
child overcome their
problems
When significant
difficulties emerge at
school the situation is
complicated by aspects
such as professional
judgement, legal issues
and lost educational
progress
Negotiating Systems
“There was a massive
elephant in the room
whenever we talked to
schools about her
anxiety, they couldn't at
any point admit they
couldn't meet her needs,
but really as the system
is they couldn’t.”
Reflecting that child’s
anxiety may not have
become so bad if school/LA
had not delayed support
& appropriate provision
Teachers do not know how
to help a child who
struggles in the school
environment
Teachers do not think it is
their responsibility to
help a child who is not
attending
Difficult Working
Relationships (parents &
schools/medical/LA staff)
[55 codes]
v. Positive Working
Relationships [5 codes]
Professional reactions
Barriers to Support
We also asked school to
send work home for her
(to keep the connection
to school and [child]
enjoyed school work)
but they refused, stating
it would be “condoning
her absence”
The ‘schoolchild’ as a
traditional construct – a
set of expectations about
children and education
Reflecting that children
have to change to fit the
education system
Reflecting some children
struggle to fit in at school,
one size does not fit all.
Reflecting was wrong to
believe the law would be
upheld.
Reflecting on acceptance
that children’s dislike of
school is accepted as
normal - adapting to
school is a rite of
passage.
In battle between adults –
child’s opinion is ignored
Family Crisis
“Horrendous times are
our ‘normal’“
Recognising emotional,
mental & financial costs
to family
Families are individual -
each has their own idea of
normality
Feeling different to other
families
Guilt about effect on
marriage
Guilt about effect on
siblings
Needing to put own life
/career on hold
Financial worries
Awareness of ‘school
refusal/SAPB’ as a ‘thing’
– may not have been aware
of it previously, or may
have known of others who
had experience of it
Awareness of way/s other
people react towards your
family if your child isn’t
attending school
Emotional Turmoil
“I’ll never forget the look
on her face when I told
her we would no longer
be making her go to
school. More than three
years on it still breaks
my heart thinking about
it. She was so relieved
and grateful; she had
suffered so much, not
having control over her
situation, feeling
hopeless and desperate
for so many months. I
made it my priority to
rebuild her trust in me,
and promised her we’d
never force her again.”
Parental instinct v
Professional advice =
conflict + dilemmas
Worry about child’s
wellbeing
Worry about child’s
education and future
Loss of ‘school-based
expectations’ & lost
membership of the school
community
Empowerment
“I was desperate to help
her, my instinct was
screaming at me to stop
sending her to school,
but the psychologist
didn’t advise it and I was
afraid that if she
stopped going it would
be a slippery slope; that
her anxiety would
worsen. I had no idea
what to do. And that’s
when I found the school
refusal Facebook group,
which I truly believe
saved our lives”
Need to develop
confidence to advocate
for child
Reflecting that I would act
differently now (changes
in priorities)
Peer support
Researching and learning
Being proactive
Recognising progress
Concern for others in
similar situations
301
CODES
Professional’s Responses:
Systemic experiences:
Perceived barriers:
Difficulties experienced:
Emotional Influences:
Empowered by:
Professional
Responses
° Lack of understanding /
sympathy /
compassion for child
° Refusal to provide
work at home
° Ignore parent
concerns
° Make own medical
judgements
° Dispute medical
diagnoses
° Priority on attendance
° Priority on attainment
° Inappropriate
discipline
° Being ‘Gaslighted’
° Dreading reporting
absences
° Parent/child blame
° Battling with school
° Negotiating with
school
° Arguing with school
° Conflict while
arranging suitable
provision
° SENCO refusal to offer
support
° Reluctance to admit
school cannot meet
child’s needs
° Inflexibility in
expectations
° Belief children need to
be in school to be
educated & socialised.
