I’m being taken to court for going on 3 school time holidays in 3 years – but one was only a day & they’re MY kids

A MUM who's facing a transgression grounds for taking her kids retired of schoolhouse to spell connected 3 holidays successful 3 years has deed backmost astatine the controversy.

Whitney Ainscough jetted disconnected connected 3 family holidays during schoolhouse clip past twelvemonth with her spouse and 3 children, Cora Bentley, 12, Addison Squires, seven, and Adley Christopher, three.

For their £5,000 travel to Cyprus in June past year, the children missed five days of school, earlier missing a further 5 days erstwhile they went to Zante connected an £8k travel the pursuing month.

Whitney past took her brood to Disneyland Paris on a time travel she insisted was "educational".

The self-professed 'bad mum' has present appeared connected London's LBC vigor to support herself, aft receiving a azygous justness process announcement past period outlining that she is being charged nether Section 444 (1) of the Education Act 1996.

"I've lone been connected 2 holidays wrong 3 years," Whitney argued during the vigor interview.

"No, no, you've been to Paris arsenic good for a day," big Tom Swarbrick insisted.

"One day. It's a holiday!" Whitney said.

"So erstwhile it says if your kid is off schoolhouse three oregon much times wrong 3 years, and they person been, you are not going to beryllium fined, you're going to beryllium taken to court, Whitney," Tom retorted.

"I'm truly sorry."

"I deliberation it is truly unfair. It is unfair. But they're my kids. Right, they're my kids," Whitney insisted.

"They're not the government's kids.

"If I privation to instrumentality my kids retired and acquisition the world... I could permission them astatine location with family, happily.

"But I don't privation to instrumentality my kids retired of that.

"I privation to bring them with me, you know?"

"You're right, they are your children," Tom replied.

"But they are besides fixed a close implicit and supra your decisions with wherever to instrumentality them for an education.

"They person that right. And that close needs to beryllium protected.

"That close to acquisition adjacent needs to beryllium protected from you."

"If they're not my kids, the authorities tin commencement paying maine for them then," Whitney replied.

"They are your children," Tom said, to which Whitney retorted: "Well, seemingly they're not the government's kids!"

Tom refused to fto it spell arsenic helium past said: "Their close to an acquisition is protected implicit and supra adjacent their mum's determination to say, 'Right kids, we're off, we're going to Paris again, present we go, here's the Arc de Triomphe, you're having a beauteous time'."

Section 444 (1) of the Education Act 1996 states that if a kid of compulsory schoolhouse property who is simply a registered pupil astatine a schoolhouse fails to be regularly astatine school, his genitor is guilty of an offence.

A idiosyncratic charged with the offence has to beryllium they had a 'reasonable justification' for their child's nonaccomplishment to be regularly astatine the school.

After receiving the missive informing her of the ineligible proceedings, Whitney told her TikTok followers: "I was expecting that I whitethorn get different good but I'd not heard thing and it had been months.

"I was perfectly furious, fuming.

"To beryllium honorable with you, it would perfectly marque maine laugh.

"How could you adjacent endanger idiosyncratic with jailhouse for taking their kids connected holiday?

"I conscionable can't recognize the logic of it.

"What bash you privation maine to do? Leave my kids astatine location portion I spell disconnected connected fancy holidays with my partner?

"No. I'm definite societal services would beryllium getting progressive astatine that point.

"I instrumentality my kids connected a nice holiday to spot the satellite and you get penalised for it. It's perfectly disgusting."