Home Education Consultation April 2019

Here are my thoughts regarding the New HE consultation that is open from2nd April – 24th June 2019. The questions you get asked vary depending on how you have answered previous questions, so there will be some questions that are not visible to me.

The overview says:

This consultation is about establishing a local authority registration system for children who do not attend state-funded or registered independent schools.Why We Are ConsultingThis consultation is a follow-up to the consultation and call for evidence on elective home education held by the Department for Education in 2018.It seeks views on proposed legislation to establish a register maintained by local authorities of children not attending mainstream schools, together with associated duties on parents and the proprietors of certain educational settings. It also consults on proposed legislation to establish a duty to support parents who educate children at home and seek support from their local authority in doing so.

The Introduction says:

IntroductionThe survey may appear lengthy from the number of pages it contains. However, please note the following:After some preliminary questions about you as a respondent, the survey is structured around the four basic propositions in the accompanying consultation paper, which if possible you should read before completing the survey:a duty on local authorities to maintain a register;a duty on parents to supply information for the register;a duty on certain settings to supply information; anda duty on local authorities to provide support for home educationFor each of these four propositions, you are asked whether or not you agree with the proposition. An answer is required. Whether you answer 'yes' or 'no' determines the next page of questions presented to you, which is about details related to that proposition.For each proposition, the subsequent questions on detail are almost identical whether your answer to the initial question is 'yes' or 'no', but seeking responses on the details separately for respondents who agree or disagree with the propositions helps us to analyse responses more meaningfully.After the basic question and detailed questions on each of the four propositions, there is a final page of concluding general questions.This structure means that the number of questions put to each respondent is only just over half of the total in the overall survey form.Thank you.

The first page asks you for your name, email and in what capacity you are answering the question (eg home educating parent, or on behalf of an organisation or whatever). Incidentally, you do NOT have to fill in either your name nor email, if you don't want to.  Because I have answered that I am a home educating parent, my first question is no7:

Do you agree that local authorities should be obliged to maintain a register of children who are not registered at specified schools (those listed at paragraph 2.2 of the consultation paper) or being educated under s.19 arrangements?

Following my response of ‘No’ to question 7, I then encounter questions 20-31. For each set of questions, I'll give a few of my answers.
There should be no register for home educated children.

A register will hold no benefit for anybody. Any child that is removed from school is ALREADY registered with their LA. Many LA EHEOs are not qualified in home education, let alone pedagogy, teaching or how children learn best. LAs do not have enough funding/budget to adequately support home educators, and having to maintain a register will cause monies to be stretched even further, resulting in the individual families and children not receiving the care they deserve. In order to try and reduce this increased workload, LAs will be forced to cut corners and "encourage" all home educators to tick-box, and coercively restrict the education provision for these children until it mimics a school environment.

There should be no register of home educated children.

Children who are being educated under s.19 arrangements should ALREADY be on a register - either from the school or tuition service that is being provided. As the LA are responsible for providing such arrangements, of course the LA should be aware of who is receiving such services.

There should be no register of home educated children.

Flexi-schooled children will already be registered at the school which they attend.

There should be no register of home educated children.

IF there is a welfare concern, of course information should be shared between various other LAs and agencies. There is ALREADY a procedure in place that can be followed should it be required.

There should be no register of home educated children.

However, if such a register were to be created, of course the LA should be open to inspection from other bodies.

The only non-voluntary registers are birth and death (which are both understandable) and a register of criminals. Home educators are not criminals, and should not be forced to join a register because they have opted to take full responsibility for their children's education, rather than outsourcing it.

Question 32:

Do you agree that parents should be under a legal duty to provide information to their local authority about a child who is within scope of the proposed registration requirement?

To which I answered ‘No’, and it opened up questions 38-42.

Parents should not be forced to provide any information about their children.

Parents should not be forced to provide any information about their children. Parents are legally responsible for the education of their children. If this legal responsibility were removed from parents, there would be many cases of schools being sued because they have not fulfilled their duty of keeping children safe, nor educating them adequately.

Question 43:

43. Do you agree with the general approach that the proprietors of settings providing education in school hours - other than specified types of school - should be under a duty to supply information to local authorities about any child in scope of the proposed register?

I think this means that if a club or service provider, runs during school hours, it will be forced to inform the LA about any children that it caters for.  I said “No”, and got Qs 49-53 – some of which specifically include non-registered HE groups...

Unless their is a welfare concern about a specific child, service providers should NOT be passing on details to the LA about any children.

