When Parenthood Is Watched Through Glass
As the state moves ever closer to the cradle, it’s not danger they’re watching for—but control
There’s a line being crossed. Quietly, incrementally, under the familiar banners of “wellbeing” and “safeguarding,” the state is redefining its relationship with the family—and with your child.
This is not a drill. This is not theoretical. This is the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill—a piece of legislation so sweeping, so intrusive, that it effectively reassigns the job description of who raises your children. Spoiler alert: it’s not you.
Love Isn’t Measured in Forms
Let’s begin not in Parliament, but at home. Imagine a mother smoothing her daughter’s hair at bedtime, humming the same lullaby sung by her grandmother.
Picture a father arriving late from work but still sitting down to hear about a failed maths test or a playground triumph.
These are the quiet rituals of parenthood—unspectacular, unpaid, and irreplaceable.
Now imagine that love subjected to scrutiny by someone with a clipboard who met your child for ten minutes and says they know best.
Therein lies the chasm.
The love between parent and child is instinctive, irrational, and relentless. It’s the mother who will run into fire, the father who will give up food to ensure his child eats.
That bond is not only older than the state—it came long before any system of rule.
And yet, today, it is being redrafted by bureaucrats.
The Bill That Redraws the Family
The Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill proposes, among other things:
That no parent can withdraw their child from school without state permission.
That families who choose home education must register, undergo risk assessments, and satisfy arbitrary state benchmarks.
That local authorities can enter homes, interrogate children, and issue school attendance orders against parental will.
That children will be assigned unique identifiers and tracked across multiple government agencies.
Let that sink in.
You brought this child into the world. You held them through sickness, watched them take their first steps, and dreamed about their future.
Now, a government officer—who has never met them, who doesn’t know how they like their toast or fear the dark—gets to decide what’s “suitable” for them?
This is not about safety. It’s about supremacy.
This Isn’t Oversight. It’s Overreach.
No reasonable person denies that children deserve protection. But a system that treats all parents as potential threats flips justice on its head. The presumption of innocence is gone. Parental responsibility is no longer a right, but a conditional status granted by the state.
And it’s not just about home educators or religious families. This bill targets the very notion that parents are the default guardians of their children’s lives. It assumes that unless the state is involved, something is suspicious.
It replaces relationship with regulation. Love with policy. Conscience with compliance.
Bureaucracy Can’t Love Your Child
Local authority officers and safeguarding professionals, for all their training and good intentions, do not and cannot love your child. Their knowledge comes from files, not familiarity.
We’ve seen this in painful detail. In Hackney, a family was separated from their eight children—wrongfully. In Cleveland and Orkney, dozens of children were removed from homes based on false allegations. In Rotherham, the state ignored 1,400 cries for help to protect its image.
And yet, the answer we're now offered is more intrusion. More power without accountability.
A Society That Forgets the Parent Forgets Itself
This is bigger than policy. This is constitutional.
Once the state presumes the right to veto your parenting choices, liberty itself becomes conditional. Today it’s education. Tomorrow it’s medical choices, religious expression, even how you speak to your child.
If Parliament forgets that its power is borrowed from the people—and not from focus groups or Whitehall memos—it forgets how to serve. If lawmakers forget that the parent-child bond is sacred, they risk becoming architects of a future where families are monitored, not trusted; managed, not cherished.
What We Stand For Today Shapes the World They Inherit
We are not pleading. We are setting boundaries.
We declare:
Let this be the moment when quiet concern becomes courageous clarity.
Let this be the moment when ideology meets accountability.
Let this be the moment when everyday families stand firm.
This is not politics. This is principle.
It is time to say with calm, fierce clarity:
You cannot govern conscience with a checklist.
Being in government is not a licence for overreach.
And no institution can ever replace the heart of a parent.
A National Petition, A National Reckoning
There is now a petition before the UK Parliament—calling for independent, cross-party scrutiny before any education law affecting parental rights, religious freedom, or home education is passed.
This is not a token. It is a test.
If you believe that no one knows a child better than a loving parent—not a form, not an algorithm, not a stranger with a clipboard—then now is the time to speak.
🖋️ Make your voice heard—before the line is crossed.
Sign here:
Require Independent Scrutiny Before Passing Education Laws Affecting Rights
Because history doesn’t remember the moment the line was crossed — it remembers those who stood before it and said: Enough is enough.