Home   Kent   News   Article

Why father taught autistic child himself

HOME TUITION: Nicholas Baker with his father Bob
HOME TUITION: Nicholas Baker with his father Bob

A MAN kept his autistic son away from school because he was unhappy with his progress and no alternative schools could be found, a court heard.

Instead Bob Baker, 53, of Pine Grove, Hempstead, Gillingham, taught 16-year-old Nicholas at home but without the approval of Medway Council education officials.

At Medway magistrates' court, Mr Baker admitted failing to ensure his son's attendance between April and September last year to Bradfields School, Chatham. He was fined him £50, plus £50 costs, but did not make an order to send 16-year-old Nicholas back to the school.

Derek Harpum, prosecuting for Medway Council, said Nicholas had missed a total of 154 school sessions during the last summer and autumn terms. The court heard that relations had broken down between Nicholas' parents and his teacher.

Meetings between the parents and education officials were held to tackle problems, attempts were made to bring in mediators, and Baker wrote to the Department for Education and Skills and the Ombudsman.

Mr Harpum told the court: "Despite all the time, conciliation meetings, advice and warnings given for this matter to be resolved the parent has failed in his responsibility to ensure his son is in receipt of full time education as determined by the Education Act 1996."

Julia Agnini, counsel for Baker, said Nicholas had a loving and supportive family and there was no negligence to his education.

She said Baker was an educated man who had been a lecturer at Mid Kent College and ran an autistic support group.

She stressed: "He loves his son and expects an awful lot from the education system, and his expectations have not been met."

She said Nicholas had progressed in primary school but not after going to Bradfields - he had started to make out some words but now could not make out any.

She added that the parents had been told the teacher was SEN (special educational needs) qualified but turned out not to be.

Miss Agnini added the parents had also been told Nicholas would learn through a special little-by-little teaching programme, which did not happen, and that he was made to repeat the same tasks, which as an autistic he would get easily bored with.

Miss Agnini added that there were no places available for him at two alternative schools and a third, in Tonbridge, was too far away.

Reporting restrictions were lifted, allowing Nicholas to be named following a submission by Baker's defence counsel.

Close This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.Learn More