“I didn't even know anything about SEND before I had my son. It was a completely new thing for me, so it was very, very difficult.”

Many parents and carers of children with SEND will recognise this feeling.

For some families, barriers to accessing support are compounded by other aspects of their lives and identities. Too often we think about protected characteristics such as disability or gender in isolation. But for minoritised groups, multiple marginalised identities can compound the barriers they face accessing support for their children. Imagine a parent telling IPSEA about their child’s unmet SEND needs while also living in overcrowded housing, on a low income, managing their own mental health, and speaking English as an additional language.

SEND research consistently shows that socio-economic status and where you live in the country are critical factors shaping families’ experience of SEND provision. Children and young people from disadvantaged backgrounds are more likely to have special educational needs, yet they are less likely to secure an Education, Health and Care (EHC) plan or a place in a special school.

Recognising the need for an intersectional and systemic approach, with equity at the forefront, was at the heart of IPSEA’s recent project assessing demand for future outreach services. In 2024-2025, I conducted a scoping exercise, interviewing organisations working with several minoritised communities, including care-experienced families, those with unsettled immigration status, those with children or young people detained in the youth justice system, with English as an additional language and Gypsy, Roma and Traveller communities. This was followed by focus groups with parents and carers exploring their experiences of SEND provision and barriers to accessing advice and support. Many other communities experiencing similar inequalities could also have been included in this research.

Four themes emerged clearly from these conversations, each highlighting how structural inequalities shape families’ experiences of the SEND system.

Early isn’t early enough

"I had nobody, even the family was against me, they said my son has nothing. He's OK."

In some families, disability carried stigma. Parents often felt unsure how to interpret their child’s behaviour or raise concerns. Without early information and reassurance, many felt isolated and uncertain about how to support their child. This lack of confidence can delay people seeking help for their child.

The government’s proposed family hubs are a welcome recognition of the importance of early support for families. However, if they are to improve access to SEND advice and information, they will need to work closely with the community and voluntary sector. This research confirmed that these organisations hold the trust and local knowledge needed to reach families who might otherwise be excluded. Without lived experience peer support from local communities, there is a real risk the families who most need early information will not access it.

Dismissed

“Your child might grow out of this.” I just took their word for it. He didn't grow out of it. He's in year 8 now. He's going through all of these difficulties. I have to go back in the queue and now ask them to assess him."

Parents frequently described feeling dismissed when raising concerns, often being told their child would “grow out of it” or that support required a diagnosis. Parents who spoke English as an additional language described being told their child’s difficulties were simply due to language barriers. Others reported that children’s needs were attributed to culture or parenting rather than recognised as potential SEND.

For families already experiencing discrimination or marginalisation, this reinforces mistrust of statutory services. Some parents described feeling reluctant to challenge decisions or ask for further support, particularly where language barriers or immigration concerns were present.

My research shows how easily parents can be excluded from the SEND process. There is therefore real concern that the proposed Individual Support Plans (ISPs) could make this situation worse.

Ministers have suggested that parents experiencing problems should begin with a school’s complaints process. But, as journalist John Harris recently observed, this “threatens to bring adversarial disputes into the kind of relationships that have to work on an everyday level”. Parents in this research were already sceptical about these processes, often describing them as schools “marking their own homework”. For families who already feel marginalised within the system, relying on internal complaints procedures is unlikely to build trust or provide accountability.

Co-production isn’t yet a reality

“Nobody breaks anything down. They don't tell you what … No one told me the purpose of [SEND provision]. And even when you realise what you need, you don't know who is involved as a parent because you have never [done it before].”

Even when children received support, many parents did not feel included in decisions about their child’s provision.

Some families were unaware that their child had an EHCP, or that they had the right to contribute to its development and review. This reflects wider pressures within the system.

Parents also described experiences of discrimination within interactions with schools and local authorities. Some felt ignored or treated as troublemakers when they tried to advocate for their children. South Asian mothers spoke of professionals assuming they could not speak English and asking to speak to their child’s father instead.

Across the research, parents repeatedly described “fighting” for support. This becomes far harder when parents also face housing insecurity, financial pressure, language barriers or health challenges.

Widespread failures in SEND provision

“[The school said], ‘We’ll keep him in a room by himself and give him toys to play with.’ But there was nothing to help him develop. They told me, ‘There’s nothing we can do for you.’”

Almost every parent involved in this research described failures in SEND provision. Parents spoke of support being refused, delayed or never implemented. Even where EHCPs existed, the provision was often not delivered.

Some experiences were deeply concerning. Parents described children being isolated within schools, placed in separate rooms or excluded from normal school activities. Others described repeated exclusions, pressure to home educate or long periods out of education. Parents described leaving work to care for their children, experiencing worsening mental health and financial pressure.

A system moving further away from families?

These findings raise important questions about the direction of current SEND reform.

The existing SEND framework is built around a personalised, rights-based model centred on the needs of the individual child. But proposals that move towards more generic “packages of care” risk shifting the system in a more top-down direction.

For families already facing multiple barriers to interacting with the system, it is difficult to see how a more standardised approach would make access easier. If support becomes less personalised and harder to challenge, those with the least knowledge, confidence or resources may find themselves further excluded.

Similarly, proposals that give schools greater responsibility for determining access to support risk deepening existing power imbalances. Parents may increasingly find themselves negotiating directly with schools for provision.

For families who already face language barriers, discrimination or low confidence in challenging decisions, this could make an already unequal relationship even more difficult. As Madeleine Cassidy recently noted at IPSEA’s recent SEND legal conference, this makes it even more important that organisations such as IPSEA empower parents and carers with the knowledge and confidence they need to work positively – and effectively – with their children’s schools.

What works – and what needs to change

Despite these challenges, families and organisations were clear about what works.

Parents consistently emphasised the importance of accessible information about SEND rights that reflects families’ languages, cultures and lived experiences. Trusted community organisations play a crucial role in bridging the gap between families and statutory services. Through peer support and culturally informed advice they help parents understand and assert their rights.

Where support is rooted in trusted relationships and clear information, families are better able to navigate the system. For IPSEA, the challenge is ensuring these services are accessible in practice to the families who need them most. 

This means building long-term partnerships with community organisations, supporting culturally competent outreach and peer-led advice, and ensuring that families receive information about SEND rights early – before unmet needs escalate into crisis.

SEND does not exist in isolation from poverty, housing insecurity, migration status or discrimination. Addressing inequalities in access to SEND advice therefore requires approaches that recognise the wider realities families are navigating — and that ensure those currently least well served by the system are not left further behind.

At IPSEA, we are committed to supporting all families of children and young people with SEND navigating the SEND legal framework.

About the author 

Gerry Mitchell is a social researcher and programme lead with experience across the public and third sectors, including charities, local authorities and think tanks in the UK and internationally. She specialises in community engagement and service development, with a focus on tackling inequality. Between 2024 and 2025, she worked at IPSEA as a Community Project Researcher, developing outreach strategy to improve access to SEND support.

Explore more of our latest policy blogs here.