To not like the fact my child is grouped under the term “vulnerable”

[NiknicK]

So my 10 year old ds has autism and because he attends specialist school he is automatically classed as vulnerable. He is currently still attending his small autism specialist school but he’s doing so because school have made a place available to every child. I agreed for him to go because during the first lockdown he didn’t go at all and he struggled with the change of routine, didn’t give his older brother (18) the quiet time he needed to do his work etc and I was also working from home which was very difficult to do as my husband continued to work full time outside of the house and I had zero help.

I’m grateful that my ds can still attend school but I resent the fact that he is classed as vulnerable because of his Sen. Now don’t get me wrong there are some kids at my ds’s school who are vulnerable, very much so. Some have services involved due to CP issues, some families have broken down and need extra support, some (older secondary dc) have the youth offending team involved etc, but my son’s circumstances couldn’t be any further from this.

He has two loving parents, we both work, he has an older brother who looks out for him, we have permanent housing, he has his own bedroom and space to play. He has enough technology to do his school work, we have (pre covid) plenty of days out together, he’s fed and clothed well etc. A lot of kids aren’t lucky enough to have this and it’s awful. I’m not offended that they assume all Sen kids need extra help as most of these kids will need this help for the rest of their lives, what I am offended with however, is that my son is assumed to be in need when all of his needs are met.

Totally over thinking it

I have ds with autism, and I’m glad he’s seen as vulnerable. It means his circumstances are seen as important and worthy of continuing the support he needs. Because if he doesn’t, he’s vulnerable to falling behind significantly.

@Bluebirdcup Thank god you're in a country that is able to help support those kids in society who needs it.
How I wish this were true - our child has autism, a severe learning disability, a social worker and an EHCP. DC’s special school isn’t open for them because the school have decided that the government’s definition of vulnerable would mean they would have to take all their children as normal so they have redefined what vulnerable means but won’t tell us what the new definition is🤔

@funinthesun19

I have ds with autism, and I’m glad he’s seen as vulnerable. It means his circumstances are seen as important and worthy of continuing the support he needs. Because if he doesn’t, he’s vulnerable to falling behind significantly.

Exactly. My son is now at sixth form but he is vulnerable in many ways and could easily fall right behind beyond any mean of catching up x

I think you're getting hung up on what you think the vulnerable kids should be like. To you, vulnerable kids are kids being neglected or abused in some way, it sounds.

There are many ways to be vulnerable in relation to school closures, your son is vulnerable because school closures affect him more than his neurotypical peers, it will have more effect on his learning, behaviour, mental health. Another child may be vulnerable because there's no heat in their house, or because there's no one to notice a new bruise. Very different situations, but both vulnerable to school closures.

Just like we can all be vulnerable to covid in differnt ways, some people are more likely to die, some will have their mental health affected more by lockdown, some have jobs in hospitality and leisure etc all vulnerable to covid, in different ways.

I have a DS with autism. Our situation is very much like yours, stable home life, no poverty etc. He absolutely is vulnerable. It would be a disaster for him if for any reason I wasn't able to fight his corner and support him, whereas our NT child could have their needs met by any other adult family member.

I think YABU. I'm in the same position, my DS5 has some high functioning SEN that impacts his learning so this lockdown his school offered him to come in and we accepted. But I'm worried that the other class mums will be wondering why he's going in as they don't know he has SEN as it's not something that I openly disclose and it's not obvious without knowing him well. But he definitely can't learn at home so I'm glad he's going in and in that sense he is vulnerable.

"Vulnerable" doesn't mean deprived, in poverty, or in danger from their family. It means they are likely to suffer more harm from a period of not going to school than is reasonable to inflict on a child.

Children who are deprived, in poverty, or in danger from their family most certainly are vulnerable, but the category of vulnerable also includes those whose educational needs cannot be met at home. Those with additional educational needs who have an ECHP in place will certainly have needs that it isn't reasonable to expect you to deal with at home, especially not when you have other DC too. That does make your DS vulnerable but that really isn't a criticism or anything to feel ashamed about.

Personally I'm not 'offended' by the use of the term vulnerable - I found the assumptions that we would need particular services, and the implications of neglect in legal documents, and the fact that a refusal to see certain professionals could be seen as obstructive....all due to ds being under the umbrella term vulnerable/child in need, to be very difficult to deal with.

There are however many disabled adults who balk at being deemed vulnerable, for example disability rights campaigner Baroness Campbell Article.

There seems to be a consensus that YABU because it is just obvious that vulnerable includes disabled children, regardless of their social background.

However, I remember reading some quite nasty and misinformed comments online right after the lockdown was announced, about how certain parents were 'taking the piss' or 'cheating the system' by sending in their disabled child who is 'not really vulnerable' because they have no social worker/are not at risk of harm at home. So clearly the term vulnerable is vague enough for it to cause misunderstanding and in-fighting.

I'm not sure what would have been better, maybe something less loaded like 'children who meet special criteria'? It was all being decided in a short space of time, so I can forgive the wording not being perfect. I don't think YABU though.

