Unspeakable, vile attack on children with special educational needs

Irish Times report today:

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/0212/1233867933162.html

Says he's thinking of u-turning now. Imagine this was a smokescreen to divert energy and attention from the banking stuff ....

Aragon wrote:

Irish Times report today:

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/0212/1233867933162.html

MINISTER FOR Education Batt O’Keeffe is under growing pressure to rescind his controversial decision to cut special teacher support for over 530 children with mild general learning disabilities.

The surprise move, which has unleashed a storm of protest, will yield less than €7 million in annual savings for the department from a total budget of €9 billion, according to the Irish National Teachers’ Organisation (INTO).

Unusually, the 119 schools in question were informed of the cutback by letter on Tuesday morning without any prior consultation between the department and the INTO or special needs teachers. The union is seeking an urgent meeting with the Minister, in a bid to reverse the decision.

On RTÉ’s News at One yesterday, Mr O’Keeffe said he did not know exactly how much money the measure would save annually. Fine Gael education spokesman Brian Hayes said the “unforgivable” move was an “attack” on the most vulnerable pupils in the school system.

[quote="Aragon"]Irish Times report today:

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/0212/1233867933162.html[/quote]

There's nothing in that article to contradict anything Kate P said.

And Aragon even though you have a personal involvement here and are understandably upset at any proposed changes, the nature of your attack on Kate is not justified by anything she said in her post.

The notion that you labour under that any politician would go out of their way to do down children, particularly children with a learning disability, is just pure nonsense Aragon, there aren't any goodies & baddies here, there are just people/politicians trying to do the best job they can do in the circumstances we find ourselves in at the moment.

[quote="Auditor #9"]Says he's thinking of u-turning now. Imagine this was a smokescreen to divert energy and attention from the banking stuff ....

Aragon wrote:

Irish Times report today:

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/0212/1233867933162.html

It doesn't say he's thinking of doing a u-turn at all.

Quote :

Says he's thinking of u-turning now. Imagine this was a smokescreen to divert energy and attention from the banking stuff ....

Do I get a prize if I'm right?

tonys wrote:

It doesn't say he's thinking of doing a u-turn at all.

Indeed it doesn't - it says he is under pressure to rescind only.

tonys wrote:

Aragon wrote:

Irish Times report today:

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/0212/1233867933162.html

There's nothing in that article to contradict anything Kate P said.

And Aragon even though you have a personal involvement here and are understandably upset at any proposed changes, the nature of your attack on Kate is not justified by anything she said in her post.

The notion that you labour under that any politician would go out of their way to do down children, particularly children with a learning disability, is just pure nonsense Aragon, there aren't any goodies & baddies here, there are just people/politicians trying to do the best job they can do in the circumstances we find ourselves in at the moment.

That is utter nonsense. Predicably so from you tonys who, as I;ve said before, would be on here defending Fianna Fail even if they had murdered these children in cold blood in front of you. Perhaps we will get to that yet. I've already given you one example: the ghastly Mary Hanafin introduced a rule that restricted schools to a mximum of between 2 and 4 assessments per year per school - knowing full well that that would prevent many more children again from having their learining difficulties properly identified and supported. This was a financial decision which disregarded the human, social and educational costs to all these young people politicians are daily gong out of their way to save money by hurting children: chld benefit withdrawn, child care hlep withdrawn, special needs children abused. Dress it up anyway you like , it is disgusting behaviour and apologists for this sort of thing deserve everything the get: they should be shunned.

Aragon wrote:

tonys wrote:

Aragon wrote:

Irish Times report today:

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/0212/1233867933162.html

There's nothing in that article to contradict anything Kate P said.

And Aragon even though you have a personal involvement here and are understandably upset at any proposed changes, the nature of your attack on Kate is not justified by anything she said in her post.

The notion that you labour under that any politician would go out of their way to do down children, particularly children with a learning disability, is just pure nonsense Aragon, there aren't any goodies & baddies here, there are just people/politicians trying to do the best job they can do in the circumstances we find ourselves in at the moment.

That is utter nonsense. Predicably so from you tonys who, as I;ve said before, would be on here defending Fianna Fail even if they had murdered these children in cold blood in front of you. Perhaps we will get to that yet. I've already given you one example: the ghastly Mary Hanafin introduced a rule that restricted schools to a mximum of between 2 and 4 assessments per year per school - knowing full well that that would prevent many more children again from having their learining difficulties properly identified and supported. This was a financial decision which disregarded the human, social and educational costs to all these young people Politicians are daily gong out of their to save money by hurting children: chld benefit withdrawn, child care hlep withdrawn, special needs children abused. Dress it up anyway you like , it is disgusting behaviour and apologists for this sort of thing deserve everything the get: they should be shunned.

Sorry Aragon, I can't & won't try to argue with cartoon attitudes.

I am somewhat jarred off that they have cut this for a measly 7 million when the banks are getting 7 billion and still being allowed to pay some of their non-executive staff bonuses.

I do note that Lenihan does seem to slowly be getting to grips with bankers pay, but not fast enough.

