As you will probably be aware, the home education review was prompted by concerns voiced by Delyth Morgan, who decided - without a shred of evidence - that home education was used as a cover for forced marriage, child labour and child abuse.

Better to be safe than sorry... You simply never know... If it saves only one child... 

 Despite those concerns being recognised as totally unfounded - not that you'll ever hear about it in much of the mainstream media coverage, the chain of events leading to our brave new world of Badman 'n' Balls is well and truly gathering momentum at an alarming pace. But more of that in my next post, when I've recovered from the latest assault on our collective intellect.

In addition to educating children, schools are taking on an ever-increasing number of responsibilities that might once have been deemed to be within the remit of the, er, parents. But of course schools can do it so much better, can't they? Especially with breakfast clubs, after hours sessions, weekend lessons and suchlike. Now it seems they are also to be responsible for identifying "signs of forced marriages ahead of the summer holidays". 

"The guidance comes as an official report raises questions about how some schools and councils have failed to act on suspicions or evidence of abuse."

Everyone - not just teachers - has a duty to act on (reasonable) suspicions and evidence of abuse. Abuse is pretty clear cut. But forced marriage is not. How does one navigate effectively yet sensitively around early marriages, arranged marriages, any culturally unfamiliar marriages and forced marriages? Has the DCSF issued specific guidance on that? I bet it hasn't.

"The report calls on schools to play a greater preventative role, saying some are clearly reluctant to get involved."

I am not surprised, given the ever-increasing likelihood of being labelled (and possibly prosecuted for being) culturally insenstive or racist.

"The government's Forced Marriage Unit (FMU) says it has received 770 calls for help this year - up 16% on 2008."

Well, there you go. A telephone call to the FMU is a far better indicator of abuse than, say, someone's ethnicity combined with an extended holiday to see relatives in a different country. Did the government's Forced Marriage Unit act on each of those 770 calls and prevent those forced marriages? Incidentally, I wonder how many calls bullying and abuse helplines receive from other distressed children? Do you think it's likely to be more than 770? I suspect so...

"Experts say the coming month will be critical because there is growing evidence that abusive families use the school summer holidays to coerce daughters and sons to marry abroad."

Ah, "the experts" the BBC is so fond of. Well we all know that they can be trusted. I can see this leading to yet another Lowest Common Denominator solution.

"The new guidance published by the FMU urges teachers to be aware of signs of a possible forced marriage because school or college is often the only place where the potential victim can speak freely."

Well if the victim can speak freely in school or college, then there is no need for teachers to concern themselves with trying to extrapolate vague and often misleading "signs of a possible forced marriage" from a wide variety of cultural and other factors. Is there? Simply encourage teachers to establish good, communicative relationships with students, ensure that they are adequately prepared to deal with any disclosures of abuse that might arise, and make sure that where they have reasonable suspicion or evidence of child abuse, they act - as anyone ought to. 

Foreign Office minister Chris Bryant told the BBC that professionals needed to have their "eyes wide open".

Yes. But not "wide open" with unwarranted suspicion, risk aversion, and disproportionality.

"'There are key times of the year, particularly if an elder sibling has married very young or suddenly left school, if a youngster is self-harming or if they are constantly being accompanied by parents, even to a doctor's surgery," he told Radio 4's Today programme. "These may be clear signs that there is a problem.'"

Aside from a young person self-harming, which is in itself a problem, none of these things are "a clear sign that there is a problem". So where is the justification for acting?

"'I should make it absolutely clear there is no culture and there is no religion in which forced marriage should be acceptable or indeed is acceptable,' he added."

"Should be"? Chris Byrant believes it is his duty to dictate to other religions and cultures uninvited? Of course he does.

"'I know there are maybe some people who think this is an issue about Islam - it's not. Islam does not recommend or accept forced marriage. Marriage in every religion has to be freely and openly consented to.'"

