Support for Non Verbal Disabled Families

About This Site

This website offers free, informal support and advocacy for parents and carers of non-verbal children in England.  

Practical guidance articles in pages links

The aim is to make SEND law, various related processes, communication, and behaviour, easier to understand, and to help families feel supported while navigating education and care systems.

About Me

Against many odds, in 1997, with the help of a very good non-practising barrister and other very determined parents, I successfully overturned a Special Educational Needs Tribunal decision and won a second tribunal on the same issue. This was a 'Landmark' case which made legal history.

 That case made applied behaviour analysis (ABA) available as a government funded provision.

I was informed by aba expert, Prof.Svein Eikeseth and others -in person and in our home and during a workshop consult, that my son would 'definitely speak'- sadly no- we later, after a few years in- worked on 'verbal behaviour' and used broader reinforcement strategies that gained approximations- e.g. my son would, when prompted properly -would say 'bees' for 'keys' etc - one therapist who assisted was called Amy H- very sadly his progress was halted due to tragic circumstances.

I am not currently supportive of all ABA practice and sometimes advise various bodies on changes that need addressing there- such as providing mandatory training and provision of AAC's to be incorporated in all therapy/teaching in non-verbal disability as a legal right.

An example of ABA not being helpful is the fact that a lot of non speakers have problems with processing speeds- making the 'instant reinforcement' aspect in parts of the ABA therapy- not only useless in many ways but potentially harmful too-and very tedious and/frustrating for the child.

 Personalised, varied reinforcement practiced in the community and not just at a table- for extended periods-can be really helpful. I made therapists do it in parks, supermarkets, and on trips to museums and in boats on the river! That is where progress began. Sunlight is a requirement for health.

 Former ABA service users report abuses and even PTSD due to unfavourable ABA practices.

 ABA uses coercive practice to eliminate behaviours that are natural, such as hand-flapping in Autism- though compassionate, tailored behaviourism is becoming more popular.

The coercion: ABA is about 'compliance' and repetion mostly- which brings disability, equality and discrimination law to seriously consider. 

I worked for four years as a behaviour therapist, employing and training therapists and occassionally advocating for others as a disabled parent.  

I have also, intermittently and informally, tried to research Autism causes since 1994. 

 Recent research includes news that autism and non-verbal developmental disability share many genetic pathways. 

The genes most consistently connected to absent or very limited speech are FOXP2, UBE3A,ARID1B, bvFTD, CACNA11, EHMT1, CNTNAP2, DDX3X, SHANK3, SYNGAP1, DYRK1A, ADNP, and MECP2. The future of genetic testing is looking very promising.

 My background includes certificates in DBT, ACT, Psychotherapy in PTSD and trained in Operant Conditioning-Skinnerian theory, as well as holistic nutrition therapy and herbal certs, I have a love of herbal teas and creating diy non-toxic soaps and deodorants.

How I Can Support You

I offer informal, experienced guidance and support for parents, carers, teachers or other professionals,who need help for non-verbal children, offering direct general support or directing them to appropriate SEND documents, services and helpful, free information.

If you’d like to get in touch for reasons listed, use the email icon or contact form below please.

 Messages are confidential, and I don’t store or share personal information.

It may take a while for me to respond. 

Aac help for non verbal children

Liz Lucy Robillard

'50,000' immigrants are not the problem- ECHR need remain- explained

 

Cohesion Over Headcounts: The Real Question Is How We Live Together

Focus: residents born outside the UK. References and statistics included.

The Core Idea

The health of a community isn’t decided by how many newcomers arrive, but by how people living here take part in civic and cultural life. This article looks only at residents born outside the United Kingdom — excluding British-born people entirely — to explore integration, participation, and cohesion.