° Belief that it is ok to
ignore a child’s
distress
° Children cannot be
allowed to ‘choose’
whether to attend
school
° Inaccurate knowledge of
legislation
° Lack of Mental health
awareness
° Lack of SEND Awareness
° Family Disruption
° Family Wellbeing
Issues
° Feeling Bullied
° Feeling Criticised
° Feeling Judged
° Experiencing Anger &
Hostility
° Lack of professional
honesty / integrity
° Being viewed as part
of the problem when
emotional
° Parenting/Home Life
being viewed as the
problem when
siblings attend
without problems
° Lack of compliance
with legislation, SEND
guidance etc
° Supportive GP
° Diagnosis by private
practitioner
° CAMHS referral leads
to support
° Feeling empowered
by a supportive
professional
° Recognising skills of
helpful professionals
° Feeling empowered
by knowledge and
understanding gained
° Finding support from
local charities or
advocates
Reactions of
Family &
Friends
(F&F)
° F&F Expressing Anger
° F&F Expressing
Concern
° F&F Criticism
° Being disbelieved by
F&F
° F&F Offering Support
° Culture
° Media
° History/Tradition
° Policy
° Politics
° Understanding of
SAPB (+ OR -)
° Conformity –
expectation ‘Children
go to school =
normality’
° Different Reactions of
mother & father
° Family Relationships
° Family Wellbeing
Issues
Experiencing:
° Isolation
° Judgement
° Support
° Criticism of parenting
° Avoiding telling wider
family & friends
° Applying parental
knowledge to
reactions of others
° Gaining knowledge by
talking to other
parents of children
with similar difficulties
Systemic
Failures
° Having no options to
offer when a child is
severely anxious
° No informed
advice/guidance
° Forced attendance
° No Relevant Guidance
/ Policy
° No Relevant Sources of
Support
° Lack of SEND
awareness
° CAMHS access/failure
° Low Understanding of
school refusal
° Low awareness of
school refusal
° SAPB = inconvenience
= Blame on Family
° Disruption to Home
Life
° Changes to structure
of family life
° Financial Issues
° Marriage /Relationship
Issues
Experiencing:
° Prosecution referral
when professionals
know child’s problems
are real/genuine
° Accusations of
fabricating illness
° Empowered by Peer
Support
° Empowered by
Knowledge Gained
° Empowered by Being
Proactive
° Staff attempting to
collect child from
home
° Off rolling attempts
° School disinterest in
helping
° NHS failure to support
° LA issues
° Education System
° Low priority = Lack of
action
° Parity of esteem –
physical & mental
health
Influences:
° Tradition
° Funding - Austerity
° Politics
° Employment Issues
° Letting people down –
multiple
responsibilities (work
& family)
° Referrals to social
services
° Inaccurate coding of
absence
Child’s
Reactions
° Observing child’s
distress
° Observing child’s words
& actions
° Identifying child’s
reactions
° Understanding child’s
needs
° Identifying triggers
° Listening to child’s
comments and
opinions
° Impact of Systemic
Issues on child’s
health & wellbeing
° Breaking child’s trust
° Loss of interest in
education
° Loss of time in
education
° Self-harming
° Loss of friendships
° Criticism of child’s
attitude
° Coping with traumatic
memories
° Practical family
difficulties
° Problematic
behaviours
° Forced changes in
family life
° Trying to support child
to recover
° Accommodating
specific needs
° Being hurt by child
° Child says they want to
die
° Making wrong
decisions
° Not taking action
sooner to support
child
° Forcing child to attend
° Leaving distressed
child at school
° Prioritising school over
wellbeing
° Asking child about
their needs and
solutions
° Asking child for
opinions about school
options
° Listening to child
Emotional
Turmoil
(created by all
aspects of the
situation)
° Guilt
° Worry
° Regret
° Fear
° Conflict
° Blame
° Frustration
° Judgement
° Intimidation
° Anger
° Despair
° Frustration
° Judgement
° Blame
° Stress
° Fear
° Frustration
° Anger
° Blame
° Pressure
° Helplessness
° Heartbreak
° Guilt
° Isolation
° Pressure
° Worry
° Distress
° Judgement
° Emotional Impact
° Needing to find the
strength to carry on
° Feeling unsure
identifying the
problem
° Feeling unsure about
actions to take
° Mothers shouldering
the responsibility
° Gratitude
° Pride
° Relief
° Luck
° Hopeful
302
Appendix 3. Recruitment Flyer
(p. 82)
* Any participation will be voluntary and anonymous *
Why take part?
