Record 1 in 5 pupils in England getting special education needs support
Nearly one in five pupils in England are receiving support for special educational needs (SEN) in the classroom, according to government statistics.It comes as separate stats shows a sharp rise in the number of tribunals concerning special educational needs support, as parents challenge the support on offer for their child.Teaching unions say systemic change in special educational needs provision is "urgently needed" for schools and students. The government said it will set out more detailed plans for reforms to special educational needs in the autumn.
The number of school pupils in England receiving support for special educational needs rose to more than 1.7 million, according to annual statistics from the Department for Education released on Thursday. That's a rise of 5.6%, or an extra 93,700 pupils compared to last year.It means nearly one in five of pupils in England (19.6%) are getting extra support for special educational needs, the highest proportion since stats were collected in this way. Over 482,000 of those pupils have an education, health and care plan (EHCP) - a legal document issued by local authorities that sets out the support a child needs. Since 2016, the number of children receiving all types of special needs support has risen by 44% and those with an EHCP has more than doubled.The EHCP increase has been driven by rising rates of autistic spectrum disorder among pupils, speech and language problems, and more pupils with social, emotional and mental health needs, the independent think tank the Institute for Fiscal studies said.The stats show autistic spectrum disorder is the most common need named on education, health and care plans. Although it is unclear what is behind the rise, the IFS has said it could be down to better recognition of autistic spectrum disorder symptoms, particularly in girls. There's recent research that suggests reduced interactions during Covid impacted speech and language development for some children.Helping pupils struggling with their speech, language and communication is the most common type of special educational needs support that schools are giving, according to Thursday's data.
Even getting an education, health and care plan in place for their child can be an ordeal for parents. Cath is a mum from Bristol. She is in the process of applying for an EHCP for her nine-year-old son, who has been diagnosed with autism and ADHD. She's currently getting his needs assessed to see what extra support can be put in place. She says his mainstream school have been supportive, but her son needs more support than they can offer without an EHCP. She says "having to go through the system and fight every step of the way - it takes a big toll on you.""We're constantly filling in forms and thinking what is best for our child."She says they are "in limbo" as his needs might not be great enough for a specialist school, but he is struggling in mainstream."You're seeing them struggling and you're crying out for help and there's no one who can give it to you."Cath says she's concerned that the government will make changes to - or abolish -EHCPs in their upcoming reforms.
Teaching unions have said that rising number of pupils who need extra support is putting more pressure on schools. Paul Whiteman, general secretary of the headteacher's union the NAHT said "despite incredible efforts" the current system is "completely unsustainable". He said "schools face shortages of experts like educational psychologists and speech and language therapists, and a postcode lottery in accessing additional money from cash-strapped local authorities for pupils with the greatest needs - while parents are having to take councils to tribunal to get the places they want for their children due to a lack of capacity".More parents are turning to tribunals to challenge the support on offer for their child. Separate stats out today from the Ministry of Justice show there were 24,000 SEND (Special Educational Needs and Disability) tribunals brought in the year to April, an increase of 36% on the previous year and the highest number on record. The National Audit Office said in a report last year that the SEND system as a whole "wasn't financially sustainable" and wasn't delivering better outcomes for children and young people, despite big increases in high-needs funding over the last 10 years. Local authorities are under huge financial pressure because of rising SEND needs. A deal holding £3bn of SEND deficits off local authorities books is due to run out next year. The government said in the spending review they would be setting out their long-awaited plans to reform the SEND system in England this autumn in a government white paper. They've also set aside £760m over two years to reform SEND from a transformation fund In response to today's figures for SEN pupils and the rise in SEND tribunals Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson said: "Behind each one of these figures is a family desperately fighting for even the most basic support for their child, leaving a staggering number of parents exhausted while young people are denied precious help."It doesn't have to be this way, and this government will deliver the reform that families are crying out for through our Plan for Change – giving an excellent education to every child."We have already taken the first steps to identify and meet children's needs earlier in mainstream schools, including through more early intervention across speech and language, ADHD and autism to prevent needs from escalating and £740m to encourage councils to create more specialist places in mainstream schools."Additional data reporting by Harriet Agerholm
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
36 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Resident doctors have good reason to strike over pay