Q54: Do you agree that there should be a statutory duty on local authorities to provide support on request to parents who educate children at home, of a type to be prescribed by the Secretary of State in regulations?

I found it difficult to understand what was meant by this question:
Does this mean (a) IF a parent requests it, the LA must provide support, OR (b) the LA has been requested by the government to contact all HErs to offer support? My answer to each of these questions would be different.

I’ve decided to assume it means (a) but will clarify exactly what I mean in each text box on the next set of questions.

Assuming this is at the parent's request, so is optional.

There should be no register of home educated children.

LAs should share information about groups, websites and online-groups as requested by local home educators. They should not claim that their legal team has said they are not allowed to give information where they have the express permission from the organisers of said groups.

These should be available to all, and not determined on whether the family is on a register or not.

Q71:

Do you have any comments on the conclusions set out in the published equalities log, UNCRC analysis and family test?

Where are the links to these published documents to enable the question to be answered from an informed position? By not providing easy access to the documents, you could claim that many people have no concerns about the conclusions drawn, when in fact they have been unable to answer due to not knowing what the documents say.

There seems to be multiple ‘Equalities Log’s and I couldn’t find one relevant to this topic.

I don’t know what specific UNCRC analysis is being referred to, but alink to the UNCRC pdf can be found here. 

Here’s a link tothe Family Test. 

There should be no register of home educated children.

Access for support should be entirely voluntary and at the request of the parent. Should support be requested, then LAs should do everything in their power to help the family and child, whatever support is required, including, but not limited to, helping the family to get in touch with other home educating families and local peer-run support groups.

Some home educators want financial support for accessing exams, and enabling home educated students to take exams as private candidates. Again, this should be optional, at the request of the parent, but should it be requested then it should be implemented.

So this is an overview of some of my responses to the consultation. I am not claiming they are perfect answers, but give a guide as to how I answered the questions.
Please don't simply Copy & Paste my answers. However, you are more than welcome to use anything I've written in this post as the basis of your response and to change it into your own words.

Response to Elective Home Education Guidance - April 2019

Today, the government has released it's new Elective Home Education Guidance, and it is shocking.
(For comparison, here are the old guidelines that were perfectly adequate and suitable for what they were intended.)

These are my raw thoughts, as I read through the document for the first time, but given the consultation that took place last year, I am not expecting it to be good.

I've only just started reading the introduction and have already come across this sentence:

Educating children at home works well when it is a positive, informed and dedicated choice. However, the past few years have seen a very significant increase in the number of children being educated at home, and there is considerable evidence that many of these children are not receiving a suitable education.

Where is the evidence for this?  Where is the proof?  It's a disappointing, though not surprising, start to a document that shows it will be full of prejudice.

Still in the introduction:

Where necessary - because it is evident that a child is simply not receiving suitable education at home and the use of school attendance powers is not achieving a change in that situation - the local authority should be ready to use its safeguarding powers as explained in this guidance

So basically, if a child is not receiving a suitable education, then the LA should make up some safeguarding concern in order to get the change it wants?

Section 2.4 has take the place of the old 3.13 - a list of 'nots': things that are not required for home education.  Unfortunately, this list has not only decreased, but significantly changed in some areas.

Approaches such as autonomous and self-directed learning, undertaken with a very flexible stance as to when education is taking place, should be judged by outcomes, not on the basis that a different way of educating children must be wrong.

For approaches such as Unschooling, unless the LA is content to wait until the child is of school leaving age, how can the LA judge 'outcomes'? Or is the LA now saying that the child must keep up with school-aged peers?  How does that fit in with SEN?

Section 4.2 is all about the need for creating a register of home educators, even though that word isn't used:

Identification of children who have never attended school and may be home educated forms a significant element of fulfilling an authority’s statutory duty under s.436A of the Education Act 1996 - to make arrangements to enable the authority to establish, so far as it is possible to do so, the identities of children in its area who are not receiving a suitable education. The duty applies in relation to children of compulsory school age who are not on a school roll, and who are not receiving a suitable education otherwise than at school (for example, at home, or in alternative provision). Until a local authority is satisfied that a home-educated child is receiving a suitable full-time education, then a child being educated at home is potentially in scope of this duty. The department’s children missing education statutory guidance for local authorities applies. However, this should not be taken as implying that it is the responsibility of parents under s.436A to ‘prove’ that education at home is suitable. A proportionate approach needs to be taken. 

