Okay folks - I am aware that I may be opening a can of worms here but why does this topic piss so many people off?

[Theclosetpagan]

I mean if someone has deemed a child G+T (or is it G or T) why is it that they seem to be flamed when they post about any difficulties here?

If the label has come from outside the family and the family struggle why can't they post here saying "Help" without people leaping in to say "your child sounds normal to me"

For what it's worth I don't have a child labelled as G+T but am glad I don't given the response some posters get to this topic.

Surely it's okay for some children to be extra bright. Or is it that there is distrust of this label?

Just interested really.

But your ds2 has started school now, so what will you do to factor in ds2 time.

Message withdrawn

KM, please don;t think that you have to respond to this - some people are just judgemental - their opinions mean nothing

Their dance teacher said 'Not every day a six year old bites you.' Quite.

KM, agree, lojo is just stirring.

I felt really uncomfortable about the way this thread went - you must feel like everyone picks on you and criticises - I certainly wasn't intending to, but am aware that happened to some extent. We all take our own childhood experiences and apply them to our children and others, in both positive and negative ways.

Sorry to hear your ds2 is tricky - and I hope his hearing loss resolves.

KM do you not think maybe you try a little too hard, spending so much time one to one with each . While it is commendable and definitely of benefit sometimes chidlren need to have the freedom to explore and play by themselves without requiring constant adult input. A truly gifted child, imho, will seek out ways of promoting their interests and lead the way. Sometimes support and guidance is needed from adults, but not always and not 100% of the time.

personal attacks are not allowed on MN kerry, don't feel you have to reply.

I'd agree that children do need time to explore things for themselves though (re liz's last comment'

In some ways one of the best things we could do with able children is simply to give them time off timetable and let them go to the school library and reserach their own interests on the Internet. Bright children can do this, which is why their needs are not the same as those kids with SEN, who do tend to need constant 1 to 1 if they are to make progress

Thanks for the links Kerry, it was really sweet of you. Sorry the discussion got so personal and unpleasant.

Just to clarify, it's not my daughter's abilities that are the problem but the way the label has acted upon her other, erm, difficulties for want of a better word.

Kerrymum, is it worth asking MNHQ for a new name for this board? I can't think of one at the moment but having the same name as the state school G & T system is muddling and not helping people with children who are truly extraordinary.

my son was placed on the g&t register at his school when he was in reception (he is now yr2). we were told he was exceptional. the problem we faced was the teacher using him for teaching the others. He was made an example of and it went to his head. he started to say he was better than everyone else and knew better than them. we made the decision to move him to another school (state not private) where he was in a class where there were children of similar ability. now he is no longer the exception, and has children to work alongside, instead of being way above them all. his younger brother is very bright too - reading , writing and doing sums, and just started in reception, and we are much happier with this school. it can be as big a worry to have bright kids as it is to have kids with special educational needs.

no, ckrm, it is not even comparable having exceptionally bright children to children with SN, and it really is a bit much to say so.

With Sn children you never know how they will fare, will other people take advantage of them, laugh at them, how will they fare in adulthood, when you are no longer there to look out for them, how will they get along as teenagers, will they go to university, will they be able to get a decent job, will they realise they are struggling, will they struggle, will school reduce them to tears as the gap between them and their same age peers grows every day, what if they have SN with everything - academics, sport, music, socialising etc etc. Obvioulsy there are fantastic and lovely positives to every child and they are loved and cherished whether they are G&T or SN. But I'm sorry, worrying your child is not being pushed enough, or is getting a bit too big for their boots, is simply not in the same league of worrying.

Thank you, PCsMum, for being a voice of reason.

Or even PCSMum, I'm clearly not very G&T this evening.

I don't like the 'exclusivity' of G&T- most kids ime are G&T in some way, for example how many kids like ds1 have a verbal age of 16 - 21? Oh except his sn means he cant write- but that doesn't negate his skills, though he is welcome on SN but not G&T.

there is no way SN and G&T equate! A G&T kid (or an average NT one- of which I have one) chances are they'll grow up, leave home, have a job- I have no idea whwetehr ds1 willa chieve that, am pretty certain ds3 won'r ever manage it! I'd quite like ds3 to hold a conversation, let alone any of the rest of it! I iamgine having a G&T kid is a struggle but walk a day in my shoes if you will, or just read a few SN threads, and you will find its a whole new scary world where even the most absic things have to be fought for constantly.

Oh and also because a child at 2 is not a child at 10, 16, 35.

