Jump to content

Canopus

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    2,089

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Posts posted by Canopus

  1. Posted · Report reply

    Absolutely their prerogative - and in my own post I highlighted my concerns about LA funding and the LA getting 'first dibs' on services - but...

     

    There is also the issue whether the government funding of the NAS means that it acts in the interest of the goverment before that of the people it represents. If it decides to stand up for the people it represents whilst violating the terms and conditions attached to government grants then the NAS will be biting the hand that feeds it. The NAS is not the only government funded ASD charity, so even if there were 5 or 6 medium sized ASD support organisations instead of the NAS then theoretically they could all be subject to government funding and control.

     

    And as I commented earlier, it is always noticable that when the funding is under threat it is the outreach service that's threatened with closure, and a scrabble then ensues in the wider community to lobby on their behalf... you see the flaw in that? Sadly, many other people miss it too...

     

    I see the flaw in that.

  3. Posted · Report reply

    I'm a bit confused by the turn this topic has taken, 'cos i thought it was sort of to gauge how people felt about the NAS as opposed to lots of smaller charities? The general consensus seems to be that one big charity is flawed but probably less flawed/better than lots of littlun's(?)

     

    I don't think the sample space is sufficiently large enough to draw any conclusions yet.

     

    Asking people to define wheres and whyfors of what a charity 'is' or who's entititled to charity status/who isn't seems wayyyy off topic?

     

    Charities are free to decline donations from whoever they want. If a charity accepts money from the government then it will almost certainly come with strings attached. I know of a local AS charity that has refused money from the government because they did not agree to various terms and conditions.

  4. Posted · Report reply

    All of the schools I attended were registered charities. I remember finding it amusing, but apparently it is normal for a school to be a registered charity. There has been an issue recently about whether independent school should qualify as registered charities, but I don't remember what the conclusion of that was in the end.

     

    Were they religious schools or foundation schools? These are often registered as charities. Bog standard state schools owned by the local authority (and that's most secular schools) are not registered as charities.

  5. Posted · Report reply

    To take the hospital example, Governments give money to hospitals, hospitals provide a plethora of services and it is the Chief Executives and others who decide where the funding goes and how it is split between the services offered. It is why we end up with the situation where some health authorities pay for a treatment that others do not. The NAS for instance does something similar. It takes the Government funding and decides how to share this out between the different services. In the same way that the Government wouldn't be aware of all the different treatments and therapies offered by hospitals, they wouldn't be aware of all the services and provisions run by or overseen by the NAS.

     

    In that case, explain:

     

    1. Why are NHS hospitals not charities?

     

    2. Why is the NAS not a public sector institution?

  7. Posted · Report reply

    Because the charity is surely better placed to direct the funds appropriately? :unsure: The Governemnt will not know what services are required; this comes from (funded) research conducted by charities.

     

    Governments are lobbied all the time by many people and organisations. They do know what the lobbying people want.

     

    If your claim that the government does not know what services are required is as strong as you believe it to be, then it means that hospitals, schools, and the armed forces should all become charities.

  8. Posted · Report reply

    My mum works for a registered charity which also receives donations from the UK government, the Isle of Man and also the EU. They do not even work in the EU. I don't think you can be right about the definition of a charity there.

     

    I don't know who described the NSPCC as a fake charity or criticised the type of work they do, but one person's opinion does not necessarily make it the truth.

     

    Where do you get this from? I work for a charity which gets quite a lot of money from the government - if they didn't they would not be able to pay my salary

     

    I recommend you do a Google search about government funded charities. There's quite a lot out there and some of it makes alarming reading.

     

    Bigger charities have more power and whilst this could be construed in some incidences (i.e. who they are accountable to, who they represent) a problematic

     

    This raises the question of why a government should give money to a charity rather than spending it on providing services and support for the people the charity represents.

