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.

@hiredandsqueak it is lovely to hear DD is enjoying learning.

@Kendodd not being academic &/or not sitting exams isn’t the same as not having/needing an education, though.

@ThisOldThang if staff could be shared, they would be.

There are some DC with needs complex enough to have 3:1 or 4:1 and all staff busy at once. DS1 has EOTAS/EOTIS and has 2:1 at all times with 3:1 sometimes. Staff can’t be shared. For his safety, his carers’ safety, the safety of anyone else around and to ensure progress is made and the provision be needs is delivered.

In your example, if there are 8 children who need 1:1 most of the time but 4:1 sometimes but you only have 12 staff, what happens if child A needs to leave the classroom to go outside to regulate, child B needs changing, child C then needs to also leave the classroom to go to the sensory room to regulate, child D needs to go to work 1:1 with the OT, child E needs medical attention… You can’t rely on being able to share staff.

"For example, a class contains 8 children that all require 4:1 ratios, surely 8x 1on1 + 4x backup = 12 staff would be adequate?"

You would not put 8 children requiring 4:1 in the same classroom.

I agree that to much is placed on the importance of exams but children still had an education those, that left school with no qualifications back in day could still read and write and do basic maths they were not denied an education like this poster is suggesting.

Ok so put 4 children in two neighbouring classrooms.

Saying you need 32 staff just in case all children simultaneously require 4 staff at the same time seems ridiculous and surely an area where sensible and safe cost savings can be made.

As your initial example was about “kicking off,” if it does “kick off” you really would need all those staff.

Our son for example is 1:1 when he’s sat still doing nothing - which is rare. 2:1 if he just needs redirection. For restraint…. 3, 4? Depends who was trying.

When anyone in his vicinity goes into crisis (and needs their staff), he also goes into crisis (which would mean 3/4 staff), so on and so forth.

If those staff aren’t available, or are coming from a different room, or are running across the school to respond to that situation - someone’s getting hurt in the meantime. It’s actually the very opposite of sensible.

The number of children on 4:1 staffing is absolutely miniscule. If they are on 4:1 staffing their needs are extreme and they probably can't share space with other children for most of the day. I don't think you understand the realities of what caring for these children involves or looks like.

Entomology is the study of insects...

Being "put on the SEN register" does not "open up opportunities later". What opportunities?!

On the subject of ratios, I have from 20 to 32 students in my secondary school classes. That ratio is ok because they are all perfectly safe getting into and out of the classroom and can (mostly, most of the time) access the curriculum.

However, we have for example a disabled student who needed 1-1 at all lesson changeover times and break times, to keep them physically safe and to make sure a wheelchair is accessible as needed (no space to leave it in room or corridor). This was not always the same member of staff because staff also need the loo, lunch and get ill occasionally. So that required 2 people most days even though the student was perfectly able to access the curriculum cognitively.

Not a popular view but very true.

You keep claiming my friend was not bullied. Yes the comments were removed at my request on behalf of her. MNHQ.

• Disagreement is allowed: MNHQ will not delete a thread just because the OP (Original Poster) is getting answers they do not like.
• Reasons for removal: MNHQ will remove posts or threads if they break their guidelines, which include:
• Personal attacks/rudeness.
• Content that is illegal, racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, or genuinely "grim".
• Breaching personal privacy/identifying details.
• Trolling or creating a thread solely to provoke a reaction.
• Requesting removal: If you want a thread removed, you must use the "report post" button. MNHQ will review it and, while they usually refuse to remove threads just because the OP is unhappy with the replies, they may take action if the thread has become abusive or if the OP is distressed and not returning.

The fact that MNHQ removed the thread clearly suggests the posts were becoming abusive and causing distress in other words bullying. My opinion is that those who deny bullying when there is evidence are condoning bullying. Therefore are implicated in the bullying. All it takes for evil to prevail is good men to do nothing.

Are you struggling with reading comprehension?
I said the law is developed from philosophy and how the law is interpreted and understood by the barrister, judge and other professionals shall depend on their interpretation of the law (they may not have delved into the foundations of their beliefs, they will still have them).

