Reform councils to cut SEN spending

@OneDeepReader yes, I judge people people who are happy to discriminate against other individuals. If you don’t like that, don’t judge others in the first place.

cannot afford to give every disabled child their optimum education

Children and young people with EHCPs are not entitled to an optimum education or the best education. Case law is very clear on that. They are, however, entitled to what is reasonably required.

Arguments around funding medication, QALYs etc. are far more complex than the argument about not funding education for disabled children if it costs above X amount. I have DC on a medication which was originally not prescribed because of the cost and really the arguments are not the same. And campaigning (often long, drawn out campaigns that are heart breaking for families and result in patients dying while waiting) can result in agreements being made.

But we’re not talking about £500k and actually the NHS funds hoards of things that are way more than EHCP packages. So again, why is that ok?

I can say with a high degree of confidence that if a child is requiring a 100k a year placement (or more!) Then the mutual benefit will be there. These super expensive placements are nearly always children who can not be placed anywhere else and will likely end up in/out the CJS for their entire lives unless they get the support they need.

They already do bring this argument into healthcare.
Some medicines literally do not get prescribed because they are prohibitively expensive: they work, but it is deemed that the benefit derived from using them isn't enough to outweigh their cost.

I'm not saying disabled children don't have a right to an education but if it was going to cost 500,000 per year would that be reasonable? Why is 100k reasonable if 500k is not? Where do you draw the line?

It cannot only be about the benefit to the child, sadly. Society is based on shared costs for mutual benefit.

Nobody ever wants to think about this stuff because yes it involves some really tough decisions but maybe we just cannot afford to give every disabled child their optimum education, just like the 8k spent on all the other state educated children does not deliver anything like an optimum education for many of them.

All this is the LibFems trying to scare reform voters

I am glad you have recognised that because for someone who doesn’t like others online judging you and making assumptions, you have done a good job of making assumptions and judging others on this thread.

Keep in mind as well that not every child has a EHCP due to autism. My child has one due to a complication from an illness leaving him physically disabled.

He has missed a lot of school because he spent 10 months in hospital so needs academic help in that regard but he has no behavioural issues and is academically capable.

A child on high rate care is in school (assuming full time - as of course many are not) for 14.5% of the time they are cared for. This works out at £16 in DLA.

Then you need to deduct all the extra costs of disability that are still incurred in school time eg incontinence pads bought by the parent, multiple sets of uniform bought by the parent, time attending meetings that parents of children without disabilities don't have to attend, all the times they are sent home with 'd and v' because of one soft movement, etc

I don't think that leaves much that can be reasonably expected to be handed over.

@OneDeepReader you have changed your tune. Earlier in the thread you were advocating for parents to pay someone to be with their DC instead of attending school. Ignoring the fact many families couldn’t afford to do that.

Not to mention what DLA covers.

For my son it is extra therapy, incontinence pads, adapted shoes so he can wear his braces and on and on.

Where would the money then come from to cover those expenses?

With the DLA we get for DS we're still, overall, £6k/yr worse off than if DH and I both worked full time on NMW.

well, and luckily you cannot stop a disabled child's education either. HTH.

As a SEND parent and a local authority worker, I'd prioritise education over pensions.

You can't just stop someone's specific pension scheme - the scheme they are in it set by their start date. And it's part of a renumeration package which compensates for lower salaries than in private sector (I could easily earn double working privately).
Tax Amazon more? They will just move abroad like Google did when we tried to tax them more - they moved to Ireland. 10% of a million is 100k. 40% of zero is.... zero. Much better to have the 100k than nothing!

There is a law of economics (can't remember the name) that when you tax more, there is a point when you actually end up with less revenue due to people moving abroad, businesses become less viable etc, and I think we are pretty close to that point. Also, taxing middle and higher earners more with no clear benefits for them in return, pushes people towards extremism - such as Reform, which is bad news for everyone. There is no more public money - more money for one public service means less for another.

so you do not wants cuts to education and you identified children with SEN as the culprit to bring these cuts about? you are fucking nuts!

I think most Reform voters want to have tented camps for refugees to concentrate them in one area so they don’t have to look at them in their towns. Possibly with a sign on the top extolling the virtues of work and the freedoms they afford. They would possibly have camps for SEN and other children who are polluting the life blood of dead old Blighty. They see what Trump is doing in the US and said to themselves, “He is doing such a great job for the working folk, let me have the little Trump in the UK”. They will get what they voted for and more and when it goes wrong blame it on poorly implemented Brexit or foreigners.

Just to add the social care and education funding are both from the LA just different pots...health comes from Children's Continuing Care

Lots of packages are joint funded so a proportion form health and a proportion from children's social care... for a young person with very complex needs for example who needed waking staff overnight at home this would probably look like a 50:50 Social Care and health split and then education funded separately. To the pp who said that people should be "looking after there own children" there are children with complex needs who need round the clock 1:1 care from someone trained to use their vital machines.... evidently that isn't something parents can do without help.