I am not a natural enemy of FF (they got some pretty good infrastructure built in the boom that they don't get enough credit for, and the low government debt at the beginning of this crisis, plus the NPRF, are possibly the two reasons we may survive this-barely). BUT, CUTTING SEN teachers for a MEASLY 7 million is NOT the way to go.

There are some essentials; the health and education system are two of those.

The problem as I see it is that since Thatcher, there has been an explosion of the sort of semi-autistic, slightly psychopathic economist/banker types who, you can tell, think that any sort of social service (and Government itself) are not cost effective..... a friend was reading a newspaper interview with some eminent banker who was on about nurses, doctors, teachers etc not giving any return to the economy......the sort of person who probably thinks the sick should be shot as soon as they start to cost serious money in old age..... and who obviously has never had any close relationships with/responsibilities for anyone who is disabled, chronically ill etc.

Many of these people are complete moral/compassion voids on two legs, they know the price of everything and the value of nothing. Everything has to turn a profit or it gets abolished or privatised.

They are also the sort of people who rise to levels of responsibility in the banks, business, departments of Finance/treasuries, central banks, etc, and, because they advise from the shadows, unlike the politicians who are directly accountable to us, we have no way of making them realise that their free market religion is almost as much of a failure as Communism.

The environment, and compassion for others, not necessarily in that order, need to become more of a driver than economic growth and obscene profit.

Finally, no-one should be employed in places such any national treasury or Department of Finance without passing a compassion test.

tonys wrote:

Aragon wrote:

tonys wrote:

Aragon wrote:

Irish Times report today:

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/0212/1233867933162.html

There's nothing in that article to contradict anything Kate P said.

And Aragon even though you have a personal involvement here and are understandably upset at any proposed changes, the nature of your attack on Kate is not justified by anything she said in her post.

The notion that you labour under that any politician would go out of their way to do down children, particularly children with a learning disability, is just pure nonsense Aragon, there aren't any goodies & baddies here, there are just people/politicians trying to do the best job they can do in the circumstances we find ourselves in at the moment.

That is utter nonsense. Predicably so from you tonys who, as I;ve said before, would be on here defending Fianna Fail even if they had murdered these children in cold blood in front of you. Perhaps we will get to that yet. I've already given you one example: the ghastly Mary Hanafin introduced a rule that restricted schools to a mximum of between 2 and 4 assessments per year per school - knowing full well that that would prevent many more children again from having their learining difficulties properly identified and supported. This was a financial decision which disregarded the human, social and educational costs to all these young people Politicians are daily gong out of their to save money by hurting children: chld benefit withdrawn, child care hlep withdrawn, special needs children abused. Dress it up anyway you like , it is disgusting behaviour and apologists for this sort of thing deserve everything the get: they should be shunned.

Sorry Aragon, I can't & won't try to argue with cartoon attitudes.

Nobody asked you to do that tonys - what you really mean is that you are backed into a corner.

Did I hear that O'keeffe is considering a u-turn on the whole issue?

Gawd almighty - why announce something that you know is going to cause uproar and then chicken out of it a couple of days later.

Makes you look like a total muppet - still its consistent tho - thats why 82% of the electorate are downright peed off with this Government - No plan, no roadmap and no balls.

Eh.. I might have contributed to starting a rumour on the u-turn Edo - I misread the Irish Times which said he is under pressure to rescind ..

not that he shouldn't

Auditor #9 wrote:

Eh.. I might have contributed to starting a rumour on the u-turn Edo - I misread the Irish Times which said he is under pressure to rescind ..

not that he shouldn't

didnt hear from you or the Irish Times - it was a lot closer to the centre of power - FF Tds are getting in the neck big time

You'll be an expert on Prime Time next.

Edo wrote:

Did I hear that O'keeffe is considering a u-turn on the whole issue?

Gawd almighty - why announce something that you know is going to cause uproar and then chicken out of it a couple of days later.

Makes you look like a total muppet - still its consistent tho - thats why 82% of the electorate are downright peed off with this Government - No plan, no roadmap and no balls.

Don't Edo, if you take another step you'll embarrass yourself, perhaps forever.

Aragon wrote:

tonys wrote:

Aragon wrote:

Irish Times report today:

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/0212/1233867933162.html

There's nothing in that article to contradict anything Kate P said.

And Aragon even though you have a personal involvement here and are understandably upset at any proposed changes, the nature of your attack on Kate is not justified by anything she said in her post.

The notion that you labour under that any politician would go out of their way to do down children, particularly children with a learning disability, is just pure nonsense Aragon, there aren't any goodies & baddies here, there are just people/politicians trying to do the best job they can do in the circumstances we find ourselves in at the moment.

That is utter nonsense. Predicably so from you tonys who, as I;ve said before, would be on here defending Fianna Fail even if they had murdered these children in cold blood in front of you. Perhaps we will get to that yet. I've already given you one example: the ghastly Mary Hanafin introduced a rule that restricted schools to a mximum of between 2 and 4 assessments per year per school - knowing full well that that would prevent many more children again from having their learining difficulties properly identified and supported. This was a financial decision which disregarded the human, social and educational costs to all these young people politicians are daily gong out of their way to save money by hurting children: chld benefit withdrawn, child care hlep withdrawn, special needs children abused. Dress it up anyway you like , it is disgusting behaviour and apologists for this sort of thing deserve everything the get: they should be shunned.

