20/01/2026
Let’s talk about this SEND message — and what it’s really saying.
“Needs met.
Parents involved.
Children thriving.
Support without a fight.”
On paper, it’s perfect.
No SEND parent disagrees with a single word.
But here’s the quiet truth:
every one of those promises already exists in law.
And yet thousands of families are:
• in tribunal
• in crisis
• out of school
• paying privately for statutory support
• or watching their children deteriorate while waiting
So when I see a post like this from Bridget Phillipson , I don’t hear policy.
I hear positioning.
Because this message isn’t about how needs will be met.
It doesn’t mention enforcement.
It doesn’t mention consequences.
It doesn’t mention what happens when local authorities ignore the law.
It reframes SEND as a system that just needs tweaking —
not one that has been systemically failing families for over a decade.
And that line — support without a fight — that’s doing a lot of work.
It could mean earlier help.
It could mean less adversarial processes.
But it could also mean fewer routes to challenge.
Fewer legal levers.
Less ability for parents to push back when support is refused.
SEND parents don’t fight because we enjoy it.
We fight because it’s the only way support currently becomes real.
“Parents involved” sounds warm —
but involved doesn’t mean empowered.
It doesn’t mean equal.
It doesn’t mean listened to when the answer is inconvenient.
This post is reassurance before detail.
Vision before mechanism.
Calm language before hard choices land.
And maybe that’s why it felt noticeable that, on a post about parents being involved, conversation itself wasn’t easily available.
Probably just settings.
But it’s a familiar pattern.
Because involvement only works when voices can actually be heard.
— Tales of a SEND Parent