There are many, MANY, reasons why creating a register is not a good thing (too much of a rant for me to go into detail now) but it looks like that's the way the government wants us headed.   A register, then a prescriptive curriculum, then only school-at-home will be allowed.  DD1 and DD2 have never been to school, so are not 'known' to the LA.  They are, however, known to various specialist teachers (eg dance, gym etc), known to doctors, dentists, opticians, and many more people besides.  We don't want and don't need anything the LA can provide, and do not want to be on such a register.  Until schools can ensure that zero pupils are ever abused or leave school without basic qualification, then they have no right to interfere with my private life.  (Sorry for that mini rant, but you get the gist.)

Section 4.4:

Some local authorities already actively encourage referrals from doctors and hospitals of children whom there is reason to think may be home educated.

I don't know how this fits with a data protection or doctor:patient confidentiality?  My GP and nurses know that my girls are HE as they are often with me for appointments.  Do, I now need to hide them away so I don't get asked the inevitable "no school today?"?

NEVER mention "deschooling" to the LA.  Section 6.2:

"Some parents may go further and describe this period as being necessary for ‘deschooling’. There is no legal basis for such a position. Any statement along these linescould be an indication that the child is not being properly educated."

Deschooling is a really important part of home education.  It is important for the child that needs to work through school trauma, but it is also important for the parent as they learn that education is more than school, and a life set up for learning and natural curiosity means that education never stops.


Section 6.5 says:

"Parents are under no duty to respond to such enquiries, butif a parent does not respond, or responds without providing any information about thechild’s education, then it will normally be justifiable for the authority to conclude that thechild does not appear to be receiving suitable education and it should not hesitate to do 18so and take the necessary consequent steps"

And section 6.6 says:

" although arefusal to allow a visit can in some circumstances justify service of a notice unders.437(1).8"

So, home educators can no longer say no to a visit?  It doesn't specifically say, but I hope that a 'visit' at a neutral location (such as a library or cafe) is allowed, rather than having to be at home.  My involvement with Educational Freedom means I am aware of EHEOs using visits as subterfuge for judging parents and home conditions, resulting in SS involvement.


Section 6.12:

"On the other hand the information provided by parents shoulddemonstrate that the education actually being provided is suitable and address issuessuch as progression expected and (unless the home education has only just started)achieved. It should not be simply a statement of intent about what will be provided, or adescription of the pedagogical approach taken – this would not enable the authority toreach a legitimate conclusion that a suitable education is actually being provided. "

7.3:

" There is no proven correlation between home education and safeguarding risk. Insome serious cases of neglect or abuse in recent years, the child concerned has beenhome educated but that has not usually been a causative factor and the child hasnormally been known anyway to the relevant local authority. "

Actually, HE has NEVER been known to be a causative factor, but hey, why let facts get in the way...7.6:

"Although some cases will berelatively clear-cut (for example if a child was being provided with no education at all formonths)..."

How much do they truly understand and accept unschooling?7.9:

"Such enquiries may yield enough information. If they do not, and in particularbecause the parents refuse access to the child then the authority has a number ofoptions available. It can apply to a court for a child assessment order"

This is in the section of safe-guarding, but we don't know how the LA will apply it.7.12:

"However, an ESO imposes a duty on parents to allow the supervisor(the authority) reasonable contact with the child,..."

Section 7.13:

" The use ofsuch an order is of course a last resort, and should only be necessary in a very smallminority of cases. But the key point for local authorities to bear in mind – and make clearto parents – is that this could be the end result of continued failure to provide suitableeducation and a continued obstruction of an authority’s efforts to ensure that the childreceives suitable education."

8.1:

"It can, ofcourse, be the case that a local authority has no knowledge of a child’s specialeducational needs if the family has not sought assessment or support. However, localauthorities have a duty under s.22 of the Children and Families Act 2014 to try to identifyall children in their areas who have SEN. This includes home-educated children. "

8.3:

" Some parents educate, or attempt to educate, children at home because ofdissatisfaction with local SEN provision. However, educating at home a child who hasspecial needs is often more difficult than for other children"

**Attempt** to educate? Prejudice much!

 Look - Something positive!!!! See, I'm not biased and only reporting the bad things, lol. 8.10:

"When a home-educated child’s EHC plan names a school, some local authoritiesinstruct the school to add the child’s name to its admission register without the parent’sagreement, with the result that the parent is committing an offence if the child does notattend the school. It is not lawful for a school to do this, and local authorities shouldensure that both schools and their own staff know that. "

9.4e tries to soften the bit about outcomes...

