To ask you to explain SEND funding and bankrupt councils to me?

[Myanna]

I've read a few articles like this one:

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2026/feb/05/send-costs-bankrupt-english-local-authorities

But I don't understand why the cost of funding SEND is so high that it's going to potentially/actually make most councils insolvent.

It's not like provision is generous or easy to get, from what I've read (I don't have a child who is supported).

Were these kids previously just not supported in any way by the state and was it left to families to cope as best they could?
Are these kids who previously wouldn't have survived, but now do because of better medical care and therefore need a lot of help?
Is this private equity running enterprises and charging huge amounts to local authorities?
Is it just inflation and the cost of employing people?

I really don't know much about this at all but I'm sure many on here do, so I'd really welcome your knowledge.

But the taxis are all arriving with individual children in them so what's the difference if its parents cars with individual children in?

Glib statements like this absolutely don't help.

We all know that the reason we are in this mess is because there are unfunded legal obligations placed on councils. The law isn't some static concept. It changes with circumstance, practicality and public sentiment. This is an obvious area of the law that needs to change.

Your response is the equivalent of responding that the law allows adults to buy cigarettes on a thread debating a complete smoking ban. It doesn't really add to the debate. We all know what the law currently is.

I’ve read a number of EHCPs and they are so complex and demanding they seem virtually impossible to implement.

Ultimately until we find out why so many kids are anxious and unable to cope in an ordinary classroom environment, this will continue. Because it’s not children in wheelchairs or with Down’s syndrome that are driving this surge.

I’m all for primary schools reverting to being more ‘90s’ but despite what everyone says, I don’t think this would actually solve anything. I think the children would utterly rebel without fidget toys, screens, ‘movement breaks’, sensory rooms and all the other things we didn’t have back then that they seem reliant on now.

My personal feeling is this goes much deeper than school.

I wasn't saying the kids shouldn't go to school. I was just questioning the individual use of taxis, costing the council £500 a week, when non working parents, with no other children and with DLA money and a mobility car have no obligation to get their own kid to school.

Also, as I said, if I were the parents, I wouldn't drive the kid either. They have a right for the state to transport the kid to school so honestly, who would spend two hours a day doing it yourself? You just wouldn't. I'm saying that maybe in circumstances like this, with a mobility car, that right to state transport might be looked at.

My son has higher rate DLA but goes to mainstream with an EHCP and 2:1 support.

He is capable of mainstream school with the support he currently has in place. Taking that away from him with a 'specialist' at home simply because he has higher rate DLA would be a disaster.

I'm not saying all sessions would be run 1:1 at home. Parents could obviously take children to group sessions too, much like home education works generally. Sometimes it isn't practical to always have 1:1 tuition. The thing is if a child is currently being fund to the tune of £50k plus then it leaves a lot of scope to fund all kinds of things and still make a saving.

Before people jump on me calling me cruel and uncaring. We have to make the system work somehow and currently it simply isn't. Lots of children are getting no help or not enough help and councils are bankrupting themselves. National debt is astronomical and the tax burden is historically high. We have to do something! The most obvious place to look is families themselves who have much more of a vested interest in their own child than the general public has.

I worked for a council which 15 years ago started to outsource this.
So they cut the drivers, the vehicles, the mechanics and outsourced to taxis ‘as a saving’.
Except it wasn’t. The saving was based on a manager guessing how much the cost was, and then that cost has risen each year. All they looked at was one year and saving staff costs.
As well as cutting council jobs, paying into the local economy and paying their council tax.
The manager who made that saving will have gotten a pay rise for good job, that was replicated in many many departments- thats one of the reasons councils are going bankrupt.

I understand that you weren't suggesting this. I was simply building on the idea that parents could potentially be funded in some cases to do more.

Basically we have a care emergency with many vulnerable groups in our society, not just SEN children. There are an awful lot of legal obligations and not enough money and resources to meet them. We have to be practical and all of us can maybe expect to do more for our vulnerable family members. Just to be clear I have a disabled family member so I include myself in this. I also have elderly family members. I wouldn't be immune to this.

Yes, it is the severely disabled children who are suffering because the pot is getting smaller.

The pot is getting smaller because the definition of SEN has now widened to an unsustainable degree and more people are taking out of it.

The more people who are allowed to fish in the same pond does eventually mean that the pond will empty pretty quickly.

Yet you think its ok to deny disabled children their statutory right to an Education ,why is that ?

The ehcp we have isn't complex and demanding, it wouldn't be virtually impossible to implement. The la and schools have point blank refused to implement and have ignored it. They haven't put any provision in place whilst the child has been out of school.
The ehcp doesn't include fidget toys, screens, or sensory rooms.
The ehcp would have been cheaper than the tribunals, and judicial reviews.
The ehcp doesn't include travel, I would drive my child to the end of the earth if that was necessary, as it stands they are now unable to leave the house.

