Supreme court

It seems that the tenor of the argument is that "every school day is very important to a child's education". So why is it at my grandson's school, if he or any other child throws up, (and we all know this can and does happen for no other reason than bolting food etc), his school insists that the child is kept absent for a period of 48 hours.  Parents usually know if a child is genuinely unwell and they should be the better judge of whether to keep the child away from school. Yes, it can be a forerunner of something more serious but usually it is not.  Every day at school important? It seems that there are double standards here.

The user and all related content has been Deleted User

Because a school has a duty of care for all its children and staff

Amazing how holidays and finances have changed, I can't think that my own grandparents would have taken me to a Caribbean Island let alone a winter holiday. Sad to think that some still don't have holidays at all. Some things need to be put in perspective. 

Solution is simple.... leave kids with relatives and go on holiday without them. ....sorted😇👍

I believe that if a holiday cost per person whatever in January or the lowest price, then it couldn't cost more than whatever + 1000 in July/August.

 

I think that's bit different, children should attend unless there is a valid reason and throwing up could be deemed a valid reason? Also this approach is usually for primary children and when it happens at school. If there is a vomiting or 'other end' bug going about the school wouldn't want that to spread.

I'm not convinced by the argument that a week off school during term time is so detrimental to education. When I was ten years old I was in hospital for seven weeks with TB. I still passed the 11+ a year later despite not having any work sent in to the hospital whilst I was there. Seven weeks is a long time when you're ten😱

what happens if you don't have any kids ?? I don't and many years ago my now ex husband had a job that closed down for set holidays at peak times so we had to pay extra for hols all the time until he left the job, I didn't start this thread for folk to slate each other or the education system but the clubs practice of stretching the peak periods is frustrating if i want to take a week off work in early July before the school holidays peak rates start 30/6 here in Yorkshire at the most popular sites Brid is £22.40 just for me per night and York £22.80 that's only 2 I quickly looked at ,not having facilities in my TINY camper limits me going to site without them for long as I need to be able to shower especially if it's hot so going away when it's cheaper rates means not being able to go in the summer months when it should be warmer !!!

GC, I do sympathise, but it has been said before. Using Club Sites, as a single person during peak periods is not the most economic way to take a holiday, particularly at York and Bridlington. My OH had some nights away on his own last year, in our small MH, and just did some research and found sites to suit his requirements and price ceiling and then booked or visited accordingly. Quite a few, once he mentioned he was alone in a small outfit offered him a discount. They could, because unlike the Club, they had the flexibility. There are lovely CLs, small private sites, at a fraction of the cost of Club Sites, and some even better deals if you book late and get a discount.

The Club doesn't cater well for small, single occupancy outfits at peak times. They don't have to, because they can get far more money from families and multi occupancy outfits utilising the same space and facilities. This is just sound business opportunism. Conversely, in off peak periods, the Club offers some absolute bargains for those who seek them out, often cheaper than a lot of CLs with comparable facilities.

Edit: a quick look at CLs in the York area has just thrown up three lovely CL, all not far away from city. Two have loos and showers, third has a free outdoor swimming pool. All are under £20 per night, two well below!