  9. Posted · Report reply

    1: I don't believe that community support (or any sort of aid) should be directly funded from charity coffers. i think the more that happens the less social responsibility there is for us to take care of society's most needy. In the real world, I think charities have to spend money on direct support, but i think that should be directed through education and lobbying rather than offering individual awards, handouts and 'daily living' support. It's the old 'give a man a fish' principle...

     

    There is the old saying that charity sees the need but not the cause. However, will government lobbying always be successful? Many organisations have been lobbying successive governments for decades (proportional representation in elections being a classic example) without an ounce of success. Governments generally don't act unless they see an advantage for themselves into taking action. This is why self help and direct action organisations (for various issues) continue to thrive worldwide.

     

    2: Personally, I would never embrace a segregationist (and potentially disabling) policy of 'home education with mininum interference' but i would certainly not want to see 'square pegs pushed into round holes' for the sake of ideologically sound but flawed in practice inclusion policies. The complexities of this issue are huge, but effectively it's a three way argument about autonomy, cultural exemption and difference-blind liberalism, and that is complicated in disability generally (but autism specifically) by the fact that compromised understanding may mean many individuals are actually unequal to the task of 'seeing' the benefits or pitfalls of each option for themselves.

     

    I used two extremities to illustrate a possible conflict of interest when in practice there are many shades of grey in between. I will make the point that the NAS is currently very much in favour of inclusion and improving support and services for SEN in mainstream schools. They tolerate home education but they see it more of a last resort rather than something that should be made more popular and widespread. The result of this is that some parents who choose to home educate find that the NAS has little to offer them. They usually end up deriving more support from the 'non ASD specific' home education community.

     

    3: I think services need to be directed where they are most needed. At the moment I am concerned that shifts in what autism means have led to the further disenfranchisement of those more profoundly affected. I suspect huge numbers in the AS community would disagree with me on that. This is defintely an area that needs the 'vs' removed and something more holistic inserted!

     

    Again, I used two extremities when in reality there are as many boxes as there are individuals with ASDs. Developments in the knowledge of ASDs over the past 20 or so years have redefined the scope and definition of ASD. The next part is how well have ASD support organisations responded to the developments? There have been concerns by both parents and adults with ASDs that the NAS provides much better support and services to people with LFA than people with HFA who have higher than average subject knowledge or academic ability.

     

    4: Again, not an easy one, and it encompasses aspects of all of the above. Certainly I'm in favour of selective amendments to an individual's curriculum, especially regarding self help, but not at the expense of core skills that actually contribute to abilities in self management. I think the best situation is to 'adapt' the curriculum as far as possible to meet the individual needs - i.e. foreign language study should include international sign, Maths & English taught through 'maths and English friendly' domestic/social skills, domestic rather than industrial science etc etc.

     

    It isn't actually possible to adapt the state school curriculum to meet the individual needs of students as they have to follow what the government and exam boards dictate. This is not really an ASD issue but a general education issue but it explains why there is considerable support for ASD specific schools that have the autonomy to tailor a curriculum to meet the needs and desires of students rather than providing a curriculum similar to that of the National Curriculum. A hypothetical example could be for a student who is ready for A Level maths at the age of 13, wants to take an English language GCSE as they have serious difficulty with Shakespeare and poetry, does not wish to take more than 4 GCSEs, has an interest in video production with the intentions of a career in this subject, and requires the teaching of certain life skills that are unavailable in mainstream schools.

     

     

     

  10. Posted · Report reply

    The problem with several national groups is that it lacks cohesion, and I don't see any reason why one national group should be any less effective at addressing all of those areas (through different 'departments') than lots of different groups that would all be fighting over finite resources. In fact, the problem could get much worse, because areas of 'need' to which the public were less sympathetic (i.e. individual support for adults on housing etc) would lose out to ones which aroused more sympathy (like children). Of course, that happens anyway, but at least the NAS are accountable across the board. In the other scenario, the most succesful lobbyists would be legitimised in taking the lion's share by saying 'well it's nothing to do with us' and 'well we're only responding to public demand'...

