Impact of Badman report on children with SEN

[Riaz]

I have been wondering what the implications of this Badman report are on children who are HE because of SEN or those who's parents are considering HE. On the surface, the SEN community appear to be less moved by the report than the 'mainstream' HE community are - I have encountered several comments here and there that some parents even welcome the changes in legislation.

Possibilities exist that HE children with SEN who fail to meet certain NC milestones, even on small issues such as bad handwriting, could be forced to attend school and their parents prosecuted. LAs could decide to refuse to allow children who hold SEN statements to be HE unless evidence exists that the requirements in the statement are upheld out of school even if they are no longer relevant. The section about having to produce plans and outcomes for a 12 month period is likely to be very difficult to implement properly for children with some types of SEN.

[Ali Admin]

I think a lot of people are still either shell shocked or simply taking stock.

Parents and children with special needs seem universally to get a raw deal in the school system and the Badman report does indeed look set to create additional hurdles for those who are home educated.

I keep coming back to the lack of money to implement any of these proposed changes. Meeting the needs of special needs children is a mightily expensive business and causes serious migraines for schools when parents demand suitable provision and become serial complainants.

I was going to suggest taking a look at the Asperger Home Ed Forums, but from another post I see you already know about it.

[Elaine Kirk]

Parents with SEN/disabled children have been cowed by authorities they struggle to get even the most basic of provision for their children and this review shouts out loud that they will remain the underdogs.
However were they to stand up my assertion that the whole process has been discriminatory holds more water than ever.
Ballsups response to the report states that sen/disabled will not be dealt with at this stage
WELL hello to discuss/consult on/ mandate/statute or merely mention formulating any plan that will affect sen/disabled without consulting on/discussing/seeking input from disabled/sen and then putting their needs foremost even if to do so leads to them recieving treatment/provision/rights over and above those of the able bodied to neglect to prioritise disability is DISCRIMINATION
I have promised this is a Jen day so I shouldnt be here but had to come to point out a related fact.
BALLSUP and madman say parents with mental health issues/disabilities would be refused permission to home ed
ON that basis alone they should be told to fuck of until they can produce something that doesn't openly discriminate against the disabled

e.g. (though there are much better examples to be found)
4. States Parties shall ensure that a child shall not be separated from his or her parents against their will, except when competent authorities subject to judicial review determine, in accordance with applicable law and procedures, that such separation is necessary for the best interests of the child. In no case shall a child be separated from parents on the basis of a disability of either the child or one or both of the parents.

[Ali Admin]

Originally Posted by Elaine Kirk

In no case shall a child be separated from parents on the basis of a disability of either the child or one or both of the parents.

Yet look what they did to this poor woman.

If that's not disability discrimination, I don't know what is (especially since she had family support to help bring up her child).

[Renegade Parent]

I think there are actually two women who have had their children removed because they are deemed too stupid to look after them - Rachel and another woman.

It's something I was intending to write about this week but can't find where I've put the links and a quick (very quick) google search hasn't thrown both of them up. Am on the case though.

[Riaz]

Originally Posted by Ali P

Parents and children with special needs seem universally to get a raw deal in the school system and the Badman report does indeed look set to create additional hurdles for those who are home educated.

There is a problem that many SEN support organisations are not very sympathetic towards HE. They tolerate HE but are generally unwilling to campaign for the rights of HE families. The reason for this is because they favour a policy of inclusion within the mainstream school system.

I keep coming back to the lack of money to implement any of these proposed changes. Meeting the needs of special needs children is a mightily expensive business and causes serious migraines for schools when parents demand suitable provision and become serial complainants.

There is concern that major cutbacks will be made to services for children with SEN by local and central government due to declining tax revenue because of the recession. This is already prompting some parents of children with SEN to consider HE if their needs cannot be met due to budgetary constraints.

[Elaine Kirk]

An example of a very real headache they would have is that it is rare for a Type 1 diabetic child to get support in school and the English gov will not legislate to force schools to support these children of whom there are 20,000 in britain.
At the momentsome schools provide support (minority) via statements
Some parents run back and forth to school for blood tests injections
Some children are 'run high' all day to prevent life threatening hypo's (this is where minimal insulin is given so the child has blood sugars above the safe range for 6hrs a day which causes long term organ damage but providing insulin is increased after school to get them back in range is not going to cause coma as would a hypo if bloods went too low
some children self manage but this can and has caused emergency situations .
So how do they propose to restrict a parents freedom to home educate their type 1 child as the3y choose ?
Offer full support in school? that would by default entitle 20.000 other children to the same level of support
Maybe some MP's asked this type of question short sweet and to the point within the next few days ??

[Diane]

This is a very good point, Elaine, and very sad.

There was also the case of my sister-in-law whose lad was allergic to eggs and particularly nuts. They would not assure her that someone would be around to inject him if he were to ingest food he was allergic to.

Diane
http://www.threedegreesoffreedom.blogspot.com
New blog entry - Bully for You

[vinny]

Originally Posted by Elaine

BALLSUP and madman say parents with mental health issues/disabilities would be refused permission to home ed

I really need to find out more about this - have they said it outright or is it inferred? I just assumed we (people with MH difficulties) would be under attack because we always are (we're all 'dangerous', dont you know? Dangerous and incapable. Subhuman. Like children.. )

[HomeEdMum]

Originally Posted by Elaine
"BALLSUP and madman say parents with mental health issues/disabilities would be refused permission to home ed"

post natal depression makes a history of mental health issue or problem. What about people who have suffered a brain injury or where one partner is a survivor of brain injury through accident/illness etc.? I think this definition of a person can be used in a very broad way. Someone overweight or with arthritis or -anything really- might be classed as disabled for this purpose. They are saying that if you are not perfect in health in every way, we will use this against you. It's shocking.