Nursery refused place aibu

[Honeyplease]

Saw a lovely nursery 2 weeks ago. Looking to start my 2yo son who is currently with a childminder. I mentioned that he had tried preschool but didnt get on with it too well (he is only just 2 and the preschool had mostly 3/4 year olds) I also mentioned that I suspect him to be neurodiverse but I wasn’t sure (no diagnosis or anything) he is developmentally on track he just has odd quips.

Was given a reg form, sent it back same day. Waited.. nothing. sent another email, and another.. tried calling. Left a voicemail. Basically 2 weeks of chasing. Nothing.

Today I finally received an email back from the owner.

“The problem I have in securing the place is we already have children coming through with significant needs and I'm concerned having spoken to our special educational needs coordinator that we won't have the capacity to give your son the the quality of care he deserves just like any other child.”

I am stunned! Aibu? surely they cannot do this.

Nothing the OP has said suggests this child has any needs requiring funding and councils are on the verge of going bankrupt all over the country. Perhaps we all need to calm down and think a little bit before encouraging the outlay of yet more public money?

This is correct - the funding nowhere near covers the cost of an additional staff member. It’s also only available (in my LA, at least) to children in receipt of 2 or 3 and 4 year funding. So 50% of kids, give or take (though, of course, that will change as more children become eligible). And, unlike EHCP funding, it is paid in arrears, often months after the nursery has funded the provision. I am still waiting for funding that has been approved by the LA be paid out from September. It’s utterly unsustainable.

And ultimately, why should I - as a nursery owner - be responsible for paying extra staff to meet the needs of children who cannot cope within normal ratios? Would a headteacher in a state school use part of their own salary to do so? Of course not - it’s a preposterous suggestion.

Parents need to step up and fund the shortfall in these situations, or apply for charity funding or petition the LA to pay what it actually costs and on time. Sorry, but they are YOUR kids, not mine. I have to put food on the table for my own kids. You are not entitled to take that off them.

WOW.

If your business model doesn’t work because you can’t include children with disabilities then perhaps you shouldn’t be running.

Take it up with the government not the poor parents who are already stretched to breaking point

Are you this rude in real life? I’m not surprised you have encountered problems if so.

Of course the business model doesn’t work. My LA pays a maximum of £2500 per term or £7500 per year for inclusion funding. Minimum wage from April is £11.44 per hour. That’s the equivalent of more than £21,000 per year, plus on costs. Could you make that work? If so, how?

It is the government that parents need to be angry with and not childcare settings. The government have spent years underfunding early years and pulling the wool over everyone's eyes. This new promise of 'free' hours for all is just another con. It is always the childcare settings that get the abuse and complaints when they cannot accommodate every child.

@Catsfrontbum please read the last few responses. As I said they can refuse if they think the setting isn't right for them. As can mainstream schools!

NewName24 · Yesterday 22:03What @BonnyBo said.It really isn't as black and white as some people are trying to make out.They can however apply to the LA for inclusion fundingWell yes, you can apply . That doesn't mean you will receive it.If you do receive it, it doesn't cover the costs of employing someone extra for the time the child is in.Even if you do decide to use some of the funds from the Nursery to add to the inclusion fund to employ someone, for the last couple of years it has been nigh on impossible to actually find someone to work those hours.There is a crisis in the Early Years sector and that is BEFORE the Government's totally not thought out plan to offer more "free" hours from April and then September. It is only when you try to find a place you begin to fnd out about some of the issues.this claps

It's absolutely not disability discrimination on the armchair diagnosis of a parent. Until the child has seen an actual professional with the qualifications and training to make a diagnosis, there is no discrimination at all.

If they felt it would take time away from the rest of the class or not be able to provide proper care, then it's the right decision.
They may have special needs kids already and need to provide proper care to them.

Discrimination isn’t against a label, it’s against needs.

By this logic a child in a wheelchair arriving in the uk with no prior access to healthcare would have no rights at all.

A disability is simply a long term physical or mental impairment that has a negative and substantial impact on day to day activities. If the impairment is undiagnosed for social reasons, or any other reason, it’s irrelevant when assessing if discrimination has taken place.

Discrimination isn’t against a label, it’s against needs. By this logic a child in a wheelchair arriving in the uk with no prior access to healthcare would have no rights at all. A disability is simply a long term physical or mental impairment that has a negative and substantial impact on day to day activities. If the impairment is undiagnosed for social reasons, or any other reason, it’s irrelevant when assessing if discrimination has taken place A parent thinking a two year old has quirks that may or may not mean that they are potentially ND does not fall into a category of anything you have just said.

