Can One Parent Decide to Home Educate a Child? School and Home Education Disputes After Separation
In Brief
When parents with parental responsibility disagree about whether their child should attend school or be educated at home, neither parent should assume that acting first will settle the issue. The dispute may need to be resolved by agreement, family mediation or an application to the Family Court for a specific issue order. A prohibited steps order may also be needed to prevent a unilateral change while the dispute is being considered.
The court does not decide which parent has the stronger personal preference. Its focus is the child’s welfare, including educational needs, stability, wishes and feelings, any special educational needs, the practical quality of each proposal and the likely effect of a change.
A July 2026 Administrative Court order involving a parental disagreement about home education did not change the law. It provides a useful reminder that a private dispute between parents about a child’s education ordinarily belongs in the Family Court, rather than being resolved indirectly through judicial review proceedings against a local authority.
Can one parent decide to home educate a child?
A parent may have strong reasons for preferring home education, mainstream school, specialist provision, private education or a different school. However, where another person with parental responsibility objects to a major educational decision, the disagreement should not be treated as if one parent’s view automatically prevails.
Parental responsibility involves the legal rights, duties, powers and responsibilities a parent has in relation to a child. Important decisions about education should normally be discussed between everyone with parental responsibility. Where agreement is impossible, the Family Court can determine the disputed question.
Section 8 of the Children Act 1989 defines a specific issue order as an order giving directions to determine a specific question arising in connection with parental responsibility. School choice and home education are established examples of the type of question that can be determined in this way.
The fact that one parent has historically managed school arrangements, or that the child mainly lives with that parent, does not necessarily give that parent an unrestricted right to make a disputed long-term education decision alone. The exact position depends on parental responsibility, any existing court orders and the urgency of the situation.
What did the LOH v Essex County Council case illustrate?
In LOH v Essex County Council, the father and mother had originally agreed that their three children would be electively home educated. Their agreement later broke down. The father sought to challenge the local authority’s continued home-education assessment process through judicial review and wanted the children returned to mainstream schooling.
The Administrative Court refused permission for judicial review. The judge considered that the proceedings were being used to pursue what was fundamentally a private family dispute and said that the proper forum was the Family Court. The order referred to the fact that no application had been made for a specific issue order.
This was a fact-specific order refusing interim relief and permission for judicial review. It is not a new appellate authority changing the legal test for school or home-education disputes. Its practical value is the procedural reminder: a local authority does not ordinarily decide a disagreement between two parents about how parental responsibility should be exercised.
Which Family Court order may be appropriate?
The correct application depends on what decision is required and whether a parent is trying to prevent an immediate unilateral step.
| Issue | Possible order | What the order may address |
| Whether a child should be home educated or attend school | Specific issue order | The court determines the disputed education question in the child’s best interests. |
| Which school the child should attend | Specific issue order | The court can choose between identified schools or educational proposals. |
| Stopping a parent removing a child from their current school or deregistering them | Prohibited steps order | The court can prevent a proposed step while the dispute is resolved. |
| Where the child should live or how time is divided between parents | Child arrangements order | The court determines living and contact arrangements where these are part of the wider dispute. |
More than one order may be required. For example, a parent may seek a prohibited steps order to prevent immediate deregistration and a specific issue order asking the court to decide the longer-term education plan. OTS Solicitors’ specific issue and prohibited steps order solicitors can advise on the appropriate application and whether urgent protective orders are necessary.
How does the Family Court decide a school or home-education dispute?
The child’s welfare is the court’s paramount consideration. The judge will not determine the application by deciding which parent appears more confident, articulate or committed to their preferred form of education. Each proposal must be examined through the child’s individual circumstances.
The court will consider the welfare checklist, including:
- The child’s wishes and feelings, considered in light of age and understanding.
- The child’s physical, emotional and educational needs.
- The likely effect of changing the child’s current arrangements.
- The child’s age, background and any characteristics the court considers relevant.
- Any harm the child has suffered or may be at risk of suffering.
- Each parent’s ability to meet the child’s needs.
- The range of orders available to the court.
Education disputes are rarely decided by a single factor. A child may be academically capable of home education but need peer interaction, specialist support or stability. Another child may be struggling in a school environment and benefit from a carefully planned alternative. The court’s assessment is child-specific.
What evidence is important in a home-education or school-choice case?
A clear comparison of the competing proposals
The court needs more than broad statements that school is “better” or that home education is “safer”. Each parent should explain what their proposal would involve in practice and why it meets the child’s needs.
Relevant material may include school information, attendance and progress records, Ofsted reports, proposed home-education timetables, curriculum plans, examination arrangements, social and extracurricular opportunities, transport plans and evidence about specialist support.
The child’s current experience
Evidence about how the child is functioning under the current arrangements can be significant. This may include attendance, academic progress, behaviour, friendships, anxiety, bullying concerns, safeguarding issues, health evidence and the child’s response to previous educational changes.
Special educational needs and health evidence
Where a child has special educational needs, a disability, a mental-health condition or a health issue affecting attendance, the court may need professional evidence. Existing education, health and care material, reports from the school, medical evidence and assessments of available provision should be gathered early.
The child’s wishes and feelings
The child’s view can be important, but the weight placed on it depends on age, maturity and understanding. Parents should avoid asking the child to choose sides or repeatedly questioning them about the dispute. The court may obtain information through Cafcass or another professional rather than expecting the child to participate directly in adult conflict.
The practicality and sustainability of each plan
A home-education proposal may need to address who will deliver education, working commitments, resources, social development, examinations and how progress will be monitored. A school proposal may need to address admissions, travel, pastoral support, transition and whether a place is actually available.