"e. although it may well be a good starting point in assessing suitability to assesswhether the curriculum and teaching have produced attainment in line with thenational norms for children’ of the same age, it must be borne in mind that the s.7requirement is that the education is suitable to the child’s ability and aptitude. If achild’s ability is significantly above or below what might be regarded as ‘average’then allowances must be made for that; and similarly the home education maylegitimately cater specifically for particular aptitudes which a child has, even if thatmeans reducing other content; "

9.4f:

"f. factors such as very marked isolation from a child’s peers can indicate possibleunsuitability. Suitable education is not simply a matter of academic learning butshould also involve socialisation;"

Because all He kids are kept locked under the stairs... :

Beware if you don't live in a spacious house... :(    9.4g:

"g. any assessment of suitability should take into account the environment in whichhome education is being provided. Most obviously, home accommodation which isnoisy and/or cramped is likely to make it very difficult for a child to learn and makesatisfactory progress"

Unlike overcrowded classrooms, which are known to be quiet and spacious...

 9.7:

"9.7 An efficient education, within the meaning of s.7, is one which achieves what it setsout to achieve. It is important this concept is not confused with suitability. A whollyunsuitable education can be efficiently delivered – but would still be unsuitable."

Sections 9.8 and 9.9 discuss what it means to be full time.

9.9:

"Despite this greater flexibility inherent in home education, local authorities should beenabled by parents to assess the overall time devoted to home education of a child onthe basis of the number of hours per week, and weeks per year so that this informationcan be set alongside that relating to suitability to ensure that the home education meetsthe requirements of section 7. "

Beware if you admit to learning alongside your kids...  10.1:

If information and views provided by the child castdoubt on whether the education provided is actually suitable in terms of the s.7 criteria(for example, the child indicates that the parent is not providing education suitable to hisor her age because the parent does not sufficiently understand the subjects in question)

 Also 10.1 - I wonder if they ask schooled kids the same thing, or suggest alternatives to their parents..?

" Nonetheless, if it is clearto the local authority that a child does not wish to be educated at home although theeducation provided meets the s.7 requirement and there are no safeguarding concerns, itshould seek to discuss the reasons for this with the parents and encourage them toconsider whether home education is ultimately likely to be successful if their child isunhappy to be educated in this way. "

On a personal point, section 10.12 is about tutors and DBS. The guidelines do not make clear that self-employed tutors can only get a Basic DBS, rather than an enhanced one.

Section 10:15 seems to contradict some of the other points they've made:

"10.15 Children learn in different ways and at different times and speeds. It should beappreciated that parents and their children may require a period of adjustment beforefinding their preferred mode of learning and that families may change their approach overtime. Parents are not required to have any qualifications or training to provide theirchildren with a suitable education. It should be noted that parents from all educational,social, linguistic, religious and ethnic backgrounds successfully educate children outsidethe school setting and these factors should not in themselves raise a concern about thesuitability of the education being provided." 

Overall, these guidelines are disappointing.  As a home educating family, we can expect more disruption and interference to our daily lives.  The LA does not have enough budget as it is, yet is expected to do a whole lot more work, not least contacting families such as mine that do not want any of their "help".

Weekly Update No13

From last Monday to today, I have lost half a kilo (a pound); but actually I got down to my lowest weight for 100 days! (Yes, by weighing myself daily, I can work out random stats like that.)

Drinking one or two smoothies a day, followed by a proper dinner, has been working really well for me. My evening meals have included Egg-whitepizza, omelette, fajitas (in lettuce cups rather than wraps). Unfortunately, I ate too much over the weekend.

Sunday was Mother’s Day (in the UK it is celebrated the 3^rd Sunday in Lent; whereas other places in the world such as the USA celebrate Mother’s Day on the 2^nd Sunday in May) and I wanted an Afternoon Tea. As I knew not to expect one, on the Saturday beforehand, I bought myself a platter of sandwiches, a selection of cakes, and scones with clotted cream to share with my girls. I ate too much of the wrong things, so wasn’t surprised when I put on weight the next morning.

