Today, I received a copy of a letter that my local MP sent to the education secretary, Ed Balls. This letter was prompted by my concerns about the Badman report, a review into home-education which was submitted in June and immediately accepted by Balls. The government may implement these recommendations by including them in the Queen's speech on 18 November.

My six-year-old daughter is educated by me, at home. I am not a home-education evangelist and neither do I have any problem with the concept of school, but I do know that home education works for us. Badman's recommendations would change what home education means to us – a positive and successful part of our family life – into an ongoing battle with the state. It would be compulsory for me to register with the local authority and a criminal offence for me not to. I would also have to apply to my local authority for approval which may, or may not, be granted. Even if granted, I would have to go through this process on an annual basis and, at any point the LEA could refuse my application and force my child into school. In terms of fostering an educational environment which feels secure for the child, it is hard to think how the government could be less helpful.

My greatest concern about Badman, though, is his suggestion throughout the report that being at home rather than with "professionals" means that the child is at a "greater risk of harm". He claims that home education is the perfect cover for child abuse, but provides no evidence to support this claim. The education officers who liaise with home-educators are trained teachers, not social workers, and so are not trained in the highly specialised field of child abuse. Under the new regulations though, they would have the legal right to enter my home and interview my child alone in a room to "check" for signs of abuse, not because of any good reason to suspect abuse is taking place, but simply because I have chosen to home educate. Will education officers also be going into schools and taking each child into a room by themselves to "check for signs of abuse"? No, because what the report implies is that if you send your child to a school, you are less likely to be a child abuser.

This report is a solution without a problem. As with so much legislation that the government has managed to get through parliament under the emotive banner of "child welfare", this proposed legislation peddles the idea that children can only be dealt with by professionals. More and more parents are choosing to home educate because the school system fails their children. There is widespread complaint among parents that children are tested too young and too often, teaching them only to pass tests so that civil servants can compile ultimately meaningless statistics. Only a fortnight ago a report was published by Robin Alexander and his team at Cambridge University which found that the primary school curriculum is too narrow and involves too much testing. Rather than taking on the challenge of addressing existing problems in a failing system run by overworked and pressured staff, Ed Balls is making a scapegoat of those who have chosen to work outside of that system, and blame them for noticing the government's educational failings. Of course, we all know that bad parents exist. But typically, the state tends to make the worst parent of all, and I don't need its kinds of lessons.