Paces

Thinking personally about adult services - in 2002

When the picture was taken that sits on my desk of my daughter Sarah stood next to Dr Hari, Sarah would have been about 11 years old.

Today she is 29, and doing splendidly living apart from Mum and Dad, with two friends, in accommodation of her own. We are very proud of her and know what a difference Conductive Education has made to her life.

That's just to put into context the piece that follows, found while trawling for something else. I do not know who wrote it. Not me. Possibly someone called 'Jenny'. It seems to be based on an interview I gave the writer. I really do not remember. But it was written in 2002, shortly after Sarah had left school.

I have not amended or updated it - other than to correct the telephone number at the end. It is as it was written. A period piece with no contemporary relevance?  You must decide. But I'd be interested in the recent experiences of other parents and can be contacted by email or by phone - or by comment below.

Hurtling into a void

Sarah Perrin has just left school.

She should be looking forward to going to college, meeting new friends or starting a job – all the good things about growing up.

But all there is ahead for Sarah is a big question mark. Like many young people with severe disabilities, she is ‘hurtling into the void’ - as a recent report from the Joseph Rowntree Foundation put it.

Sarah has cerebral palsy and her communication and mobility problems mean she needs one-to-one support. Now that the state’s responsibility to provide five-day-a-week schooling is ended, there’s little on offer.

She is still entitled to further education, but instead of hundreds of further education courses to choose from, Sarah has only one - a three day a week course in ‘independent living skills’ at the Sheffield College. It’s the only one the college can offer the necessary support on. And that may not be possible  if transport isn’t provided – something which prevents many disabled people taking up opportunities on offer.

Her alternatives are one or two days in a day centre, staying at home or permanent residential accommodation – probably in the company of middle aged and elderly people.

It’s a bleak future for a young person who has aspirations to earn her own living and share a flat or house with friends her own age, who enjoys pop music and going out.

More and more young people with severe disabilities like Sarah are surviving into adulthood, but the Rowntree report says health and social services up and down the country are failing to meet their needs.

It talks of young people being ‘warehoused’ in day centres or residential units – instead of authorities providing the sorts of services that young people themselves want.

Sarah has already experienced adult residential care, says her father, Norman. Because she’s now an adult, she can no longer go to the local authority’s young people’s home, Chancet Wood, for the short breaks which help the family cope with the intensive care she needs.

“She used to enjoy her stays with the other children,” says Norman, “She now goes to an adult home for respite care . She has found the transition very difficult with no peer group and the youngest resident being over 30. The real problem is that Sarah’s main need is not for “care” but for interesting things to do, away from the family, like any young person. And such facilities do not exist.

Sarah is lucky in that her parents are determined she won’t end up in institutionalised care. Over the past decade they, together with other parents, campaigned to bring the Peto Institute’s conductive education for children with cerebral palsy to Sheffield. They’re determined now to show that integrated care and independent living arrangements can work.

But even for a seasoned campaigner, making sense of the fragmented services and getting the different authorities – health, social services, education – to work together over Sarah’s future is proving a daunting task.

“Mostly you learn about what’s available through the parents’ network rather than from the authorities,” he says.

Even where ‘strategies’ exist they don’t always work. All children with a  Statement of Special Needs have annual reviews to plan their ‘transition’ to adulthood. In Sarah’s case, it has failed because she has left school and her future is still up in the air. “We cannot talk with Sarah about her future because at the moment she has not got one,” says Norman.

“After 19 years it’s come to this, that there’s nothing for her, no courses, nowhere she can live independently and make a life of her own, that doesn’t depend totally on her family sorting it out,” he says.

Families are willing to take their share of the care, but they cannot be left to cope alone, he says. If they are, then one or both of the parents has to give up work – which means they also become dependent on society instead of being productive. 

And if the care burden becomes too great, families might just opt out all together, leaving the taxpayer to pick up the whole care bill instead of part of it.

“There’s one couple, I know” says Norman, “who finally gave up on the battle with their local authority to get resources for their adult son. In the end they transferred their house into his name, and moved out.”