Well said Aragon. Tonys is wrong when he claims people/politicians do not deliberately go out of their way to do down vulnerable children. There is a cabal of senior civil 'servants' at the top of Health and Education who have been running a campaign of abuse and intimidation for years against Special Education and they are ably assisted by the likes of Hanafin & Harney. They will in due course be exposed for what they are, just like the banking class have been exposed for the vile parasites they are.

Well, if you put it together with the first cuts last November of book grants for children from low income families and also allowances for education of Traveller children, a pattern emerges of going for the most vulnerable, needy and defenceless.

Of course the utilitarian explanation is that they don't have votes.

I will be offering up my vote to whoever shows any indication of supporting them.

The placing of a random ceiling on psychological assessments per school is arbitrary, short sighted and inhumane. To use the introduction of that system to claim there is a fall in children needing assistance is ghastly hypocrisy.

The Department of Education was trying to encourage children to go to their local school and have their needs met there, and it was working well. With cuts in SNAs (some of which have already happened) the children move schools and go to one where the numbers add up and they will all end up clustered in a few schools and travelling hours to get there. Dismissed SNAs will be on the dole and savings probably won't be made at all.

What infuriating nonsense.

Not to mention the fact that half of the jail population consists of improperly diagnosed/treated people with SEN.

The costs are merely being transferred 15 years... This is idiocy

Does anyone think the title of this thread could use some more rude words??

Quote :

The Department of Education is to cut special teacher support for children with mild general learning disabilities in 119 national schools across the country, it was confirmed today.

I think it's worth starting again with this and making some sense out of it, starting with the basics and an understanding of what 'mild general learning disability' is.

Leaving aside the behavioural and social consequences and symptoms some of which can be indicators of other conditions, it's an intellectual disability characterised by a significantly low IQ in the range of 50-70.

Can we agree on that much to start with?

Katie P wrote:

Quote :

The Department of Education is to cut special teacher support for children with mild general learning disabilities in 119 national schools across the country, it was confirmed today.

I think it's worth starting again with this and making some sense out of it, starting with the basics and an understanding of what 'mild general learning disability' is.

Leaving aside the behavioural and social consequences and symptoms some of which can be indicators of other conditions, it's an intellectual disability characterised by a significantly low IQ in the range of 50-70.

Can we agree on that much to start with?

Is there a link, or any general background for that Katie ? Is that how the Department of Education understands it ?

Would you say this covers it?

http://www.scoilnet.ie/article.aspx?id=3253

Yes. The Special Education Support Service has some word documents on it too.

www.sess.ie

The key feature is the intellectual capacity.

Katie P wrote:

Yes. The Special Education Support Service has some word documents on it too.

www.sess.ie

The key feature is the intellectual capacity.

The site describes how this would be likely to manifest itself:

Quote :

One of the most common learning characteristics of children with mild general learning disabilities is that they have difficulty mastering academic content. In addition, these students frequently have difficulty with social behaviours and in finding appropriate work once their formal education is completed.

It goes on -

Often individuals with MLD will display one or more of the following characteristics:

Delayed conceptual development
Limited ability to abstract and generalise
Difficulties with memory
Slow speech and language development
Limited social skills
Inappropriate or immature personal behaviour
Limited attention span and poor retention ability
Decreased motivation
Poor self-concept
Low self-esteem
General clumsiness
Lack of coordination and of gross and fine motor skills
Emotional disturbance
A minority may also have varying degrees of hearing or visual impairment

Quote :

Delayed conceptual development
Limited ability to abstract and generalise
Difficulties with memory
Slow speech and language development
Limited social skills
Inappropriate or immature personal behaviour
Limited attention span and poor retention ability
Decreased motivation
Poor self-concept
Low self-esteem
General clumsiness
Lack of coordination and of gross and fine motor skills
Emotional disturbance
A minority may also have varying degrees of hearing or visual impairment

The difficulty is that just about all of those are common to all kinds of other disabilities. For example, a child could have ADD or ADHD or autism and have quite a number of those characteristics but have a very high IQ.

Without the 50-70 IQ, there'll be no diagnosis of MGLD.

Katie P wrote:

Quote :

Delayed conceptual development
Limited ability to abstract and generalise
Difficulties with memory
Slow speech and language development
Limited social skills
Inappropriate or immature personal behaviour
Limited attention span and poor retention ability
Decreased motivation
Poor self-concept
Low self-esteem
General clumsiness
Lack of coordination and of gross and fine motor skills
Emotional disturbance
A minority may also have varying degrees of hearing or visual impairment

The difficulty is that just about all of those are common to all kinds of other disabilities. For example, a child could have ADD or ADHD or autism and have quite a number of those characteristics but have a very high IQ.

Without the 50-70 IQ, there'll be no diagnosis of MGLD.

Yes ?

Yes what?