I write in response to the letter from senior clinicians urging resident doctors to vote against strike action (8 June). During my 22-year career we have seen fundamental changes in medical training, including the introduction of tuition fees for medical school, loss of free accommodation for first-year doctors, the lack of expansion in training numbers, and pay erosion over 15 years. This has left many resident doctors with crippling debt on graduation, spiralling costs of training, deteriorating pay, and the prospect of unemployment. I, and the authors of the letter, were fortunate enough not to face such hardships during training. Hence I urge colleagues not to influence the negotiations between the British Medical Association (BMA) and the government regarding resident doctors' pay. A mandate for strike action is a strong negotiating position, and I for one welcome productive discussions between the government and the BMA to reach a fair settlement. If senior clinicians cannot be supportive of our resident doctors, I suggest that they sit on their hands (with regard to writing letters) and bite their Ajay M VermaKettering, Northamptonshire A group of medical professionals write urging resident doctor colleagues to vote against proposed strike action. They cite the Hippocratic oath. They appear to overlook the daily flouting of the oath by colleagues who are active in the systems of American‑accountable care that have replaced a National Health Service in England. In these, 'first do no harm' appears to have been replaced by 'first protect the bottom line'. The unrest among health workers is not merely about pay; it is about the degradation of an entire public service and its subservience to corporate interests, many of them American. Let's have impassioned letters urging the expulsion of Palantir and co and a return to the principles of Bevan rather than BlackRock. It is untrue to say 'there is no spare money'. The money simply goes into the wrong Donovan Birkenhead, Merseyside The six senior doctors who wrote to you are key among those responsible for allowing the NHS to become such an unpleasant work environment for training doctors. As Wes Streeting so eloquently pointed out, the NHS treats training doctors 'like crap'. A lot could be done to improve the working lives of doctors – simply telling them not to strike is unhelpful and suggests indifference to the challenges they face. Declared interest: parent of two resident EvansMonmouth I am a former NHS GP now living and working in Canada. I read with interest that senior doctors recommend junior doctors don't strike. Would these be senior doctors who had their university education paid for by the state, then had their hospital accommodation paid for by the state, and then enjoyed a fixed benefit pension that kicked in at age 60 (for most of their careers)? Society looked after them well. Could it be possible that today's resident doctors have a different point of view for a reason? I suppose the other thing to say is that fixing morale in the NHS and deciding where society spends its money is outside the remit of the doctor. But fixing the NHS is the government's prerogative. Tom NewthNelson, British Columbia, Canada Have an opinion on anything you've read in the Guardian today? Please email us your letter and it will be considered for publication in our letters section.
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Fears assisted dying bill could be defeated as MPs warn ‘tide is turning'
There are growing fears Kim Leadbeater's assisted dying bill could be defeated when it returns to the Commons next week, as MPs claim confidence in it is rapidly being lost. The warning comes as Ms Leadbeater suffered her first major defeat on Friday, after MPs voted to introduce new safeguards to prevent health professionals raising the subject of assisted dying with children. They voted 259 in favour and 216 against an amendment tabled by Labour MP Dame Meg Hillier stating 'no health professional shall raise assisted dying with a person under 18'. It is understood Ms Leadbeater didn't support the amendment because she agrees with the British Medical Association, which has said doctors should not be put in the position where they are barred from raising it with patients. It comes amid concerns that if people under 18 with terminal illnesses are unable to get the advice they want from their doctor, they will turn to the internet, where they are more likely to be subject to misinformation. Labour MP Paul Waugh told The Independent that today's voting shows the bill has 'rapidly lost the confidence of MPs', adding that the 'strong momentum against it is now clear'. 'It had a Commons majority of 56 last November. That was cut to 36 last month on a key amendment. Today, we saw a further cut of the majority to 21 and 26 on amendments. And the final vote - a big defeat for the proposer of the bill by 43 votes - just underlined how uncomfortable MPs are.' Mr Waugh added: 'The more the scrutiny of this particular bill, the more MPs have deep concerns about its lack of safeguards for the vulnerable.' But sources close to Ms Leadbeater insisted there is no reason to believe momentum is being lost, pointing out that the decline in majorities came as a result of fewer MPs attending the debate overall. It is understood that Ms Leadbeater is confident that support for it remains strong. Kit Malthouse, who supports the bill said: "The evidence from today is that our numbers held strong. Our majority proportionally was the same. On one vote, where a fine judgment was required, obviously views of colleagues differed. But if anything, that would probably strengthen their conviction to vote for the bill, having supported us in other votes.' Danny Kruger, who has been a vocal opponent of the bill, said he is 'increasingly hopeful' it will be voted down next week. 