Weaponising the most vulnerable children

[2021hasalowbenchmarktobebetter]

I am absolutely sick of seeing MPs and members of the public using "the most vulnerable" children as a reason to get their own way about schools.

Unlike most MPs and members of the public, I have actually been working with this group of society for two decades.

If people genuinely and generally cared about these children and felt that they were the highest priority group in the whole of society, why did MPs implement (and people vote for them to continue implementing)
-Sure Start centre closures
-the benefit cap
-benefits freezes
-the bedroom tax
-council cuts, leading to reduced numbers of social workers, SEN workers, SEN funding
-almost total decimation of youth workers and youth centres
-reduced youth offending team support
-changes in SEN laws which have disproportionately reduced provision for those economically disadvantaged children without articulate and educated parents
-changes to GCSEs which the DfE's own impact assessment (and subsequent GCSE results) evidenced disproportionately negative impact on economically disadvantaged students and those with SEN
-education funding cuts in real terms
-only a tiny proportion of laptops and routers being given to schools in the autumn term
-schools not being reimbursed for measures to make schools safer, including hand gel, cleaning products etc.
-abolishing educational maintenance allowance

• raising tuition fees?

It took a footballer to get the government to agree to fund holiday meals for these children and I didn't sense a massive amount of concern from many people about why that would need to be the case.

Handwringing about how school staff and unions daring to ask for better and safer conditions is so selfish because "of the vulnerable children" is just the epitome of hypocrisy.

Be honest and say it's inconvenient for working parents, by all means, and (for MPs) how it will make economic recovery difficult if people can't work. But most people need to stop pretending that their concern is for the most vulnerable children. They're not human shields.

If society really wants to protect the most vulnerable children, the last ten years have been a very weird way of showing it.

Well said, so many people couldn’t give a stuff about vulnerable children until it suits to use them for their own agenda.

Well said indeed.
They can start reversing the issues in your list. And approving the meals for school children.

Well said

I don't disagree.

Whilst I agree with many of your points - I totally disagree the final one that the only reason people are concerned about what is going on with schools is economic.

Whilst it is true school closures will have a pretty awful impact on many people who need to work the main reason that politicians in ALL political parties want schools to remain open if at all possible is because of the damage that the previous lockdown had on children and young people.

That damage was across all demographics but had an even worse impact on vulnerable children.

Nearly every charity working the sector - mental health charities, youthwork charities, etc. have been publishing evidence of the damage that has been to children and young people. To their education, wellbeing, development, physical and mental health. Even worse if they were vulnerable already.

The risk to children and young people from covid is pretty low. The risk to them of lockdown and school closures has been evidenced to be great.

Yes all the things you listed are important. And yes many mistakes have been made in the last ten years.

But lets not deny the damage that will continue to be inflicted on children and young people if they schools remain closed for a significant period of time.

Agree with this 100% !

We also need to consider that some restrictions lockdowns school closures will also turn some previously non vulnerable children into vulnerable children. A plunging economy and ever increasing job losses puts more children and families into poverty and needing the resources of the above mentioned services that have already been decimated.
Whilst I agree people shouldn't use "vulnerable children" as an example of why they think x y or z should/shouldn't happen it is feasible to say that we don't need the amount of vulnerable children increasing due to x y or z.

So true. Aside from the whole point being able to stay open for said vulnerable children, the most vulnerability come from communities that tend to be hardest hit by covid - disabled, vulnerable parents, poverty and the overcrowded housing that goes with it and associated health risks eg higher levels of obesity, large multi-generational families, BAME backgrounds disproportionately represented due to structural racism...
You can't just say 'it's about the vulnerable kids they need to be in school'. Often they are also the ones who most need us to drive down covid rates in the community in any way we can.

@GintyMcGinty and @3littlewords
Also very true.

We need schools to be able open safely for those very reasons. I am personally a big fan of the idea of trying out rotas, masks in classrooms, blended learning - once numbers allow and the science supports this . The only reason it's become such an all or nothing debate is because everything has lost all nuance and because they government has stuck to gaslighting society that schools are safe - no debate.

Brilliant post. Well said!

As a parent of a vulnerable child with significant disabilities I couldn't agree more, no one has given a shiny shit about vulnerable children for as long as I can remember and to use them in this way now for their own selfish gains is making me quite queasy.

Absolutely agree with you!