If they demonstrate a long term impairment in day to day activities it does.
If they don’t it doesn’t.
Mum’s thought process is irrelevant

Until the child has seen an actual professional with the qualifications and training to make a diagnosis, there is no discrimination at all.

A diagnosis is not required in order to be protected by the Equality Act.

My LA pays a maximum of £2500 per term or £7500 per year for inclusion funding.

Wow.
If you get the Inclusion Funding in our LA, (and it is a big if) it is only £1000 per term...... £3000 per year.

So for those thinking Nurseries can just take on any child and even keep them safe, let alone support them well and give all the children in the setting a safe, fun, happy, challenging, exciting education by "applying for Inclusion funding from the LA" I'd quite like to hear how they think Nurseries can do that.

As for the preposterous suggestion that Nursery Owners should make a loss - actually use their own savings / deprive themselves of a salary - in order to take all children without any thought for their staff or other children's well being, you need to actually visit some of the Nurseries I could take you to and decide if you'd work there for free every day

(Obviously this has moved on from the OP's child, and is responding to the people shouting that all Nurseries should take in every child, regardless of need.)

A diagnosis is not required in order to be protected by the Equality Act A little more is needed than mum thinks her developmentally normal two year old child has a few quirks so is possibly ND to be protected by the equality act. The OP doesn't say anything other than she has a suspicion.

That’s not what the post I quoted said though. You posted ”Until the child has seen an actual professional with the qualifications and training to make a diagnosis, there is no discrimination at all.” Seeing a professional who can diagnose is not required to be covered by the Equality Act. And it can still be discrimination if the organisation thinks someone has a protected characteristic but actually doesn’t.

They can refuse, even with an EHCLP, if they can't meet his needs. This is one of the reasons that EHCPs are sent out to a number of schools before a place is confirmed.

In schools where I've worked, children with EHCPs have been refused if there are already multiple other children jn the class with EHCPs and to accept the new child would mean the needs of the other children in the class would be adversely affected.

With an EHCP, for none wholly independent settings the LA must name parental preference unless the LA can prove:
-The setting is unsuitable for the age, ability, aptitude or special educational needs (“SEN”) of the child or young person; or
-The attendance of the child or young person would be incompatible with the provision of efficient education for others; or
-The attendance of the child or young person would be incompatible with the efficient use of resources.
Unless the LA can prove the high bar for the above, which case law demonstrates is higher than an “adverse effect”, “impact on” or “prejudicial to”, the LA can and must name the school even if the school objects.

Yes thanks, my child is now 3 and developmentally is not on track for their age in several areas, they are being supported by SALT and has ongoing assessment with the paediatrician who at the moment, can’t say if it’s autism or a global delay, or what, it’s actually pretty insulting for someone to say “oh my 2 year old is on track in every way but I think he’s neurodiverse” because you know, you would know, and the HV and childminder/nurseries will know, and set your child on the track for the support they need. OP gets what they deserve tbh.

But if the needs don’t require additional support then most of the arguments as to why the nursery is right to say no don’t really stand up (beyond they can do what they like as a private business, which at best is legal but justifiable to moan about). If they do need additional support then inclusion funding feels like quite a good use of public money.

But then, I’m a parent of a preschool child with additional needs, and like the idea of being able to pay my mortgage and for her to be able access education. Both things that wouldn’t be considered radical if I had a typical child.

I hope at least some people read this thread and realise the absolute shit show that is early years support and education for families and kids with disabilities and SEN, because the majority view seems to be “fuck ‘em”.

I had a similar experience expect although they didn't flat it refuse a space but just had such a bad attitude after realising there could be additional needs in the future that I wouldn't have left my child with them after that.

You know, the obvious answer to this is for the government or local authorities to open more specialist SEN settings, where they pay staff and overheads directly. Unfortunately, the way things are going, there would be more demand for SEN places than mainstream and the country would go bankrupt.

you would know, and the HV and childminder/nurseries will know, and set your child on the track for the support they need.

The many who are not picked up until primary, secondary or even adulthood shows otherwise.

I’ll reiterate, her child at present does not have delays, she thinks something from “subtle quirks”, I’m sorry but subtle quirks wether they have a ND explanation or not are quite different from measurable developmental delays which are very noticeable and do require support.

and even in children with delays it’s still very much “watch and see” with some exceptions that the paediatrician can diagnose clearly ASD etc. there will be many children into adulthood that yes you are correct, will forever go without diagnosis because how they are outwardly affected treads the line, OP has shot herself in the foot, her own fault really for wanting to liken her child’s “quirks” to other with measurable developmental delays that need particular support, she might find her child suddenly plateaus and/or regresses, who knows, at which point it’s appropriate to start asking the questions.