▪ This research study will enable and validate the voice of parents in school refusal situations in recognition that
they have a key role in influencing any successful outcomes.
▪ The findings of this study will make recommendations for policy and practice.
▪ The findings will contribute an alternative viewpoint to that in the majority of existing studies which have a
medical or educational basis.
What will you be asked to do?
▪ You will be asked to participate in an EMAIL BASED INTERVIEW with me.
▪ During the interview process I would like to ask you some questions about your own experiences and your
thoughts about the school refusal situation in general.
Where the term ‘parent’ is used this refers to those in a parental role such as biological parents, step parents, grandparents,
foster parents or adoptive parents.
The study refers to ‘school refusal’ in acknowledgement that it is currently the most recognised term used for children who
are unable to attend school, (or whose attendance is at a rate considered below an acceptable level), often for reasons
related to anxiety.
‘Not Fine in School’ members are invited to take part
Researchers know very little about the experiences of parents with children who struggle to regularly attend
school (commonly referred to as ‘school refusal’).
As the main care providers for children, it is important we understand what parents are experiencing and
how support for families in this situation could be strengthened.
This research attempts to understand parents’ experiences and parents’ points of view.
This research is being undertaken by
Beth Bodycote
I have been the parent of a school refusing child and a school-anxious child.
I have been involved in running school refusal related parent support groups on Facebook for over seven years. Because of
these experiences I am undertaking this research project for my PhD.
To request a Participant Information Sheet please email me using my university email address
p12225413@my365.dmu.ac.uk
The Social Construction of School Refusal: Parental Perspectives
303
Appendix 4. Participant Information Sheet
Research Participant Information Sheet
Version 4. March 2019
PARTICIPANT INFORMATION SHEET
Title of Study: The Social Construction of School Refusal: Parental Perspectives
Name of Investigator: Beth Bodycote
Thank you for your interest in participating in research for my PhD. I have been the parent of a school
refusing child and I have been involved in running school refusal parent support groups on Facebook for over
seven years. Because of these experiences I am undertaking this research project for my PhD. I would like to
find out about parents’ experiences of school refusal and their experiences of trying to obtain help and
support.
Where the term ‘parent’ is used this refers to those in a parental role such as biological parents,
step parents, grandparents, foster parents or adoptive parents.
The study refers to ‘school refusal’ in acknowledgement that it is currently the recognised term
used for children who are unable to attend school, (or whose attendance is at a rate considered
below an acceptable level), often for reasons related to anxiety.
What is the study about?
Researchers know very little about the experiences of parents who have children who ‘refuse’ to
regularly attend school, often for reasons related to anxiety.
As parents are the main carers for their children, it is important we understand what parents are
experiencing, and how support for both them and their children could be strengthened.
This research therefore attempts to understand parents’ experiences and parents’ points of
view.
Before you decide whether to take part it is important for you to understand
why the research is being done and what it will involve.
Please take time to read the following information carefully and
discuss it with friends and relatives if you wish to.
Please ask me if there is anything that is not clear or if you would like more information.
My email address for further information
Beth Bodycote - p12225413@my365.dmu.ac.uk
I will email you seven days after I send you this information sheet to ask whether you have any further questions,
and whether you would like to take part.
304
PARTICIPATION
What does participation in the study involve?
If you agree to volunteer, firstly I will send you a short questionnaire which allows me to gather
some contact information and understand a little about your school refusal related
circumstances.
The Email Interview
We will arrange to exchange emails over a period of time. I will ask you two or three questions
per Email in an ongoing sequence. I will create a file of our email exchanges to form the overall
interview.
During the interview I will ask you to answer a range of open questions about your experiences
of school refusal. An example of the type of question which I will ask is:
“Can you tell me what you think influences or causes school refusal?”
