nellie Report post Posted January 9, 2007 (edited) Ruth Kelly should have gone through the statementing process. Skipping the process gives the message that she believes her son would not have received a statement or the necessary provision on a statement to meet his needs. Most children with dyslexia have their needs met at school action or school action plus.......if they are lucky!! Nellie xx Edited January 9, 2007 by nellie Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CarerQuie Report post Posted January 10, 2007 My DD has dyslexia and never got a statement or extra help while at School.It seems rare to get a statement or much specific help for dyslexia. Now she is at University,she is getting extensive help,which will cost the LEA a fair bit.xx Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pingu Report post Posted January 10, 2007 Ruth Kelly should have gone through the statementing process. Skipping the process gives the message that she believes her son would not have received a statement or the necessary provision on a statement to meet his needs. Most children with dyslexia have their needs met at school action or school action plus.......if they are lucky!! Nellie xx My daughter struggles terribly with writing / comprehension/ reading and instructions. Yet i cant even get the problems recognised within the school. They still insist that she is slow and lazy. Regardless of numerous assessments which state that she has dyspraxia and dyslexic tendencies. Her teacher even said to me, that i should stop looking at the negatives and start been positive......... Positive about what??? Makes me sick !! shaz Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pumpkinpie Report post Posted January 10, 2007 I dont know if anyone looks on the ouch disability site on bbc site, if yiy do there is a debate there about ruth kelly and you can pleave your views. Time to air them people!!!!!!!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
niki Report post Posted January 10, 2007 i actually live in the next village to the school rk is sending her child too and my son goes to the state primary in the same village as the special school. this special school is amazing and boasts facilities any state school would be envious of, and yes i do believe she is sticking two fingers at state provision and yes from a parents perspective if i had her income i would clearly do the same but not only is she in the public eye, being an education doo dah (sorry not up to speed with proper titles!) she sets a poor opinion of an education system she has played a hand in. although i know it takes time to change, having a child with a learning disability she should have more empathy and change things to help our children not cut budgets and close schools i think it shows very poor taste. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
opheila Report post Posted January 10, 2007 I have emailed my MP about this matter and ask the next time he is in parliament if he could raise a few questions to Ms kelly. I am waiting on news of a school placement i have been told there are only three places and there are a lot of parents trying to get these places for their child I am still really angry about this we are partly in this postion because of Ms kellys policies in closing down special schools and units. Personally it is about time Tony BLair got off his backside and did something about the double standards within the party. More intrestingly will David Cameron decide to send his child to private school should he become prime minister i was very shocked at his response and wonder if he didnt give his view due to the fact he could be next with egg on his face Opheila Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nellie Report post Posted January 11, 2007 BBC News - Kelly complains over story on son Ruth Kelly has said she will refer the Daily Mirror to the Press Complaints Commission over its coverage of her decision to educate her son privately. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6253935.stm This topic is being discussed on Question Time now. Nellie xx Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lorryw Report post Posted January 11, 2007 David Cameron also has a huge private care package for his son. No having to wait for months/years for a few hours of respite for his family. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kathryn Report post Posted January 11, 2007 I also emailed my MP today. I'll let you know if I get a response. K x Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pumpkinpie Report post Posted January 12, 2007 I think Ruth Kelly is a complete hypocrite I missed it on question time any good? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kathryn Report post Posted January 12, 2007 QT was interesting - a lot of comments from the floor: mostly about the lack of trained support in schools. To me, much of the debate surrounding RK is missing the point - the issue is not about private vs state education. The law allows for children with SEN to be educated in the independent sector if necessary. The question is why was RK allowed to evade the assessment and statementing process, and in doing so has she let her LEA off it's legal duty to meet her son's needs? If the answer is that she was going to opt out of the state system and choose an elite private education for her son anyway, why does she not just come out and say so? She wouldn't be the first Labour minister to do so. In justifying her decision by saying that she was merely acting on professional advice about her son's SEN, was she just trying to deflect the inevitable accusation of double standards? K x Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Karen A Report post Posted January 12, 2007 Hi I was very interested in your last comment re RK being allowed to evade the Statementing Process Kathryn.I have thought about the RK situation a lot this week.I think that RK has made a convenient decision for all concerned.If she had requested an Assessment she would have placed the labour council in a difficult situation. Our Council produces a free paper distributed to all houses in the borough.The paper is remarkable in its ability to put a positive spin on the most negative of situations.I am keen to see what they say or do not say in next week's paper. Karen Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kazzen161 Report post Posted January 12, 2007 To me, much of the debate surrounding RK is missing the point - the issue is not about private vs state education. The law allows for children with SEN to be educated in the independent sector if necessary. The question is why was RK allowed to evade the assessment and statementing process, and in doing so has she let her LEA off it's legal duty to meet her son's needs? In justifying her decision by saying that she was merely acting on professional advice about her son's SEN, was she just trying to deflect the inevitable accusation of double standards? K x The issue is that RK neatly bypassed the whole system, because she had the money to do so. No waiting for her - why not? Why is her child more important than all our children? I have no problem with people paying for a better education for their child (though I do, if they have no choice but to do so) - but RK said the provision was OK for our children one minute, and then now says "but not for my child" - that is hypocritical. Wouldn't it be nice if we could all "act on professional advice" in the same way, rather than having to try to convince the LEA that that advice is valid. Karen Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Karen A Report post Posted January 12, 2007 The issue is that RK neatly bypassed the whole system, because she had the money to do so. No waiting for her - why not? Why is her child more important than all our children? I have no problem with people paying for a better education for their child (though I do, if they have no choice but to do so) - but RK said the provision was OK for our children one minute, and then now says "but not for my child" - that is hypocritical. Wouldn't it be nice if we could all "act on professional advice" in the same way, rather than having to try to convince the LEA that that advice is valid. Karen Exactly.It would be wonderful if everyone here could just act on the professional advice without having to fight to prove that it is valid,that the professional is correct etc etc.It would be so peaceful here. Karen. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kathryn Report post Posted January 12, 2007 (edited) This was one of the topics on Any Questions on Radio 4. Here's the link to the programme. The topic is towards the end - about half an hour in. http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/news/anyquestions.shtml K x Edited January 13, 2007 by Kathryn Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kathryn Report post Posted March 27, 2007 The Press Complaints Commission has rejected Ruth Kelly's complaint that her son's privacy was invaded by the newspaper article about his education. They decided that the issues raised were "a matter of considerable public interest". http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/poli...icle1572567.ece Good decision, in my opinion. K x Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
baddad Report post Posted March 27, 2007 The Press Complaints Commission has rejected Ruth Kelly's complaint that her son's privacy was invaded by the newspaper article about his education. They decided that the issues raised were "a matter of considerable public interest". http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/poli...icle1572567.ece Good decision, in my opinion. K x Abso - blummin - lutely! Press intrusion is one thing, but if the woman couldn't see herself the implications of what she was doing then it really does beg the question about her suitabily to represent her constituents, doesn't it? L&P BD Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pumpkinpie Report post Posted March 27, 2007 I heard this on the radio and thought about time. Ruth Kelly is an absolute discrace and having the nerve to complin shows she really is out of touch with reality. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BusyLizzie100 Report post Posted March 27, 2007 The Press Complaints Commission has rejected Ruth Kelly's complaint that her son's privacy was invaded by the newspaper article about his education. They decided that the issues raised were "a matter of considerable public interest". Quite right too. I could say a lot more but I'll just go into a rant if I do. Glad the complaint was rejected. Now just wish we could reject her. Lizzie Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
