Three out of four parents of children with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) have been forced to give up work, or cut their hours, Sky News has learned.
In a survey of more than 500 people, two out of five (40%) had to leave their jobs, and more than one in three (33%) reduced their hours.
Most said it was because there was a lack of local authority help, and a large proportion blamed not enough school support.
Some also said it was down to a lack of flexibility from their employer.
The survey, specially commissioned by Sky News with the charity Support Send Kids, found that mostly women were affected.
Abigail Bates had to give up her job when she found that the nursery her daughter Harriet was in “couldn’t meet her needs”.
Harriet, who is two years old, has autism, global development delay, and sensory processing disorder.
Abigail said leaving her job has affected her family financially but “…with nurseries not having the knowledge or training in special educational needs I can’t work”.
“That leaves me with no choice but to meet her needs myself.”
Advertisement
Image: Harriet has autism, global development delay, and sensory processing disorder
She adds that it would be “lovely” to go to work which would be “a break in itself” but without the support available children are being “failed by the system”.
The number of special schools in England does not meet the rising demand of children with special educational needs and disabilities.
It means often children have to attend mainstream schools on reduced timetables, while others are waiting months, sometimes years, for special school places.
Harriet has been offered a special school place but it is only for three hours a day.
“Where can I get a job that’s going to take me for less than three hours because I have to go pick her up again?” she asks.
‘Withholding more places from children’
Caroline Withers, trustee of charity Support Send Kids, says access to special educational needs provision is being “gate kept” by local authorities.
“Budgets have been cut,” she says, “and then local authorities have entered into agreements with central government about the funding deficit they hold, and as part of those funding packages they’ve agreed to withhold more places from children”.
She adds that “the adversarial nature and withholding of support” in the system is “at the core of any reform”.
Image: Caroline Withers says access to special educational needs provision is being ‘gate kept’ by local authorities
‘Huge social and economic effects’
Hannah Peaker, director of policy and advocacy for the New Economics Foundation, says the number of parents leaving work, because of a lack of specialist provision, is detrimental to the economy.
“We’ve been in a period of economic stagnation”, she says “…so to not take advantage of one of the highest returning investments you can make [in early years education] where all the evidence suggests you would get that back and more for an investment that would have huge social and economic effects, including for the families involved, it just seems odd not to pursue that.”
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
She also states that not investing in early years education, considering the benefits to future job prospects and the economy, would be an act of “self-harm”.
A Department for Education spokesperson described a “system unable to cope with the level of need” following “years of increasing pressure”.
In a statement, they said: “We want every child to have the best start in life and to give flexibility to parents, which is why we’re rolling out more government-funded early years places, breakfast clubs in every primary school and wraparound childcare before and after primary school.
“We are also committed to putting inclusion and early intervention for children with SEND at the heart of the education system, and have already started that work by providing new online training to early educators to help them identify and support children with SEND.”
But what about his style ‘prince’? Some want that ditched too.
It’s a complicated but not impossible process. Andrew could, of course, just stop using it voluntarily.
Some want him to give up his home, too. For a non-working royal, the stately Royal Lodge, with its plum position on the Windsor Estate, is an uncomfortable optic.
With the reputation of the monarchy at risk, William does not want to appear weak. He’s putting loyalty to “the firm” firmly above his familial relationships.
Prince Andrew has always strongly denied the allegations, and restated on Friday: “I vigorously deny the accusations against me”. Sky News has approached him for comment on the fresh allegations set out in the Mail on Sunday.
But with Virginia Giuffre’s tragic death and posthumous memoir due out on Tuesday, Buckingham Palace will be braced for more scandal.
When Andrew gave up his titles, there was certainly a sense of relief.
There is now a sense of dread over what else could emerge.
Sky News’ royal commentator has explained why Prince Andrew has not given up being called a prince – while another expert has said “the decent thing” for him to do would be “go into exile” overseas.
Andrew announced on Friday that he would stop using his Duke of York title and relinquish all other honours, including his role as a Royal Knight Companion of the Most Noble Order of the Garter.
However, he will continue to be known as a prince.
Royal commentator Alastair Bruce said that while Andrew’s other honours and titles were conferred to him later in life, he became a prince when he was born to Elizabeth II while she was queen.
He told presenter Kamali Melbourne: “I think […] that style was quite special to the late Queen,” he said. “And perhaps the King, for the moment, thinks that can be left alone.