I will analyse the data that I collect and I will send all participants a summary of the final research
report, if they wish to see it.
Why have I been asked to participate?
You have been asked to participate in this research because you are a parent of a child or young
person who is experiencing school refusal. I have been able to make contact with you as a
member of a school refusal related parent support group on Facebook.
Does it matter what sort of school refusal experience I have had, or which sort of solution
I have chosen for my child?
I am keen to involve all types of experience. As a parent, and as a researcher, I recognise that we
each have our own opinions and circumstances. I am interested in hearing and including all
points of view and types of experience within the study.
Are there any disadvantages in taking part?
You will be giving up your time to complete the interview.
The interview questions have the potential to raise emotive issues. As we are conducting the
interview by email exchanges you always have the option of pausing so you can gather your
thoughts, and returning to complete your answers when you feel ready.
You always have the option of withdrawing from the study at any time, if you feel it is necessary.
I will provide all participants with a list of sources of support that may be helpful.
Are there any benefits in taking part?
The research is not designed to benefit you individually, but you may find it useful to share your
experiences and voice your opinions.
305
You will be providing information which will inform debate, and hopefully contribute towards an
improvement in awareness of family perspectives when school attendance difficulties are
experienced.
Do I have to take part?
Your participation in the study is entirely your choice, and you can choose not to take part
without giving a reason and without prejudice.
If you should decide not to take part, or to leave the study, your decision will not affect our
relationship in any way now or in the future.
What if I agree to take part and then change my mind?
If you decide to take part you are still free to withdraw at any time without giving a reason.
Please note however that I will not be able to remove the data you have provided once the
interview has taken place and I have begun the analysis process. Any data used within the study
will always be anonymised.
If I have a complaint, who can I complain to?
You can initially approach me, as the lead researcher – Beth Bodycote:
p12225413@my365.dmu.ac.uk
You may also contact my supervisor, Professor Sarah Younie:
syounie@dmu.ac.uk
If this achieves no satisfactory outcome, you should then contact the Administrator for the Faculty
Research Ethics Committee, Research & Commercial Office, Faculty of Health & Life Sciences, 1.25
Edith Murphy House, De Montfort University, The Gateway, Leicester, LE1 9BH or hlsfro@dmu.ac.uk
CONFIDENTIALITY
Will my taking part in this study be kept confidential?
• Yes, it will. Only I (as the researcher) will have access to your full name and contact details.
• Only I, and my three supervisors will have access to the email transcripts.
• I will give you a pseudonym within the research. Any information you give me or direct
quotations I use in written articles or presentations will be anonymised – in other words, it
will be impossible for anyone else to know the information has come from you.
Where will my information be stored?
• All information and files will be stored on secure, password protected storage devices or in a
locked cupboard.
306
• De Montfort University policy is that any raw data is kept securely for 5 years after a study
has been completed and it is then destroyed.
What will happen to the results of the research study?
The results of the research will be used in a report that will be submitted for a PhD award. I may
also write some articles and present my findings at conferences or workshops. I will write a
summary of my findings and you are welcome to a copy of this.
Who is organising and funding the research?
The research is funded by De Montfort University and I am organising the research under the
guidance of my supervisors.
Who has reviewed the study?
This study has been approved by De Montfort University, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences
Research Ethics Committee.
I have another question, who do I contact?
Please email Beth Bodycote using her university email: p12225413@my365.dmu.ac.uk
Thank you very much for your interest in this study
307
Appendix 5. Initial questionnaire
Beth Bodycote V.3 (March 2019)
Participant Initial Questionnaire
The Social Construction of School Refusal: Parental Perspectives
Thank you for volunteering to take part in my research study.
I need to collect some details so that I can contact you.
I also need to ask some questions about your experience of school refusal so far.
I am the only person who will see your answers and they will be stored securely to protect your privacy.
Please could you tell me:
Your name
Your email address
Which county do you live in?
Your child’s age when they
began to experience school
attendance difficulties?
Your child’s age now?
What do you think are the main
reasons for your child’s
difficulties with school
attendance?
