Guest article by Dr Jill Pluquailec, Gill O’Connor, and Emma Sadler, Sheffield Hallam University
SNJ Intro: When the SEND Review was announced in 2022, we knew better than to trust the system to seek out the voices that matter most. So, we did what SNJ always does: we got stuck in. We broke down the consultation jargon, offered practical prompts and reminded parents that their lived experience is not just valid, it is vital.
To help parents and carers engage in the complex consultation process, we published information from a wide range of perspectives and different organisations, a SEND Review podcast and webinar series including interviews with the SEND Minster (Will Quince MP, remember him?) and a legal roundtable, as well as Chapter guides and prompts for submitting evidence. We knew that if parents did not engage, the SEND Review would be shaped by those with the least skin in the game, and the most interest in cutting costs.
Now, with the Schools White Paper due this autumn, the stakes appear to be even higher. The government says it wants a “unified system” and “inclusive provision.” We say: prove it. That includes removing the barriers that stop families from contributing their views, whether it is inaccessible language, consultation fatigue, or the sheer emotional labour of reliving trauma for the sake of policy. And of course, make sure accessible versions are immediately available—
Our guest article today provides information about the Right to Review Project, which paints a worrying picture about how parents engaged with the SEND Review. We believe that it is important that the government learns from this project, because if we want an education system that actually works for everyone, we need to start by listening to the people who live with its failures every day. And we need to do it properly this time.
The Right to Review Project, by Dr Jill Pluquailec, Gill O’Connor, and Emma Sadler, Sheffield Hallam University
I will fill in the consultation but I very much doubt it will make any difference, because they won’t be asking the right questions, and they won’t be hearing what they need to hear, because they don’t listen. They don’t know, they don’t understand, they won’t hear it. But I will fill it in anyway.
That’s how one parent described taking part in the government’s SEND Review consultation. For many readers of SNJ and families of disabled young people, those words will ring all too true.
The SEND Review, launched in 2022, was meant to “restore families’ trust and confidence in an inclusive education system” (DfE, 2022, p. 5). After years of delays, rising tribunal cases, and countless stories of families being failed, it promised to be a turning point. However, parents spoke of deepened mistrust and voicelessness within the SEND system, the exclusion of children and young people from the process, and their concerns that the reforms seemed to be about funding, rather than children like their own.
Embracing the voice of lived experience
This should have been the chance to recognise young people’s lived experiences and parents’ expertise, using their responses to build a system that works. To us, it seems the opposite of the Review’s stated aim happened, and our findings raised important questions about who should be at the centre of public policy reform and how public consultations should, and shouldn’t, take place.
In our Right to Review project, we set out to explore how parents experienced the consultation, why some took part and others did not, and what the process felt like from their perspective. What we found was worrying. So what went wrong? And, more importantly, what needs to change now if parents and young people are finally to be heard?
Key Content
What parents told us
For many, the Review felt like déjà vu: a tick-box exercise where their carefully crafted responses would be filed away and forgotten. Parents spoke of being treated as “the problem,” their hard-won expertise reduced to “just feelings.” Instead of trust being restored, mistrust only deepened.
What struck us most was how young people themselves were left out. Out of 1.6 million children and young people with SEND in England, fewer than 100 under-18s responded. Parents said their children wanted to take part, but faced an impossible task: a 104-page consultation document written in inaccessible language, with very few options for how and when they could take part. One mother asked:
…why can’t my daughter be engaged in this? She is highly articulate, why can’t they engage with her and say it’s your rights, your responsibilities and you are a citizen of this country and it’s all about you? Of course it affects me as a parent, but it affects her a million times more.
Even for parents, the path to participation was both exhausting and barrier-filled. The documents were long and confusing, and at first, no accessible versions were provided. For families, the cost of responding to the consultation was significant. Many longed for real conversations, focus groups, school-based discussions, or dialogue with officials, instead of an impersonal online form.
Consultation communications failure
The DfE hosted over 60 events with families or young people, yet our participants didn’t know they existed. This suggests that there were flaws in the implementation of the broader consultation exercise, which failed to reach a significant set of stakeholders. Responding took considerable time and energy from people already ‘battling’ with a system in which they doubted they would be heard.
And when it came to the reforms themselves, parents felt shut out all over again. Proposals were vague, disconnected from children’s lives, and focused on finances rather than futures. Some feared they would make things worse, not better. As one parent, both playfully and seriously, lamented,
…we want accountability and transparency and honesty, and it’s just like – it’s like you are trying to make a cake and they are putting in eggs that are out of date and milk that is out of date and worrying about what candles to put on the top. Do you want a sparkly candle or a regular one? Forget about the candles, we need the eggs to be safe first! Do you know what I mean? It’s like all of these steps are being missed out.