“They rang up social services and said they’d left home and that their son was living with one of his disabled friends at the house. Social services were round within 12 hours.

“Actually the parents had bought a house nearby, but it was the only way they could get the support their son needed.”

Some parents feel the problem is basically one of resources, but Norman Perrin believes that it’s more than that. It’s do with a mind set that looks for ‘economies of scale’ rather than building individual solutions.

When residential accommodation can cost £1,000-£1,500 a week, he says, surely that money can be better used through a system of ‘direct payments’, so individuals themselves can buy-in support workers and set up independent living arrangements with a small group of friends? So far only about 5,000 people in the whole of the UK have had this choice.

Paces Centre in Sheffield is pioneering one possible solution – a project to help people with disabilities set up their own enterprises with support  - both in terms of accommodation, business advice and support workers to help them through the physical barriers.

If people with disabilities can be helped into a job in a supported environment it makes their lives more fulfilling and reduces the burden on society.

“But most of the really exciting innovations in this direction are coming from the voluntary sector. We need local authorities to be more willing to work in real partnerships and be more open to new solutions. Somehow we have to encourage a torrent of inventive new ideas for this group of young adults which will make a reality for them of social and economic inclusion.

Norman is keen to stress that this not just a Sheffield problem but a national one, as the Joseph Rowntree Report makes clear.

Meanwhile, Sarah is left wondering what will happen to her when her contemporaries are beginning their new lives in September.

Readers who may be interested in sharing their experiences and looking at what the future might hold, can contact Norman on 0114 284 4488.

 

 

First report of Labour SEN review - and actually there was something interesting

Special Needs Jungle reports "Special needs experts offer views for Labour's SEN plicy review". There are no surprises, but there was indeed one something worth a moment's attention which I copy below. First, the event itself - as Andrew Sutton recently wrote on Facebook 

"UK: SEN CHEWING OVER THE SAME OLD NOURISHMENT-FREE GRISTLE
The Labour Party is holding yet another weary review of 'special educational needs'. Look at its agenda, if you can bear to: http://www.nasen.org.uk/latestnews/?news=109

Not a hint that the system has no idea of what it is doing, employs 'teachers' with no training in pedagogy, and does not even grasp that this results in the fundamental problem of children's not being taught.

Just to reinforce the point, Andrew then added the Comment:

Why are they doing this anyway. The Government surely is about to publish a White Paper. The old agendas are all trampled flat, nobody has anything to say. Haven't people anything better to do to fill their (highly) paid time?

So it's good to find a nugget of something interesting - and not just because I too am a Churchill Fellow - recipient in 2007 of a Winston Churchill Memorial Trust travel fellowship (and yes, you should check it out). Here it is: an inspirational mother and daughter:

One inspirational mother and daughter team are Nadia Clark and her mother, Katie. Nadia has cerebral palsy and is deaf. She uses a vocal synthesiser to speak, but her indefatigable spirit and intelligence shines through and she soon hopes to go to University. She is the recipient of a Winston Churchill Foundation grant to research alternative methods of communication.

Her mother, Katie, is a woman of great determination and she has worked tirelessly to support her daughter. She spent two years looking for a school that would take Nadia, moving her family across the country to do so. She later formed the parent-carer forum, One Voice Communicating Together and believes the future for SEN & disability services should be about “looking at things differently and more creatively”. She stressed, and I thoroughly agree with this, the need for good emotional support for families in the early years, saying supporting parents’ self-esteem is vital if they are to be able to be strong for their children.

Each will find their own inspiration and interest in their story. As one who has just seen his daughter aged 29 years move out of the family home, I can assure anyone that "good emotional support" is essential for parents (... and grandparents ... and siblings) well beyond "the early years".

-----------------------------

You can find Special Needs Jungle's ever interesting updates on SEN on twitter as @SpcialNdsJungle and also on Facebook, though I haven't checked the link.

BTW I don't know how to link to Andrew's specific Status update on Facebook, but if you go searching for it, it was on Monday this week.

