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.

So you want us to opt out of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child and say that actually no, not all children have the right to an education, only the ones who can be educated cheaply.

No one is saying these children will not have an education?

It just might not be the education they, or their parents, want. It might not be quite as good an education as is ideal, but it might be good enough?

Ultimately there has to be a threshold somewhere in terms of which children qualify for more support. ALL children out there could progress quicker if they were in classes of 10, that doesn't mean we can afford to do that for all children. You have to draw a line somewhere and wherever you draw that line, there will always be some children close to it who would have benefited from being on the other side of the line with more support. The line still has to be somewhere.

The problem here is people are interpreting "education" as this incredibly broad catch all concept covering health, emotionally well being and happiness, which is not what was intended by the term in that context.

Would you accept a “good enough” education for your children, that met their needs “enough”?

Or do you expect your child to receive an education that is suitable for them, like any reasonable parent?

No one is saying these children will not have an education?
It just might not be the education they, or their parents, want. It might not be quite as good an education as is ideal, but it might be good enough?

This.

Would you accept a “good enough” education for your children, that met their needs “enough”?

Yes i do, every day. I consider it on me as a parent to offer more. The state provides "enough". If i want "the best", i have to provide that.

if no SEN is detectable by age 11, then they’re very unlikely to be ‘disabled’ (unless medically diagnosed with for example, diabetes), and therefore it’s a ‘SEMH’ issue which doesn’t need addressing via channels meant for children with disabilities.

This is complete and utter rubbish. Anyone who thinks this doesn’t understand SEN and disability. Firstly, although many with SEN will also be disabled and vice versa, it is possible to meet the legal definition for one and not the other. Secondly, SEMH needs is one of the broad areas of SEN. Thirdly, many with SEMH needs are disabled, using the Equality Act’s definition.

Does anyone know why there is such a high number of children with SEN now? I remember the odd child at school (70's/80's) but it was rare.

There hasn’t been as huge an increase in recent years as some people like to portray. The most recent statistics released last year show 19.5% of pupils have SEN. In 2010, so before EHCPs, it was 20.9% or 21.1% (depending on which statistics you look at - I think it is a rounding issue adding up SA, SA+ and SSEN (anyone seeing resemblances to targeted, targeted plus and specialist?)). In 2005, it was 18%. Going back several decades to the Warnock report in 1978, “some 20% appeared to need some form of special educational help. This may even be an underestimate…”

Nowadays there seem to be a host of people with children who don't have learning disabilities etc, but who expect the state to provide an incredibly tailored, one to one level of provision, even where this doesn't appear to be effective in enabling the child or young person to attend school or work

There is far more to be considered than attending school or work. Not providing support required now costs more in the long term. not. For example, the right support now can be the difference between the child needing 1:1 or 2:1 (or even 3:1 or 4:1) as an adult. It can be the difference between a residential placement being needed or a placement within the community. It can be the difference between an ordinary residential placement or a secure placement. It can be the difference between 24/7 care or only care for some of the time. It can be the difference between contact with the justice system and not. It can be the difference between a child going on to be eligible for CHC funding or not when they are an adult. It can be the difference between someone needing prolonged hospital stays in the future or not. None of which are about attending school or work.

DC don’t get EOTAS/EOTIS/C unless it is inappropriate for the provision to be made in a school or college. They don’t receive it just because parents expect it. Just because a child doesn’t have a learning disability doesn’t mean they don’t have incredibly complex needs.

no able bodied child with a normal IQ needs to take an expensive place in a special school.

They wouldn’t be placed in such schools if it wasn’t needed or there was a cheaper option. For some, the alternative is EOTAS/EOTIS/C, which done properly can be even more expensive.

Such children need mental health support, things like CBT, confidence building
But this is not education. This is for parents to provide.
Yes - education. Which doesn't include mental health support, cbt or "confidence building". These are for healthcare services AND PARENTS TO PROVIDE.

Actually, it is considered special educational provision rather than health care provision. By your post, it would be acceptable to leave a child without mental health support if parents couldn’t provide it. It wouldn’t be.

I also think there's a big difference between what constitutes a need vs a want.

Children cannot learn without feeling safe and somewhat happy. All the research shows that! Absolutely ridiculous that anyone would suggest otherwise in the 21st century.

DC with SEN don’t get the best possible education now. The current law doesn’t allow for that.

DC don’t get provision just because they or their parents want it.

