All Rights Now: why de-segregating public education means backing teachers too

A central political tension between teachers and parents of Disabled families is always communication.

The reason for this is: labour.

It's interesting. I'm a staunch trade unionist, an ex Educator, a Disabled person and Advocate, and I'm also the mother of a Disabled child in a public school - so I can see the balance of needs.

It is a known phenomenon that Disabled children, due to complexity of needs, connections to services, need for additional care plans, use of medications, and need for adjustments, attract additional paperwork and communication labour in education settings and at home.

There's a reason parents of Disabled kids, or Disabled adults navigating systems, often experience burnout. The mental load, and communication load, of being Disabled under late stage capitalism is immense.

I am fine with this as a carer, and reconciled to it as a Disabled person, mostly. Good care and support is my child’s human right. Good care and support is my right, too, so when I speak about labouring for my child, it is not with complaint. It is merely an observation of fact. Parenting is labour, and parenting a Disabled child is additional labour. I do think parents need more support, but that is another subject for another time.

We live in an NDIS funded era, where more and more, Disabled children attending schools are being given the supports they need to live well in the community. It is imperfect, but we are crawling toward a more hopeful future for children.

However, we have an underfunded public education system that is ill equipped to deal with the changes the Disability Royal Commission has suggested. The NDIS does not pay for supports considered to fall under the responsibility of Education Departments; and this is a source of tension between these two systems.

How the Education system used to approach Disabled students with high needs, is that it kept them at home, or it kept them restrained and sedated, suspended or expelled them. The DRC Report makes it clear that we can no longer do this, because it is inhumane, and in violation of the Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities.

Disabled children have a right to be educated, included, and part of the school community. All Disabled children. Safely, and without neglect, violence or abuse; this is the minimum expectation we should have, going forward.

Yet there is a labour dynamic to this that we must discuss. When we talk about rights, we must talk about all rights - Disability rights, and workers rights. It is unfortunately the case that far too often, these discussions are set up as ‘us vs them’ rather than ‘all rights now.’

The recent NSW Restrictive Practices bill has made this clear. That bill has been the subject of ongoing debate within the Teacher’s Federation due to fears for Work Health and Safety.

Teachers of support classes burn out. They crumble and come apart at the seams; they experience violence at work. None this is the fault of the children they are trying to teach; nor is it the fault of their families.

Executives and teachers trying to lead schools transitioning to having a multi-categorical class or support class, or full inclusion without segregation, experience unsustainable workloads. They are given insufficient leave, pay, or training to do this properly. They need more support.

The cracks show in elevated stress, failing mental health, burnout, and additional leave. It also shows in elevated levels of conflict with families of Disabled children. Many teachers and executives resort to blaming families of children with complex needs, because we represent intensive levels of work.

Recently, our school principal reported me to DCJ in part due to the frequency with which I communicated with the school, and due to my pointed observation that a lack of funding was resulting in failing conditions for both students and staff. Yet I was carrying out my duty of care for my child who has complex needs; and my observation of conditions in the school was correct.

My compassionate view of this situation is that it is a symptom, a geyser bursting from pressure building from below, of a system that is under-resourced in every way. Conflict, and poorly negotiated conflict, arises from this climate.

While I do not agree with the principal's actions, I am, as I said, a trade unionist down to my bones. My family does present a lot of labour. That labour is essential for full inclusion; and conditions must improve. I would be a neglectful parent if I ignored my child's needs, and his distress.

But I would also be a neglectful citizen if I did not also remark that there is not enough support in schools to negotiate the full inclusion of Disabled students - and their often Disabled parents, in the case of Neurodivergence - with safety and grace.

There is a central tension here that must be resolved to de-segregate public education. That tension is a resolution of the policy question of whose rights come first. Teachers or students?

I would argue: neither. Both.

I support the aims and mission of the Teacher's Federation. I support worker's rights. I don't want the teachers or the executive at my child's school to do more work. I don’t want more teachers on workers comp; I don’t want teachers being hurt by stressed children who don’t have adequate support.

I want there to be more of everything they all need - more assistance, more leave, more professional learning, more hands-on deck, more back-up. More. I don't want to see teachers leaving: I want to see them learning. I want to see them taking more breaks. Having more help. I care about their well-being, deeply. I want to see less frustrated communication between parents and teachers, and less friction from overwhelm.

I support an end to segregation and restrictive practices, and I support the recommendations of the Disability Royal Commission, though I think the end to segregation can indeed come in the seven year time-frame suggested by Senator Jordon Steele-John.

Tensions felt between families of Disabled children and teachers are entirely the result of under-funding. Therefore, as we move forward, it is the role of State and Federal government to balance labour rights and disability rights. You cannot squeeze blood from a stone; and our teachers are that stone, already being crushed for the last drop.

With regulation and a regulatory authority must also come expanded global and school-based funding; Integrated Funding Support must be expanded and made easier to access. Ratios will have to decrease, and the teacher shortage must be addressed. If support units are closed, then in class support must be radically expanded; the appropriateness of classroom environments assessed, and adjusted, with universal design and funding the remodeling of classrooms a likely aid; teaching practices changed, with robust and ready care for the teachers in the wave of this shift.

The key and vital role played by SLSOs (School Learning Support Officers) and SAMs (School Administrative Managers) will become more important than ever; as will the role of the Behaviour Specialists. From planning to implementation, the transition must centre the rights of children AND teachers; any corners cut will result in poor outcomes. We know this, from decades of evidence.

De-segregation that doesn’t risk our teachers, or our kids, is completely within reach, and will involve a massive financial investment; and it is doable.

I believe the two most precious things our society has are our teachers and our children.

What better way to spend our money than on them?

It's time.