SEN funding isn't a bottomless money pit

[Sogfree]

I'll preface this by saying I really enjoy my job working in a SEN school. I care deeply for the children and families I work with.

I've had 4 different conversations this week with parents where they expect an excessive amount of additional resource to be allocated to their child. They expect this as, in their opinion, it's needed. I disagree with 3 of the 4 parents that this is needed.

All 4 of the parents are going to fight the decisions county have made. Their decision to fight will mean county spend more money arguing the challenge.

Services are already broken with the increase in need. Recruitment fails, as there aren't enough speech therapists/OTs/CAMHS practitioners etc to employ.

One parent demanding extra from one of these services means another child gets less.

One parent demanding a child goes to school X at £100k per year when a place at school Y at £30k is going to meet their needs means the child who needs the place at school X doesn't get it, and extra £70k per year is wasted. And the parent keeps their child out of school for 12-18 months whilst they fight for the place at school X.

That's the reality.

Every parent wants the world for their child. I understand that. But taxpayers can't afford to give every child the world.

AIBU - parents know their child best and we should fund what the parents say the child needs

YANBU - there's only so much money to go around and parents need to accept hard decisions have to be made without challenging them

OP is overly simplistic.
Basic human rights include the right to an education. For every child, not just the ones who are easy and cheap to educate.

In OP scenario it is likely that parents have been struggling for a long time and have been given professional advice that their child needs resources A, B and C but then the council documents come through saying they don't need C, they "would benefit from" B (which is unenforceable and will therefore never happen) and can have A at a quarter of the quantity that would make any difference, and is unlikely to be effective without B and C. Then they say school Y can meet those needs no problem. Parents know that only school X, where resources A B and C will be available as needed, will create an environment where their child can thrive.

Yes we are goong to fight.

Either the country stands by the principle that every child has a right to an education and puts sufficient money into the system to make it work, or be outright honest about it and admit you don't give a shit about whether disabled kids get an education because human rights shouldn't apply to the disabled. Which side are you on?

I completely agree, but the poster I was replying to was trying to catch me out.

So what are you suggesting if you think objectively and criticism thinking is off limits?

Agreed. The parents clearly proved their case. So they were right.

I’m not trying to “catch you out” I was trying to get to the crux of what you’re getting at.

I was adding and agreeing to what you said. I think it's the risk of using the quote feature.

If you really believe that is true of most parents of children with SEN, you are in the wrong job.

and unless they are very obvious cases, of course it will mean writing off some children.

My son has profound needs and I’m so glad that isn’t the attitude of those who care for him. He’s already defied the odds several times.

Either the country stands by the principle that every child has a right to an education and puts sufficient money into the system to make it work, or be outright honest about it and admit you don't give a shit about whether disabled kids get an education because human rights shouldn't apply to the disabled. Which side are you on?

And you said I'm overly simplistic @RareGoalsVerge 😉

There is literally no-one on this thread arguing for that. Comprehension skills on this board are really low sometimes.

I wouldn’t disagree with that.

What is it that means needs are met at your school and not mainstream schools? Is it the size, is it funding, is it that staff are happier, is it the freedom to do things differently? Both my children go to independent specialist schools with EHCPs and one is absolutely thriving. I wonder what it would take for that to be replicated in state schools. I think with earlier identification and provision to meet needs, a lot of children like mine would have needed less support, but I also wonder whether the fact that the schools are independent is why they succeed.

Many of us who can afford it quietly take our SEN kids out of state and into the Private system too. And yet we get berated for that. The smaller class sizes etc in private system has been a game changer for my DD. The state system is generally quite shit for SEN as per OPs post basically. We know our DC best.

I'm just actually sad that MN are allowing a thread full of misinformation to stand. We all have enough to deal with and this kind of bullshit from someone claiming to work in a special needs school is unnecessary. Though I'm not surprised this is how the "teachers" actually feel.

*Ime the people working with the children are barely qualified to work as potato peelers but somehow are able to work with the most vulnerable on society.

This is a neat little example of the attitude that so many, even in SEN education, sadly embody.

Children with SEND need more resources than "most children" in order to access education. This isn't a special extra gift that we should be very grateful for, and be doffing our cap left and right. Our children are entitled to an education, just like every other child in the UK. The accomodations and resources that they need in order to access that education are not a favour. Stop comparing our children to everyone else's and expecting a level of gratitude from us that you don't expect from the families of neurotypical children.

but you can see how in the past disabled children and adults were locked away with minimal opportunity and life. Inclusion costs and someone needs to pay for it

Actually exclusion costs much more, it’s just the cost isn’t on a balance sheet somewhere. It costs parents who can’t work because they need to care for their child 24/7, it costs the economy when families can’t access the community, it costs in higher divorce rates, significant mental illness, life long benefits not just for the child but the parents who are out of the workplace. It costs in residential care when the parents can’t access no longer cope. I guess all worth it though as long as a child doesn’t get anything more than anyone else.

I don’t receive any Universal Credit, but I know plenty of others do as they need to have their wages topped up so that they can live. Do I think the Individuals are grabby and shouldn’t be putting in claims? No I don’t.

Do I think big businesses should pay their staff more and stop expecting the govt to subsidise their work force? Yes.

Do you think our government is prudent and makes wise choices with regards to spending?

Op- you are engaging in divide and rule tactics, whilst probably claiming UC or some other benefit yourself. Please try and think critically and examine your biases. How much do you receive in state benefits?

Don’t hate the player, hate the game.

Given that the tribunal success rate is over 95% in favour of parents then it would suggest they are indeed better placed to make that judgement then some of the so called professionals they've had to battle against.

You’re misunderstanding what I’m saying entirely - I’m saying target the area of most benefit. Perhaps that’s toilet and basic life skills rather than literacy and maths.

It's really not a "winky" face emoji situation when telling people who were broken by their lives that their children don't deserve the funding they need.

I do wonder how much money would be saved by giving the right provision at the right time.

To paraphrase The In-betweeners the winky face is the mark of a cunt.

I work in a mainstream school, and I think there is plenty of taxpayers' money to help SEN kids. It's just being utilised wrong and not used early enough in a child's life. (This is not the fault of school staff)

I also think the secondary school system needs a shake-up to meet the needs of the in-betweeners who can meet academic expectations but wouldn't thrive in a large mainstream secondary and end up being homeschooled.

It bewilders me that people think they are infallible and that they know everything in medical terms. I've seen many cases where school/local authority experts have sworn blind that a child doesn't have a need, or won't achieve something, only to be proved wrong. Sometimes I suspect it is because they develop a sort of tunnel vision: they think along the lines of "This is what I was trained to do, this is what I do, this is what I have always done, it works OKish in most cases, therefore it must be right and anyone who says otherwise must be wrong".

Also you don't seem to accept that parents are perfectly realistic. After years of dealing with a disabled child since birth, they don't expect miracles. But when they are dealing with, say, a child in increasing pain or one who is losing mobility, they will happily take something that alleviates that pain, stops it getting worse, and slows down the loss of mobility even if it doesn't lead to the child walking, let alone running marathons.

I can see your point.

But I have a DC with ADHD/ autism who needs only very small adaptations. I found that school SEN were sceptical of his needs and treated me like an over anxious parent.

when he was finally diagnosed the psychiatrist said his hyperactivity and impulsivity were extremely high. He was also very obviously autistic.

All missed by teachers. So sometimes it’s worse than teachers think.