Please list any solutions you have
tried to resolve your child’s
difficulties with school
attendance?
Is your child currently receiving
any form of educational
provision? (if ‘yes’ please
describe)
Your occupation or job when
school refusal started?
Your occupation or job now?
308
Appendix 6. Overview of Parents’ Journeys
THE JOURNEY EXPERIENCED BY PARENTS RESPONDING TO SCHOOL ATTENDANCE PROBLEMS
1. RESPONDING TO EMERGING SCHOOL ATTENDANCE PROBLEMS
[a] IF CONCERNS BEGIN WHEN ATTENDANCE DIFFICULTIES START
[b] IF LONG-TERM CONCERNS ALREADY EXIST
§ Observing child’s distress/reluctance about attending school
§ Applying knowledge of child’s developmental history
§ Attempting to make sense of any current observations
§ Investigating possible triggers
§ Discussion with others and reflection
§ Difficulties may continue or escalate
§ Threshold for further action reached
§ Concerns were first noted when child was younger
§ Parent may have discussed concerns with professionals
§ May have received a di agnosis that could be relevant
§ Observing child’s distress / reluctance about attending school
§ Attempting to make sense of any current observations
§ Difficulties continue or escalate
§ Threshold for further action reached
SEEKING INITIAL SUPPORT FOR ATTENDANCE PROBLEMS
Professional Support
Personal Support
School staff and/or GP
Family members and/or friends/peers
EXPERIENCING INITIAL RESPONSES
Impeding Responses
Empowering Responses
Impeding Responses
Empowering Responses
Dismissal of concerns
Blame of child / home / parent
Threats of fines / prison
Recognition of concerns
Support for concerns
Home / school partnership
Disagreement / anger
Criticism of child or parent
Rejection & suspicion
Recognition of concerns
Advice & Support
Practical assistance
§ Parent makes further
observations &
assessments
§ May try other sources
§ Interventions are tried
§ Referrals made
§ Assessments of needs
carried out & responded to
§ Parent reflects upon
further observations &
assessments of child
§ May approach others
§ Interventions tried at home
§ Emotional support shared
§ Experiences are shared
§ Reduction in isolation
§ Responses vary depending upon the suspected or known triggers / causes of the child’s difficulties
§ Responses vary depending upon the understanding / training / experience / seniority / opinions / priorities of those involved
§ Responses vary depending upon whether the person believes what the parent/child is saying – if their own observations match the
parents - whether they interpret the observations in the same way
§ Responses vary depending upon policies within systems in local areas, levels of funding, waiting times for input and assessments
within health services & advisory services
2. NAVIGATING THE SYSTEMIC CONTEXT
SCHOOL
GP/NHS
CAMHS
LOCAL AUTHORITY
Parent & child experiences relate to either:
Impeding Working Relationships
Empowering Working Relationships
§ Ignoring family concerns
§ Lack of empathy for child
§ Making own medical ju dgements (unqualified)
§ Disputing medical diagnoses (unqualified)
§ Assuming child is ‘fine in school’
§ Assuming truancy or refusal
§ Willingness to l isten to family concerns
§ Demonstrating empathy for child
§ Recognising limits to own knowledge
§ Respecting medical practitioner input
§ Considering child is masking difficulties / distress
§ Avoidance of making automatic assumptions
§ Lack of knowledge about attendance difficulties
§ No mental / physical health awareness / provision
§ Lack of SEND knowledge / awareness
§ Ignoring legislation related to SEND / attendance
§ Prioritising attendance / attainment over wellbeing
§ Knowledge of attendance difficulties
§ Mental/physical heal th support offered
§ Demonstrating knowledge of SEND
§ Following legislation related to SEND / attendance
§ Prioritising child wellbeing
§ Refusal to support EHCP applications
§ Refusal to provide schoolwork at home
§ Ignoring or denying cases of bullying
§ Referrals to Social Services to avoid funding support
§ Arranging SEND support via EHCP if needed
§ School work provided at home
§ Resolving bullying issues effectively
§ Referrals to Social Services to provide support
§ CAMHS access delays
§ Lack of NHS support options
§ LA non-compliance with legislation related to EOTAS
§ LA non-compliance with SEND Code of Practice
§ Fines & prosecution threats (ineffective resolution)
§ CAMHS referral leads to assessments
§ CAMHS referral leads to appropriate support
§ LA complying with legislation related to EOTAS
§ LA complying with SEND Code of Practice
§ Working in Partner ship & Co-production
309
REFLECTING UPON EXPERIENCES & OUTCOMES
REACHING A DECISION POINT OR A RESOLUTION
The family continue their search for support & assistance indefinitely, until a resolution is found, or a decision is taken to stop searching.