I think the real issue is that nobody is very clear what the issues actually are, and it's nigh on impossible to have a sensible discussion about it. Everyone is far too concerned with causing offence - a climate that has been created by a slavish adherence to political correctness in its most vile of incarnations - to ask the questions they really want or need to know the answers to. Many people are terrified to even think about such questions. 

"Mayah: 'I was very much sedated, I was beaten up, I was locked in.'"

That sounds like abuse to me.

"The report for the Department for Children, Schools and Families details criticisms of some schools and education authorities. Critics say some are "non-responsive" and failing to intervene as they dismiss forced marriage as a "cultural issue" or fear a backlash from powerful figures in minority communities."

Dismissing abuse as a cultural issue is not acceptable. That is the only message that schools need to hear. But fearing "a backlash from powerful figures in minority communities" if one makes a mistake? Or even when one hasn't? Well, that's completely understandable. Whoever would wish to find herself in the position of Erica Connor, for example? 

"'In all areas we noted a variation among key partners in the importance they attached to responding to forced marriage,' says the report."

And what we want is mindless, unthinking conformity and compliance to our nonsensical and harmful ways of working. Because we are borg, says the DCSF.

"'One respondent talked about how it was precisely those cases of children [going missing from education] that showed the signs of forced marriage that were less likely to be followed up in schools as this was seen as an issue specific to the culture of the child.'"

Oh, for goodness sake. If ANY CHILD, WHATEVER THEIR CULTURE OR RELIGION goes MISSING FROM EDUCATION, FOR WHATEVER REASON, then follow the STATUTORY GUIDANCE that deals with CHILDREN NOT RECEIVING A SUITABLE EDUCATION. There, does that embrace equality and diversity sufficiently for you?

"Jasvinder Sanghera of Karma Nirvana, a national campaign group against forced marriages, urged public sector workers, and particularly teachers, to act on suspicions.'This is not something you must be culturally sensitive about,' she said. 'This is a child abuse issue, and you must treat it in that way and follow your child protection procedures. Do not turn a blind eye'."

Unfortunately, the uncritical demand for cultural sensitivity tends to take unnecessary precedence, especially in a public sector setting. I have less than fond memories of sitting in a cramped little room for two days, being treated like a criminal for refusing to agree that prejudice in and of itself is wrong, or that it is as unacceptable as discrimination.

Culture and religion should never be conflated with child abuse; where teachers have reasonable suspicions or evidence of abuse - that is actual harm to a child - then of course they must follow their child protection procedures. If they do not have reasonable suspicions or evidence, then they should not act. It would be wholly wrong for them to do so.

"The Forced Marriage Unit, run jointly by the Home Office and Foreign Office, received 1,600 reports last year - and intervened in 420 actual cases."

So why didn't the Forced Marriage Unit intervene in the other 1,200 odd cases? Is it because - gasp - they didn't have resonable suspicions, or indeed evidence? Even when the young person had contacted them directly? And if so, then how on earth are they expecting schools, whose primary purpose (at least once upon a time) was to provide an education to its pupils, to do more?

"Overall, there are estimated to be at least 5,000 cases of forced marriage, but it is impossible to know for certain. In some cases, a specialist British team launched secret rescue missions to repatriate victims held captive by their families abroad. The courts have also made 36 forced marriage prevention orders, a recently created power designed to prevent people being taken abroad against their will."

And how many other cases of bullying and abuse that go unchecked in school settings?

As it's impossible to know for certain how many cases of forced marriages there are, why are we assuming that the joint efforts of schools, the Forced Marriage Unit, the specialist British team and the courts aren't sufficient - assuming they actually put "cultural sensitivites" to one side, as they are being urged to do by none other than Karma Nirvana, and simply act on clear cut cases of child abuse, as is their moral and legal obligation? 

Or is that not enough? Well, here's another suggestion that Delyth Morgan might like to consider - why don't we lobby for yet more legislation, with accompanying draconian powers to register, monitor and regularly inspect each and every family home of those whose religion or culture might be used as a cover for forced marriage and child abuse? What? That might be discriminatory? No, it can't be. Look over here - it's perfectly acceptable.