 

Schooling: when enough is enough

Much of my thinking time yesterday was spent pondering Paces' adult services and conductive education. Prompted by a meeting in the morning, the subject whirled around my head all the rest of the day and into the evening.

Partly my pondering is about conductive education. We know something about "conductive pedagogy"; but what do we know of "conductive andragogy"? We know something about "conductive upbringing"; but what do we know about "conductive living?" Coincidentally, I yesterday, too, happened to re-read Andrew Sutton's "Memorandum to the Norwegians", about which he had posted on his blog ("CE Research: An overview"). Noting that strictly it falls outside his brief, Andrew writes that "the much smaller field of adult conductive rehabilitation has attracted a small body of empirical outcome research" to which similar methodoclogical issues apply as to research into conductive education with children. In short, nothing much to help me there.

Partly my pondering was also personal; relating to the imminent move of my daughter into a home of her own with two friends. It has been a long time coming: she, and we her parents, were ready for it several years ago. I must confess I find it difficult to stop refering to her as a "girl" - and to the three friends as "the three girls". She's 29, one of her friends is 30 and I should do better. Sometimes, I manage "young women". Anyhow, I was wondering about the movement from childhood to adulthood, from children's services to adults' services, from school to ... to what? Maybe there is no "what?"

The recent SEN Green Paper from the DfE proposed a unitary system of education, care and health assessement and the maintenance of an individual plan from 0-25 years. This would be a radical step, not just in the notion of education, care and health bureaucracies having to find ways of working with each other, but also because it forces a taking account of what it means to leave school, to set out on becoming an adult, on becoming independent. Local authorities, at least as far as I know, have always contended that their responsibility to maintain a statement of special educational need ends at 19 years.

Coincidentally, too, I yesterday had an email from Susie Mallett (thanks, Susie) alerting me to an article in yesterday morning's Daily Telegraph: "Down's Syndrome case could see thousands of special needs adults taught alongside children". Apparently, (one says "apparently", relying on only one journalist's report), "the father of a woman with Down’s Syndrome is attempting to force his local council to let her stay in school until she turns 25".

And I wonder, why on earth would he want to do that? Perhaps, because there is no real alternative for her and him and the family? That would seem a possible explanation though not one that the journalist explores. Yet that is precisely why, as I began this post, I was yesterday pondering what Paces' adult sevices should be. What is Paces' alternative? One point I was quite clear on: Paces' adult services should not be "more school"; not more 'pedagogy'.

As we all move, as I hope we will, to the introduction of 0-25 year individual plans; as the 'personalisation' policy extends ever wider across adult and increasingly children's services, the progression, the transition, from childhood to adulthood, the need for all to able to leave behind childhood and schooling will need to be argued for and the necessary arrangements funded. What these should not be, is more school.

 

 

Joint Committee on Human Rights inquires into independent living for disabled adults

On 11^th February 2011,  the Joint Committee on Human Rights, chaired by Dr Hywel Francis MP, launched an inquiry into the implementation of the right of disabled people to independent living.

Joint Committees consist of MPs and Lords and conduct an ongoing examination of a particular area (such as human rights). The Joint Committee on Human Rights is a permanent committee.

I had not heard of this particular enquiry until today and have not yet satisfactorily tracked down a written record of its proceedings. (If anyone can help, please do so in a Comment below). I am grateful to Carer Watch’s blog for the alert. If you follow the link, you will find you can download or play a video of proceedings this week, on 18^th October (see earlier proceedings below).

Unfortunately, the call for written submissions has long-since closed, on Friday 29^th April 2011.

However, the launch of the inquiry on the Joint Committee website contains a clearly written remit of the inquiry and a useful account of independent living.

There, you will find a description of  “Independent living” by the Office for Disability Issues: "Independent living is about disabled people having the same level of choice, control and freedom in their daily lives as any other person."

[This brought to mind our experience of a recent meeting with social workers, planning for our daughter Sarah’s imminent move into her own accommodation with two friends.  I asserted that she was entitled to “go home” from time to time like any other young person and that her care needed to be managed to enable her to do so. This seemed to cause one of the social workers present some considerable difficulty, because of the impact on her department’s budgets.]

