Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Lynne Featherstone (Hornsey and Wood Green) (LD): TreeHouse, which is located in my constituency, does excellent work and is pioneering progress with autism and on the various measures available to offer help. It has just hired a transition officer as its first cohort approaches the age of 18. That is not the case throughout the constituencymany parents have terrible trouble and anxiety about transition; the facilities are simply not there. But even in the light of TreeHouse and the transition officer, nothing follows to assure parents that there is something for their children thereafter. Does my hon. Friend agree?
Annette Brooke: I thank my hon. Friend for that intervention. Obviously, I am very appreciative of the work of TreeHouse and would be very proud to have such provision in my constituency. Yes, there are huge gaps in available services. We can find examples of good practice; nevertheless, it just is not available to enough people.
I also want to congratulate the hon. Member for Burton (Mrs. Dean) and the all-party parliamentary group on autism for their work. Half way there?, which was published just a few months ago, outlines clearly the significant progress that has been made in many respects in the past five years, but that same document acknowledges that huge holes remain in service provision.
Throughout all our earlier discussions, early identification and intervention have been common themes.
Mark Williams: My hon. Friend talks about the patchiness of service provision. Does she acknowledge that in that context, specialist knowledge within schools is a huge issue? That is not to be critical of the teaching profession; rather, I am talking about some of the training opportunities available for teachers in developing that specialist knowledge in our higher education institutions.
Annette Brooke: I thank my hon. Friend for that intervention. Yes, although it is true that the Government have moved forward with initial teacher training on special educational needs, the first cohorts with such training will not come through until 2011; and yet, the Government have been pursuing an inclusion agenda for the past 10 years. These things must marry together.
Early identification and intervention is very important, but we have to recognise that some conditions need ongoing support throughout life, and that is of course true for many people on the autistic spectrum. Ongoing support and appropriate interventions are a requirementa necessity. Such support has to be tailored to individual needs, and those needs will be very different, given the diversity within this condition. Support must be available at the right time, at the right quality and to all those with needs, so it is not just a matter of identification, important though that is.
I am told by health professions locally that diagnosis for children in Dorset is adequate, but I do not doubt that improvements across the country and in Dorset are necessary. We do have a Dorset childrens autism strategy, which is described as a good platform, but it has not led to a strategic plan for delivery and implementation.
I want to consider the different types of support required, and to start with parents. As we often say, parents, as first teachers, are with their children more than anybody else. They need to understand the condition
of autism. It is not a question of just one or two sessions explaining the characteristics of autism in a particular childs circumstances, but of continuing support. The more that parents and carers can understand, the more that they can help their children to develop. People with a child with autism cannot just turn to a textbook and look at straightforward processes of a childs development.
Sandra Gidley (Romsey) (LD): My hon. Friend raises a very important point about the help available to parents, but does she accept that even in the medical profession itself, many professionals are poorly trained in these aspects of health delivery? The subject is little understood and there are significant needs in that regard, as well as in social services.
Annette Brooke: I thank my hon. Friend for that intervention. It is absolutely right that there is a need for more training and knowledge across the board for any professionals who come into contact with people on the autistic spectrum.
We have a local parent group, which is very important, but a parent support group should be an add-on, not the main form of support. This group has had support from TreeHouse on how to negotiate with the local authority, which is interesting to note. Parents also need respite. I am extremely pleased with the Governments programme Aiming High for Disabled Children. However, we in Dorset are a pilot for that, and professionals tell me that we have yet to see clear benefits in terms of children with autism being given respite care. That is an important issue.
Mrs. Humble: Before the hon. Lady moves on from support services to parents, may I advise her on one point? In Blackpool, there is a specialist team that offers advice to both teachers and parents, advising them on the issues that they will face, including those as the child grows older. She mentioned earlier that there are examples of good practice. Surely one thing that must come out of the Bill is that, where good practice exists, it must be spread around the whole country, so that the gaps she referred to can be filled.
Annette Brooke: I thank the hon. Lady for her intervention and I could not agree more. We all know of examples of good practice and how frustrating it is when they are not spread right across the country. The spreading of such good practice must indeed be an outcome, as I hope it will be, of the Bill.
Parents face various issues in finding the right school, such as whether it should be a special school or a mainstream school, and the fight to get a statement. The situation is incredibly fraught for parents, and even within a given mainstream setting there will be teachers who, as yet, have not had that training. There are children with autism who, by the age of eight or nine, are perhaps struggling with the academic side but particularly with social skills. It has to be recognised that such children will often need a modified application of the national curriculum. They might not be able to cope with whole-class lessons; they need a quieter environment. There is so much to be appreciated.
John Bercow: Will the hon. Lady allow me?
