Relational legacies and relative experiences: Austerity, inequality and access to special educational needs and disability (SEND) support in London, England

Abstract

Through the lens of access to Special Educational Needs and Disability (SEND) support services in London, England, this paper highlights the relative legacies of state‐led austerity since 2010. Drawing on findings from a four‐month institutional ethnography with a London borough SEND support team and 43 repeat in‐depth narrative interviews with 15 parent carers with autistic children, this paper focuses in on two parents: Alice and Lucy. Comparing Alice and Lucy's experiences shows nuanced relational legacies of austerity: families with disabled and neurodiverse children have been disproportionately affected by austerity cuts. Additionally, however, their accounts show their relative experiences of accessing help: some more marginalised families with disabled children are finding it harder under these circumstances than others. Yet a neoliberal myth of meritocracy has emerged during this time which obscures the underlying structural and systemic reasons for widening relative inequality between families with disabled and neurodiverse children. This myth suggests that the parent carers who do manage to secure ever shrinking SEND resources have simply worked harder than others to get there. The result is that parent carers – including Alice and Lucy – have different experiences of trying to navigate and access the same SEND services, in the same place, at the same time. Bringing together geographical and sociological work on austerity, families, disability, and education, this paper extends understandings of how austerity is relational in its effects and shows how these legacies are still unfolding.

To what extent do England's local offer websites adhere to the statutory guidance as set out in the special educational needs and disabilities code of practice?

“…The LO was seen as an attempt to end the conflict that exists between parents and statutory authorities through encouraging co-production of services (Lamb, 2013). This is of great importance given the difficulties facing parents of children with SEND, with disparities between the most privileged and the most disadvantaged families having widened, with some being able to assert their rights to SEND support while others cannot (Warnock, 2023). The LO could therefore be used as a tool to improve service design and implementation, as well as being a resource that is co-developed with service users to help drive quality improvement.…”