On Mother’s Day itself, I had volunteered to do refreshments at my church (before I realised it was Mother’s Day) so didn’t get home until nearly 1pm. Despite being told that we’d be going out for lunch, my husband hadn’t booked anywhere… on a normal Sunday you need to book to get a table anywhere, let alone on Mothering Sunday! So I ate a scone, or 3…

In the evening, we ordered a takeaway. I shared starters with my husband, and ate half a portion of Salmon & Spinach, with [half] sauteed potatoes, carrots, green beans and broccoli. I ate far too much! I was in agony overnight with the stomach problems I get, so literally got zero sleep before 7:30am. Between 7:30-9:30am I was able to doze on and off, in between my alarms going off. When taking my girls to their Home Ed activities this morning, I have been sensible and got a taxi, rather than driving with no sleep. It wasn’t a surprise that my weight had gone up slightly, but as I said it has gone down overall from last Monday.

So this week, I am going to keep going with the smoothies and proper dinner, trying to be careful with portion sizes so that I don’t irritate my stomach any more.

What will people in the future think of us?

Surprisingly, this isn't another political post about Brexit (though I do wonder what what historians will think of us in the future...).  Today a friend shared a video on FB about how almond link is made:

On watching this, my immediate thought was what would people in the future think of this?  

Suppose there was an Earth-changing event, people were struggling to survive, and there were limited resources.  Maybe the internet* didn't work, but there were pockets of servers around the globe where fragments of information can still be sourced?  Maybe there was a retaliation against knowledge (some days it sure feels like that!), and all libraries and books were burned?  Suppose that the human population had decreased to such an extent that much knowledge was no longer in the human psyche.  People were struggling to grow crops, the world was vegan because we couldn't afford to grow meat, and someone came across this video about how to milk almonds...

What would they think of us?
Would they know that it is not real? That it is meant to be humorous? Will they try to breed almonds?

Or will they know it won't work, and assume that we're stupid? Perhaps blame this stupidity on the reason why the human race is near extinction?

I admit, I may have read too many dystopian and post-apocalyptic novels and watched too many movies, but still.  I do wonder sometimes what the future will think of us...

*If I have used "internet" wrong, and mean "www" or even some other term, please forgive me.  Just because I have an Engineering degree, doesn't mean my geekiness extends to all things computers.

The Best Green Smoothies on the Planet by Tracy Russell

After my weightloss kickstart recently, I have dug out my smoothie recipe book and am making delicious smoothies daily again.  This is a really good habit for me to be in, because they are delicious and filling, and easily transportable.

The Best Green Smoothies on the Planet by Tracy Russell was initially a collection that came as a spin-off from her blog and FB page, where she shared many recipes that she created or used as part of her own weightloss journey.  I have followed her recipes, and completed a virtual smoothie bootcamp in the past, so am glad to get back into the practice.

The blurb says:

IncredibleSmoothies.com founder Tracy Russell tried just about every fad diet and expensive “superfood” supplement out there, with negligible results. It wasn’t until she discovered green smoothies that she lost 40 pounds, lowered her cholesterol by 50 points, and started running marathons.

In The Best Green Smoothies on the Planet, Russell shares healthy, down-to-earth recipes made with unprocessed whole foods. Packed with fresh fruits and vegetables—particularly leafy greens—that you can find at your neighborhood grocery store or local farmers’ market, every recipe in this book contains nutrition information as well as options for substitutions and variations. Russell reveals optimal flavor pairings (which green goes best with which fruit and which fruits blend best together) and specific health benefits of key ingredients.

Focusing on the many positive effects of drinking green smoothies, including detox and cleansing, natural weight loss, and mood enhancement, Russell offers nutrient-rich recipes with flavorful, fun combinations such as:

Pineapple-Ginger
Chocolate-Peanut Butter
Mango-Avocado
Cherry-Pomegranate
Nectarine-Goji Berry

With 150 delicious green smoothie favorites (enough smoothies for five whole months!), The Best Green Smoothies on the Planet provides recipes that can accommodate and enhance any individual or family diet. Whether you’re a smoothie veteran or trying something new, these drinks will wow you—with both accessibility and incredible taste.

Over time, she has branched out to include other aspects of holistic health and mindfulness as seen on her new website Dave & Tracy.com.

So far, I have made a delicious Spiced Blueberry and Pear smoothie yesterday, and for lunch today I made Pineapple-Mango smoothie. They are thick, filling and vegan.  I can't wait until I make a Chocolate-Cherry smoothie - I love that combination!

Egg-white Pizza Recipe

I’ve seen egg-white pizza discussed on a few sites as well as part of the 2B Mindset. It is meant to be a tasty low-carb version of a pizza.

