I appreciate the opportunity to raise this matter on foot of a letter I received. A copy was sent to the Minister. It outlines the matter in graphic detail and is better than any speech that I could make. The woman in question has a child aged eight and states that the child knows the difference between right and wrong and is generally well behaved. His previous school teachers expressed concern regarding his concentration and his ability to start, follow through and complete a task. She goes on to state that his teacher said in the past that the child had difficulty getting information from blackboard to brain to hand to copybook. His vision and hearing were tested and found to be fine and the child's health is generally good. In September 1996 the child returned to school and on 10 September, seven days into the new term, his teacher demanded an educational assessment for a learning difficulty. There were difficulties in trying to get this done. The woman was referred by her doctor to the Eastern Health Board in Naas which referred her to a child guidance clinic which refused to see the child because it deals with behavioural difficulties and not learning difficulties. She then contacted the psychological assessment unit in the Department of Education, but due to cutbacks there is no child psychologist for north Kildare even though one is available in south Kildare. There are child guidance clinics available to some of the major Dublin hospitals, but as the child does not live in the catchment area of those Dublin hospitals those clinics are unable to help.
She subsequently contacted the director of community care in the Eastern Health Board in Dublin and he informed her that if the board dealt with one child from north Kildare it would have to deal with all the children from that area and his budget is already overstretched. She then contacted the director of community care in the Eastern Health Board in Naas and he advised that he would request an assessment and a school teacher's report and depending on the position he might be able to arrange for the educational psychologist in south Kildare to deal with this case. She subsequently contacted the community welfare officer to see if it would be possible to send her child to a private psychologist, but the supplementary welfare allowance does not nearly cover the cost involved. She got a sympathetic hearing from the Minister's office, but little else. She then contacted a primary education psychologist who told her the fee would be approximately £130 to £150. That parent is living on deserted wife's benefit.
The final paragraph in her letter is significant and sums up the matter. It states that the total result so far is that a child is desperately unhappy, confused and who, while trying his hardest, cannot seem to cope with the regular school workload and curriculum for an average eight year old. The letter goes on to state that one frustrated hardworking teacher with 36 children in her class can only spend so much time on her child. It also states that one school principal cannot put the child into a remedial class without an educational assessment as it is already overcrowded and under-resourced for the population of the school. It also states that one upset and angry mother would like to do the best for her child but she is not a qualified teacher. I followed up that letter and what it states is correct.
It is upsetting that in the past year I have read that the numbers employed in the Civil Service have increased dramatically and the number of teachers employed by the Department of Education has also increased significantly, but the increase in the number of primary teachers and others employed in that area is minuscule. The greatest increase has been in the numbers employed in the third level sector. In the four years prior to June 1996 there has been an increase of 22.7 per cent in the numbers employed in the third level sector. I have continually berated Ministers of all shades to prioritise in their Departments. What priorities has a Government that decides to allocate £40 million to cover the abolition of third level education fees while it cannot employ a few educational psychologists at primary level? Surely a proper psychological service at primary level would be more beneficial to our people, particularly our children. Has it not been proved time and again that early intervention is far more beneficial to everyone in the longterm, not least to the taxpayer because it solves all types of difficulties? This sector was the first to be hit. As a political society, we appear to have a strange set of priorities in that we do not put resources into the primary level but concentrate them in other areas. This case speaks for itself.
