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.

I didn't say this is what should happen. I simply stated that you can change the law without falling foul of discrimination laws.

These days you need professional evidence,,I csnt comment what happened in the 80,s ( im.also early 50,s) regarding disability benefits ,but uts not as simple as people seem to think it is now.

and you think that is going to go well and not cost more money in the long run?

If my son can't attend mainstream school with his EHCP then he can no longer be in mainstream which means I would either have to fight for a special school if EHCP's would be accepted there still in which he very likely wouldn't get a place or more likely fight for an EOTAS package which will be far more expensive than attending mainstream with an EHCP.

When DDs started school around 25 years ago, and DD1 was always in special provision with children with ASD, the rule of thumb for incidence of ASD was 10:1 for boys to girls. I went to a workshop with Tony Attwood (a leading expert in Aspergers, as it was then) a few years later, he suspected the real incidence was 4:1.

There was an article in the Guardian yesterday, about the gender gap in diagnosis of girls with ASD:

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2026/feb/04/autism-women-men-diagnosis-childhood-adulthood?CMP=ShareiOSAppOther

A study in Sweden showed the real ratio by the age of 20 is 1:1; but girls are diagnosed later than boys and are less likely to get support under 10 in school. For instance, a girl’s special interest may be reading - that is just assumed to be a characteristic of girls, rather than it’s a special interest. Ditto, I knew a teenage girl, diagnosed with a special interest in make up. Most people wouldn’t think anything of that, would they?

So, that is one reason why rates of diagnosis of ASD is going up. As usual, it’s girls who have come off worse!

Incidentally, the report by the Institute of Fiscal Studies, mentioned by a pp, says that LAs can take 0.5% from the core education budget for SEN, not 5% as some pp have quoted.

As for £20k for the production of an EHC plan, where is the written evidence for this?

There are 6 children in our DC's class at their level. So I assume there are another 6 in the other Y4 class. And there will be in the other primary school in the area. So why not put those 24 kids in one class and teach at their level? Instead of teaching higher level skills they'll bit lucky to hit by the age of 12?

Would those teachers with a class of 24 100% SEN, (still being expected to teach the National Curriculum) get paid any more-that sounds like an incredibly difficult job.

My friend teaches at a special school, with 9 children in her class, totally geared up for their needs (sensory room, SaLT/OT sessions built in) not expected to follow the NC and has 4 other adults in there!

I don't think you'd get many takers for the class you are suggesting.

You imagine wrong.

As I said, 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. There is a reason LAs don’t like it at the moment - part of that is cost.

It isn’t the best option.

I can assure you that I never have and never will go by a different name on Mumsnet. I have never said anything that I’m ashamed of, and if I change my mind on any topic that’s certainly no reason to try to hide that I ever had a different opinion.

Well plenty do have a mobility car, highest rate DLA and still get individual taxis to school costing hundreds of pounds a week.

You can only have a motability car if you have highest rate DLA.

And I know multiple families, like myself, who would indeed facilitate school drop offs instead of taxis with simple workarounds, but if I have two children to get into the school in my street at 8.50am and no place in breakfast club then I cannot be dropping off 45 minutes away at 8.45am.

It's a Motability car, not a teleporter.

Just quoting myself to add that the same thing is happening in places like Alton Towers, where they have decided to withdraw most passes that allow people to not have to queue.

There are just too many people claiming them.

It's the same principle and it is only going to expand to other areas, leaving the the severely disabled worse off.

I do think that the ever widening definition of SEN will have to be narrowed if severely disabled people are not to end up missing out.

If the choice is between no SEN support in school or educate your child at home, most parents will still send their child to school. Think about what classrooms will be like and teacher retention.

An education for these children is essentisl no they are not going to learning trigonometry or reading Shakespeare or taking GCSE,s
They are being taught to communicate effectively, self care ,how to make a basic meal like a sandwich, toast etc, safety awareness so they don't just run into traffic .
Many many other basic life skills.