The Numbers (non-UK-born only)

• Foreign-born population: In 2021, there were 10.0 million residents in England and Wales born outside the UK — 16.8% of all usual residents. In 2011, that figure was 7.5 million (13.4%). Source: ONS Census 2021
• English proficiency: 90% of migrants in England and Wales said they spoke English “well” or “very well.” Source: Migration Observatory
• Top countries of birth: India, Poland, Pakistan, Romania, and Ireland accounted for roughly 32% of the foreign-born population in 2021. Source: Migration Observatory
• Net migration trend: Net migration to the UK nearly halved to about 431,000 in 2024, after new visa restrictions. Source: Financial Times, 2025

What Cohesion Actually Means

Research consistently shows that integration has less to do with raw numbers and more to do with language, trust, and participation. The UK Home Office’s Indicators of Integration Framework (2019) highlights employment, education, housing, and social contact as the core drivers of cohesion.

<

Teaching kids empathy alongside critical thinking

 TEACHING CHILDREN EMPATHY AND CRITICAL THINKING WHILE STRENGTHENING IDENTITY AND RESPECT FOR PARENTS

Teaching children empathy alongside critical thinking while strengthening their identity and respect for parents requires an integrated, developmentally sensitive approach based on social and developmental psychology. The aim is to help children understand both themselves and others, including parents, as multidimensional human beings.

1. TEACH PERSPECTIVE-TAKING AS A THINKING SKILL

Empathy and critical thinking both depend on seeing the world from another point of view while maintaining independent thought.

Activity: Use role play or family storytelling. Ask the child to retell a recent disagreement from your perspective. Follow with questions like "why do you think I felt that way?" or "what might I have been afraid of or hoping for?" This strengthens intellectual empathy—the capacity to analyze emotions and motives without blind agreement.

Tip: Invite "why" questions about you as well as about the world. "Why do you think I got upset when you didn't call?" This builds cognitive flexibility and moral reasoning.

2. LINK IDENTITY FORMATION TO INTERGENERATIONAL UNDERSTANDING

Children develop identity through family narratives and by observing how parents make decisions.

Activity: Make a "parent timeline." Let the child interview you about your own upbringing, formative events, and values. Discuss together: "what do you think shaped how I parent?" and "what parts of my story surprised you?" This develops narrative empathy—the ability to connect emotionally and intellectually through life stories. It also helps children see parents as evolving people rather than fixed authority figures, which reduces adolescent rebellion and increases emotional regulation.

3. USE CONFLICT AS A LEARNING LAB

Disagreement can be reframed as a shared investigation rather than a power struggle. Encourage reflection during calm moments: "what did we each want in that argument?" and "how could we have understood each other better?" This models self-regulation, accountability, and reasoning about emotions.

REFERENCES

Hoffman, M. L. (2000). Empathy and moral development: Implications for caring and justice. Cambridge University Press.

Eisenberg, N., & Spinrad, T. L. (2014). Empathy-related responding in children. Annual Review of Psychology, 65, 459-485.

Habermas, T., & Bluck, S. (2000). Getting a life: The emergence of the life story in adolescence. Psychological Bulletin, 126(5), 748-769.

De Witte, S., & Vanhooren, S. (2021). The role of parental storytelling in children's moral and identity development. Journal of Moral Education.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.

Piaget, J. (1932). The moral judgment of the child.

How To

Integrate empathy and critical thinking into school subjects like history and literature through perspective analysis.

Encourage parents to discuss ethical dilemmas together with children using real family examples.

Use emotion labeling during daily routines to teach self-awareness and vocabulary for feelings.

Practice guided reflection: after any disagreement, summarize what each person learned rather than who was right.

Use community or cultural storytelling to expand empathy beyond the family, reinforcing cultural identity and mutual respect.

ESTIMATED OUTCOMES

Children who engage with these approaches consistently show improved emotional regulation and reduced conflict intensity with parents by ages 8-10. Perspective-taking practice develops the neural pathways associated with theory of mind, leading to more sophisticated moral reasoning by ages 11-13. The parent timeline activity increases adolescents' understanding of parents as complex people, which research suggests reduces oppositional behavior during teenage years and strengthens intergenerational relationships into adulthood. 

Combined practice in perspective-taking and guided reflection demonstrates measurable gains in both empathetic responses and independent critical thinking, helping children maintain respect for parents while developing their own values and identities. Over time, these practices create families where disagreement becomes a pathway to deeper understanding rather than a rupture in relationships.

