By Mike Baker BBC education correspondent

It's not often that a domestic British education story makes news around the world.

But when a mother was sent to prison for failing to ensure her children turned up for school, the BBC's World Service regarded it as an issue that would interest, and maybe shock, a global audience.

The chances of the maximum sentence being used seemed slight, so we rather forgot about it

Similarly, cheque-book journalism does not often stray into the sphere of education news. More usually the big money offers for "exclusive" stories are confined to showbusiness, sport and serious crime.

But this week, when there was a possibility that Patricia Amos might be released on bail, there were tabloid journalists galore outside Holloway Prison waiting to buy her up and whisk her away in smart limousines so others could not get her story.

Tough talk

All this gave me pause to reflect. While busy reporting this story, had I fully appreciated the human impact of what was happening here?

Patricia Amos: Jailed for 60 days

The concept of imprisonment for the parents of persistent truants is something education correspondents have been writing about for some time.

Ever since former education secretary David Blunkett threatened to get tough on truancy there has been talk of tougher penalties for parents.

Then there was the legislation which increased the penalties to a maximum fine of �2,500 or a jail term of three months. It passed into law some 18 months ago.

Yet it all seemed rather academic with the chances of the maximum sentence being used seemingly slight. So we rather forgot about it.

Implications

Then magistrates in Banbury decided to send Patricia Amos to prison because her two teenage daughters were persistent truants. A theoretical issue had been made flesh.

A mother was separated from her children. She was in Holloway Prison. She could be staying inside for 60 days.

Just think about that for a moment.

These are terrible burdens to place on young teenagers

She is in jail not for something she did but, more unusually, for something she failed to do. You could even say she is in jail for something others (her daughters) had failed to do.

If she serves her full sentence she will be in prison until the school summer holidays. Her daughters will spend the last school term of the year, when examinations take place, without their mother at home.

Moreover, these teenage girls must live with the knowledge that their actions have put their mother in prison.

This is not just private grief. The story has received huge media coverage. The girls were identified. Even had they not been, everyone in their locality and school would have known it was them.

These are terrible burdens to place on young teenagers, particularly two girls who clearly have started life with many disadvantages.

Lack of information

We should be shocked by what has happened here, both to the mother and to the daughters. Deciding whether or not it is right, though, remains a tougher decision.

An obvious difficulty is that we do not have the full facts.

Oxfordshire education authority says it turned to the courts only as a "last resort". It had, after all, been working with the family for two years but all other measures had failed to work.

Nor do we know how Patricia Amos responded to any warnings she had been given about the risks of prison or how she behaved towards the court. It's understood she had already been subject to two previous parenting orders.

We do know, however, that the girls have been into school this week, apart from when they went to visit their mother in prison.

Shock value

They are being looked after by an adult sister. She said the girls had now realised what their truancy has caused and were going to attend school.

This adult sister also said of her mother: "She's devastated. She misses the kids. She's never been without them."

The government's frustration with truancy is also understandable

So, it is possible to argue that one effect has been to give the family a shock and to get the children back to school.

It may also have given a shock to the families of the 50,000 children who are out of school on each school day.

Maybe it has also strengthened the hand of parents, who can now threaten their children with something more than loss of pocket money - they could also see their parents sent to jail.

The government's frustration with truancy is also understandable. Ministers know it blights children's lives and stands in the way of a raising of school standards.

They also know that police "sweeps" of high streets and shopping centres during the school day have found that up to 80% of truants have been accompanied by an adult.

What can parents do?

But some nagging doubts remain.

To what extent was the mother able to force her daughters to turn up at school? The family says she did get them ready in the mornings but somewhere between home and school they "bunked off".

Considering how widespread truancy is, we could be seeing hundreds, even thousands, more parents going to prison

Can you force reluctant teenagers to turn up?

I have also been told that a charity involved with women in prison has spoken to her and discovered that one of the reasons the girls were not turning up was that they had no suitable shoes and were embarrassed to go into school.

I'm told this charity contacted the school's head teacher with an offer to provide �150 for new shoes and that this proposal was welcomed with delight.

What next?

It is quite possible - especially in an area like Banbury, where most families are comfortably off - that children from poorer homes will feel ashamed if they don't have the right clothes or shoes.

This may be a case of being over-sentimental. It is quite likely that educational welfare officers had considered such factors and maybe even offered help. We just don't know.

Whatever the underlying cause - poverty, lack of parental interest, failure to take truancy seriously, inability to control teenagers - this remains a shocking story.

Considering how widespread truancy is, we could be seeing hundreds, even thousands, more parents going to prison.

But there is also another possibility: How many education welfare officers will think twice before referring a case to the courts because of the risk of a jail sentence?