Annette Brooke: I will, but I am getting a bit worried about the time.
John Bercow: I am extremely grateful; the hon. Lady is generous in giving way. Does she agree that, more widely across the field of policy and in other legislation, the Government have a continuing duty to give particular consideration to people on the spectrum? For example, on the Governments proposals for apprenticeships, in which I see much merit, does she agree that there should not be arbitrary academic requirements for accessing those apprenticeships? Such requirements might very well cut off opportunities for people on the autistic spectrum who would be well suited to an apprenticeship, but who might lack the formal academic qualifications that the Government have in mind.
Annette Brooke: I thank the hon. Gentleman for that intervention and I am looking forward to some productive discussions about young people with special educational needs in the context of the Apprenticeships, Skills, Children and Learning Bill. There is a great deal to be said for offering alternative routes forward for children and young people with special educational needs, and I hope that successful amendments to the Bill achieve that.
I was very pleased to serve on the cross-party panel of MPs that was established to conduct hearings on services for disabled children. Of course, I should note that the vice-chairman was the hon. Member for Blackpool, North and Fleetwood (Mrs. Humble). Among the horror stories we heard, it came through very clearly that parents felt that they had somehow got through school only to find that, lo and behold, they were faced with the transition stage. Time and time again, we hear that successful outcomes through transition can be achieved only by parents screaming for the services that they need.
We hear so frequently of the inadequacy of transition planning and communication between childrens and adults services, the lack of co-ordination between different services and agencies, and the lack of assurance of support when a statement comes to an end. We must have multi-agency assessment at the right time, and we need transition plans to be developed with families and appropriate goals to be set. I was recently given a local example when a young person on the autistic spectrum had a college placement and was in a class with a group of young people with mild learning difficulties. One might have thought that that would have been all right, but in fact it was not. That young person, because of their difficulties with social skills, could not handle the lack of structure outside class times. It just shows how much thought must go into everything and the special planning for individual needs that is required.
Paul Holmes (Chesterfield) (LD):
My hon. Friend has just given a sequence of facts that exactly mirror and reflect what a constituent of mine has told me. Sarah Oldfield has autistic children, but she also runs a web-based parental support group that extends beyond Chesterfield and Derbyshire to across the country. The parents with whom she is involved have made those exact points about the difficulty of getting information when a parent realises that their child is on the autistic disorder spectrum, the difficulty of getting a statementthe
arrangements governing statementing can be appalling in some parts of the country and very good in othersthe difficulty of getting proper support in mainstream education and the transition issues. Does my hon. Friend agree that the very fact that there is such diversity of provision across the countryfrom good practice to appalling practiceis why we need a legislative framework such as that proposed in the Bill to try to ensure that there is a more uniform approach? That is why I hope that the Government will adopt the proposals in the Bill.
Annette Brooke: I thank my hon. Friend for that intervention. Our party agrees that we need that legislative framework.
Let me move on to adults, because I want to reflect on a few comments made by the Dorset adult Aspergers support group. It has only recently been set up, but it reflects the problems of such adults very well. Each individual family has different needs. Aspergers is an unseen condition in which there is no noticeable physical disability and it is mostly not recognised or acknowledged, not even by professionals such as social workers and GPs. The individual has a personality that does not fit in with the norm, with odd behaviour and obsessions, and often has an acceptable IQ that does not come under the definition of special needs, which means that they can fall through the gap between social services and mental health services. These adults can have depression and more extreme psychiatric conditions, and so they need to be seen by the mental health teams. Many live a normal life and can hold a job, but others are employable in a limited way and others are completely unemployable and struggle to fill their days. That can be a great strain on all concerned.
I have another local example that I want to mention. A young man got a job collecting trolleys at a supermarket, but he did not react very well to females. On one occasion, a lady customer asked him to move the trolley and he responded with very strong language, as one might imagine. There was a real lack of understanding from everybody. That example shows the support we need to offer: additional job coaching, teaching people how to deal with social gaffes and work with employers. We need to try to fill the social skills deficit.
The big problem is that many of those people fall between NHS and social service departments, particularly in the case of those with Aspergers. The support group also said that those adults and their parents struggle with behavioural problems. Those adults need independence but are unable to be independent. There is a lack of suitable housing, and those with Aspergers are often unable to claim benefits as many have difficulty in getting a proper diagnosis. What is offered to them is, as I have said, a Cinderella service. Indeed, the new criteria will make claiming the disability living allowance difficult for some of those people. They can also be socially isolated through the lack of facilities that can offer a professional approach and understanding. Once a youngster leaves full-time education, they are on their own. Parents have already gone through years finding the right place in education, often not succeeding, and, sadly, the fight goes on for parents until they die. That sums up some of the problems of parents who support adults with autism.