DC don’t get EOTAS/EOTIS/C unless it is inappropriate for the provision to be made in a school or college. They don’t receive it just because parents expect it. Just because a child doesn’t have a learning disability doesn’t mean they don’t have incredibly complex needs.

I fundamentally disagree that all the things some parents consider to be "needs" are actual needs. I think many of them are wants.

Most of the parents at my DS's 2000 kid, local comp do. It's far from ideal and all the kids would benefit from smaller class sizes or their own personal 1:1 teacher. But that's not realistic. We couldn't afford private so we plug the gaps as best we can.

Then you don’t understand the current law. If provision wasn’t reasonably required, in the legal sense, to meet needs in B, it wouldn’t be included in F. The LA wouldn’t included it. SENDIST wouldn’t Order it either and if the LA thought SENDIST had erred, they would be quick to challenge it.

Excellent post. I'd like to add it's not unusual to find semh needs emerge because other SEND needs are unidentified/unmet. Proper identification and support can see semh needs reduce dramatically.

Also a nice diagram all the 'but send has exploded' people dislike

Do SEN parents really think non SEN kids are ‘having their needs met’ and an education tailored to them? Because if so - nope; not even close. A lot of them are losing out because everything is channeled into SEN. Teaching assistants meant for all are now just one to ones. 60% of all new funding goes on SEN.

Children are entitled to an education, that doesn’t mean the best education money can buy that fits them perfectly.

I think some people on here actually can't grasp the maths.

Uk public spending per head, is under £14k. For those of us in the south east, its even lower, only £12k.

Thats covering health, social care, education, the lot.

And you really think we can be affording to spend 2 to 3 times that (and more) on as many as 1 in 5 kids education?

We literally can't. As a country we would go bust. We have to spend less or there simply isn't enough money to go around.

Do you understand how courts of law work? They look at evidence. They don't award packages based on what parents want 🙄. If they were LAs would be appealing the courts decision every single time. They don't though do they? Because all is above board and the judges are doing their jobs as they should be.

I just want my child to be able to go to school! How about that!

Neither of my kids has their educational "needs" met in school . One is exceptional in maths and has learned absolutely nothing in school maths as a result. No he gets absolutely nothing more, because state education is not geared up to provide more for him.

The other could do with more help in maths but isn't "bad enough". She could do better with small group teaching in maths but couldn't we all?

“Teaching assistants meant for all are now just one to ones”

I would be very surprised if my son’s 1:1 is a general TA that’s been pulled from the other children, because the school are provided with specific ringfenced funding for that 1:1 and legally have to spend it on that. They’re accountable for that spend to the LA.

His 1:1 also doesn’t count into the class’s ratios, because she’s for him, so if she has just been moved from general TA work and not backfilled by another member of staff, they’re out of ratio.

Nice try though!

Do you understand how courts of law work? They look at evidence. They don't award packages based on what parents want 🙄.

The law was written in a different time that did not envisage the vast expansion of diagnostic criteria for asd/adhd. It was never intended to provide this level of support to this proportion of children.

I’d increase my expectations if I were you. If my child needed an intervention that the school wasn’t providing, I don’t think I’d be taking to MN to tell disabled kids off, I’d do something about it.

Like what? They don’t have enforceable legal rights via EHCPs do they?

It needs to be reviewed because needs change. A child who has support in place at 5 (which my dd did) may need different support by 8 let alone 11. It may be more, less or just different

Clearly something hasn’t been working for a long time. I’ve not had the battle personally but I have seen parents have to take our local authority to court to get ECHPs. It is a massive waste of everyone’s time and deeply challenging for those parents. Not everyone can manage that fight.

My worry is the money doesn’t touch the surface or really put in place the environment to support children or their teachers properly. At one point in my daughter’s class of 30, there were the following issues (that I was aware of- no doubt there were more).

2 kids severe adhd
1 kid severe autism (moved to a special school)
1 kid with severe anxiety (left to be home schooled)
1 kid with autism and anxiety
1 kid with v difficult home life and anxiety
1 kid with v flakey parents and high levels of absence
1 kid with v severe difficulties (was on roll but
only actually attended for 1 week before it was deemed impossible)
3 kids with dyslexia (one of whom left as they weren’t getting enough support)
1 kid who was exceptionally bright and operating on a different level to everyone else in the school (possibly with hyperlexia)

For many years, there were no ECHPs or funding support for this class. Honestly I don’t know how on earth teachers are supposed to manage these dynamics let alone then deal with the other 15-20 kids with different needs and abilities.