As I’m trying to only cook one meal in the evenings, one of our go-tos is wrap pizza (which is also lower carb than a standard pizza): put a wrap on a baking tray, add toppings and grill until the cheese melts. We like this because each of us can choose our own toppings, so we all eat everything, and it is not so filling that you feel stuffed afterwards.

So last night, instead of the wrap pizza, I made myself an egg-white pizza.

Half a cup of egg whites (I cheated and bought a carton of egg-whites, rather than separating them myself) whisked until fluffy. I also added in a pinch of garlic powder and onion salt into this base, just to give it a bit more flavour.

Then, spoon into a hot pan and wait for the base to cook.  I put a lid on the saucepan to encourage to top/middle to start to cook too.

Carefully turn the base of your pizza base over.

As the bottom of the pizza is cooking, spread with tomato sauce (I used pesto) and add your toppings on the top. In mine, I added Pepperami, mozzarella and a sprinkle of Italian herbs.

If you are using a frying pan that can be put under the grill that would probably be best, but I couldn’t do that, so I put a lid on the pan, so that the top would heat and cook. When the cheese melted, I dished it up.

I confess to not having a photo, of the pizza on my plate.  I had intended to take a photo when I had taken a few bites, but it was too yummy and I got distracted.

It was delicious. Much tastier than I was expecting it to be. And really filling too, without being bloating. I quickly ate it before going to Growth Group (my Bible study group), and I didn’t feel like eating more when I returned a few hours later.

The only things I would change are:

1. Add the basil leaves on top that I bought but forgot to use!

2. Serve it up with a large salad. As I was in a rush, I ate it as it was, but would be really good to eat with a salad so I can eat more slowly and savour every bite.

This will definitely be one to make again.

Ugly Me: My Life with Body Dysmorphia

Last night I watched Ugly Me: My Life with Body Dysmorphia a documentary on the BBC about how some people view their own bodies (it is currently available on iPlayer if anyone wants to watch it).

The write-up says:

Documentary exploring body dysmorphic disorder, a condition which causes people to believe they are extremely ugly. The film follows 29-year-old Liane and her boyfriend Mitch over a year as Liane starts therapy to try and conquer this crippling condition. Each week Liane meets Professor David Veale, one of the world's leading experts on BDD, who attempts to undo some of her deeply entrenched habits, often leading to uncomfortable and revealing realisations.

The documentary also hears from a range of people who are in recovery from BDD. Talking movingly about their own personal experiences helps illuminate Liane's journey and reveals more about this illness.

What I found interesting about this program, is that these people are patently not ugly.  Yet, they were vocalising my thoughts.  Is it not BDD if it is true?  I am fat and I am ugly.  I am not good at makeup, and as Liane says in the documentary, what's the point spending hours on your makeup when it makes no difference?  So, I don't.  I rarely wear makeup, because I feel like I look like a dog's dinner when I do.  At least this way, I haven't put in loads of effort to still look ugly.  I have papulopustular rosacea, which is largely controlled by antibiotics (compared to previously where I was continually asked if I had chicken pox or if I was contagious), but still have breakouts in spots and a red face.  And spots still look like spots, even when covered in foundation and concealer, the raised bumps are still visible and, in my mind, look worse than just admitting I'm covered in spots in the first place.

The other difference between me, and these people, is that I don't let it stop me doing anything (unless I'm getting swamped by my depression).  I am ugly, but I figure that other people can not look. I am fat, but I don't let it stop me (and I've never liked buying clothes anyway).  Depending on what I'm wearing (or whether I've been drinking, as to whether I'm concerned about it) I do feel self conscious, and if people start laughing I'm always convinced it's about me.  One of the reasons why I carry my kindle (or kindle phone app atm) is because I'd rather be alone by choice, than excluded.  If I'm upset or overwhelmed, I can stare at my book/phone pretending to read, rather than face up to the fact that people are talking about me or laughing at me.  If I pretend long enough that I'm fine, maybe it'll be true?

Growing up, I was always fat, and was bullied in primary school because of it.  At home, I was "the clever one" and my sister was "the pretty one"/"the sporty one" (none of these names did either of us any good).  And yes, my husband regularly tells me I'm beautiful etc and I have slowly come to believe that he truly believes that.  I don't doubt him at all.  He is, however, misguided.

So after all this, do I think I have BDD? No.  Firstly, it's true: I'm not pretty or beautiful in the slightest.  But also, it doesn't impact my life much or stop me doing stuff.  I mainly just thought the program was interesting because I assumed that everyone thinks these things about themselves.