After the war-legacy

This is a temporary placement- my Medium account has disappeared since posting this there this morning

After every war, the fighting doesn’t end when the soldiers come home. It moves into the kitchen, the nursery, the silence between people who once loved each other. 

My father came back from World War II decorated by the King, later a naval commander for Canada. To the world, he was a hero. To his family, he was a man trying to live with the noise still in his head. He certainly had what we now call PTSD, though back then it was just “bad temper,” “discipline,” or “ungratefulness.” He hit the older brothers, quite badly assaulting them. He pushed my mum downstairs when pregnant and cut her. 

 No one used the word trauma. They just carried it. He felt ambiguous about her- she was nice- but pretty dumb (but fun at times) and poorly educated- he was quite the scholar with many associates- she was lost and isolated in a foreign country- a woman born in North London- with 4 kids- in French speaking Canada- with no way of knowing what was being said around the family dinner table.

My mother couldn’t carry it. She had been a performer once—a brief spark of talent and kindness, singing for burn unit patients—but when her marriage broke, so did her sense of self. Instead of rebuilding, she folded inward. She sometimes- rarely though- had hoped for reconciliation between branding him a 'selfish bastard' and hating it if we ever inquired about him- branding us 'traitors' if we did- real hard rejection

 Regret and resentment became her companions, and the bottle became her stage-and her inability to care for our emotions properly. Her children were left to raise themselves with their only moral compass coming from showbiz people- in the wreckage of two wounded adults: one broken by war, the other by bitterness.

What happens to a family when love collapses into self-preservation? Each person becomes the center of their own survival story. 

When Pain and PTSD Looks Like Narcissism

We’ve turned 'narcissist' into a moral diagnosis. It’s a word people throw around when someone withdraws, can’t connect, or fails to give us what we want emotionally. But not everyone who seems self-absorbed is self-worshipping. Many are simply fighting ghosts, embedded in their unconcious, cells and neurons—people whose trauma has taught them that closeness is dangerous and vulnerability- often fatal. Do your research. Cptsd is hell- but unique stories behind it all.

A traumatized person and a narcissist can behave in similar ways: emotional distance, defensiveness, flashes of rage, self-focus. The difference lies underneath. The traumatized person’s world is built on fear. The narcissist’s world is built on entitlement. One says, “I can’t trust you, I’ve been hurt.” The other says, “I deserve more than you, and you owe me.” Fine lines- always look at facts not conjecture nor fall for assumptions.

Trauma often mimics narcissism because survival mode narrows empathy. When someone is constantly scanning for threat, they often simply don’t have room to notice other people’s needs. But given safety and time, their empathy returns- especially when non judgemental, unbiased support comes in. A true narcissist doesn’t find their way back. There is no curiosity about others, no capacity for guilt, only calculation and self-maintenance.

Labeling every difficult person a narcissist helps no one (though I came across a properly 'covert narcissist' the other day- fkn monster that was) 

 It isolates the traumatized even more, leaving them ashamed for coping the only way they know how-and every unexpected noise firing off the nervous system. 

 What we need isn’t a sharper insult—it’s discernment. If we can learn to see when pain is masquerading as pride, we give people a chance to heal instead of condemning them for trying to survive.

If you complain about bad services as every dutiful citizen should- nothing changes if you don't- but if you do- you are massively at risk for being framed as a narcissist- 'vexatious' etc. So get your facts together and call out ad-hominem attacks- they are used to hide huge crimes and accountability- and numerous innocent victims suffer massively as a result. My dads efforts in ww2 carry me along daily as does my beautiful son and lovely friends.

Liz Lucy Robillard

ASSUMPTIONS- the worst enemy of every profession

 

Picture by Elimende Inagella- Unsplash

Assumptions duckie, are the velvet gloves that hide the iron fists of error. We make them quickly, often with the best intentions, and they lead us straight into the lion’s mouth. Let me walk you through a few examples.

There was a case in medicine where a woman came in with chest pain. The doctor assumed it was anxiety—she was young, female, not the “typical” heart attack candidate. They didn’t run the tests. She died. That assumption, that profile, cost her everything.

