My son attends a ‘special school’; I don’t want it to close

The Royal Commission on Disability is the biggest investigation into the abuse and mistreatment of people with disability in Australia. As a lawyer and policy professional, its report interests me academically. But mostly it’s personal; my husband and 2 kids are autistic.

The report has generated a fair bit of discussion, particularly a divisive recommendation by some Commissioners that segregated education (‘special or non mainstream’ schools) should end by 2051. Most people with disability and disability advocates agree, saying segregated education is discriminatory and contributes to a non-inclusive society.

From a policy perspective I agree; how can we fully accept and support people with disability when they are sequestered in separate institutions from childhood? How will our children appreciate and respect neurological or physical difference when they never see it? And what does it say to the kids with a disability, when mainstream schools cannot or will not support them? (I’ll tell you; it says they are too much, too different and unwelcome).

But I don’t support a compulsory end to non-mainstream education. My son attends a non-mainstream school because they are uniquely placed to meet his needs. Mainstream schools cannot or will not support him. And I am not prepared to sacrifice his well-being now for the hope of a better policy outcome in the future. Equally, I don’t want my son to suffer the teething problems, cultural backlash and inadequately trained teachers in the years following the possible phase out of non-mainstream schools.

We pursued enrolment in our local public school; after several visits they encouraged us to apply to the Department of Education for a year-long exemption from enrolment. They said because of his support needs, our son would be unlikely to participate in school without significant distress. Support teachers were also concerned he would not be accepted in the Department-run support units as he wasn’t “high needs” enough. He needed both too much and too little for public education. My son is bright and eager to learn. He is curious and gentle. The accommodations he requires are not difficult, though they are constant. Holding him back a year solely because a mainstream school couldn’t support him would be wrong.

Private schools we tried were worse. My husband is an ‘old boy’ of a prestigious boys’ school. After offensive enquiries as to the ‘severity’ of my son’s autism, we were told they would not have the resources to provide more than a few teacher’s aide sessions a week, and was I still interested in the place?

Conversely his school has a positive, neurodiversity affirming culture. My husband and I enjoyed the parent training and resources long before we discovered they ran schools.

Not all non-mainstream schools perpetuate segregation; ours is aimed at equipping its students with skills to transition into a mainstream or lower support setting as soon as possible. And my son’s class frequently visits the neighboring public school for social and educational events.

At my son’s school he benefits from a wealth of expertise in autism research and education, and tailored supports inconceivable in mainstream settings. He is one of 6 kids in a class, taught by a passionate teacher and full time assistant teacher. They use direct communication, visual supports, sensory aids. They work on therapeutic and developmental goals, not just educational ones, alongside therapists. Each classroom has access to a playground the kids can run to when they need a break. Our son swims in pools and joins noisy book parades; things he simply could not do in current mainstream settings.
Crucially, when my son is dysregulated, his teachers have the expertise and appropriate student load to respond with care, skill and patience.

Do I wish he could receive this level of support in public education? Absolutely. Can he? Not without holistic change and significant political will.

This year I posed a question to my son’s therapy team; could he attend a mainstream school if he repeated a year? Perhaps his different social and independence skills would be better accommodated in a younger cohort. We concluded he could not get the support he needs in a class of 20-30, even repeating a year. And his therapists would know; they advocate for other clients enrolled there.

To close schools like ours would remove a vital and rare safe space for kids like my son to learn. For many of the families at our school, if we did not get a place there, we’d apply for exemptions to delay schooling for years if possible. Or we’d home school.

Even if mainstream schools were better equipped, quality schools like ours may well remain the best suited or preferred places for some kids to learn.

Call me skeptical, but they form an important safety net too. If changes to mainstream education are poorly implemented or don’t work for all kids with disability, there needs to be schooling options that do.

I absolutely support improving disability inclusion in mainstream education, but that doesn’t require the closure of quality specialist schools. We need more, not less options and control over supports offered to our kids. Parents of typical children get legitimate choice when it comes to education. I want that for all of us.