“It’s a matter really for the King, for the royal household, perhaps with the guidance and advice of government, which I’m sure they are taking.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:49
Who pushed Andrew to drop his titles?
Since Andrew’s announcement, there has been speculation over whether any further measures will be taken – and one author has now called for him to “go into exile”.
More on Prince Andrew
Related Topics:
Andrew Lownie, author of The Rise And Fall Of The House Of York, said: “The only way the story will go away is if he leaves Royal Lodge, goes into exile abroad with his ex-wife, and is basically stripped of all his honours, including Prince Andrew.”
Royal Lodge is the Windsor mansion Andrew lives in with his ex-wife, Sarah Ferguson, who has also lost her Duchess of York title.
Image: Andrew and his former wife continue to live on the Windsor estate. Pic: Reuters
Mr Lownie continued: “He makes out he’s an honourable man and he’s putting country and family first. Well, if he is, then the optics look terrible for the monarchy. A non-working royal in a 30-room Crown Estate property with a peppercorn rent.
“He should do the decent thing and go. And frankly, he should go into exile.”
Mr Lownie added if the Royal Family “genuinely want to cut links, they have to put pressure on him to voluntarily get out”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:11
Windsor’s take on Prince Andrew
Andrew’s decision to stop using his titles was announced amid renewed scrutiny of his relationship with paedophile Jeffrey Epstein, and fresh stories linked to the late Virginia Giuffre.
Ms Giuffre, who was trafficked by Epstein, alleged she was sexually assaulted by Andrew on three occasions – which he has always vigorously denied.
Bereaved families whose loved ones took their own lives after buying the same poison online have written to the prime minister demanding urgent action.
Warning: This article contains references to suicide
The group claims there have been “multiple missed opportunities” to shut down online forums that promote suicide and dangerous substances.
They warn that over 100 people have died after purchasing a particular poison in the last 10 years.
Among those who have written to Downing Street is Pete Aitken, whose daughter Hannah was 22 when she took her own life after buying the poison from a website.
Hannah was autistic and had ADHD. She was treated in six different mental health hospitals over a four-year period.
He said: “Autistic people seem to be most vulnerable to this kind of sort of poison and, you know, wanting to take their lives.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
4:05
Pete Aitken speaking to Sky News
Sky News is not naming the poison, but Hannah was able to buy a kilogram of it online. Just one gram is potentially fatal.
“There’s this disparity between the concentration required for its legitimate use and that required for ending your life. And it seems quite clear you could make a distinction,” Mr Aitken said.
Analysis from the Molly Rose Foundation and the group Families and Survivors to Prevent Online Suicide Harms says at least 133 people have died because of the poison. It also says coroners have written warnings about the substance on 65 separate occasions.
The report accuses the Home Office of failing to strengthen the regulation of the poison and says not enough is being done to close dangerous suicide forums online.
Lawyers representing the group want a public inquiry into the deaths.
In a joint letter to the prime minister, the families said: “We write as families whose loved ones were let down by a state that was too slow to respond to the threat.
“This series of failings requires a statutory response, not just to understand why our loved ones died but also to prevent more lives being lost in a similar way.”
The group’s lawyer, Merry Varney, from Leigh Day, said: “The government is rightly committed to preventing deaths through suicide, yet despite repeated warnings of the risks posed by an easily accessible substance, fatal in small quantities and essentially advertised on online forums, no meaningful steps have been taken.”
Image: Hannah’s dad is one of the family members to have signed the letter
A government spokesperson said: “Suicide devastates families and we are unequivocal about the responsibilities online services have to keep people safe on their platforms.
“Under the Online Safety Act, services must take action to prevent users from accessing illegal suicide and self-harm content and ensure children are protected from harmful content that promotes it.
“If they fail to do so, they can expect to face robust enforcement, including substantial fines.”
They added that the position is “closely monitored and reportable under the Poisons Act, meaning retailers must alert authorities if they suspect it is being bought to cause harm”.
“We will continue to keep dangerous substances under review to ensure the right safeguards are in place,” they said.
Anyone feeling emotionally distressed or suicidal can call Samaritans for help on 116 123 or email jo@samaritans.org in the UK. In the US, call the Samaritans branch in your area or 1 (800) 273-TALK.