Abandoning the vulnerable?

Loathe as I am to link to an article in the Daily Mail , this is what's already happening with some SN pupils:

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8704387/Council-offered-father-autistic-boys-100k-county.html

The Coronavirus Act, if not modified, means that councils are not obliged to honour Education Health and Care Plans [EHCPs].

BBC Panorama: Fighting for an Education is on BBC1 tonight at 7.35pm.

Pantglas2

No ,of course not Growstuff, I was just trying to identify a pathway for those struggling through the morass of help that may be available. Those bodies have been funded for a reason and if they’re not functional that in itself needs identifying, surely?

Ah! I get you. As it happens, I don't think the role of Children's Commissioner serves much purpose. I only know about the Children's Commissioner for England and she seems to be a mouthpiece for government (in effect another unelected government member), rather than a genuine advocate for children's needs and wellbeing. However, I guess the parents of any SN children affected could contact her and highlight the situation.

No ,of course not Growstuff, I was just trying to identify a pathway for those struggling through the morass of help that may be available. Those bodies have been funded for a reason and if they’re not functional that in itself needs identifying, surely?

Pantglas2

There are Childrens Commissioners in each of the Uk countries and the first port of call should be to them for signposting of where to find help.

I don't really understand what you mean by this. The parents of many SN children will tell you that it's an ongoing battle to get the support their children need. The underlying problem is money. SN support is expensive and local authorities will do what they can to provide the minimum. I'm sure the Children's Commissioners are aware of the problems and they can put pressure on the governments, but they can't make resources appear or change the law.

I noticed illte having a go at another poster the other day for not returning to the thread. Some of us have busy lives and events take over sometimes which means you don't get back till much later.

I made a totally justified request for opinion on a piece I had seen out of the blue in a publication I had wondered about. So I stupidly bothered to ask others what they thought without setting out in detail what I had read and concerns I had. I am not remotely bothered by difference of opinion, I am bothered by being implicitly accused of not bothering to read something and draw my own conclusions. I'd call that a personal attack. I also don't find Iltee's response informative, she stated an opinion that 'workers in the field of social responsibility needed reassurance...' Who? What? Source? Seeing she's so keen on facts and accuracy.

As I said I don't pretend to be an expert, ha, ha, unlike some. Still, don't let me bother anyone with concerns about the content of the piece, let's just gang up and be rude and then our mates can sidle up and join in. You do get warned off the political threads, quite. And then there was that thread about kindness on GN not long ago, ha, ha ha.

I think it’s the initial response to the OP that puts people off from posting. I, too am grateful that something has been pointed out to me that I didn’t know about and other people have elaborated on it. Isn’t that what forums are all about?

There are Childrens Commissioners in each of the Uk countries and the first port of call should be to them for signposting of where to find help.

Luckyoldbeet what nonsense!
Illte has given informative and measured responses to you,
But you have chosen to be rude in return.

Hmm, think it's the kind of personal attack that you've launched that puts people off.
Most people seem to be able to withstand questioning or a difference of opinion.

But fear not. You won't see me or my questions again. I've been driven away by you.

(Do you really think you're not rude?) ?

Well Illtee what a lovely know it all character you are, the sort of person who drives people away from sites like GN. I didn't have time to read the whole act and even if I had, my reason for posting was that I haven't worked in social services and there are many people who have, especially on GN and an insider may well have something informative and succinct to say.
I am not one of those so common now who think they are an expert on everything. Nor do I speak to others in such a rude and condescending way.

No need to apologise! I was probably being pedantic.

I've been interested in local politics for a long time. I can't actually do much about national politics, but I do my best to be aware of what's going on locally and to be involved.

I've been concerned for a long time that local government funding has been cut - more so in the areas with a high need for services - and decisions have had to be made to cut all sorts of services. Some services, such as SN provision, school transport and some adult social care have been statutory. Even before this Act, authorities haven't been able to provide what they want and there have been fines for increasing Council Tax beyond a certain level. Local authorities have become the scapegoats for central government cuts, so to remove statutory requirements seems like the last straw.

growstuff apologies, please insert an "also" before "aware"

I am deeply concerned for everyone impacted I really am and it needs to be addressed as a priority

growstuff

Whitewavemark2

I had no idea that the LA’s have been relieved of the responsibility for special needs children.

So is it now the government? D of E ?

Can a parental group sue for failing to provide education?

No, they can't sue. That's what the Act is about, with regard to SN children. Nobody is responsible for providing whatever special education is required.