I agree. It is mystifying that the narrative is all about protecting vulnerable DC and mental health when the powers that be did not give a flying fuck pre pandemic. So much so that SOS!SEN had to start judicial review proceedings for DS1. But now - everything I do ... Bollocks - everything I do, I do for me (and my cronies) but I will use you to look good.

Sorry - I said mystifying - it's not really, I meant insulting for those that have been dealing with the reality for years and gaslighting for those new to this.

Those vulnerable children are written off at birth. The comments Boris previously made about children of single mothers lets you know exactly what he thinks of people not like him.

Yanbu

100% agree with you OP. The self same people who argue this forget that for 13 weeks of the year, vulnerable children are not in school. I'm guessing that none of those demanding schools stay open at all costs because of the vulnerable have ever argued for them up until now.

I also agree. It isn’t just the government either it is other parents.

Completely agree

@2021hasalowbenchmarktobebetter

I am absolutely sick of seeing MPs and members of the public using "the most vulnerable" children as a reason to get their own way about schools.

Unlike most MPs and members of the public, I have actually been working with this group of society for two decades.

If people genuinely and generally cared about these children and felt that they were the highest priority group in the whole of society, why did MPs implement (and people vote for them to continue implementing)
-Sure Start centre closures
-the benefit cap
-benefits freezes
-the bedroom tax
-council cuts, leading to reduced numbers of social workers, SEN workers, SEN funding
-almost total decimation of youth workers and youth centres
-reduced youth offending team support
-changes in SEN laws which have disproportionately reduced provision for those economically disadvantaged children without articulate and educated parents
-changes to GCSEs which the DfE's own impact assessment (and subsequent GCSE results) evidenced disproportionately negative impact on economically disadvantaged students and those with SEN
-education funding cuts in real terms
-only a tiny proportion of laptops and routers being given to schools in the autumn term
-schools not being reimbursed for measures to make schools safer, including hand gel, cleaning products etc.
-abolishing educational maintenance allowance

• raising tuition fees?

It took a footballer to get the government to agree to fund holiday meals for these children and I didn't sense a massive amount of concern from many people about why that would need to be the case.

Handwringing about how school staff and unions daring to ask for better and safer conditions is so selfish because "of the vulnerable children" is just the epitome of hypocrisy.

Be honest and say it's inconvenient for working parents, by all means, and (for MPs) how it will make economic recovery difficult if people can't work. But most people need to stop pretending that their concern is for the most vulnerable children. They're not human shields.

If society really wants to protect the most vulnerable children, the last ten years have been a very weird way of showing it.

Agreed,and you can put same argument fir mental health,too.

Yes, should have put the cuts to CAMHS on that list.

In my area, even children who have attempted suicide sometimes don’t meet the criteria for mental health support, because of cuts. So schools pick up those pieces.

Another reason for them to be open, I know, but also another example of how vulnerable children have not been a priority for many for too long.

Couldn't agree more.

My child is disabled, he has an EHCP and needs full time 1-1 support. He hasn't had a full time school place for 2 fucking years.

Nobody gave a shit. His mental health was never a priority. The impact on his education has repeatedly been waved away with "he's bright, he will catch up".

When I hear people saying "oh but kids with an EHCP will still have a school place" it makes me rage. Thousands of children with EHCPs don't have a school place even pre-pandemic. But where was the outrage then?

No need to waive around vulnerable children. All children do better in school. During this pandemic many children have turned out to have mental health vulnerabilities that no one realised until the first lockdown.

🙌🙌🙌 nothing to add.

Spot on.

Well said

Op, absolutely agree.

@GintyMcGinty

But lets not deny the damage that will continue to be inflicted on children and young people if they schools remain closed for a significant period of time

The problem is expecting schools alone to be responsible for all of the issues facing young people. When I was at school, schools were for education. That’s it. Now they have to cover education, safeguarding, pastoral, supporting vulnerable families, supporting children with mental health issues (our school had access a psychologist for a short time which was amazing) . They also have to help families in need access food over holidays and school closures. And all with budget cut after budget cut.

How does anyone seriously think this is sustainable?

WHERE are the other government agencies that’s should be stepping in and supporting children and young people? Why must everything be done by schools?

Schools have had to pick up a lot of extra work due to government cuts (which they happily do, as they care about their students) but insinuating that schools closures will damage children is putting the “blame” on completely the wrong place.

Schools can NOT do everything for everyone. Even if we want to.

WHERE is the government? Where is the funding for agencies to step in support children during every closures?

Why does everything have to be left to school, and teachers then demonised when we have to close to keep our staff and students safe?