There is also a useful ‘history lesson’ on recent governments’ policy:

Independent living was placed at the heart of the New Labour Government’s policy on disability. Each of the three main political parties expressed their approval of the Independent Living Strategy published in 2008, which sets out actions aimed at improving the choice and control disabled people have over the services they need to live their daily lives. The aims of the strategy are that:

• Disabled people (including older disabled people) who need support to go about their daily lives will have greater choice and control over how support is provided
• Disabled people (including older disabled people) will have greater access to housing, education, employment, leisure and transport opportunities and to participation in family and community life.

In June 2010, the Coalition Government explained that it was looking at further ways of taking the Independent Living Strategy forward.

As I read this, I am reminded, too, of the recent SEN Green Paper, and the commitment in Section 4 “Preparing for Adulthood” to addressing the experience of so many that leaving school for adult services is like ‘leaping off a cliff’ or ‘hurtling into a void’.  “Too often”, the Green Paper rightly asserts, “the opportunities and support available to disabled young people and young people with SEN fall short of what they need to make a successful transition to adult life.”

For this reason, we at Paces called our adult transition programme “Leaping the Void”.  Our Mission Statement, which you can see at the top of this blog is explicit: “Supporting families supporting disabled children into independent adulthood as active citizens, especially those with cerebral palsy and particularly through Conductive Education.”  One of our earliest statements about our adult services asserted that inclusion, truly understood, was about “the politics of citizenship” and that “We need a view of inclusion which is lifelong.”

These early formulations seem, to me, to chime harmoniously with the definition from the Office for Disability issues quoted above: "Independent living is about disabled people having the same level of choice, control and freedom in their daily lives as any other person" – definitions that are inclusive, about what it means to be a member of society and one’s community and are lifelong.

What could this mean for conductive education and young adults? We know of ‘conductive pedagogy’: what do we know of ‘conductive andragogy?'. We know of ‘conductive upbringing': what do we know of 'conductive living'?  As we at Paces look forward, hopefully, to our School becoming a Special Free School from September 2012, so too we are re-assessing our conductive education work with those young adults who may (or could have) attended Paces School as children with Statements of Special Educational Need. As two of our very first 4 pupils in 1997, finally take steps to living independently of their parents, what ought conductive education have to say about their “independent living”?

 

 

On 24^th May 2011, the Joint Committee held its first public evidence session http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/joint-select/human-rights-committee/news/evidence-session-on-independent-living/

Witnesses

 

    i. National Centre for Independent Living, RADAR, Disability Alliance, and UK Disabled People’s Council

    ii. Independent Living in Scotland, Disability Wales and Disability Action

 

On 28^th June 2011, the Joint Committee held  a further public evidence session

http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/joint-select/human-rights-committee/news/independent-living-evidence-session-on-28-june/

The implementation of the right of disabled people to independent living

Witnesses

    i. Disabled people with experience of independent living issues

    ii. Carers UK, People First, Scope, and Age UK

 

On 18^th October, as linked above, the Committee held its third session.

 

On 25^th October there is a further session of evidence

http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/joint-select/human-rights-committee/news/independent-living-evidence-session-on-25-october/

 

 

Each of these links has a further link to a video recording of the evidence sessions.

 

 

 

Taking the long view, for a moment more

Responding in a Comment to my post Taking the long view, for the moment, Andrew Sutton wrote:

I too wish every success to everybody trying 'to work out how, sustainably, to create "a place for ​conductive pedagogy that can accommodate children up to age 18" .... and beyond, no doubt, to independent citizenship apart from their parents.'

In brutal reality, I wonder how many people/institutions this might add up to world wide. Tsad Kadima have shown the way, the Perrin family is trying very hard (but is Paces involved institutionally?)

A fair question, "but is Paces involved institutionally?' Well .... yes, sort of .... and maybe in a surprising and interesting way, although the answer is not quite straightforward.