I want to congratulate the Wessex Autistic Society, which is an important organisation that provides valuable
services in Dorset. I also want to highlight the importance of the voluntary sector. I have a special mission in that I feel that adults with autism need a key worker. I hope that the details of the Bill will reveal that such provision will be made, because I find that in constituency cases my office can become the key worker if I am not careful. It is absolutely essential to have a key worker when an adult is not claiming benefits, is building up debts and needs health and social services support. Somebody has to take ownership of that.
Mr. Oliver Letwin (West Dorset) (Con) rose
Annette Brooke: I am about to finish, if the hon. Members do not mind.
The Bill, which I wholeheartedly support, identifies the basic need for good information on which commissioning can be based. We must know what the needs are. Scarce resources must be used effectively. We need to know the requirements for services and support. Planning and commissioning must be preferable to reactiveor even a lack ofpurchasing of services. Those services should offer value and quality. We obviously need to improve inter-agency working to secure effective transition for young people from child to adult services. If I was writing a report, I would classify the transition stage as poor and I would classify the current support for adults as dire.
We need work force training and sharing of good practice, and people must not fall through the gap. There are a lot of issues to consider, and I ask the Government whether the measures that they are proposing will provide the bite that is needed across all the issues.
Mark Hunter: My hon. Friend has made a number of eloquent and supportive comments about what the Bill seeks to achieve and, of course, she speaks for us all in that. Like many hon. Members who have spoken, I have received dozens of cards from constituents who are concerned about this matter. Does my hon. Friend agree that they will struggle to understand why, given the assurances that the Minister has been prepared to give, the Government will none the less not allow the Bill to progress? If they support so many of the initiativesindeed, all the key initiatives that the Bill seeks to establishwhy will they still not allow it to make progress? Is that not the only belt-and-braces way of ensuring that progress will be made?
Annette Brooke: I thank my hon. Friend for that intervention and I shall return to that point in my conclusion.
It is important that the Bill should move to Committee. There are a lot of questionsI have a long list here, which I will not go through because of the time availableand we need assurances about what the regulations will do. We need to know who will be included and whether children and young people with Aspergers syndrome will definitively be included on registers. There are many questions to ask and they need to be tackled in detail in Committee. The Bill is about ensuring that we improve the outcomes for millions of individuals and families, because without the right support we know that they suffer profound and devastating effects.
We must approach the issue across society. I agree wholeheartedly about the need to involve Jobcentre Plus and the need to give all the advisers special training. The Liberal Democrats support the Second Reading of this Bill and we want to have further discussions in Committee.
Dr. Stephen Ladyman (South Thanet) (Lab): Many of the comments made by the hon. Member for Mid-Dorset and North Poole (Annette Brooke) were about adults and I entirely agree with the sentiments she expressed, but if the Bill goes into Committee, one of the questions that the Committee ought to ask is why the Bill contains no duties relating to the police and the courts, which often do not recognise the needs of autistic people, and no duties relating to the Department for Work and Pensions and Jobcentre Plus. If the Bill makes progress, perhaps the hon. Member for Chesham and Amersham (Mrs. Gillan) will discuss those matters.
Mrs. Gillan: I have never said that the drafting of the Bill is accurate or perfectquite the reverse. I am flexible and, during the Committee stage, I would welcome amendments that improve the Bill and extend the benefits for people with autism.
Dr. Ladyman: I know that the hon. Lady has never claimed that the Bill is in its final form. My understanding is that she regards the Committee stage as an opportunity to debate the Bill, and I think there is even an implication that she does not expect it to come out of Committee
Dr. Ladyman: If the hon. Lady lets me complete my comment, I shall then give her an opportunity to respond. If the Bill is not to complete all its parliamentary stages, we need to explore what the Government have to do to ensure that what desperately needs to be done for autistic people is indeed done, as a result of this debate.
Mrs. Gillan: I want to disabuse the hon. Gentleman. If, in Committee, details and cast-iron assurances are given, or if the Government have, in fact, completed and delivered the measures set out in the clauses, we could withdraw the Bill. The Committee stage will give us the opportunity to have detailed discussions; we could then bring the Bill back for Third Reading, when people will be able to see what shape the legislation has taken. It is subject to the will of the House, as the hon. Gentleman knows.
Dr. Ladyman: I entirely understand that that is what the hon. Lady envisages. At this point, let me congratulate her on introducing the Bill. She has done excellent work, and the very introduction of the Bill has focused the Governments mind on ensuring that concrete progress is made. I congratulate her, her team and everyone else who has been involved in that process.
Next Section | Index | Home Page |