Reform councils to cut SEN spending

So basically you’re happy to leave the disabled to die. At least you have played your hand early

Where did I say disabled children don’t deserve an education? They are absolutely entitled to one, same as any other child. They go to school for free; again, like any other child.

But if that child happens to cost the local authority thousands in additional expenditure per month, I don’t feel it’s unreasonable or inappropriate to expect the parents to be contributing towards that bill.

my Sons medications aren’t free - should I pay for them?

Uh, yes… It’s your child? Who do you feel is responsible for paying for him?

That really does mean that many disabled children would not recieve an education at all.

So what your basically saying is disabled children don’t deserve an education.

my Sons medications aren’t free - should I pay for them?

his tube feeds are expensive - should I pay for them?

where do we stop?

To answer your question; I think, rightfully, standard education should be provided FOC by the state.

I think any additional, supplementary services (such as council provided transport or a 1:1 teaching assistant) should be paid for by the receiving family. These things aren’t free, and the cost has to be recouped from somewhere.

Many families of children with complex additional needs already have their work availability and family income restricted by the care needs of their children when not in school. Proposing that parents who are already struggling have to pay towards an education that other people's children can access for free is discriminatory.

As always with far right ideology, if reform ever got into power, they would start by removing all rights eg. ECHR and the Equality Act 2010, then they would be saying any women with genetic disease or disability should be sterilised as it costs the taxpayer too much money for their care needs. Sounds ridiculous now, until it happens very, very slowly and they start to convince the electorate it’s a great idea, as they already have a lot of people feeling willing to give up their rights as it is. Classic boiling frog.

I'll agree to that when adult children agree to contribute to their parents' pensions - the state pension is an unaffordable drain on the economy.

So do you think parents with SEN children have the same opportunities as the average person to just change their jobs and hours and make cut backs if they have care responsibilities for a disabled child, do you? Hmm, not thinking this one through, are you? As per usual, simple solutions for complex problems.

It’s unpopular for a reason.

And let’s not forget many parents of children with SEN are unable to work because of their children’s needs. Before getting my job I was out of work for 6 years to help support DS.

the only reason I can work now is because he has a proper system in place to support him

What does everyone else do if they’re not getting by on their current income - they increase their hours, change jobs or make cut backs in other areas of their expenditure.

Said by someone who clearly doesn’t have disabled DC.

I think that’s what many want. Out of sight out of mind.

So only children with wealthy parents are entitled to an education then?

i work as a TA, I would have to use my whole wage to pay for DS TA, let alone covering the rest of his package.

Even if it’s not a particularly high contribution, I think there should be some percentage covered by the parents, perhaps on a sliding scale.

What does everyone else do if they’re not getting by on their current income - they increase their hours, change jobs or make cut backs in other areas of their expenditure.

The default shouldn’t be “extra PIP payments” - it’s apparent that self reliance is heading straight out of the window.

Using what? What if they’re already struggling on their income? Do they then need to claim extra PIP payments? How does that solve the issue for the taxpayer, exactly? PIP would just have to increase.

Do you think parents of DC without SEN who are educated by the state should pay towards their DC’s education and transport (beyond paying tax)? Or is it just families with DC with SEN you discriminate against?

Parents could contribute towards the cost of SEN provision for their child, including TAs and taxis/transport to school?

That might help with the ever rising (and wholly unsustainable) cost.

Perhaps we should go back to the system in place when I was at school in the '60s.

Children with special needs went to special schools, where they were barely educated at all, and reached school leaving age with no hope of ever finding employment.

As there's not enough funding for educational psychologists etc anyway, if they then decide to make cuts, they will then hit the problem most councils have of parents appealing and taking their case to judicial review and the statutory obligation to pay for private assessment when a local authority fails to meet time frames.

Friend and I were talking about this yesterday and saying that they would probably find that the cost of fighting all the judicial reviews would probably be greater than meeting the needs in the first place.

I used to work in local government and having loads of new councillors all at once was a nightmare. They always thought they had far more power than they actually do, and frequently wanted to start doing stuff they didn't have the power to do and stop doing stuff that was a statutory duty.

Some on this thread are conflating diagnosis and SEN. A child or young person doesn’t require a diagnosis to be classed as having SEN, and the definition of SEN is the same wherever in England you are. The definition is set out in section 20 of the Children and Families Act 2014.

Support in schools isn’t based on a diagnosis. Exam access arrangements don’t require a diagnosis either.

There hasn’t been such a huge increase in SEN compared to historical rates as some people like to claim. For example, the latest SEN statistics from 23/24 show there were 1,673,205 children and young people with SEN. The official government statistics from January 2014 show 1.49 million pupils had SEN. Down from 1.55 million in 2013.

Even the Guardian

Oh yes, that well known accurate source of information… The sharp elbowed parents seeking the golden ticket rhetoric suits the narrative of some in politics and clearly some on this thread. Parents advocating and enforcing their DC’s legal rights are not to blame for the state of the SEN system. If services didn’t act unlawfully as often as they do, parents wouldn’t have to enforce their DC’s rights. Rather than blaming some parents, all parents should be supported to know the law, advocate and enforce their DC’s rights.

Thankfully, Reform can’t (at the moment) change the law so they can say whatever they want.

It's a very strange measure to pick in a way.

It tells us nothing about the fact that a hypermobile student with down syndrome learned to walk without pain due to the in-school OT / physio, or the pre-verbal child that gradually edged unto verbal enough to cover thier basic needs, or the child that learned emotional regulation and could now work in a cafe as a result.

what an ignorant post. There are still many skills to learn for them which will make a huge difference to their lives - and the amount of support they need. Many so not only not work but need social care support/supported living arrangements. Many college courses for those with more complex needs cover essential life skills. It will absolutely make a big difference to the support (and the cost of that) needed many years down the road.

Well when you post inflammatory and quite ignorant posts you get the responses you get. 🤷‍♀️

If the electorate chooses to vote in a far right party like Reform, then it is only to be expected that there will be vulnerable people in our society who will suffer as a result of that choice.

Sadly, this is the downside of democracy, and most people will only really start to care when the fuckers start coming for them or their loved ones.