28 May 2026

What happens to children and young people with SEND when they find themselves in custody? Are their special educational needs understood, and do they get the special educational provision they need?

This is one of the questions being asked by the House of Commons justice select committee, which is carrying out an inquiry into children and young adults in the secure estate in England and Wales.

MPs on the committee are looking at whether custodial settings such as Young Offender Institutions, Secure Children’s Homes and others are suitable and safe for children and young adults – particularly given the high levels of SEND, trauma and mental ill-health among the population in custody.

The widespread failure to recognise the special educational needs of large numbers of children who are detained in custody, and to provide the educational support that would help them, is an issue that IPSEA and others have been raising with policymakers for years.

We recently submitted written evidence to the justice select committee focusing on whether children and young people with SEND can access education, whether their rights are upheld, and whether children and young people with complex needs receive the necessary tailored provision.

In our evidence, we reminded MPs that children and young people don’t lose their right to education when they enter custody. But if they have SEND, the right to an education that meets their needs becomes much harder to enforce.

This is not a marginal issue. More than half of children and young people in custody are identified as having SEND, compared with around 18% of children in the wider community. Many have speech and language difficulties, learning needs, autism, ADHD, or social, emotional and mental health needs.

A system where needs go unidentified and unmet

Children in custody already face major barriers to education. Research by the prisons inspectorate has found that many children in the secure estate receive very little meaningful education at all. For children with SEND, the situation is even worse.

IPSEA’s work alongside the Howard League for Penal Reform has found that special educational needs are frequently misidentified, ignored or left unsupported in secure settings. Assessments that should take place when children enter custody often do not happen properly, despite the SEND Code of Practice being clear that they should.

This matters because unmet educational needs do not disappear in custody. In many cases, they become more acute. Children whose needs are not recognised are more likely to struggle in the secure environment, and behaviour arising from unmet needs may be treated as a disciplinary issue rather than a sign that support is missing.

However, it is also the case that children and young people with SEND lose some important protections when they enter custody – and we think MPs should be aware of this.

In the community, local authorities and health bodies have an absolute duty to secure the provision specified in an Education, Health and Care (EHC) plan. But in custody, this duty is weakened. Local authorities are only required to arrange provision “if practicable”.

That difference has real consequences. We know that support specified in EHC plans is often simply not delivered while children are detained.

Children in custody also have fewer appeal rights than children in the community. There are many key decisions that parents and young people cannot challenge through the SEND Tribunal, including failures relating to the detailed contents of EHC plans or decisions not to reassess a child or young person’s needs. There is also no equivalent right to seek recommendations about health and social care provision.

Even more troublingly, some young people lose the protection of the SEND legal framework altogether. For certain detained young people aged 18–25, EHC plans cease to have legal effect entirely once they enter particular custodial settings. Their local authority no longer has duties to maintain or review the plan, and rights of appeal disappear.

These gaps send a dangerous message: that educational rights are conditional, and that children in custody are less deserving of support than other children with the same needs.

SEND reform must not ignore children in custody

The Government’s proposed SEND reforms make little reference to children and young people in the secure estate, an omission that we believe represents a major policy gap.

At a time when ministers are considering changes to the wider SEND system, there is a serious risk that children and young people in custody will remain invisible within reform discussions. Yet these are among the most vulnerable children and young people in the country, with some of the highest levels of unmet need.

We are urging MPs to recommend stronger legal protections to ensure that children and young people in custody receive the same educational entitlements they would in the community. Provision in EHC plans should be delivered regardless of the type of detention setting, and accountability for identifying and meeting special educational needs should be strengthened across the secure estate.

Rights should not stop at the prison gate

Children do not lose their right to education because they enter custody. Nor should they lose the support and protections they need to access that education.

For many children and young people in the secure estate, unmet special educational needs have already shaped their educational experiences long before they are placed in detention. Failing to identify and support those needs in custody risks compounding disadvantage and undermining future opportunities.

About the author

Catriona is responsible for IPSEA’s work in bringing about change by influencing the development of SEND policy nationally. Her background is in public policy and communications, and she has worked for a number of charities and public sector organisations, as well as in Parliament. In the past she has served as an elected councillor in a London borough, a special school governor and a charity trustee. She has personal experience of having a disabled child. In her spare time, she enjoys walking, reading, going to the theatre and being by the sea.

Explore more of our latest policy blogs here.