The "Perrin family" (with the Hague family and the Abbey family) have certainly taken on this work, as distinct from, say, the City Council. We have, for instance, supported ourselves as parents through this transition, there being nothing else on offer. The experience has convinced me completely that this is a transition with which parents, just as much as the young people, need a guiding hand. We have, also, made the running in finding accommodation and, if our earlier aspirations fell to the wayside along this 11 year journey, to set up a social enterprise, owned by the young people themselves from which they would rent accommodation, we have in the end found accommodation that looks like it might work very well indeed. And, no, Paces has not really been involved in that.

However, as a settled solution appeared, so our adult group, "Leaping the Void", has actively - and conductively - helped two of the young women, including Sarah, in the approach to the transition. Last week, they were choosing colours for their bedroom walls. Yesterday, they all went to tea together. I have no doubt that this is why Sarah obviously feels positive about it. So, yes, Andrew, when the time came, institutionally, Paces stepped up to the mark.

What complicates the answer, what makes it perhaps more interesting, is this: Paces Campus was set up, as we used to put it, to create a resource for children and young people with cerebral palsy and their families at the heart of a local community centre. If anyone would like to see more, take a look at Paces Campus website, or visit us on Facebook. It's an unusual model for a conductive education centre but one with several advantages for mutual support.

The bungalow which the the three young women will shortly make their home has been bought and refurbished by AbbeyCare. AbbeyCare's office is based at Paces Campus and its entrepreneurial founders are parents of a daughter with cerebral palsy who, when she was younger, attended Paces School and is one of the three housemates. AbbeyCare will supply the care package; Paces will supply daily activities during the week, as well as some evenings and weekends. This, to me, is a fine example of the Campus mutual model in action. So, yes, Paces Campus is institutionally involved.

Obviously all this is not solidly established; no more than the City Council do we have a smooth, well-ordered process for managing the self-determination aspirations of other young men and women who might wish to follow. Sarah and her two friends remain our foremost pioneers, helping us get it right. (In a fairer world, they might be paid as consultants, might they not?)

What interests me, aside from being Sarah's Dad, as Paces' Chief Executive for a little while longer yet, is the Government's intent, set out in the SEND Green Paper, for a unitary health, care and education plan for each individual, to be maintained from 0-25 years. In other words, at a stroke, we will have 'lept the void' that faces so many at 18, on leaving school, and 'institutionalised' the planning for the transition to actual independent living, away from the parental home, for those who wish it. Now we as a society, as a bunch of schools and institutions, can do this well or badly - or even not at all. But crucially, there will be a structure, across health, care and education, for achieving this, which in our experience, is almost entirely non-existent, currently, despite the good will and efforts of the individual social workers involved.

How then should Paces respond? (1) How should we arrange "a place for ​conductive pedagogy that can accommodate children up to ...." not age 18 but age 25, and make the experience for them of perhaps coming to Paces almost daily from 18 to 25 years, from leaving school to leaving the parental home, conductively meaningful yet quite distinct from "school"? and (2) How should we arrange for their journeying "beyond, no doubt, to independent citizenship apart from their parents", to live conductive lives, in and from their homes, perhaps coming to Paces rarely?

Two quite separate questions. Needing two quite separate answers. If there are conductors out there who can help with creating these answers, I would really like to hear from you.

And my thanks for the challenging question, Andrew.

 

Taking the long view, for the moment

Just heard Sarah's going to be home late. Hasn't yet left Paces. Don't know what time she'll be in for tea. Transport company being evasive about where her taxi is and likely time to pick her up. Funny same thing happened last Friday. 

Next week she's joining her two friends - and soon to be housemates - for afternoon tea, to see their new bungalow. All refurbished and newly painted and kitted out by AbbeyCare. Sarah has chosen lilac for her bedroom colour scheme. The great and probably unique thing about AbbeyCare is that it was set up by parents of a child, now young woman, with cerebral palsy, and their speciality is caring for the younger disabled client with complex health needs in their own homes.

It's good to feel there'll be someone to care for Sarah when in future the taxi is late, as well as the team at Paces.

Sometimes it's hard to take the long view. Just now I'm more concerned about the next few weeks and Sarah leaving home for her new home.