The structure of the CaFA 2014 legislation was under a coalition government of Conservative who have a Essentialism education philosophy and Liberal Democrat’s have a Progressivism and Liberalism two opposite educational philosophies. It was due to the coalition that two opposing philosophies were brought together and influenced the CaFA 2014 and the SEND CoP2015. These laws and legal arguments are founded on the philosophy of each political party. Labour’s education philosophy is Perennialism and idealism education philosophy. Which is why they are trying to change the SEND landscape. Again as I stated those arguing and influencing the interpretation of CaFA 2014 and SEND CoP will be influenced by their beliefs they found the basis of their arguments. This is why education has no set definition it is based on the philosophical beliefs of the administration and political party creating the legislation which will be based upon their philosophical views as humans.
It is not set in stone with one clear philosophy or definition which is why there is interpretation and debate of what is education and who should receive it.

I think DLA is something else that will need to be brought under control.

1 in 13 children are in receipt of it. Thats utter madness. If 1 in 13 children are so disabled they need benefits, then our workforce is in big trouble in 15 years (I think it already is).

The number of claimants has doubled in 10 years. And rises and rises

So what should they have?

An education could look like physical therapy provision to strength core muscles through play or animal therapy, learning about animal care, learning about values in a very practical way, engaging with the world with their hands, learning about textures, forces, physics etc in a way that is developmentally appropriate for them whilst allow them to build the core strength they need to survive.

An education could be learning how to take turns and wait, so that they can play with other children through therapy modules catered to the different stages of sustaining attention and emotional literacy.

An education could be learning to talk through music therapy, low tech and high tech AAC.

It could be learning life skills so they don't elope into a main road and get hit by a car, and they know how traffic lights work, bike lanes, zebra crossings and ramps.

What should the children that receive this do instead?

I’m talking about children who, sadly, have very little idea of what is going on. I don’t believe that an expensive education can be justified for those children. It’s unfortunate but realistic.

Thank you maybe it was a Freudian slip. I meant
etymology.

Well if it is this then it certainly shouldn’t cost the figures being quoted on this thread.

I agree though with PP, some children cannot benefit from an education and it’s a complete waste of time and money. Especially at those costs. It’s eye watering, and yes if something is a waste of money we shouldn’t be funding it. We are not a bottomless pit of cash.

No, I still don't quite understand what you're saying, can you be more specific about these children that don't know what's going on?

Yes to this. It’s disgraceful. Something radical will have to change, and I’m sure it will, as this is completely unsustainable.

How did we get to these levels of suggested disability when life IS easier than it has ever been in human history?!

Do you think the cost of care would be materially different than the cost of care that educates or trains?

I keep beating this drum but its not unusual for chikdren to be in a 'waste of money" education placement that costs less than the care package they age out into.

As I said, just because the ‘friend’s’ comments were withdrawn does not mean she was bullied.

If it was on the thread about if SEN caseworkers could be trusted, which I presume it was since you haven’t said it wasn’t when I mentioned that thread, the thread is still standing. The thread has not been deleted. Some comments were deleted and some withdrawn, including the ‘friend’s’ posts. MNHQ doesn’t only withdraw comments when they have broken talk guidelines - some are “This reply has been withdrawn We have taken this down at the poster's request.” rather than “This reply has been deleted Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.”

Are you struggling with reading comprehension?

No, but you apparently are. You can’t even remember what you have posted on this thread.

SEP does have a set definition.

"I’m talking about children who, sadly, have very little idea of what is going on. I don’t believe that an expensive education can be justified for those children. It’s unfortunate but realistic."

So which children are these?

People who think some DC cannot benefit from an education don’t understand the scope of what is considered education.

Well for most of human history if you were disabled you died, or were abused, some were even paid to be abused, and then there was the time where institutions got involved and families were convinced that their disabled loved ones would be cared for, and then they weren't really cared for, so they closed down.

Technology hasn't caught up or been administered in a way that universally makes the world more accessible, the world is getting busier, we have more people around, and disabled people continue to be disabled to everybody's surprise.

Deleting as duplicate

It really isn't. What use is a very expensive education to a child that may not make it to adulthood or a child that will never work because they can't. I understand that sounds harsh but it is the reality for some children. I also see no point in teaching Maths to NT children that struggle with basic Arithmetic or Spanish to those that struggle with their own language.
We all have to accept life is not a level playing field and not everyone can do everything. Life is not fair.