I could read at 2.5, i'm not anything special.

and also G and T children can expand their own understanding of the world on their own or with limited guidance. This is almost a defining characteristic of the bright or able child.

Children with SEN very often need intensive 1 to 1 adult support if they are to make progress.

the two are just not comparable

i didnt mean any insult to sn children. I do however have family experience of an extremely bright child who has grown into a very dysfunctional adult. he couldn't handle the pressure put on him - he dropped out of uni and disappeared for five years. when we eventually located him he had a history of alcohol and substance abuse, and now lives on benefits. This is my sons uncle, and if it happened to him it could happen to them. I agree its a different league, i know the struggle a mum at school has faced getting her son statemented and the nightmare another mum is going through trying to get a statement for her daughter and i don't underestimate that. But i have very real fears for my children and you cant underestimate that.

I genuinely think though that any child is vulnerable to the whole drop out drugs thing- kids with AS for example have a tendency towards depression, and depressive people towards drugs- but there's abig difference between that general-to-all worry and say, wondering if your child will ever be dry, or feed themselves.

G&T kids CAN face hardships of course- bt they can also face benefits which in a large way mitigate those risks, for example the chance to have wonderful careers etc. there's nothing to mitigate the sn of poor child who is in a wheelchair for life, or can never talk

agree with Peachy and PCSMUM. At the moment I genuinely have no idea whether DS will ever catch up in his severely delayed language to the extent he can live/work independently. So I struggle to be sympathetic to parents who feel that concerns their child will be understimulated at school are as much of a special need as my DS's language impairment.

If you look at what is needed by children at either end of the distribultion curve, the two simply are not in the same legue.

A bright child can be easily stimulated by being given a library and access to the internet, with a few questions to guide.

A child at the other end of the scale needs 1 to 1 to be taught to read or write, or even to used expressive language.

I've taught very bright children, and I've taught children with SEN who at 11 have reading ages of 5. I know full well which need most help. And anyone who disagrees can spend a day in the classroom, and then see what they think.

I don't think it's comparable at all. Really don't. I was browsing through this board today, and saw the quote 'a G&T child's Special Need is just as great as a child with SENs'. It's just not true. A gifted child has already been 'given' (for want of a better word) a head start. My friend with a son with autism does not know where he will be in 1 year, 5 years, 10 years, whether he will ever work, be able to make meaningful relationships, be able to live independently. Not the same at all.

There are some mental illnesses that favour intelligent and creative people. If you are an artist, writer or musician, for example, your chances of developing some sort of affective disorder (such as depression or bipolar disorder) are a bit higher than for the general population. There are plenty of people of above average intelligence/creative ability who are never ill in this way though so it's a bit pessimistic to assume that a G&T child will go on to have such problems.

AN di do think its also important to remember that many children with Sn are also gifted- as I mentioned before, my 7 year old with HFA (a form of autism) has a spoken language age of 16 -21, and was measureed thus before he was 6- it's as high as he can go on the scale. perhaps my dh, who has very poor educaitonal attainment generally (pretty clear he ahs dyslexia, and has a history of mental health issues)- has a business designing electronic systems for complex digital lighting applications- they're just as important as any other aspect of their personalities. A child needs to be looked at as a apckage- which can include G&T, Sn or whatever- and may well include both. I think there's a sense of exclusivity on the G&T board that doesn't recognise this at all. On the Sn board we are far mroe welcoming, parents are accepted whatever their diagnosis, whereas a board that is specifically for the top 10%- well logic suggests it will have a vested interest in maintaining that 10% range, and as such not being inclusive to those who are gifted in some areas rather than others. Indeed thats a criticism of the whole education system- as a child I was considered gifted enough in writtena nd spoken communication to receive special lessons from the head, yet I needed SN amthematics coaching just toa chieve anything in that subject. Beyong primary there wasn't sufficient flecxibility to cope with that variation- there was either a choice of SN classes which would have left me seriosuly bored and under achieving in Humanities subjects, or Top stream which did leave me sat alone in maths without any chance of following teh curriculum (I amnaged to apss GCSE level at college 2 eyars ago, finally). Since then I have widely felt that a child is a package of abilities and needs to be looked at as an individual, given access to G&T resources where appropriate, but also enabled to develop in thsoe areas where theya re not so able. I don't think having a '10%' cut off enables this at all, it simply forces children into groupings which see them as eitehr or, mean many kids don't receive help where needed, and pushes others outside the support system ina reas they particualrly shine.