This could relate to a range of scenarios including:
§ A school or local authority provide the child with access to an educational setting that suits & supports their needs
§ The child is offered appropriate support (i.e., child-led, flexible, needs focused) to reintegrate with their original school setting
§ The situation builds to a crisis point where a child is too unwell to access any type of education
§ The family independently source alternative educational provision (including elective home education / self-directed learning /
alternative schools / online schools/education)
§ Negative systemic responses (lega l action, social service intervention) force a chil d’s return to school
§ Systemic difficulties and pressures mean deregistration i s the only viable option left (i.e forced rather than elective home education)
Overall Conclusion:
The agency of each parent to be able to fulfil their legal duty to resolve a child’s school absence will be hindered or empowered
by the systemic & societal responses they encounter
3. MANAGING THE HOME CONTEXT
PRACTICAL IMPACTS
EMOTIONAL IMPACTS
§ Disruption to home life
§ Difficulties meeting work & other commitments
§ Financial cost (salary loss / private assessments / legal advice)
§ Attending meetings and appointments
§ Managing problematic reactions of others
§ Complexity of accommodating specific needs of all children
§ Forced changes to family and personal plans & activities
§ Marriage /Relationshi p issues
§ Letting people down – multiple responsibiliti es
§ Worry about multip le concerns & practical issues
§ Experiencing blame, judgement, guilt, & isolation
§ Explaining child’s situation to others (repeatedly)
§ Observing impact on siblin gs
§ Impact on relationships with wider family and friends
4.WORKING TOWARDS A RESOLUTION
Parent Peers
Self-Empowerment
Charities / Organisations
Professional
Empowering result:
§ Gaining knowledge from
other parents with lived
experience of what works
& what options there are
§ Sharing information
§ Gaining emotional support
from others who
understand what you are
going through
Empowering result:
§ Being proactive
§ Self-conducted Research
§ Listening to and respecting
your child’s opinions
§ Observing improvements in
child’s wellbeing because
of your actions
§ Trusting parental instincts
§ Gaining self-confidence
Empowering result:
§ Finding support, advice, &
information from SEND
related charities, advocates
or other advisors / services
§ Accessing support in
meetings with schools,
local authorities, social
services, and courts
Empowering result:
§ Therapy by NHS or private
practitioner
§ Assessments by NHS or
private practitioner
§ Diagnosis by state or
private practitioner
§ Professional advice,
support, and advocacy
Impeding result:
§ Being unable to locate
parents who have similar
experiences to you
Impeding result:
§ Being unable to source
relevant information
§ Professional intimidation
§ Practical barriers
Impeding result:
§ Finding SEND charities or
advocates are too busy or
unable to help effectively
Impeding result:
§ Private fees/costs too high
§ Unable to source suitable
professionals
§ Other professionals dismiss
private reports
§ Observing a continuation/worsening of distress /ill-health
§ Observing further / additional concerns for wellbeing
§ Reduction in child’s engagement with people / activities
§ May reflect changes in circumstances; within the school environment;
in (physical or mental) health; within support systems, etc
§ Observing a reduction in distress / ill-health
§ Observing improvements in child’s wellbeing
§ Increase in child’s engagement with people / activities
§ May reflect changes in circumstances; within the school environment;
in (physical or mental) health; within support systems, etc
= Parent makes further attempts to locate people who will
listen to their concerns & help them access support & advice
= Parent continues to monitor child’s wellbeing and
communicate with sources of support as necessary
A FAMILY CRISIS POINT may relate to:
FAMILY EMPOWERMENT may relate to:
§ Child’s loss of progress in education
§ Child’s loss of friendships