Blimey I missed that! It must be incredibly difficult for the parents, particularly if they can’t depend on help.

In fact i think people will be at risk both physically and mentally -parents and children - if they don’t get support.

Starblaze

I am seeing this happening and am aware of situations where children for example are unable to return to mainstream education being clinically vulnerable and their parents unable to return to jobs with absolutely no means of support.

Being clinically vulnerable and SEN isn't the same thing. I have only read of some cases on a local media group (I don't know the parents personally), but I understand there's an issue and people don't know where to turn. Our MP won't do anything.

lemongrove

Gill Children with SEN are back at school now (thankfully)
In my county.?

As I wrote, the situation is patchy. Some LAs are continuing to provide what they did in the past, but they have no statutory obligation to do so - and some aren't.

Whitewavemark2

I had no idea that the LA’s have been relieved of the responsibility for special needs children.

So is it now the government? D of E ?

Can a parental group sue for failing to provide education?

No, they can't sue. That's what the Act is about, with regard to SN children. Nobody is responsible for providing whatever special education is required.

Illte

Or you could say it provided a measure of protection for workers who were unable to carry out their statutory duties and could otherwise have been prosecuted.

Let's have your ideas for what should have been done instead, other than a temporary Act.

I don't have a problem wit a temporary Act. In March, nobody really knew what the future would hold. Regarding children with special needs, it is one of the few responsibilities which local authorities retained (alongside school transport). Once a child has a statement, the authority is obliged to provide the resources and can be sued if it doesn't. I understand that the statutory responsibility need a temporary lifting, to prevent court cases. Some local authorities, by the way, have continued to do more than they are required to do.

Nevertheless, when the time for a review comes (in a couple of weeks), it needs proper discussion, not rubber stamping.

I am seeing this happening and am aware of situations where children for example are unable to return to mainstream education being clinically vulnerable and their parents unable to return to jobs with absolutely no means of support.

Gill Children with SEN are back at school now (thankfully)
In my county.?

I had no idea that the LA’s have been relieved of the responsibility for special needs children.

So is it now the government? D of E ?

Can a parental group sue for failing to provide education?

Hetty58

I can't help thinking that emergency legislation, due to Coronavirus, provided an ideal, convenient excuse for government to limit or abandon it's responsibilities to the most vulnerable.

I'd predict that there will be great reluctance to reinstate things to where we were before.

I agree with you Hetty. I remember saying to somebody when this all started that it would show up the gaping holes in local government provision. Local government has been starved of funds for years and services have been slashed.

I have personal experience of being discharged from hospital after a heart attack without any social support and I was shocked that nothing was available. When the pandemic started, the first thing I did was to make sure that people had my front door key and I had a list of phone numbers of people who could help me, if necessary. It sounds dramatic, but I seriously could be one of those people who dies and nobody knows for weeks. It was frightening.

The fact that there is no longer a statutory requirement to support the most vulnerable cause me a great deal of concern.

lemongrove

Forgot to add, these ‘Acts’ can be repealed or changed to suit.

Yes, they can and the Coronavirus Act is due to be reviewed every six months, but how many people even know about it? The Conservatives' majority means that almost nothing can be done in Parliament. Unless there's public pressure, it will just be waved through, as much procedure in Parliament is.

The only reason the Conservatives will want to change it is if they think that it's unpopular with their own constituents. That's how politics works.

If people have been affected, they need to make their voices heard. If they don't or can't be bothered, the Act will continue in its present form.

Sadly, it would appear that emergency legislation brought in due to the pandemic is in danger of being abused. I have no issue with the legislation as I understand that this was unknown territory ( apart from the Cygnet report, but let's forget that for the moment), but I am very uncomfortable with any rubber stamping and continuation without checks and balances. We have already seen much evidence of contracts being awarded to companies unable to fulfil the brief, and without any due diligence, and generally buddies or party donors. I would hope that children with SEN would be back at school or within the care of LA supervision as soon as the implications of main stream schools returning is known.

Or you could say it provided a measure of protection for workers who were unable to carry out their statutory duties and could otherwise have been prosecuted.

Let's have your ideas for what should have been done instead, other than a temporary Act.

I can't help thinking that emergency legislation, due to Coronavirus, provided an ideal, convenient excuse for government to limit or abandon it's responsibilities to the most vulnerable.

I'd predict that there will be great reluctance to reinstate things to where we were before.