This is such an emotive subject and there isn't an easy/ straight forward answer but I feel like there is an over arching theme of blame the parents it's their problem let them solve it. That isn't fair. Yes there will be people who are exploring/ abusing the systems in place and yes there will be some.unengaged parents but actually a lot of parents of child with additional needs already do go above and beyond providing time/ support/ educating their children or simple trying to protect their basic rights.
For example I have a child who struggles some of or current struggles were caused by him.trying to be in mainstream primary without proper support.
We had to fight to get our child's needs reassessed for EHCP because their current plan didn't meet needs. We are still fighting to get it right.
Right now I don't work.because I need to be available for my child. I take them to their appointments. I make phone calls and chase what is happening to their EHCP.
I point out they aren't recieving a suitable education at present.
I sit with them to help them focus and engage with the limited online learning they have access to because it isn't really suitable for them but it's all we have right now.
I work on teaching my child skills to help with dysregulation and working on their anxiety. (I have had to self teach myself this stuff first because there are.no courses or support form this form parents in my area).
I do many other things where someone who doesn't have a child that struggles wouldn't have to do.
I don't have to do any where near as much as many families do.
To suggest that maybe families of these children need to take more responsibility shows how little the rest of the world sees of living with children with additional needs.
Also keep in mind for many parents in this system the reality is you go.to many meetings where you have to advocate for.your child whilst all you hear is what a problem they are or how there needs can't be supported or how maybe you could do more. How they cost too much. No one.wants to talk about your child's positives.
Add to that the general media promoting the idea your child is too expensive so maybe just don't.ask.for.things leaves people feeling less than.

As I said yes there is a funding crisis
Yes fixing this is the responsibility of more than one group of people it requires teachers to be better trained. It requires better funding, it requires the national curriculum to be overhauled it requires parents to play their part. It requires difficult conversations about social care and NHS services.

Yes there are people who abuse the systems in place and that needs to be addressed

But the narrative that funding crisis in education is the fault of children who need more support and their parents is simply trying to blame the easiest target. And creates more.division in society which ultimately will not help anyone.

It's not the severely disabled children that are suffering.
They are still getting the funding for specialist placements.

The children suffering are the in betweeners. The ones not managing in mainstream, not getting support and with no other options available

These aren't costing the LA anything as the LA aren't providing anything. This is costing the child and their family through. Years of educational neglect, years of unnecessary stress and trauma.
These are the children who a small amount of funding or a change to the ways schools work is the difference between them becoming functioning adults and never being able to work. This is the difference between the in most cases mother being able to work and not being able to work.

And this is the group that the new schools and wellbeing bill is targeting. Not to support, not to meet need but to further create stress and trauma. To bill remove even more responsibility from the LA to provide education. It will give the LA more power to force children to attend environments that are making the child ill. An environment that they won't even have to make accessible under new laws.

They talk about safeguarding but they are just trying to squash the one area they can get away with.
There would be public outcry if they were suggesting Removing feeding tubes, it expecting obviously disabled children to cross busy roads unsupported. Because it would be obvious they are just trying to reduce numbers. But force children with trauma into a school that is likely to leed to safe harm no one will bat an eye because the general public believes this group doesn't really exist because it's over diagnosis, in the parents head. The parent just wanting their child to have something extra, the child just needs to get on with it.

If labour take away EHCp’s for all bar the most ‘severely’ disabled, who is measuring that? By that I mean, there are different categories of school within the specialist umbrella (copied and pasted from my LA website)

“To meet the needs of children and young people with complex SEN, each school specialise in a particular area of SEN which broadly fall under these 4 areas:

• communication and interaction
• cognition and learning
• physical and/or sensory difficulties
• social, emotional and mental health difficulties.”

So where do you draw the line? For example of the children in my sons school, are all physically developmentally in line with expectations however have complex SEMh needs (or within that category anyway) and so are severely disabled within that category. My son is completely capable of learning but not in a large, noisy classroom in a busy school. He will be aggressive, physically violent and destroy anything he can get his hands on. He is in a setting where he is restrained when necessary, and it is necessary sometimes. Though, thanks to the highly specialised support he receives, much less and his emotional regulation is a working goal. His needs are disabling.

Compared to say a child who is in a wheelchair, peg fed and requires personal care. Also, severely disabled within that category and who also has needs who are disabling.

Neither child is less/more important but who is ‘severely’ disabled? Or are we just going to head back to, well you ‘look normal?’ I also assume people who are in favour of this will be completely happy when my son ruins their children’s education for 30 hours a week because he’s not severely disabled enough?

