SEND - children’s needs to be reassessed from year 6 2029?

[missbish]

Are they taking the piss? After the struggles parents have trying to secure support for their child, they’re then going to threaten to take it away once they’re due to go to secondary? Ds goes to secondary this year so I don’t think it will effect him but I am so angry for those it does effect.

Yoi really don’t like the idea of tax payer money going on vulnerable children, how is it any different to vulnerable adults ? I’m happy for my taxes to go towards vulnerable people if it’s helping them. Shame on you !

edited to add - ds has had extremely satisfying results since he’s been at his Sen school actually, I’m sure alot of parents with ehcps would agree.

Let’s see how much of it makes it into law. A screeching U-turn would not exactly be unprecedented from these clowns, what with those pesky backbenchers expecting a Labour government to do socialist stuff like supporting disabled children to have an education.

It’s getting boring now.

Smears and insults just won’t work any more.

The government has said it plans to invest an extra £4bn in children with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) in England over the next three years, including funding for schools and more specialist teachers.

its not especially relevant to the white paper and the consultation under discussion in that the government has already said that send will be centrally funded from 2028 so its not from general council funds.

I have no doubt they want to ensure costs don't spiral and money is well spent and thats a driver for change. Believe it or not, id like a better cheaper send system too!

but I cant even work out if you are pro the proposals because you believe they will reduce costs, or if you are against them because it doesnt go far enough and which bits you like or dont like.

Just that you think its all too expensive now.

If you feel insulted maybe it’s because deep down you know yabu - this is vulnerable children you’re talking about, have some respect for them and think how it might feel to be different.

I wouldn’t put it past them.

I’d be interested to see a projection of costs. The new ISPs will be legally enforced, but presumably the support will be more generic. The white paper also says:

independent special schools will be brought under a new regulatory regime to make sure they deliver the high-quality support set out in packages to a fair and reasonable price

So it looks like they’ll be legislating on how much they can charge and for what (at LAST!). I think this one will actually make the biggest difference.

I think this is a hint that only medical physical disability and severe learning difficulties will be entitled to specialist provision:

draft packages will be published later this year and designed with independent experts and parents, guiding provision in specialist places in mainstream and special schools – for example physical disability requiring personal care assistance or severe learning difficulty

I’m not engaging with the emotional blackmail any more. I’m here to discuss a new policy which has been announced today.

No, it isn’t. The law did not change today. No legal obligations have been reduced or removed by the publishing of the white paper. It is important all parents and professionals understand this. The current law still applies and can still be enforced. Many proposals in white papers do not go on to be included in legislation.

Even if they are, it will take years for it to come into force and then for the transition to be complete. Just like it took years for the switch to EHCPs from SSEN to happen.

The government has said their plans will mean spending more. They have also said they “expect the number of children and young people needing a Specialist Provision Package, and hence an EHCP to access support, will return to around today’s level by 2035.” So, not reducing numbers compared to now, especially when you consider it as a percentage since the birth rate if falling.

I think you’ve hugely misunderstood the entire exercise.

It didn’t
mainly because ( we believe) the local council decided he should go to a different school. We disagreed, with very good reason and found a school that fitted all our children

We were the carers and were fine with taking responsibility for getting our kids to school

There’s no definitive test for PDA. It’s based on behaviours - the same behaviours caused by a lack of boundaries

Oh you have no idea. I haven’t seen your tv program, but at 6 years old my DD would have eaten your boundaries for breakfast. Including those that kept her safe, her siblings safe, her home intact and her own body to keep functioning.

As a teen she’s now thriving on an EOTAS package, the first provision of which was equine therapy. She could teach you a lot @Playingvideogames

No you’re here to kick worried parents when they’re down. We’ve fought so so hard for our children and will continue to do so, but unfortunately people like you think some of our kids don’t deserve their places in Sen schools, or the legal documents they’re entitled to

This strikes me as a profound misdirection of limited resources.

An education system works best when it recognises differences in aptitude and builds pathways that suit them. If you concentrate the bulk of time, money and specialist expertise on trying to push every student toward the same narrow academic outcome, you risk distorting the entire purpose of schooling.

From what I’ve seen in my own family, the pattern can be this: vast support is mobilised to help students with significant additional needs achieve broadly average academic results. Those results then open the door to university — often at considerable financial cost — and into knowledge-based careers that may not align with their natural strengths. The long-term outcome can be stress, debt and a persistent sense of being in the wrong lane.

Behind it all is a particular worldview — common in parts of professional middle-class Britain — that the country should be overwhelmingly service-driven and that academic, white-collar work is the default aspiration for everyone. But not every young person is best served by being channelled into that mould. A healthier system would value and invest equally in technical, vocational and practical routes, rather than assuming one pathway fits all.

No, I haven’t.

I would actually like to see some people “parent” Sen kids with their proper boundaries, think it’d be a great fly on the wall documentary watching them get absolutely mentally drained 😁

Do you think this is in the long term
a) a cost cutting exercise or
b) a spending exercise?

No not freelancing most Architects work in an office within a team except for maybe those who do small scale stuff. That’s not us
dh specialism is education bldgs
and mine historic and religious buildings and offices.

If you take the government at their word (yes, I know!) then they say they will be spending more. Reality may be very different, of course, but that isn’t what I commented on. I commented on what the government has said since we were discussing the publications released today.

I think a more common outcome is that children don't receive the support or interventions they need and leave school without the skills or qualifications they need for any pathway and with the entrenched belief that they are stupid and useless.

The announcements today are just about cost savings. Same as when DLA was replaced with PIP and people were re-assessed and left without support.

Probably because nazi bigot (in your words, not mine) is a pretty accurate description for someone who at worst is advocating for the removal of a certain subset of society with eugenics and at best, advocating for removal of all support for that subset.

Who said that? Can you quote?

The spending they’ve announced is less than the savings they’ll make by making EHCPs and specialist provision far more inaccessible.

"You can fake nonchalance but 38% is staggeringly high given the majority of it will go on SEN. It’s too high."

You have provided no evidence that the majority goes on SEN funding.

That is not what the government said. The government said spending will increase.