So we have a mobility car for my son i don't work but my dh and uses the car to get to work this is absolutely within the rules

I know it's 'within the rules' but I do find it a shocking use of public money.

Ime its mini buses not taxis and they all wait on the car park until 9 am and then its action stations

I am also confused when people say that it's because schools are now too regimented and pressured. For most of the history of school it was a place where the children sat in rows under the threat of physical punishment for not doing so. I accept that this routine and quiet might have been preferable for some types of autistic spectrum profiles, but in general school has never been more individually tailored and flexible than it is now.

Please read the rest of my quote about why it's far safer to transport children on transport ( mini buses )

I never stated I wanted to deny anyone an education. The state isn't the only entity that can deliver an education to a child and there are many ways to skin a cat. What if the legal responsibility for educating the child was placed on the parent? They were given a set amount of money that can't easily be altered and told there was a legal duty to meet their child's ECHP with it. Would that be fair? What if the cost of meeting it exceeded the amount of money available? This is the position the state finds itself in. Parents can just shrug and say the cost is the cost and talk about rights and laws but what would happen if the roles reversed and the state did the same? Something has to give

To be honest if the parents are recieving carers allowance and high rate DLA then I think there is an argument about whether some of these children can be best cared for at least some if the time at home with specialist coming into the home to deliver specific sessions. I wouldn't be opposed to parents getting extra help financially to do this as it would save the state a fortune and ultimately even if a parent is working they will never be paying the amount of tax needed to fund a place at one of these specialist schools. We either pay a lot of staff to do this work which is hugely expensive or fund the parents to do it

The thing is if a child is currently being fund to the tune of £50k plus then it leaves a lot of scope to fund all kinds of things and still make a saving.

Education otherwise than at/in school (EOTAS/EOTIS/C) is not the cheap option. It can be incredibly expensive. Far more than £50k. Every bit as expensive as independent SS and in some cases even more expensive. Parents cannot be compelled to facilitate education at home either. Parents aren’t responsible for the delivery of the EHCP and a blanket amount of money wouldn’t work.

Do you think parents of none disabled DC should be forced to educate DC at home - either electively or with the state making provision? How did that go down during Covid? Or is it only parents of disabled DC you think should take a higher level of responsibility for education?

DC don’t get “the best education money can buy that is tailored to them and exactly what they want” now. To think so misunderstands the current law. The law doesn’t entitle DC to the best possible education now. Only what is reasonably required to meet the SEN. Neither do DC get provision just because they want it.

I wonder if the increase in people getting EHCPs once in school is due to how inaccessible the education system is for many and the lack of flexibility. I know for a fact that our junior school are more flexible with my daughter on uniform and lateness due to the EHCP. They shouldn't need a piece of paper to compel uniform adjustments for example. There's more to her EHCP of course, but being forced into uncomfortable uniform or children told they have to eat all
their food when they really
struggle for one reason or another, doesn't make the school environment very accessible.

You are othering disabled children
You think its perfectly acceptable for them to have a couple of specialist sessions a week rather than a full time education.

Deleting as I'm sharing too much on here as there's simply no point.

A lot of laws would have to change to make that happen including discrimination laws unless you completely take away the right to a full time state education for all children.

"Its the individual taxis that are crippling the local councils budgets."

Almost all of the children at my son's independent special school travelled by taxi. This was because the school served a large area covering three counties, many children travelling for an hour. Even if you had several children living near each other they may not be compatible to share a vehicle with each other.

Yes i think that's probably more common for an independent specialist school
My son has always gone to an LA special school, and the vast majority travel by mini bus.

You haven't answered my question directly. If the obligation to educate fell on the parent with a set budget then would your attitude towards SEN education stay the same? Would you shame those parents that can't meet their obligations? What is so wrong with exploring families playing a greater role in caring for vulnerable people? Old and young. The current system isn't working for many but I feel like it's working for you so you would be loathe to change it.

I am in no way othering disabled children. If you are not disabled then your education has to be delivered using a very limited budget. The fact you might not be NT or have some additional needs won't even come into it unless you meet set thresholds. Every other child has a state education constrained by cost. If the parents feel that their child's needs aren't being met then they can either home school or pay to go private. If they home school then it realistically won't look the same as a FT school based education.

Have a look back to 2014 Children and Families Act c/o David Cameron.
This basically put local councils in an impossible position whereby their responsibility vastly outstripped resources.
Add to that much higher expectations of support from parents, closures of special schools and even if special schools are available many parents insist their child attends mainstream education with individual support, which is of course more expensive.
I also believe that some parents (the minority but still a significant number) prefer their child to have a diagnosis instead of accepting poor behaviour may not necessarily indicate a medical condition.