Now, I’m being a bit glib here but the point remains. It’s a slippery slope and where do we stop vilifying disabled children? I completely support SEND reform if it is child centred however it won’t be. What is needed is meaningful, structured and immediate investment into building more specialist schools across all categories, creating places for the most impacted children to receive an education, whatever that looks like in line with their needs and not rubbishing the highly skilled work as ‘babysitting’. That would allow council run minibuses, children to to go to school in their local (ish) areas, having specialist after school care so parents can go back to work, and through being maintained schools a hell of a lot cheaper than the independents we’re using.

None of that will happen and so we’ll keep blaming children/parents/schools anyone else whilst not positively implementing changes.

Yep.

I genuinely can't think of how I could support my disabled child more than I'm already doing. I have no career, no life and everything revolves around his needs, medication, therapy, appointments, meetings etc.

Our local reform council has gone down route some are suggesting on here and ordered 50 more minibuses to replace some taxis.
I admit when I saw the publicity with cllrs stood next to bright coloured buses it did jar with me as part of the move to smaller transport wasn’t just cost cutting in 90s, it was socially less acceptable to bus children with a disability around on mass from a dignity point of view. There used to be horrible slurs about disabled people on buses when I was younger.
They have just under 6000 Sen children to transport daily so even with 200 mini buses now it’s drop in ocean territory.
If a school is over an hour away I don’t see what alternative there is to a taxi. The man who takes us to airport at £120 return has a contract to take one child to school for deaf near there. It was 2 children in his cab but one aged out of the school. If there’s only one child needing specialist provision and no deaf provision in the county the authority have no choice legally.

Agreed and if your sons EHCP was taken away and he had to be taught at mainstream with no extra help other childrens education are also going to be affected, and thats not his fault becsuse his needs are not being met and it helps no one.

It's not the severely disabled children that are suffering.
They are still getting the funding for specialist placements.

This is simplistic. Many, many parents whose DC have very significant SEN are still forced to appeal to SENDIST in order to secure the provision their DC requires (be that via SS or otherwise). Many then have to enforce said provision time and again. Not to mention challenging things like transport decisions, social care decisions, continuing care funding decisions, DFGs…

There would be public outcry if they were suggesting Removing feeding tubes, it expecting obviously disabled children to cross busy roads unsupported.

You may not be aware but this is happening. I don’t see the public outcry. Some have to fight for transport. Many more have to fight for appropriate transport. Many have transport unlawfully removed, particularly post 16, sometimes in favour of independent travel training even when it is evidently inappropriate. Some parents have to fight tooth and nail for enteral feeding and then have to fight again for sufficient supplies.

In my LA its just normal mini buses that have won the contract that transport disabled children to schoo,l the LA schools at least whilst I can spot them because my son has been travelling on them for nearly 13 years ,I dont think the general public would notice them.

Some posters have touched on the age shift the other way to 25. That’s a massive change in funding obligations.
In past with more manual jobs some children would have been able to get work. Uncle could get you taken on at factory week you were 15, no forms to fill in and then pack boxes or production line work. I did factory work in 90s as a student and there were ladies who had been there years who couldn’t read and write and clearly had Sen but were able to work a production line.
There used to be a company called Remploy that had a big factory near us employing people with disabilities building furniture and all support facilities eg canteen, offices. My friend who had a physical disability worked there from leaving school until it closed down.

Instead of complaining about the problem of insufficient funding - can we think about how to get the funding because it’s clear to me that the people at the bottom can’t afford to pay more and the people at the top won’t - and they control what happens

we need a fundamental shift in our whole economic system - neoliberal right wing economics doesn’t work. Making the rich richer does not make the poor richer. It makes them poorer

so we ditch the economic model or we decide that these children lives are not worth anything to anyone but their parents. And every time I see a post about the hard up families on 100k o think of the disabled children who suffer as a result. And I think that actually they would rather these children had nothing so they can have that extra nice kitchen.

ok so I don’t earn 100k. Our family income has been come close. But I have never begrudged the taxes I pay.

Photo of minibuses

I remember remploy but. Even so they would have only been able to employ peoole with mild to moderate learning disabilities
Even very basic jobs require a degree of autonomy.

Personally I don't think it's people on 100k that are the problem. It's the people on 100 million that are the problem.

to an extent o do agree - those on more should pay more. But also I notice the habit of kicking the can up an income bracket

if the top 5% won’t pay, why should the top 4% ?