Schools (Health Support) Bill

---

Decent support for all children with long-term health conditions in schools is essential argued Jim Cunningham (Lab, Coventry, South).

Introducing the second reading of the Schools (Health Support) Bill, Cunningham said it would establish standards in schools for children with specified health conditions. Amending the Education and Inspections Act 2006, the Bill would also make provision for the inspection of such support.

“Local authorities, primary care trusts and schools must work in partnership to ensure that all children receive the appropriate support that they need to live a full school life,” he added.

Cunningham argued that not all schools currently provide excellent medical support for children with long-term conditions.

He expressed his concern that the UK has the lowest number of children attaining good diabetes control in Europe. In addition, children and young people with a diagnosable mental health disorder are more likely to be excluded from school.

Tim Loughton (Con, East Worthing and Shoreham) highlighted that the shortage of school nurses means that it is difficult for certain children to go to school if they cannot be sure of receiving the necessary emergency treatment.

Cunningham responded that it is crucial for school nurses to be able to expand their mandate of health education. Teachers must be able to teach while being aware of the health support that is a critical part of some pupils’ education, he added.

Andy Slaughter (Lab, Ealing, Acton and Shepherd’s Bush) argued that despite improved medication, children with asthma have problems joining in sporting activities and going on school trips.

Slaughter said that the “general experience of parents of autistic spectrum children is that they do not have a good time in mainstream schooling”.

Simon Hughes (Lib Dem, North Southwark and Bermondsey) argued that pupils must also be advised about long-term conditions.

“Schools will be better places and the quality of education and opportunity there will be better if they and all their members…know how to deal with those issues,” he said.

Hughes argued that a good school should “automatically seek to have a pastoral care regime and a social care regime for every child”.

Sarah McCarthy-Fry expressed her concern that a legal duty on schools at this stage might not deliver the best outcome for children with long-term conditions.

The parliamentary under-secretary of state for children, schools and families acknowledged that good practice is not uniform across the country. This is often due to a lack of knowledge, misconceptions, lack of training and concerns about litigation, she said.

“I do not want to force teaching or support staff to take on responsibility for administering medicines where they may not be qualified or confident to do so,” she added.

McCarthy-Fry highlighted that schools already have a statutory duty to promote the well-being of their pupils, defined as the five Every Child Matters outcomes.

The child health strategy establishes the plans for universal, targeted and specialist support across three life stages – early years and pregnancy, school-age children and young people. This includes additional support for those with ongoing healthcare needs, she said.

“A specific commitment is included to ensure that by 2010 all children with complex health needs have individual care plans to support co-ordinated care,” she added.

Cunningham responded that he would not wish to impose a greater burden of legislation upon teachers, and so did not intend to pursue the Bill.

Progress

House of Commons

First reading: January 21 2009 [HC Bill 22]

Second reading: May 8 2009