Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

News

Ruth kelly send her child to private school because of SN

280 replies

PeachyClair · 08/01/2007 11:53

part story here

Now I haev no problems with private schools as such, just seems this woman is partlyr esponsible for completely effing up the chances of SN kids (such as mine) in mainstream, then she opts out.

Most parentscaring for sn kids don't have £15k a year to make that decision.

Wonder if she realised what she was planning when she was the Minister? Coz that would explain the state of Sn in aminstream schools frankly.

And on the same day I geta letter stating mys ion can't have any occupational therapy because his Teacher ahsn't had the time to fill in the forms by their deadline.

OP posts:
Socci · 09/01/2007 18:28

Message withdrawn

ruty · 09/01/2007 18:39

but Socci wasn't it Kelly's govt who decided to put Special Needs children into ordinary State schools and reduce specific special needs teachers, etc? Correct me if I'm wrong, i'm not that well up on it. And what really rankles me is she just gives the usual rhetoric about vast improvements and great facilities blah blah. She has now shown us beyond doubt she doesn't believe the system serves a lot of children. So why isn't she critical of it? She can't have it both ways.

Socci · 09/01/2007 18:45

Message withdrawn

Judy1234 · 12/01/2007 17:12

Times article today on a poor lady whose parents put her in a bad comprehensive because of their left wing principles
www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,2707-2543308,00.html

Judy1234 · 31/01/2007 10:17

Wow, these are expensive. So they should instead set up their own just as good state provision so they aren't blackmailed by the private sector like this.
Letter in today's Times

"Runaway costs of private teaching and childcare
Sir, As a local authority manager I am responsible for commissioning placements for children with a variety of needs and manage a budget of almost £5 million per annum. I would be delighted if I could secure provision for £57,000 for a pupil with special needs (?Special needs fees are £57,000 a child?, Jan 29).

This is an entirely unregulated market in which the providers set their price and local authorities are held to ransom. Today I inquired about a place at a school and it quoted a fee, for term times only, of £126,000.

Independent special schools usually quote a figure of about £100,000. When the child visits the school I am told that ?following assessment? the school feels that additional one-to-one support will be required, which will be an extra £25,000. If I refuse to pay, it refuses to offer a place. The most expensive placement I currently pay for is more than £200,000 per annum.

As inducements, these schools offer invitations to the parents, not the local authority, for the child to attend for an ?assessment?, at the end of which the parent is offered a place ?subject to funding from the local authority?. If the authority refuses, parents are encouraged to appeal to the special educational needs tribunal. The website of one dyslexia special school advises parents about how to secure a favourable outcome at a tribunal. The local authority is over a barrel, caught between desperate parents and avaricious private providers.

SIMON VILETTE
Ecton, Northants

Sir, Although childcare costs are high and rising (?Soaring childcare fees hit parents?, Jan 30), the costs are highest for a mother who gives up her job, and therefore her entire salary, to care for her children full-time.

Therefore, if there is an argument on the ground of cost for increasing state subsidy to those who choose to employ external childcare, there is also a compelling case for providing state subsidy to mothers who choose to forgo their own salary.

MARY BIENFAIR
St Albans

Sir, The suggestion that single parents should only be eligible for income support up to the time their youngest child goes to secondary school is simplistic. Many long-term single parents lack the skills needed to gain reasonably paid employment, whereas others, with high professional or technical qualifications, are able to support their families without recourse to state aid.

Many who lack employment skills are in that position because, in providing care for their children, they missed out on some aspects of education or failed to gain the work experience expected of a mature job applicant.

If benefits are to be withdrawn when the youngest child reaches secondary school age, a great deal more state educational and vocational training, perhaps on a contractual basis over several years, will be required.

GEORGE GARSIDE
Benllech, Anglesey

Sir, Why the surprise that childcare at nursery age costs more than public school fees? A reasonable public school might hope to have a ratio of, say, ten children to one teacher ? care of schoolchildren does not require constant one-to-one attention. Not many parents would feel able to look after ten nursery-aged children on their own, however: hence the ratio of adults to children in a nursery needs to be far greater than in a public school.

Any parents balking at the cost should ask themselves just what quality of care they are looking for. In fact, it makes you realise what incredible value for money public schools are.

PIP BILLINGTON
Winchester Attitude change"

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread