Dáil debates

Wednesday, 13 July 2011

Special Educational Needs: Motion (Resumed)

 

6:00 pm

Photo of Richard Boyd BarrettRichard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance)

In the Children First guidelines, which the Minister says the Government will implement as a matter of legislation, it says that neglect can be defined in terms of an omission "where the child suffers significant harm or impairment of development", including intellectual stimulation or a lack of. It continues:

A child who consistently misses school may be being deprived of intellectual stimulation. The threshold of significant harm is reached when the child's needs are neglected to the extent that his or her well-being and/or development are severely affected.

This is defined as neglect and the guidelines suggest neglect should be a criminal offence. If Government Deputies say the provision of special needs assistants and support will be governed by caps and quotas, not rights as demanded by the guidelines, they are engaging in criminal neglect of children. How else can they explain that people who need supports have been denied them in the past number of weeks? Are Deputies saying that is not happening? Are they saying the parents who contacted us are lying, or are out there for no good reason? They asked us to do something and as public representatives we feel duty bound to do so. When the Deputies opposite were in opposition, they were saying exactly the same.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.