Disabled deserve a fair go in ECE sector
Concerns about the inclusion of disabled children in the early child hood education (ECE) sector are becoming increasingly apparent within the current free-market structure.
It is clear the 1989 Education Act was an attempt to protect the rights of disabled school-aged children to attend their local school but, for under 5-year-olds, the law appears less clear.
In Aotearoa New Zealand’s legislative and policy environment, the concept of inclusion for disabled young children is expressed as a human rights concern in which all children are afforded the right to attend and participate in all aspects of educational and community life; they are legislatively included.
Our Human Rights Act (1993) and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child to which New Zealand is a signatory, stress the importance of disabled young children being included and further suggest discrimination on grounds of disability is not legal.
The right to be included is also protected in New Zealand’s early childhood curriculum, Te Whariki, the use of which is mandatory in all licensed early childhood centres. Increasingly, however, families of disabled young children face significant and stressful barriers to participation in ECE. In many cases, they are denied access entirely.
A major contributor is the free-market context in which such inclusion is expected to take place. The majority of ECE centres are privately or corporately operated businesses, marketed as highyield investment sites and, in many cases, also need to consider responsibility to shareholders. While all children who attend are subsidised, such subsidies have clearly promoted the sector as a prime opportunity for financial gain.
One must question how our most vulnerable are depicted within this freemarket structure — are our children tradeable commodities, and if so, which children are most tradeable?
The marketplace economic model, characterised by poor ratios; contestable funding for disability; and the influence of deficit-focused, historic perceptions of disabled children have conflated into a trend that is clearly hindering progress for inclusion. Within this model, disabled children likely present as high-risk and of limited cost-effectiveness.
The ways in which the sector is currently structured and funded disallows for the flexibility needed to ensure inclusion is successful. It has become a more straightforward solution to simply turn families away.
The predicament becomes clearer when we understand that it is not acceptable or legal to just say “no”. In a recent study (Lyons McAdam, 2021) parents reported ECE staff citing safety concerns, inability to access timely specialist support, unsuitable play areas and long waiting lists as justification for excluding disabled children.
It is clear there is a rift between the legislation for inclusion, the ECE curriculum and the marketplace structure of the sector.
It is timely to suggest taxpayer funding to the sector be made transparent according to guidelines specifically intended to ensure that such monies cannot be used to increase investor yield but rather to benefit the children for whom it is intended.
Furthermore, funding for support for disabled children in regular ECE settings should not be contestable. A child should receive equitable support as it is required and in a timely manner in order that they may participate as the legislation intends. Te Whariki: Early Childhood Curriculum holds the promise that all children will be empowered to learn with and alongside others, and that barriers to inclusion will be removed. There are enormous benefits for disabled children and their peers when they are accepted members of the community. In order to achieve this for all young disabled children, funding and support should be equitable and flexible, the law should be upheld, and profit should never play a part in any consideration of whether a child is included alongside their peers.
I do not believe it is the intention of many teachers to deny access. It has evolved into rather more of a survival strategy. However, in many cases, ECE services are breaking the promise of inclusion and it is timely to make restoration without caveat.
To accept that there is no alternative to the status quo is to accept that our society will continue to privilege the able.