Despite parents and carers often talking about negative and traumatic experiences of advocating for their disabled children in an adversarial SEND system, they still showed up. Over 53% of the consultation respondents were parents and carers. They took part not only for their own children but in the hope of making things better for others, as one parent told us,
Lots of things I do are about making a difference for other people because that then means our bad experiences have counted for something.
Our research led us to two clear areas for change: how consultations are run, and how SEND reforms are designed:
The future of how consultations are run
Parents told us the SEND Review consultation was both inadequate and inaccessible. The government’s own principles for improving public consultation exercises specifically name ‘young people’ and ‘those with disabilities’. Nevertheless, the SEND Review consultation failed to account for arguably its most central stakeholders. These kinds of oversights deepened mistrust and, for our participants, confirmed fears that young people’s voices were not valued.
In future, consultation must be built on meaningful engagement from the start. Young people need genuine ways to share their views on policies that directly affect them. They need to be involved in both the design and delivery of consultation projects.
Language also matters. The way documents are written can empower families to contribute or discourage them entirely. Too often, the language used in the SEND Review left parents feeling dismissed as “too emotional” or “too demanding.” Policymakers must think carefully about how their words shape participation and the kinds of responses they do (or don’t) get.
Future SEND reforms
The parents in our project were clear: the proposed reforms did not tackle the system’s real failings. Families told us again and again that local authorities often fail to follow the law, forcing parents into costly, exhausting tribunal battles. The data backs this up; in 2024, 98.3% of appeals were decided in favour of families.
Since the SEND Review, political upheaval has added more uncertainty, with multiple prime ministers and SEND ministers in just these short few years. Meanwhile, tribunal backlogs now stretch longer than an entire school year. The new government must act. Families cannot wait any longer for the system to recognise their voices and protect their children’s futures.
For more information
To learn more about the Right to Review project findings, you can read our latest article here, our short project report here, and our analysis of the language of the SEND Review here.
The Right to Review Project team would like to thank the parents who participated for their time and energy.
Also read:
- Beyond EHCPs: Why Inclusion Needs More Than a Document
- The Unacceptable Truth: 20 SEND legal rights at risk from the Government’s SEND reforms
- How health and family support systems are failing children starting school
- WEBINAR RECORDING! The implications for children’s legal rights to EHCPs and EOTAS of the Government’s SEND proposals
- When things go right: Shining a light on SEND Practitioners making a positive impact [Giveaway!]
- From suspicion to support: why the Government’s child protection reforms matter for disabled children
- Have your say on the future of transport for disabled children and young people
- Unison voices major concerns over SEND reform health plans for sick and disabled children out of school in the EOTAS consultation
- Top Tips for the EOTAS & EHCP consultation: Protect your child’s rights to statutory SEND support
- Navigating constraints: Why a former PCF chair thinks the current model is missing the mark for families
- Dear Secretary of State for Education, Lucy Powell: an Open Letter from Special Needs Jungle and SEND legal charity SOS!SEN
- Research: Disabled young people define inclusive education as “learning in the place that’s right for them”
- Have your say on the future of transport for disabled children and young people
- Research shows children in special schools report higher self-esteem than those with SEN in mainstream
- Research: Inclusion for neurodivergent pupils needs lived-experience trainers and getting the wider school environment right
- No inclusion without tackling the “serious fault-line” of exclusions, says children’s legal charity, launching a “roadmap for change”
- “Covid babies” and plans for SEND Reforms: Are We Creating a Forgotten Generation?
- Inclusion bases: Can they help solve the SEND crisis?
What kind of government is “bold” enough to scrap statutory EHCPs from vulnerable children?May 16, 2025
The SEND reforms in the Schools White Paper reveal rights given, and rights stripped awayFebruary 24, 2026
Don’t miss a thing!
Don’t miss any posts from SNJ – simply add your email address below. You must click the link in the confirmation email you’ll receive to activate your free subscription.
You can also keep up with us by following our
Want more? Be an SNJ regular donor!
SNJ is a non-profit and everyone who writes here does so voluntarily. We need your support to help us with costs by donating once or as a regular patron. Find out more here
- The Unacceptable Truth: 20 SEND legal rights at risk from the Government’s SEND reforms - September 9, 2026
- WEBINAR RECORDING! The implications for children’s legal rights to EHCPs and EOTAS of the Government’s SEND proposals - September 3, 2026
- From suspicion to support: why the Government’s child protection reforms matter for disabled children - August 28, 2026
Please share this article!
Discover more from Special Needs Jungle
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
