The Task Force Report On Autism

The report of the Task Force on Autism, reported in today's editions, is an impressive document

The report of the Task Force on Autism, reported in today's editions, is an impressive document. It underlines the State's lamentable record with respect to people with special needs. As it points out, no accurate figure is available for the number of people with autism and there is little research work in the area.

The report was established in response to the Sinnott case. The facts of this case, as outlined in the High Court and later in the Supreme Court, dismayed and shocked the public. Jamie Sinnot's mother, Kathryn, had to work tirelessly to ensure that the educational rights, which most of us take for granted, were available to her son. There was further public outrage in the summer when the Supreme Court ruled that the State was only obliged to provide primary education to those under 18 years.

The Task Force report acknowledges that the legal protection available to the parents of those with special needs is inadequate. It calls for urgent constitutional reform and a bill of rights, or what it calls a "civil rights statute," to protect those with autism. Curiously, the report sidesteps the issue of a constitutional referendum which has been advocated by Mrs Sinnott and other campaigners like Mr Marc de Salvo, whose daughter, Jessica, also suffers from autism. It says the constitutional right to education should be "reformulated" but it is unclear how this can be done without a referendum.

In other respects, the report impressively underlines the dreadful plight of parents with autistic children when faced with official neglect. There are heart-rending accounts from parents of how they are being turned away by a succession of government departments and health boards. Worse, there are accounts of how parents are marginalised and excluded from meetings involving their children's future.

READ MORE

The report makes it clear that the whole area has been underfunded and under-resourced for generations. It calls for much better co-ordination between Government departments, better training for teachers and the availability of the proper levels of funding.

Some progress has been made since the Sinnott case. Under pressure from the public and from his own backbenchers, the Minister for Education, Dr Michael Woods, has signalled his intention to establish a new council for special education. He also hopes to establish a forum for parents of children with special needs.

The Government must now move swiftly to implement the main thrust of this report. It should not back away from a constitutional amendment, if that is what is required to ensure that people like Kathryn Sinnott will no longer be dragged through the courts in order to vindicate basic rights. It should, as a matter of policy, allow parents to opt for the education provision which they believe is best for their child. And it should ensure that the resources and support services are in place.