Is there any value in getting a private diagnosis for my 7 year old?

Check with ones local athority and get written confirmation that they accept private diagnoses as some local athorities will only accept NHS diagnosis. If they say they do, then you are covered and it will be money well spent. If they don't, then it is a waste of time and money.

Check with ones local athority and get written confirmation that they accept private diagnoses as some local athorities will only accept NHS diagnosis. If they say they do, then you are covered and it will be money well spent. If they don't, then it is a waste of time and money.

Under the Equality Act 2010, it is not up to the school  (or employer or any other supplier of goods and services) to "accept the diagnosis" - a clinical diagnosis is evidence that the person has a disability, and there is a legal duty to make "reasonable accommodations" from the moment the school is informed. Not only that, once someone in authority has been informed (class teacher, SENDCo, Head Teacher) the duty applies to everyone in the school. The Public Sector Equality Duty is precisely that - a duty. Local authorities have "powers" and "duties". A power is discretionary - the council has the power, say, to build a paddling pond in the park, but it does not have to if it doesn't want to. If a council fails to carry out a duty it can be taken to court or tribunal and made to do it.

Plus, getting a diagnosis is not just about school. A proper diagnosis will give an outline of areas of strengths and difficulties and suggestions for dealing with particular needs or issues. It will help the parent and young person understand their uniqueness.

The scandal is that parents have to pay to go private. The NHS and local authority children's services are underfunded.

What I don't understand is that every year people accept that their insurance premium for their house, car, holiday, or whatever insurance will go up.  Public services are funded by taxation - so why do politicians cut taxation?  It is like the AA saying " We have cut ten pounds off your annual fee" (hurray) but then telling you that when you break down you will have to wait six hours for a mechanic because they have cut the number of response vehicles to save money. Or cutting your car or house insurance and doubling your excess if you claim. We can argue over tax rates, or taxing non-doms or whatever, but the bottom line is that fixing our public services will need a lot of investment - and that means increasing the total amount of tax collected, not giving tax cuts to your mates.

I do independent social work assessments for EHCP appeals. I charge the going rate, but I am not cheap. I sometimes have mixed feelings about my work. The plus side is that my reports have helped families to get the support their kids need. The downside is that going down the private route is not cheap. In one case the parent had one of the leading education law firms representing them and had expert reports from an independent psychologist, independent occupational therapist, and an independent social worker (me). I doubt they got much change from £20k taking the case to SENDIST. The local authority was not happy with the level of support the Tribunal ordered, which was far more than their own cursory " needs assessment", but they had a duty (see above) to follow the Tribunal's ruling. I don't blame the parents for doing what is best for their child ... but not all parents have the financial resources to pay for experts to support their case. My worry is, what about those who can't afford to go private, or can do so but only with considerable hardship?

I don't blame my over-worked colleagues in Children's Social Care ... most authorities are overspent by millions on their SEND and children's social care budgets. They are required to consider financial realities and spread their resources thinly to make ends meet. The authority I worked for had to reorganize to save £1m from children's services. They made experienced (and expensive) staff with autism experience redundant or take early retirement, and employed fewer newly qualified (and cheaper) social workers as generic " Children in Need" workers. The new workers' limited understanding of neurodivergence shows in some of their EHCP reports. My concern is that the neediest families will get a service that is hopefully "good enough" from statutory services, but it is like living on pasta and baked beans from the food bank, adequate.  Those who can afford to go private are shopping in Waitrose and getting yummy organic choices.

In an ideal world, we would have statutory services that made "going private" unnecessary. But I can't see it happening soon, irrespective of who wins the next election.