Can parents resolve the dispute without going to court?
Court proceedings are not always necessary. Some education disputes can be resolved through solicitor negotiation, a roundtable meeting, family mediation or another form of non-court dispute resolution.
A structured discussion can help parents separate the child’s needs from the history of their relationship. It may also allow them to agree a temporary arrangement, obtain further information from schools or professionals, or identify a trial period with clear review points.
Before making most private-law children applications, an applicant is normally expected to attend a Mediation Information and Assessment Meeting unless an exemption applies. Mediation may not be appropriate where there is domestic abuse, urgency, safeguarding risk or a genuine concern that one parent will act before the dispute can be resolved.
When may an urgent court application be needed?
Urgency is fact-sensitive. An urgent application may be appropriate where:
- A parent is about to remove the child from their current school without agreement.
- A school place or admissions deadline will be lost unless a decision is made quickly.
- The child has stopped receiving suitable education.
- There is an immediate safeguarding, health or welfare concern.
- A parent intends to move the child or take the child abroad as part of the education plan.
- An existing court order is being breached or undermined.
An urgent application does not mean the court will automatically approve the applicant’s preferred school or education model. The applicant must still explain the urgency, the order requested and why it is in the child’s best interests.
How do you apply for a specific issue order?
An application is generally made to the Family Court using Form C100. The form is also used for child arrangements and prohibited steps applications. The applicant must identify the order requested, the children affected, everyone with parental responsibility and any safeguarding issues.
Unless an exemption applies, the applicant normally needs to address the MIAM requirement. Where there are allegations of domestic abuse or harm, a supplemental C1A form may also be required.
After the application is issued, the court will consider safeguarding information and list a first hearing. Depending on the dispute, the court may direct witness statements, school records, medical or expert evidence, or a Cafcass assessment. The judge may make interim orders to preserve the child’s position until a final decision can be made.
The timescale depends on urgency, complexity, evidence and court availability. Parents should take advice early where school admissions or the start of a term creates a practical deadline.
What should parents avoid doing?
- Do not assume that enrolling or deregistering the child first will give you a legal advantage.
- Do not use the school or local authority as a substitute decision-maker for a dispute between parents.
- Do not pressure the child to state a preference or carry messages between adults.
- Do not withhold relevant educational or medical information from the other parent without a lawful reason.
- Do not breach an existing child arrangements, specific issue or prohibited steps order.
- Do not delay until a school place, examination entry or term deadline has passed.
Practical checklist for a school or home-education dispute
- Confirm who has parental responsibility and obtain copies of any existing court orders.
- Write down the precise decision in dispute rather than framing the issue as a general disagreement about parenting.
- Collect school records, attendance information, reports and relevant professional evidence.
- Prepare a realistic written plan for your preferred education arrangement.
- Identify deadlines, including admissions dates, term dates and any proposed deregistration.
- Consider the child’s wishes without placing the child under pressure.
- Ask whether negotiation, mediation or a short-term agreement could resolve the problem.
- Obtain urgent legal advice if the other parent is about to act unilaterally.
- Keep communications child-focused and avoid hostile or accusatory correspondence.
- Where court proceedings are needed, ensure the application asks for the correct order and addresses urgency clearly.
OTS Solicitors’ View
Disagreements about education can become highly emotional because both parents may genuinely believe that their preferred option is essential for their child. The legal question is not whether home education or school education is generally superior. It is which arrangement best meets this particular child’s welfare needs.
The LOH order is a useful reminder that parents should use the correct legal route. A dispute about exercising parental responsibility should not ordinarily be redirected through proceedings against a local authority when the Family Court can determine the issue directly.
Early advice can help define the dispute, identify the evidence the court will need and protect against unilateral action. It can also create an opportunity to reach a workable agreement before control of the decision passes entirely to a judge.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can my former partner take our child out of school without my agreement?
The answer depends on parental responsibility, the current school arrangements and any court orders. Where both parents with parental responsibility disagree about a major educational change, urgent advice may be needed about a prohibited steps order and a specific issue order.
Can the Family Court order that a child is home educated?
The court can determine whether home education or school attendance is in the child’s best interests. The parent proposing home education should provide a detailed, realistic and sustainable plan rather than relying on a general preference.
Can the court choose a particular school?
Yes. A specific issue order can determine which school a child should attend. The court will compare the available options and assess the child’s welfare, including education, pastoral care, stability, travel and any additional needs.
Will the judge ask the child which option they prefer?
The child’s wishes and feelings may be considered, but the court will decide how they should be obtained and how much weight to place on them. This depends on the child’s age, maturity and understanding.
Do I have to try mediation first?
In most cases, the applicant must attend a MIAM before applying, unless an exemption applies. Urgency, domestic abuse and safeguarding concerns may affect whether mediation is suitable or required.
What if the local authority agrees that home education is suitable?
That assessment does not necessarily resolve a dispute between parents. A local authority may assess whether education appears suitable for its statutory purposes, but the Family Court determines a private dispute about how parental responsibility should be exercised.
Can I make an urgent application before the next school term?
Potentially. The court will consider why the matter is urgent and what will happen to the child if no interim order is made. Advice should be obtained as early as possible because a late application can restrict the practical options available.
Contact OTS Solicitors
If you and your former partner cannot agree about school choice, home education or another important decision concerning your child, call OTS Solicitors on 0203 959 9123 or contact us for advice on negotiation, mediation, specific issue orders and prohibited steps orders.