     

    Something you have to take into account are conflicts of interest within the ASD community when it comes to what they want their service providers to provide. Examples include:

     

    1. Lobbying the government vs providing self help and support for individuals.

     

    2. Better support and services for SEN in mainstream schools vs home education with minimum involvement from the local authority.

     

    3. Services for AS and HFA vs services for traditional or Kanner autism.

     

    4. Access to the National Curriculum and GCSEs vs teaching useful life skills and studying subjects that are of interest or may be useful in the future that are not necessarily part of the National Curriculum.

     

  11. Posted · Report reply

    I have no idea what the solution is, but I think there are flaws with both 'models', i.e. a national group trying to be all things to all people or a local group that may well have it's own agenda or perspectives(?) I think probably at a 'National' level a 'National' group is probably the most beneficial, but I also think they should be more active within (and keeping an eye on, perhaps) what goes on at local levels.

     

    I think you are missing the point here. It isn't a national vs local argument. It's the NAS vs several national groups, each having their own strengths. For example, one could focus primarily on children; another on adults; another on lobbying the government; another on providing self help and support to individuals; another on advising schools and colleges; and so on.

  12. Posted · Report reply

    We are now supposed to support the NAS with their criteria. Some of which is not relevent to me. But then that would be selfish if I wanted a local or national group to only focus on what my needs were at that particular time.

     

    I dispute that. If a local group absorbed into a national group no longer provides as good a local service to its members, but instead sees them as a resource to support the interests of the national group which are of much less interest to its members, then I would consider it as a bad thing.

     

    I dont see that the government or even private companies will fund more networks,networks who may still provide the same support and advice already being provided by NAS.

     

    Something I find cause for concern about the NAS is that they are registered as a charity but they receive quite a lot of money from the government. Officially a charity is supposed to rely upon voluntary donations and not get a penny from the government. Last year there was anger at the way the NSPCC was so heavily financed by the government that the term fake charity was coined. The NSPCC was criticised for doing work on behalf of the government rather than the people it is supposed to stand up for.

  13. Posted · Report reply

    but the tories are stating that they WANT to cut schools budgets and 1:1 and the other two are saying the opposite. the OP asked about the tories policy - I said that either if the others are offering better policies imo. I stand by that.

     

    I'm not intending to influence who you vote for in any way. Expect swingeing cuts to public services after the election regardless of who wins. I'm also preparing myself for a 20% VAT rate. It all goes back to the saying 'it's the economy, stupid'.

  14. Posted · Report reply

    I disasgree - Labour have ringfenced the schools budgets in their manifesto

     

    A manifesto is NOT a legally binding document. This means there is no legal requirement for a political party to have to implement its manifesto 'commitments' in practice. A judge in a court case a few years ago made this point clear.

  16. Posted · Report reply

    Tory policy is to slash education budgets and to "encourage" other organisations to get involved with eduvcational establishments to help fill the financial gaps. This has not changed in many decades, you can read back through manifesto after manifesto - the Conservative Party fundemental beliefs include minimal education costs to the state.

     

    in my opinion, a tory win will adversely affect any ASD child still in education in the immediate future (it will adversely affect many non-SEN kids over time). You just have to read the teacher unions damning opinions of tory policies to realise they are not designed to improve state education. The manifesto is predominently designed to help "privately funded and controlled" schools to increase and take the place of state controlled ones.

     

    The end results will be almost the same regardless of whether Lib-Lab-Con wins. This country is virtually bankrupt and various sinister higher order forces are pressing for the dismantling of major public sector institutions.

     

  17. Posted · Report reply

    Parents do not have a choice anyway - this is a myth, and believing this myth leads to a huge disappointment at school allocation time. Parents can express a preference for a school, which is a different thing altogether. Children are allocated their highest ranked school for which they meet the admission criteria. Only those lucky enough to meet the criteria for more than one school on their list can truly say that they have a choice.

