Source document: https://docs-lawep.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/1697632014132.pdf (Australia)
Current levels of access and attainment for students with disability in the school system, and the impact on students and families associated with inadequate levels of support.

Why does my child need to be “Certified intellectually impaired” to access support in the classroom?

The moment my son enters a room, people make assumptions about him based on his facial features.

In fact, people make assumptions about him before they meet him.

My son has Down Syndrome.

He is 6 years old.


When people find out that he can read, I notice the look of surprise on their faces.

When they find out he speaks a second language, I notice something between perplexity and admiration.

My son’s abilities seem to confuse people.

He started reading at 2.5 years of age and is bilingual in English/French.
When I shared my intention to speak to him in French with the various speech therapists we consulted (he spoke very little for the first four years of his life), they all strongly advised me against it, implying that he would have enough difficulties learning English.

This year my son started prep at our local public school in Brisbane.

He took to school like a fish to water thanks in no small part to the transition program set in place between the school and his kindergarten at the end of last year.
Every morning he wakes up looking forward to another full day at school learning and socialising with his classmates.

He is a good reader and is making good progress in all his subjects, with some classroom support from the Special Education Program at the school, which is roughly 1 hour 4 days/week.

This is not much but it seems to be enough for him to stay motivated when tasks are challenging and has the strong advantage of not making him dependent on support for working in class.
From the beginning I have asked his teacher to have high expectations from him and she has.

We have been lucky that she is skilled, caring, and interested in his success and we are happy with how the school has enabled him to be a fully participating student through the provision of classroom staff support for specific activities and additional resources such as a Howdahugs “listening chair” to help at mat time as well as adjustments for specific activities which he finds quite difficult (e.g.
while writing is still very difficult and slow, he is using magnetic letters to demonstrate that he can form sentences.)

We feel that the school staff cares about him and works with us to monitor his progress and his needs as the year progresses.

We feel happy and relieved to know that school is such a positive experience for him and this encourages us all for his future education in the mainstream system.
What we hope for our son is what we hope for his younger brother and what most parents would hope for their children: we want him to be happy, to be able to find meaningful work that will provide him with sufficient income to live, to have close friends, to find love, to keep learning and develop interests… So why did we have to go through a verification process?

Why was “verification” necessary when all the assessments needed to establish which additional supports he required had already been done?
When I questioned the usefulness of the verification process with the Head of Special Education, she told me that unfortunately this was how the QLD Education system worked and that there was nothing she or the Guidance Officer or any of the other Special Education staff could do.

I was made to understand that the verification process was nothing else than a means to access resources and support for my son.

In fact it was the only way he would continue to access support at all.
So I was told that there was only one category that my son would fall under and that it was “Intellectual Impairment.” I was also informed that my son had been “awaiting verification of intellectual impairment” since he started prep.

Although I had heard of the verification process before, the reality of it hit me hard.
I didn’t feel I had a real choice: either I agreed to a Cognitive assessment for my son followed by the formal label of “Intellectually Impaired” permanently attached to his name, or the support he had been receiving and which had assisted him in having such a successful start in Current levels of access and attainment for students with disability in the school system, and the impact on studentsand families associated with inadequate levels of supportSubmission 81 school would stop.
Several meetings were held with all the relevant staff to discuss my concerns and everyone was very supportive and understanding but in the end it was very clear that there was no way out of the verification process.

I came out of our last meeting feeling profoundly sad and disempowered.

I didn’t want my son to be labelled “Intellectually Impaired” and this for several reasons:  I didn’t want my son to be pulled out of class for an assessment he didn’t need and which was not going to be useful for him.
 My son has difficulties with certain cognitive tasks and has “delays” in certain cognitive areas.

However does that mean that he is intellectually impaired?

And if we agree that he has some level of intellectual impairment, how does that tell the whole story of what he does well and what he finds more difficult?

Down Syndrome is a complex disorder which affects multiple systems: neurological, musculoskeletal, cardiovascular, respiratory, gastrointestinal, endocrinal, and others.
My son has experienced problems in all of these areas and cognitive difficulties are not the ones that stand out.

Currently, chronic constipation (due to an underactive thyroid as well as low muscular tone) has a bigger impact on his ability to focus in class than any cognitive difficulties he may have.
Similarly, his poor vision (he has to wear an eyepatch) and the resulting difficulty to gauge depth and to focus on the page coupled with his low tone have a bigger impact on his ability to learn to write than any cognitive “deficit” he may have.

It doesn’t make sense and it is not useful to choose one manifestation of Down Syndrome over others.

 My son already came to the world with a label, Down Syndrome, and all the stereotypes it carries.

He doesn’t need another one.


Studies have confirmed what many of us already knew, that expectations lower when a label of “Intellectual Impairment” is made.

Labels shape teacher expectations.


Studies on teacher expectations have demonstrated that what teachers believe about student capability is directly related to student achievement (Henley, Ramsey, Algozzine, 2009, p. 32-34) The look of surprise on people’s faces when they realise that my son is able to speak and read reveals their low expectations of the capabilities of a child with Down Syndrome.
The current requirement in the Australian Education system for a label in order to access support brings with it the risk of low expectations and exclusion (Purdue, 2009.)

Could we not develop a funding system focused on student need for support rather than “impairment” or “labelling” thereby simplifying the assessment process and removing the stigmatisation inherent in “verification”?
Isn’t it “ironic that a system that strives to provide equal educational opportunity would require children to be labelled in order to qualify for equality [?
]” (Ho, 2004, p.91, cited in Children with Disability Australia issues paper Inclusion in Education: towards equality for students with disability) To conclude, I would like to re-emphasise the disheartening and disempowering effect the verification has had for our family as well as the lack of benefit for anyone: so far the only thing to come out of the verification process has been the label of Intellectual Impairment attached to my son’s name.
I would like to thank you for the opportunity to share our family’s story with you and for your time and consideration.

Julie Huysman Brisbane Current levels of access and attainment for students with disability in the school system, and the impact on studentsand families associated with inadequate levels of supportSubmission 81