Disabled students are punished more harshly and more frequently than neurotypical students due to the characteristics of their disability. Hence, disabled people are more likely to commit suicide than a neurotypical student

As an educator who identifies as neurodivergent, I have consistently noticed an imbalance in behaviour management policies within schools, particularly concerning students with Autism and ADHD.

Unfortunately, these students often experience isolation or exclusion from the classroom due to behaviours that are inherent to their disabilities. It is disheartening to witness that behaviour management policies primarily cater to neurotypical students, disregarding the needs of neurodiverse individuals i.e.  Students with special needs and disability (SEND)

I have encountered this issue across multiple schools and colleges where I have taught, which is especially concerning as I am also a parent of neurodiverse children.

It is evident that the existing policies do not adequately address the unique challenges and requirements of individuals who have disabilities.

In September 2022, I embarked on a journey to pursue a Postgraduate Certificate in Education (PGCE) with Qualified Teacher Status (QTS) qualification, with the aspiration of moving to the Secondary Education Sector as a Secondary School teacher and a Special Educational Needs Coordinator (SENCO).  Little did I know that this path would not be without its challenges, particularly when it came to facing disability discrimination.

Despite my extensive 15-year teaching experience and qualifications as a Qualified Further Education (FE) Teacher, specializing in teaching GCSE, A-level, and BTEC courses for students under 16, as well as my role as an examiner for GCSE and A-Level examinations, I recently faced significant obstacles while pursuing a PGCE course.

Unfortunately, I found myself subjected to a fitness-to-practice (FTP) trial unnecessarily because I was questioning the university lecturers about their decisions for me, a disabled educator. The lecturers did not provide the reasonable adjustments necessary to accommodate my disability whilst at university and on school placement. 

Throughout this process, my requests for reasonable adjustments and necessary support went unheeded, needlessly prolonging the proceedings and disregarding the impact of my disability on my mental health. Once again, it became evident that the existing policies were not designed with the diverse needs of individuals like myself in mind.

These policies and trials often place immense stress on neurodivergent individuals and can lead to drastic​ actions such as suicide within educational institutions. 

Even I found myself on the brink of contemplating suicide due to the incredibly challenging circumstances and the huge impact on my mental health that I faced during my time on the PGCE course as a result of the discrimination I faced as a disabled student.

My university was taking my teacher identity away from me despite being an outstanding teacher.

I was constantly questioning the university how I can be a Teacher for 15 years and be on a Fitness to Practice Trial for PGCE.

Regrettably, despite my qualifications, experience, and dedication to education, my university has denied me the opportunity to obtain my PGCE and Qualified Teacher Status (QTS).

This decision reflects a system that fails to recognize the capabilities and potential of neurodivergent individuals. Encountering such barriers is disheartening, especially in a profession where understanding and inclusivity should be at the forefront.

It is crucial for the Department for Education (DFE) and educational institutions to address these systemic issues and develop policies and practices that foster inclusivity, accommodate the needs of neurodivergent individuals, and ensure fair and equitable opportunities for all educators. 

DfE must intervene in FTP trials that are being used by Initial Teacher Training providers as systematic bullying.