     

    In practice it depends on where you live. If many of the schools happen to be close to full capacity or oversubscribed then you have little choice. If many of the schools have plenty of surplus places then your kid will probably win a place at whatever school you pick. Some parts of England have a serious excess of surplus places and schools are either closing down or under threat of closure.

     

    Trouble is though, its a waste of a vote if the party you want has no chance of winning your constituency. That's how we are placed - I'd quite like to give the underdogs a chance, but they are trailing so far behind the 2 others I'd waste my vote. We are marginal so there'd then be a good chance of the candidate I definitely don't want getting in.

     

    I can see the logic in voting for a party likely to win in a marginal constituency. If you live in a safe constituency (as I do) then it's sensible to vote for who you support. Sometimes a small party getting a strong vote, but not winning, gives the establishment a message.

     

    But isn't the point of voting to vote for who you want to and vote for the person who's policies you agree with most? if everyone voted for who they thought would win then nothing would ever change and we'd be stuck with the same parties every election.

     

    A lot of people treat elections like a horse race. They only want to vote for who is likely to win. Our FPTP election system gives most small parties a raw deal compared to most systems of PR.

  18. Posted · Report reply

    I looked at the Green Party but they agree with mainstream inclusion so wont be voting for them as I dont agree ALL children with SEN should be in Mainstream setting.

     

    The Green Party also proposes to bring back catchment areas for schools. This means that kids will have to attend the nearest school even if there are problems such as bullying, or facilities for things such as sports or computers are not as good as other local schools. Personally I think this policy of denying parents and kids a choice of which school to attend is tied to a very heavy lead balloon.

  19. Posted · Report reply

    The effectiveness of who you vote for depends on the constituency you live in. A surprisingly large proportion of people I have met aren't aware of this and think that votes for a particular party count equally no matter where you live and the party which gets the most votes wins.

     

    I happen to be the type who votes for what they believe in rather than voting for the lesser of two evils.

  20. Posted · Report reply

    Taylor is quite clearly a business.

     

    And so is Facebook.

     

    One thing that makes me a little uncomfortable about this type of site is that it seems pretty obvious that there are adults in the background behind the site - the professional layout the 'shop' etc that is 'presenting' her as an autistic person rather than the site being completely her own efforts

     

    A similar thing applies to the NAS. It's largely run by NTs.

  21. Posted · Report reply

    * Registration and monitoring of home education – following Graham Badman’s independent report into home education, these provisions put in place a valuable tool for local authorities in their work to safeguard all children.

     

    Thousands of home educating families are celebrating how this one got thrown out in the wash-up. Has the NAS published a response to this yet?

  23. Posted · Report reply

    Hi,

     

    I just thought I would let people lknow that a new support group for people with autism spectrum conditions and or parents and carers has been set up in th Sherburn in Elmet area - between Selby and Leeds. If anyone is interested in attending, the first meeting is on Saturday 10th April at 10 am in the Eversley Centre. Guest speakers are still being confirmed.

     

    All the best,,

    J

     

    Does it have a website or is there an internet page with contact details so I can add it to the directory of AS support groups.

     

  25. Posted · Report reply

    I think if you have a word with the school it will put your mind at rest.

     

    Make sure the school doesn't fob you off with fine words. Check that things are taking place in practice.

     

    I was told of an instance of a teenager sent to a pupil referral unit with the promise that he would be able to take 5 GCSEs. All he ever did was make things out out of cardboard and was taught primary school level English and maths that he already knew back in primary school. An investigation revealed that nobody who had attended the pupil referral unit had taken any GCSEs there and it wasn't even registered as an exam centre! There were no plans by the LA allow the teenager to take GCSEs at a school or college so the parents felt angry and cheated as a result.

×
×
  • Create New...