Scrapping ehcp 's for children in mainstream school

[elliejjtiny]

I can't do a link on my tablet but contact a family have said on their Facebook page about ehcp's being scrapped for children in mainstream school. Not sure if it happening or just being discussed.

I have 2 dc in mainstream school with an ehcp. Dc4 has learning disabilities and is thriving with support. Dc5 has autism and is emotionally like a toddler at age 11. He wouldn't be safe at school without his ehcp. There are loads of children who are like them in mainstream school who would have been in special needs school when I was young.

But who will be after that I wonder maybe in middle class workers?

They're already being shafted don't worry!

I saw a news article floating this as a possibility but it's insane. Additional Needs aren't a binary status of either needing a Special School place or just being fine in mainstream without any adjustments, nor is it remotely viable to expect mainstream schools to decide for themselves which pupils need which kinds of moderate additional support. Like @BestZebbie says, if anything EHCPs are more important for a child who can manage in a mainstream school if the right support and adjustments are in place.

It is being discussed apparently by the Government. Was posted in Special Needs Jungle from an article in Schools Week

thats why it was originally designed- I was a senco and advisor when the new code of practice was being written.

Absolutely this. I read the EHCPs for the children in my class and have no clue at all how on earth I’m supposed to do all of those things G’s for one child in a class of 30+. I have no time, no resources and no support.

How would it help if the children were there but without an EHCP?

Most EHCPs I have read talk about ‘a named adult’ to provide brain breaks and watch out for a child being overwhelmed etc. Parents read it and assume that the named adult is 1:1 support. Unless clearly specified as such I tell them to replace ‘named adult’ with ‘class teacher’ and see how the EHCP isn’t worth the paper it’s written on.

Children with SEND need to have their needs met and LAs need to be held to account for funding this. It’s expensive and there is no cheap way to do it.

However, a huge amount of money is lost (and made) through the current system. I am aware of lawyers and ed psychs getting anxious about losing their livelihoods should EHCPs be scrapped. I’ve also heard compelling arguments made through highlighting how specialist healthcare for chronic conditions does not involve patients having a legal entitlement to individually drawn up treatment plans and the NHS getting sued for breaches. People point out that the NHS would go bust if they weren’t able to manage their own budgets……which is evidenced through SEND budgets bankrupting LAs.

I am fully on the side of ensuring every child and young person’s SEND are met. I am on the side of ensuring the funding is there to do so. I also recognise that a lot of funding is directed in the wrong places with the EHCP system.

I’m not against them being replaced. The challenge is that they are being replaced at the same time as cuts are being made. If (and it’s a big if)money that is spent on litigation and compensating for lack of engagement and provision from health and social care, and if this can be redirected into SEND provision, this would be a good thing!

I work with teacher trainees and there is a huge amount of training in SEN compared with when I trained. I still don’t agree with scrapping EHCPs.

That’s correct - I was an advisory teacher when EHCPs were being introduced.

What I don’t understand is, it’s extremely difficult to get an EHCP and it’s quite a stringent with the criteria.

I agree more kids are being diagnosed with ASD/ADHD but that doesn’t mean they’ll meet the threshold for an EHCP.

A child with complex needs who is non verbal at 10 and has a severe learning disability with a IQ of below 50, will absolutely need a place in a specialist school without question and that’s what their EHCP will cover.

If they did get rid of the for children in mainstream, I wonder what demographic they are thinking of? I don’t believe they don’t know, though obviously they aren’t sharing it with the public yet. I’m thinking there could be a connection with PIP and those that don’t struggle academically but do socially, emotionally and behaviour wise.

I just hope they don’t turn around and say there is nothing available for these children moving forward, because that will benefit no one, teachers, kids and parents included

I think the point that many are missing (including the government) is that the education system is failing too many children, for various reasons. Yes, it’s failing children with EHCPs, but it’s also failing children without diagnosed SEN or EHCPs. The entire system needs an overhaul. Tweaking around the edges isn’t going to be enough.

There appears to be no real plan to solve the inherent problems in our education system. The government believed that the most pressing “problem” was the independent sector, which is used by many who have been failed by the state system and which, on the whole, serves children very well. They’ve attacked the one section of education which, generally, works very well. This is pushing children back into the already struggling state sector. That’s not going to help anyone.

Of course independent schooling works much better. State schools would be much better if they could be selective who they teach, have much smaller classes and more money. The teachers are the same in both sectors so of course the differences have a massive impact.

I agree Another.

The world has changed, childhood has changed and the education system needs an overhaul in line with this.