I think you perhaps need to look up what the word vulnerable actually means OP as you seem to have a very poor understanding. I would say from the tone of your post that you think it is just neglected or abused children or perhaps children from less well off families that are classed as vulnerable.
A very narrow minded and short sighted view.

I agree with you i I would assume he is vulnerable due to poor home life

But he is in need. He is in need of the structure that comes with school. In need doesn't mean neglected, OP. Just that he needs some allowances made in order to continue to thrive. Like a school place.

He is academically vulnerable in that he finds homeschooling difficult and he would be negatively impacted by the loss of formal education.

I think you're taking it too personally, it isn't any reflection on you or your parenting, you're doing an amazing job.

There was a thread just a few days ago with someone unhappy she couldn’t get her child a place at school under the vulnerable category due to ASD diagnosis and almost all of the replies where saying a diagnosis doesn’t automatically make a child vulnerable it’s all about social work involvement etc. This thread is now saying the complete opposite!

My son is almost 16 and has autism. Requires full time care and was previously at SEN school (home ed for last few years) but I’ve never thought of him as vulnerable.

My son is autistic and isn't classed as vulnerable, he's been treated no different to my NT daughter throughout even though he's struggling with routine changes and anxiety massively. You are lucky the support is there for your son.

I think of vulnerable in this way. Are they capable of age appropriate activities outside the home? Can your DC go to a shop, play on their own in a nearby playground or walk to a relative's house without you worrying excessively? My GC is 15 and couldn't cope with playing in the playground. Not able to cross roads and could be bullied because of looking different. My GC, at a special school is vulnerable in the outside world.

Not a great term and also not great for children's self esteem, although it really encompasses anyone that needs extra support for whatever reason and most people would not only consider it as social/environmental vulnerability. Not sure what else they could call it though - just additional or extra needs maybe (even that sounds a bit judgemental).
Really though I would concentrate on the fact his needs are being catered for as there are plenty around who are lacking any extra support.

Aren't children who don't have access to a laptop being classed as vulnerable at the moment.

I think OP is reacting in the same way as many parents did in the first lockdown when teachers phoned them for a welfare check and they took offence as they assumed they thought it meant that they were abusing/neglecting their child in some way, as they assumed school would only phone if they were a safeguarding risk.

I’m in a very similar situation @NiknicK with both of my two in school presently because they have EHCPs. I think of them as being ‘vulnerable to change’ .

You are over thinking this. Some 80 year olds have had Covid, and been fine. They would still be classed as "vulnerable" because their age places them in that category.

The Government don't have time to study 67 million people at an individual level, to decide what exact category would be best to describe them. In the middle of a global pandemic no less!

Crikey!

Regina, for access to school during lockdown, having an EHCP means a child automatically qualifies as vulnerable - there are other ways a child can be deemed vulnerable because of SEN (school or council deeming them so, etc), but having a diagnosis does not in itself meet the criteria.

I’ve never thought of him as vulnerable
Being caught under a legal definition for the purpose of access to education does not change who a person is or what they're capable of - it's just a criterion so that everyone (schools, government, parents, support groups, etc) is on the same page as to who has what legal rights during a period where the law needs to be amended regularly to reflect updated Covid guidance.

I find it odd that you wouldn't regard someone who needs a full-time carer as vulnerable - if something happened to their carer, they would clearly struggle to live independently. My DC are in this position and when I am fighting for services for them, I highlight their vulnerability where relevant. Their disabilities aren't obvious and they have limited insight into their divergence and limited ability to articulate their own complex needs to others, so if they were left to do this independently, they would struggle greatly and would be unable to conform to NT expectations. It would prove distressing to all involved.

OP you are getting a hard time here, which is not really necessary, but you have posted in AIBU so is expected !

My DD is classed as vulnerable and last year when the first lockdown was announced I had the same exact thoughts as you - that she is not vulnerable, she has an EHCP so therefore is entitled to a school place because of that.

I hated the term for ages but have come to term with the blanket use of it and if it means my DD gets help, then so be it,

My DD is Autistic and her special school are only prioritising children who are safer at school, so my DD does not have a place.

I have signed the petition on the gov.uk website to prioritise special school staff to get vaccinated as they have to get so close to the children. petition.parliament.uk/petitions/566217

You know how your home life is, do not let a word upset you.

He is vulnerable. He isn’t vulnerable because of his family situation at all. You are clearly great parents. He is vulnerable because of his additional needs. This isn’t a statement about your parenting at all. Try to see it the way professionals will.

It is like the term “Elective C Section” - as my friend who had one put it “I didn’t elect to have it - it was the only choice I had!”

@NiknicK
You might be interested in this article on Special Needs Jungle, about the problems with the umbrella term 'child in need' and 'vulnerable' - particularly in the way it has been used politically in this pandemic to imply that vulnerable = at risk (and therefore should be at school for protection purposes). This last correlation is one of the reasons why we found it difficult to keep ds home due to his medical vulnerabilities! Imo, it is a term that neefs refining and rethinking - pandemic or not.
www.specialneedsjungle.com/it-is-a-mistake-to-assume-all-vulnerable-children-are-at-risk-of-harm/