What set me off with this little posting was a comment over on Conductive World, Andrew reflecting on the "inevitably long-term perspectives" of parents, as he draws attention to a posting on a Belgian Conductive Education blog, which Andrew kindly translates on his blog.

It's a familiar story - and worry:

This anxiety refers to a question: what can be the sense of a process of guiding one's children on a along a path... that ultimately takes the form of an dead end? What is the sense of a process that ask someone to go forwards... towards a brick wall.
Unfortunately, the answer is a simple one: there is no sense!

The writer calls it "a brick wall"; we've said it's like "jumping off a cliff" or "hurtling into a void" (which is why we called our young adult group "Leaping the Void"). The challenge is continuity, taking the long-term perspective, the long view, helping young people "into independent adulthood as active citizens" as it says in the header to this blog.

The SEN Green Paper is an odd document, I find; rather muddled and internally contradictory. But it does propose one much needed radical change, the recognition - insistence even - on the importance of individual planning from 0 - 25 years. For me, of course, this raises - as it has at Paces since about 2000 - all sorts of questions about how Sarah (and others in Leaping the Void) should be helped to discover for herself what a 'conductive life' might mean and how 'conductive living' might- or should - replace 'conductive upbringing' or 'conductive pedgagogy'.

I wish our Belgian friends every success as they try to work out how, sustainably, to create "a place for ​conductive pedagogy that can accommodate children up to age 18" .... and beyond, no doubt, to independent citizenship apart from their parents.

Cherish the Parents

Over on Conductive World, Andrew Sutton asks "Cherish parents. Is this bureaucratically possible?"

Together, Sarah, her Mum and I are perhaps about to experience a time of enormous change. It is one we, her parents at least, are looking forward to and yet are anxious about, swinging constantly between these two extremes. Sarah is about to move into a new home, along with two of her friends.

As part of this process, we have received the following questionnaire. It is entitled "Individual Support Plan". Presumably to be filled in by Sarah, there are 7 questions:

1. My Life at the moment

2. What is important and essential to me?

3. What do I want to change?

4. What can I bring with me? (e.g. mobility car, special equipment, Informal Support, DLA)

5. How will I make, or be supported to make, decisions?

6. How will I be supported and how will I spend my budget?(Including contingency)

7. Making my plan happen. (E.g. Bank account; arrange service start etc.)

I cannot find the words to describe how this makes me feel other than that I haven't a clue how to help Sarah go about filling it in.  Do you?

"Care" is not enough

"Let's not put those with learning disabilities on the scrap heap" urges John Buchingham at the "Labour List" blog.

Prompted, I suspect, by the recent abuse revelations from BBC Panorama at the Winterbourne View care home and, perhaps specifically by a speaker on BBC Question Time, the central point John makes is, in my view, an absolutely correct one:

"So let’s focus not on who owns care homes; but on changing them from just ‘care’ homes into extensions of schooling – into places where those with delayed abilities can continue to learn ...."

John opens his blog post with an observation about how, for people with PMLD, the experience of leaving school can be very different from that of most people. John is making his point mainly around communication but he might have made the point more broadly true - and perhaps does so when he writes: "Learning is a lifelong process for all of us – but even more so for those who learn less quickly and who need extra help".

As someone involved with the conductive schooling of children with statements of special educational need and then with the same group as they make the transition to adulthood, I come back time and time again to wondering what, in the ideal world, conductive education should be offering this group. At Paces, we have experimented with some innovative ideas - but have precious little funding to establish something sustainable.

The recent SEN Green paper proposes a single "straighforward plan" covering 0-25 years, which points in the right direction as far as "the family's ambitions for their child from the early years to adulthood". However, this aspiration may not have the concrete detail that John Buckingham is reaching for so that learning is lifelong for everyone. For that to be a reality for people we at Paces try to help, we all need to be asking how learning is sustained at 35, 45, 55 and older.  Simply being in "Care Homes", whoever runs them, does not go far enough, as John says.

Wolf review of vocational education

With the uncatchy title "Review of Vocational - The Wolf Report", DfE has announced the publication of the review of vocational education by Professor Alison Wolf.