I would love to see an inclusive education system where every child is supported to make excellent progress, recognising that this looks different for different children. There is no way to do this on the cheap.

If it’s similar to the welfare cuts progress, which looks similar in terms of language and positioning, Labour will soft pitch roll with ‘not fit for purpose’ and ‘broken’ and Labour voters will back it.

Any criticism of Labour will be put down to scaremongering, speculation and the media and then cuts will be made. Opposed but they won’t listen at that point.

And now look at the welfare cuts threads, often including posters who said they won’t do this it’s Labour.

If state schools could focus on provision of education and not have to try and fill the holes in provision from mental health services and social services, that would be a big help too.

As a state school teacher I agree wholeheartedly. Seeing the current state of play in my school after 20+ years of teaching is heartbreaking. We can’t afford pencils let alone staffing.

I agree, which is why it’s totally non-sensical to introduce a policy which pushes children out of that sector into the already struggling state sector. We need to support the state sector more, not increase the pressure on it. There are now multiple state schools having to write to parents with plans of cost cutting (staff cuts/subject reduction/support for low income families removed etc) because of effective budget cuts caused by unfunded pay rises. I’m assuming this is going to have a huge impact on all children, especially those with EHCPs if schools are cutting support staff.

While I am vehemently against unfunded pay increases, I think it’s wrong to imply to parents that it is simply these that are causing support to be removed from children who need it. It will cause bad feeling between families and staff, all of which want the best for the children in their care. Schools need to pay their staff fairly and don’t have the money to retain quality staff and support all children.

And physical health services. Schools are being expected to actually carry out OT and speech therapy, for example, and monitor effects of ADHD meds.

I'm in the funny position of being an ex teacher, retrained as a SALT and also having a child with various SEN needs.

When I went into SALT it was made clear that if I worked in paediatrics - I would largely be reviewing kids for blocks of 6 sessions and setting tasks for schools and parents to do in the meantime... I went into working with adults! (I have a caseload of about 30 max, whereas those I qualified with who work in paeds have caseloads of 150+)

However in terms of monitoring effects of ADHD meds - that's kind of something that schools need to be on board with (we've just been through the titration process with DD2). Because of the nature and rationale behind prescribing them - largely to support kids to function at school (DD2 is very bright but has the focus of a particularly scatterbrained house brick at baseline), it's been incredibly hard for me and DH to sit in appointments and explain how the timed release meds have impacted DD during the school day - when we don't see her during those times of day, so we've NEEDED the school staff input to compare before/after and support us to get medication tweaked to the right levels. Thankfully DD2 is old enough and insightful enough to be able to tell the consultant that she feels it kick in during tutor group and feels it wear off during last period - but for younger kids it really is something that schools do need to be supportive of - and asking for a score out of 10 and possibly a 1 line comment about how she's focusing in lessons is something I do not feel is beyond the realms of reasonableness.

Some schools are amazing and will put things in place to help kids without needing to be pushed into it, but there are some bad apples out there who DO seek already to manage out the SEN kids and need a well-written EHCP for parents to have some leverage to remind them of what they should be doing to support. Needs funding as well - but getting rid of EHCPs would be a bad move in terms of these kids who can get along OK in mainstream with a bit of support, and for whom special ed isn't geared towards their level of need or ability - there's no way for example that DD2 would be catered for in any special school (independent or state) around here as a child who can hold level with her peers academically and just needs a little bit of time and some social skills support sometimes (she doesn't have an EHCP because, apart from having to move school once to move away from a school that were trying to push the SEN parents out intentionally, we've been very lucky to find schools happy and able to provide just that little bit of understanding without needing to go down that route). I've also been prepared to work with school to find solutions to issues that arose which could be as hassle-free as possible within a class of 30, and we've resourced equipment and solutions etc ourselves (half of the things she needed when younger like writing slopes are still kicking about her old primary as we said the school could keep them to save needing to finance for any other kid).

I don't think any of that's unreasonable and my own school does that for parents. If my own child were medicated for ADHD I'd expect them to be able to comment on that. It does demonstrate, though, how intertwined education and health are.

I advocated for the EHCP as I am aware that my child, being autistic, is at much higher risk of eating disorders, identity issues etc than the average child plus has a bunch of SEMH needs, despite being academically able. I didn't want to run into "but you never told us" down the line if/when in crisis. That was advice from a wise friend who went through a crisis and then had to get the EHCP.

Training and funding are key to providing equal access to education for all IME.

They’d need to find an alternative to the current system as schools will still need that additional funding

They are, it's called "inclusion". Much, much cheaper than offering proper support so needs less funding. So instead of up to 10K+ extra funding per child it will be few £00.