An unreasonable parents case
Along the School Act, children have to attend school and their parents have to send them there. The compulsory school attendance starts to children, who aren’t disqualified on the health grounds, at the age of 6 and lasts for 9 years.
Unfortunately, there’re still parents, who don’t care at their children’s school attendance, who aren’t interested in children’s school results and disregarded urgences from teachers to fulfil their duties. Such parents don’t mind, that their children stay at home instead of going to school regularly.
Children, who don’t go to school and stay at home, live so called the idling way of life.
Along the Criminal Code, parents, who enable, that their children live idling way of life, commit a crime called the Thread of education of youth. Such parents can be sent to prison for the period from 6 months to 5 years.
The last case like this, which I supervised, occured during the school year 2003-2004 in one of elementary schools. Three siblings aged 13, 12 and 9 years ceased attending school, so their teachers summoned their parents to visit the school, what they didn’t accepted. This teachers then visited parents in their flat and tried unsuccessfully to persuade them to sent children to school again, so after that they informed local social institution about the behaviour of children and their parents. Precautions imposed on them failed, because nothing was changed, so this institution announced the case to the police as a suspicion of a crime.
At first a policeman from a local police station questioned parents and they pleaded not guilty, so after an interviewing the teachers, the case was handed to the regional police, whose investigator accused both parents from a crime and after a short investigation prosecutor filed a prosecution to the regional court.
I took part in the trial, which lasted about 3 hours. Accused people pleaded not guilty even in front of the court, but the case was clear. The teachers’ testimony were convincing and the school documents, that were read during the trial, were also accepted as a convincing evidence.
Both parents were imposed conditional imprisonment for 18 months with probation for 3 years. They accepted punishment without hesitation and didn’t appeal against it.
It was clear, that they plead not quilty, because they were afraid of imprisonment without probation.
During the criminal proceedings it was also found out, that the whole family lived in a very poor living conditions in a flat, consisted of a kitchen and one room. The bahthroom and WC were outside the flat. They were disconnected by an electricity because they didn’t pay for its using. Both parents were unimployed, they didn’t have any education except of a remedial school. They didn’t have a chance to get a job, because they weren’t able to do any work, only simple activities, but their working moral wasn’t high. They didn’t try to get a job. They lived off welfare they regularly received from a local social authority.
I must add that simultaneously with this criminal proceedings, the civil action was held in order to take the children away from their parents and give them into educational institute, because their parents weren’t able and willing to educate them properly.