The report "considers how vocational education for 14- to 19-year-olds can be improved in order to promote successful progression into the labour market and into higher level education and training routes, and provides practical recommendations to help inform future policy direction, taking into account current financial constraints."

Secretary of State, Michael Gove's widely reported take on the report, in a parliamentary written answer is that "too many existing vocational qualifications are of poor quality or are offered inappropriately to young people. Too many young people are studying courses that do not enable them to progress." 

Of general interest, the report is a challenging contribution to an important debate, and worth reading carefully on that count. But my first, admittedly quick, reading suggests there is not much here in curriculum terms for those of us engaged in creating innovative new opportunities in conductive education classrooms for this age group.

There is, however, this:

"… this country has many young people who are classified as having ‘special educational needs’, without being severely disabled, and/or are highly disengaged, persistently truant, and, at the extreme, excluded from school. This is an international phenomenon; but England is towards the top end in its proportion of young people who are failing to achieve basic academic competencies by the age of 16 The performance of both other countries, and of the best schools in this one, make it clear that our current levels of low attainment are in no way inevitable.

"Although Foundation Learning was and is a genuine attempt to develop a curriculum suited to these young people, in practice there is a risk that it will simply legitimise failure with a significant proportion of this low-attaining group. A detailed examination of educational programmes designed for the most low-achieving was beyond the remit of this Review. They are not necessarily or even predominantly vocational in any real sense of the word; and concrete recommendations here would also pre-empt the Department’s ongoing review of SEN provision."

We must wait, therefore, until the publication on Tuesday next of the DfE's Green Paper on Special Educational Needs for further insights. (The link is to a post on Conductive World blog).

What does catch my eye is ".... educational programmes designed for the most low-achieving ... are not necessarily or even predominantly vocational in any real sense of the word".  So what might a curriculum look like that is in any sense at all vocational for this group?

May I be allowed to end on a small quibble? It's with the perspective in the phrase "most low-achieving". Of course we know what Professor Wolf means. But it rather belittles the amazing achievements of some, perhaps many, in this group - despite all the odds. And, perhaps, adds then to the wrong expectations and solutions.  Something of the same perspective, which I dare say is pervasive, is also found in the earlier "young people who are failing to achieve". Again, one understands what is meant and undoubtedly there are young people who are not achieving what they might; but the failure is on the part of the system and the teachers, not the pupils. Let us not "blame the victim". It is we who are failing them; not they who are failing us. The perspective is important. It is a perspective I first learned from conductive education.

 

Unlike me, they would not love her

"Unlike me, they would not love her", so said Janet Cameron, in April 2006, rejecting the option of her 24-year old daughter being in permanent care. "One day, we may have to accept that Sophie would be better off living elsewhere, that we can no longer manage. But I will feel that I have failed her again." For a year, Janet had been writing in the Guardian of being a carer for her daughter. It is evident that being Sophie's parent, her Mum, was first and foremost.

On 30th May 2006, Sophie died suddenly and unexpectedly.

Janet's last "Who Cares?" column appeared on 6 September 2006.

Sarah' like most evenings, is sitting on the sofa in the front room, drawing while listening to tapes and watching Jamie Oliver on TV. Her Mum has gone upstairs - possibly to check emails. I'm .... well, I'm writing this.  In all, a very ordinary evening. Typical even.  We've had an easy pleasant day. Indistinguishable from almost any other Saturday.  The sun shone for a while: a chance to continue tidying up in the garden, ready for spring.

We are at the point when it is becoming increasingly difficult to manage and - what is perhaps more important but probably counts for little in the scheme of things - we should like to have for ourselves what time remains to us of our own lives. 

Ideally, we would find somewhere for Sarah to live with her friend, Kirstin. But we are no nearer solving that than we were when she left school 11 years ago.  As a society, we seem to have no solution, no system to manage the transition to living independently - for young adults or their parents.

Like Janet Cameron, I find the thought of Sarah going into care unbearable. yet if something should happen to one of her parents before we get her settled, that is what will happen. Who, in care, would love her, like her Mum and I do?