I think Annabel Tall (Letters, 1 July) is not looking far enough. She believes the needs of children with medical/physical special needs such as Down's syndrome or cerebral palsy are being 'lumped in with a motley collection of children who are simply out of control, undisciplined or badly behaved'. That's quite an assumption. The reality is that many children, through no fault of their own, suffer from emotional, developmental or behavioural difficulties. I believe such children also have special needs and fail to see how, by helping and supporting them, it could possibly be detrimental to other children.
I think Annabel Tall (Letters, 1 July) is not looking far enough. She believes the needs of children with medical/physical special needs such as Down's syndrome or cerebral palsy are being 'lumped in with a motley collection of children who are simply out of control, undisciplined or badly behaved'.
That's quite an assumption. The reality is that many children, through no fault of their own, suffer from emotional, developmental or behavioural difficulties. I believe such children also have special needs and fail to see how, by helping and supporting them, it could possibly be detrimental to other children.
I thought the idea of inclusion is for all children, regardless of their disability, to be supported and fully included in mainstream education wherever possible.
Are we now heading towards exclusivity when deciding who is and isn't entitled to inclusion? I hope not.
* Di Tulloch, via e-mail
