A mother who failed to send six of her 17 children to school has effectively been deemed unpunishable – because she has so many kids.
The single mother found it impossible to get her children to school because she ran out of time in the mornings.
Four of her children are meant to go to a primary school but their attendance records were well below the 97 per cent expectation.
The other two are older and refused to attend secondary school despite attempts by their mother to ‘encourage, bribe and punish them’.
Their attendance records fell to as low as 48 per cent.
A 46-year-old mother, whose identity remains anonymous due to legal reasons, was brought to court by her local authority for neglecting to ensure that her six children regularly attended school.
This isn’t the first time she has faced prosecution for this offense. In the previous year, she received a two-year conditional discharge, which she violated with the latest offenses.
The defense attorney argued that imposing a community service order on her client would not be appropriate as it could overwhelm her since even a minor addition to her daily routine might lead to failure.
The woman was taken to court for failing to ensure six of her children attended school
Ewa Russell added that she could not be fined as she is already in debt so cannot pay a financial penalty, especially with the Christmas period coming up.
Parents who take their children out of school for a holiday are fined £80 per child, or £160 if they don’t pay within 21 days, and can face a fine of up to £2,500 if they are taken to court.
But magistrates gave the mother a token fine of £80 and praised and applauded her efforts as a mother, ‘wishing her every success for the future’.
The court in Dorset heard 14 of the woman’s children still live with her, with 11 of those under the age of 18.
Marian Asuemimhem, prosecuting, said the schools sent several letters to their mother, arranged meetings and even home visits.
She said the defendant was invited to attend multiple times but ‘did not want to engage’ and the children were regularly late to school after the register had closed.
From September to early December, their attendance was monitored again and their percentage was in the 60s and 50s for one child.
Ms Russell said the mother struggles to manage and the odds of her getting all of her children to school were against her because of the number of children she has.
Four of her children are meant to go to a primary school but their attendance records were well below the 97 per cent expectation
Ms Russell said: ‘She readily admits and makes it open to everyone she has struggled with managing to send her children to school.
‘I didn’t know what to expect but she comes across as a mother who does care.
‘It would seem to me she does everything in her power to make sure those children are well looked after and do go to school, but the odds are against her because of the number of children she has.’
The court heard she had repeatedly asked for help with two of the children, who often refused to go to secondary school, and had tried to everything to encourage, bribe and punish them to go.
But their attendance fell far below the 97 per cent expectation – with one at 52 per cent and one at 48 per cent.
In contrast, the four primary school-aged children identified in the court charges usually attended school but were often late after the register had closed.
The court heard this was due to the mother being a full-time carer for one of her children and most of her morning being spent caring for and getting that child ready.
Her solicitor said by the time that child was on the way to a specialist school, it would make the mother late to drop the four primary children at their school.
The magistrates described it as a ‘complex’ and very unusual case.
Speaking to the mother, chairman Colin Stupack said: ‘The bench is full of admiration in such difficult personal circumstances, we applaud you for that.
The mother had repeatedly asked for help with two of the children, who often refused to attend secondary school
‘We do understand you have particular problems with two of your children who just refuse to go to school – at long last you are getting the support you should have been given a very long time ago.
‘We are not going to go along with the recommendation as we simply feel, through no deliberate act on yourself, the likelihood is you would breach it.
‘Exceptionally we are going to deal with it by way of a fine. A community order would be unworkable.’
He ordered the mother to pay an £80 fine and £32 victim surcharge, to be deducted from her benefits.
Despite the prosecution asking for £400 costs, he said the magistrates would not make any order for costs ‘quite exceptionally for a case involving six children and a breach of a previous conditional discharge’.
He added: ‘We do feel that’s the most appropriate and most merciful approach we can apply in these circumstances.
‘I know you are doing your best to engage and the majority of absences are timing.
‘We wish you every success for the future. Good luck, we hope you will get the support from the external agencies that you clearly deserve.’
