Ruth Kelly's Decision : Cutting to the Heart of the Issue

Quite deservedly the decision of cabinet minister Ruth Kelly with regard to the education of her child with special educational needs has been the subject of much comment.

Some comment has been in respect of whether 'we' should indeed be commenting on it at all and the rest has been in respect of the decision itself. Much of that has been about the fact that the school is 'private' rather than state sector and what a betrayal of 'Labour' values that is. Looking at much of that commentary, it is nice to see that class consciousness (some terms in posts and commentary have included 'posh kids', 'great unwashed', 'plebs', 'middle classes') is still alive if not quite kicking (with Dr Martens on).

As Ruth Kelly used to be cabinet minister for education, making decisions on education for the rest of society, then of course where she sends her own child is in the public interest. Having direct experience of the service you preside over is a good guide in decision-making about that service. And she does. By all accounts her other three children do attend state schools. So her commitment to state education is at least on that score not in question. Indeed, it is possible for ordinary folk to have their disabled/SEN children sent to schools in the 'independent' sector if it can be proven (professional reports and the like) that their extra educational needs arising out of their disability/learning difficulty/complex needs cannot be met in any other way. However, only the most determined, articulate and knowledgeable of the 'system' and the law are likely to get such provision.

Keener minds have noticed that the real issue in this is that of special vs mainstream. The government has promoted a policy of inclusion in the mainstream education system for disabled children and those with special educational needs. And so right has this policy been judged to be that many special schools have been closed down, often against the wishes of those who use and benefit from them. Inclusion is great where it is appropriate. But it is often found more appropriate than is actually the case because of the perceived savings in cost of not having to provide 'special' services in addition to mainstream or universal ones. This is as true in education as in social care.

What has been exposed here is the continued necessity of specialist help in a special school. So stop closing them all down!

My favourite most incisive account of the situation, although admittedly its focus seems to touch on the private parts of the decision, is over at NHS Blog Doctor - the sentiment and language is spot on.

Read all about it....
Ruth Kelly should resign
David Aaronovitch sticks up for Ruth
Thanks, Ruth Kelly
why?....
This charming vision of inclusion isn't working
Every Disabled Child Matters