'The tide is turning on the Assisted Suicide Bill', he said. While he described the success of the amendment to prevent health professionals from raising the subject of assisted dying with children as a 'big victory', he warned that the bill is 'still way too open to abuse'. Rachael Maskell, who is against the bill, added: 'It is clear that now MPs are engaging in the detail of the Bill that they can see the cracks and are losing confidence'. 'A very different picture was painted today to when the Bill passed with 56 votes in the autumn to an amendment passing by 43 votes today against the will of the Bill's sponsor. MPs now need to engage with the evidence which clearly sets out why this particular Bill is not fit for purpose', she told The Independent. But pro-assisted dying sources pointed out that people on both sides of the debate voted to support the extra safeguards for children. Debating the amendment, Dr Neil-Shastri-Hurst MP, a medical doctor, said: 'Those who have had the privilege of meeting a young person living with a terminal illness will know that they often display a maturity and a depth of understanding far beyond their years. 'To deny them the opportunity of a considered conversation about their future upon reaching adulthood is not an act of compassion, in my view; it is to abandon them. 'It is to leave them isolated, navigating a complex and deeply personal journey through the filter of online forums, rather than in dialogue with trusted, qualified professionals. We owe them better than that.' Opinion in the medical community has been divided over the bill, with the Royal College of Physicians (RCP) and Royal College of Psychiatrists (RCPsych) expressing concern, while some MPs who are doctors are among the Bill's strongest supporters. Seven RCPsych members, including a former president and vice president, have written to MPs to distance themselves from their college's concern, instead describing the Bill as 'workable, safe and compassionate' with a 'clear and transparent legal framework'. Meanwhile, Claire Macdonald, director of My Death, My Decision said 'no-one should be forced to suffer, and the British public wants politicians to change the law on assisted dying'. In a letter to MPs this week, Ms Leadbeater said supporters and opponents appear in agreement that 'if we are to pass this legislation, it should be the best and safest Bill possible'. She added: 'I'm confident it can and will be.' The proposed legislation would allow terminally-ill adults in England and Wales, with fewer than six months to live, to apply for an assisted death, subject to approval by two doctors and a panel featuring a social worker, senior legal figure and psychiatrist. MPs are entitled to have a free vote on the Bill and any amendments, meaning they vote according to their conscience rather than along party lines.
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
British mother Beth Martin's 'cause of death' is revealed: Tragic update on holidaymaker, 28, who collapsed on plane before 'two star' Turkish hospital removed her HEART
The alleged cause of death of a British mother who tragically died while on holiday in Turkey has been revealed. Beth Martin, 28, from Portsmouth, was rushed to hospital after she became 'delirious' just one day into a dream trip away with her husband Luke and two children, aged eight and five. She was quickly placed into critical care but tragically passed away around a day after she was first admitted on April 28. Beth's family claim they were kept in the dark about the seriousness of her condition and subsequent death - with Luke even being accused of 'poisoning' his wife by the Turkish authorities. In a further sickening development, a UK autopsy later revealed Beth's heart had been removed after she passed away in Turkey, according to a fundraiser set up for her family. A bombshell report has now claimed the mother died due to food poisoning, according to local media outlet Sozcu. The report said they had found no evidence that she died from 'traumatic effects'. The report, published by the Forensic Medicine Institution, said: 'It has been concluded that Martin's death occurred as a result of food poisoning and its complications.' It reportedly added that the full examination of Beth's heart had been completed. Husband Luke previously said he has suffered the 'deepest level of trauma' since his wife's passing. He said having to tell his young children they will never see their mother again 'broke him' and he described the ordeal as the 'worst week of his life'. 'Two weeks ago me, my wife and two kids set out for a family holiday to Turkey. Only three of us made it back,' Luke wrote on social media on May 11. 'I lost my wife, my children lost their mum, we lost the biggest piece of the puzzle that was our family. 'It has been the worst and most traumatic week of my entire life, and to top it off. I had to break the news to my babies that their mum isn't coming home, it broke me.' The Martin family flew out to Turkey on Sunday, April 27, but it is understood Beth started to feel unwell soon after they touched down in the airport. Luke called an ambulance the following day and she was taken to a 'destitute' hospital where she was quickly moved into intensive care. Beth was just a day into a trip with her husband Luke when she was rushed to husband According to the GoFundMe page, Luke was 'banned' from seeing his wife and was not regularly updated on her condition while she was being cared for. It is understood that doctors did raise some concerns about Beth's heart but she died the day after she was admitted to the hospital. To compound the nightmare, Luke was reportedly accused of poisoning his wife and interrogated by police. He was subsequently cleared and no further action was taken. In further claims levelled against Turkish authorities, the family also say they were made to carry Beth's body in a bag through the hospital. They then said they were told they would have to wait more than two weeks to repatriate her body so Luke 'paid thousands' for Beth to be flown home on the same flight as him.
