Religious freedom must be considered in the light of children's well-being
Will this year’s GCSE and A-Level examinations be rescheduled to accommodate fasting Muslim students during Ramadan?
As the Islamic calendar is a lunar one, Ramadan shifts slightly each year, meaning Muslims will be fasting from June to July this year. Pupils in England, Wales and Northern Ireland will sit GCSEs and A-levels between May 16 and June 29 this year.
The Joint Council for Qualifications, which represents exam boards, said it had held discussions with Muslim leaders about the timetabling of exams this summer, but a report in the Guardian late on Thursday suggested that there had been some misunderstandings.
The council said the timing of Ramadan had been considered in the same way as other events – such as the Queen’s diamond jubilee in June 2012 – and that the timetable was not open to change. I expect more details will emerge in due course.
What has interested me, however, is the response of some people who believe this is a good way of accommodating fasting students.
The potential rescheduling of exams is not as important to me as the fact that we are not talking about mature adults who can make an informed choice, but children upon whom there is no obligation to fast, as well as encouraging them at a very young age to fast as soon as possible.
That these are young children depriving themselves of food and water seems to go largely unsaid. If non-Muslim children were to deprive themselves of food and drink for nearly 20 hours each day for a month, I suspect the response would be different.
Last year, there was uproar when a headteacher of the Lion Academy Trust – which runs four schools in London – advised parents to tell their children not to fast as it could be harmful. Instead of support, the decision was criticised by certain Muslim groups, saying it was not the school’s place to interfere.
Brushing aside the ironic fact that some of these groups try to interfere in the lives of Muslims, when did it come to this? Instead of praising children and parents for showing so much devotion to their religion, better time and energy would be spent on schools and these ‘faith leaders’ – assuming they influence the people they claim to represent – on telling parents and the wider communities to encourage their children not to fast.
If headteachers are truly concerned over the ‘negative effects’ that a clash between Ramadan and exams could have, then they should follow the example of the aforementioned headteacher.
Coming from a Muslim background, I appreciate that sense of unity one feels during Ramadan, knowing your fellow Muslims are all fasting and feeling hungry and tired, and perhaps you will all share a meal together at sunset.
But this should not come at the expense of a child’s health and well-being. If they really wish to fast then they should make up for it when they do not have exams or when they are off school.
Schools should not be making too many concessions in the name of religion – who knows where this will lead to and what the next issue will be.
To reach hundreds of thousands of new readers we need to grow our donor base substantially.
That's why in 2024, we are seeking to generate 150 additional regular donors to support Left Foot Forward's work.
We still need another 117 people to donate to hit the target. You can help. Donate today.
No related posts.
47 Responses to “Should exams be rescheduled so Muslims can fast for Ramadan?”
JackieHolt
Monogamous marriage is not the bedrock of society if we survey all societies in history and across the world. So what you’re really saying is: monogamous marriage has been an institution in British society ever since the Romans arrived; which makes it seem less like society’s bedrock, and more like an attribute of Roman and Judeo-Christian society. That’s not to say it isn’t important, but it seems a bit of a leap to claim it as the ‘bedrock’, because we lived in social groups before the arrival of the Romans, we lived in social groups after their departure and we continue to live in social groups today, long after Christianity has left the stage and has been confined to whispering prompts from the wings.
You are of course free to believe whatever you like. The beauty of secular society is that many religions can co-exist together, provided they accept that in such a society laws must be derived from rational secular principles, rather than the edicts of any religion.
In secular society statements like “sodomy is actually a sin” are pretty preposterous outside of religion. Society isn’t interested in enforcing one religion’s edicts on the whole population, what you’d need to do is provide evidence that sodomy is detrimental to society and thereby convince people with a rational argument.
Ditto with divorce. We had the debate, no-one thinks divorce is a great wheeze, but on balance it was concluded as less harmful to society to allow divorce than to deny it.
BTW, I have a potential solution for low birthrates: any woman who has paid NI for 10 years earns the right to become a salaried mother (a state employee), starting on the national average wage for the first child and rising by £10K for every additional child for up to 3 children. Low birthrates are the result of state policy, not godlessness.
steroflex
I have lived in West Africa and seen the results of African family life in my school.
Divorce causes havoc among the children involved. Please take a look at Jeremy Kyle.
If you play in a sewer, you get ill.
Is that logical enough for you?
All over European Western world, mothers and fathers are not producing enough children. This leaves the way open to people who do. They are not all nice Liberal Free Thinkers…
PS Poland has just passed the law which you suggest – to the delight of the Catholics! And our policy on contraception and abortion are surely relevant to this conversation?
chizwoz
No, no public or state run event should ever be adjusted to fit in with ANYONE. You adjust to fit the state or you lose out on the advantages it gives you. Simple.
areopagius
Whether it’s popular or indeed right, to not make allowances would be to put many Muslim students at a disadvantage and to sacrifice so many students on a point of principle would seem more than a little vindictive.
Keith M
Well said Mike.