Does 'taxi' mean something different in the UK than it does here?

Perhaps there is more here than being reported. Why does it make a difference if someone else does the actual driving while she is along to care for her son than if she drove herself?

Would it be the same if a friend or relative drove instead of a taxi?

wha?

Is there no room for common sense? I don't get it.

Maybe because the government requires the schools to provide safe travel to and from the schools and taxi's aren't considered safe. In the US or at least here in PA it is the school who is responsible for a kid from when he leaves his home in the morning to when he gets home in the afternoon.

Now just because the parent is present in the taxi doesn't mean anything. Parents have done crazy things before and the school I guess, is just doing what it should be doing and taking responsibilty to avoid getting in trouble.

People on here have said that parents should get a parenting license and this is kind of in essance what the school is doing, making sure the parent is responisble enough to be with the child. It seems that in this case she is, but thats just this case.

And as for the CRB screwing up, thats an issue that should be resolved and they should be more organized.

I think that's the "thing", here. They don't require the background check if the parent drives the kid to school. Screwed up people can get driver's licenses.

The entire protocol makes no sense.

This really makes me feel sad. i know how difficult it is to care for a special needs child but to have this on top of everything is just too much. I wish this process would be made easier for her.

Maybe its not that it doesnt make sense, maybe it just needs to be more thurough

The issue with the CRB sounds quite fishy. What a great way to get a bunch of fingerprints on file.

The requirement of the school including the parents in the stipulation of "any" adult needing a background check if they take a taxi but not if the parents drive the child themselves, is just plain ludicrous.

And this surprises you? School administrators are, by and large, complete idiots.

If they require the Mother to get a background check, they should require each and every taxi driver that drives them to school to get the same. If that is the reasoning, wouldn't that seem logical?

A background check really isn't that big of a deal. I volunteer at the library at my kids' school, and I have to have one at the start of every school year. Doesn't bother me at all.

A background check for any job working with children is reasonable, making parents get a background check in order to escort their own children is ludicrous.

Maybe they'll let her drive the taxi. But then, the taxi driver would be the escort, and would need the background check. So if she gets a license to drive a taxi, and has her own car licensed as a taxi, then it should work.

That might be the reason for such drastic measures. I know that I wouldn't be allowed to work with children from my own family on a professional basis without going through the same check as the mother in the article has to. Hell I couldn't even step into my office without it.

Being the escort to the child during school hours, even in a voluntary basis is still seen as their responsibility and they're just doing what the law says. I'm sure that they feel just as embarassed about it but that's the way it works these days. All this political correctness and "safety" for children has gone too far and to be honest, will be impossible to get back to decent standards.