§ Child’s loss of interest in education
§ Child’s loss of ambitions or interest in their future
§ Self-harming and/or suicide attempts
§ Decline in mental and / or physical health
§ Damage to family relationships
§ Threats of legal action / Social Services involvement
§ Developing confidence to advocate for child
§ Accessing suitable provision for chil d
§ Obtaining a good quality EHCP for CYP
§ Recognising a change in priorities
§ Recognising progress made by child
§ Developing a clearer understanding of options
§ Developing a clearer understanding of limits to support
§ Making choices in pa rtnership with child
310
Appendix 7. Key Worker Service Triage Plan
Microsystem
•SAPs Identified by parents, and/or school, and/or GP
•SAPs Triage Key Worker Service requested (See Note 1)
•TRIAGE A: Use of ‘light touch’ initial assessment tools, based on recent academic research/EP practice
•TRIAGE B: Further referrals made as identified by triage assessments (i.e., CAMHS, Paediatrician, Educational Psychologist, SaLT,
EHCP assessment, OT)
•Suitable temporary educational provision arranged if appropriate (See Note 2)
Mesosystem
•Investigation of possible causes with evidence from child, parents, school, and GP/ Health Services as appropriate
•No assumption of parent/child blame & no fines or prosecution threats duri ng the triage process
•School will not be judged negatively or penalised for low attendance statistics during the Triage Process
•SAPs Triage Key Worker = independent, neutral role as mediator and administrator –si gnposts, informs (legislation etc.) and
actions each step
•Triage Process (A & B) aims to build a shared understanding of a child’s SAPs
Exosystem
•Holding Codes A & B used in attendance register (as aut horised absences) during the Triage Process (See Note 3)
•Triage Process may identify any safeguarding concerns
•Triage Process may indicate actual cases of ‘truancy’ for follow-up through fines, etc (Holding Code ends)
•No assumptions of blame or pena lties for low attendance as long as parent s and schools cooperate in the process
Macrosystem
•Any systemic delays in the triage a nd assessment process are highlighted as barriers to progre ss (through Key Worker data
collection)
•Use of Holding Codes (A & B) is recorded within DfE Attendance data c ollection (to evidence relevant systemic problems)
•Early help prevents entrenchment of SAPs which could reduce financial impacts ( child, family, and systemic provision)
Chronosystem
•Triage A must be completed within a 2-3 week ‘triage window’
•Triage B = No time limit (recognising current delays within systems)
•Once appropriate support and pro vision is arranged the Key Worker checks on the child’s progress at regular intervals
Note 1: SAPs Triage Key Worker S ervice
•Key Workers must be inde pendent & appropriately train ed (SEND CoP, DfE Guidance, Legislati on, relevant assessment framework s)
•Key Worker monitors progre ss of referrals or EHCP applica tion, ensuring legislation is adhered to
•Key Worker provides reg ular updates to family, schoo l, and local authority
Note 2: Temp orary Educationa l Provision
•Alternative provision to be centrally designed following the Natio nal Curriculum
•Schools can supp lement the centrally-designed provision if they wish to
•Provision could be a combin ation of printed work, online provision, f ace-to-face tutors, and therapeutic sessions
•Level of provision to be guided by child’s needs
•If reintegration to school is possible, this ensures that the child has kept up with peers, so reducing their anxiety about returning to school
Note 3: Hold ing Codes A & B
•Holding Code A is appli ed as an attendance code in the register as the Triage process starts (an authorised code)
•Holding Code B is triggered when the Triage Plan i s in place and the need for assessments/referrals is identified (an authorised code)
•Holding Code B only ends when child ’s needs have been identified, assessed, and the right type of suppo rt and/or provision arranged
•Key worker can re-trigger Ho lding Code A or B if further proble ms emerge
SAPs Triage Key Worker Service