In law enforcement, we’ve seen it time and again. A man pulled over because he “looked suspicious.” No crime, no evidence, just a gut feeling and a profile. He was arrested, humiliated, and later released. But the damage was done. His dignity, his trust in the system—shattered.

Recruitment is another battlefield. A CV with a foreign-sounding name gets tossed aside. The candidate might have been brilliant, but the recruiter assumed they wouldn’t “fit.” No interview, no chance. Just a silent rejection based on nothing but a name.

In schools, children from certain postcodes are placed in lower sets. Teachers assume they won’t cope with advanced material. No one asks about their home life, their resilience, their dreams. They’re boxed in before they’ve even begun.

And in social services, a mother seeking help is profiled as manipulative for asking why her son has a disability. She’s questioned, doubted, denied.

 No one asks about her trauma, her history, her fight to survive. Just a tick-box form and a cold shoulder.

These are not stories from the shadows. They’re out there, in reports, in headlines, in the quiet corners of people’s lives.

 Assumptions are not just lazy—they’re lethal. If you want to understand someone, you must ask, listen, and dig deep. Otherwise, you’re just dressing prejudice up in a lab coat or a uniform.

Liz Lucy Robillard 

*Now, shall we act?

Measles- who suffers most?

 A 2024 case report describes a ten-month-old female who developed viremia, meningoencephalitis, and multi-organ failure after receiving the live-attenuated measles vaccine.

 Whole-genome sequencing revealed a homozygous loss-of-function mutation in IFNAR2, abolishing type-I interferon signaling and leaving the child vulnerable to severe viral disease.

 The authors note that defects in IFNAR2 define immunodeficiency-45 and that carriers of such mutations are at high risk for life-threatening complications from either natural measles infection or the live vaccine itself .

Poland and co-workers have repeatedly shown that common single-nucleotide polymorphisms in the measles virus receptors CD46 and SLAM, as well as in TLR3, TLR7, TLR8, RIG-I, and multiple HLA class I and II loci, significantly modulate cytokine release, antibody production, and cellular immunity after measles exposure or vaccination. Individuals carrying the “low-response” alleles mount weaker antiviral responses and experience higher peak viral loads, correlates that have been linked to increased risk of disseminated disease and post-infectious complications in subsequent outbreaks .

Clifford et al. demonstrated that specific variants of TLR7 and TLR8 reduce interferon-α/β secretion in infants challenged with measles virus, resulting in prolonged viremia and febrile seizures in a subset of vaccinees. The same study noted that a RIG-I polymorphism that lowers receptor expression doubled the likelihood of hospitalisation for measles-like illness during a community outbreak, implying that genetically impaired innate sensing converts an otherwise self-limited infection into a severe clinical course .

Taken together, these peer-reviewed data indicate that mutations or polymorphisms in IFNAR2, CD46, SLAM, TLR7, TLR8, RIG-I, and several HLA alleles can render individuals measles-susceptible and predispose them to adverse, occasionally fatal, outcomes following exposure to the wild-type virus or live vaccine.

Me and llm's - always check veracity with professionals 

Liz Lucy Robillard 

Lenny Henry- ww2 ring bells? TRAITOR?

 Lenny Henry’s Betrayal of Britain

By Liz Lucy Robillard

The Man Who Once United Us

Sir Lenny Henry was once the face of Britain’s better self — talent over privilege, laughter over division. A boy from Dudley who broke barriers through wit, timing, and graft. He represented the proof that this country, for all its flaws, still rewarded merit. Millions saw themselves in his rise: the Britain where race mattered less than effort.

Now, after a lifetime of success, he is calling for reparations from the nation that gave him everything. That is not courage; it is betrayal disguised as conscience.

Britain’s Record Deserves Respect

Britain did not invent slavery, but it did lead the world in abolishing it. Parliament outlawed the trade in 1807, and the Empire abolished slavery itself in 1833. British ships hunted slavers for decades at enormous cost. Tens of thousands of sailors fought and died intercepting slave vessels. Our ancestors paid in blood and treasure to end a global evil.

No nation has a perfect record, yet few have corrected their course as forcefully as we did. Britain’s story since abolition is one of reform, not oppression — of integration, not exclusion.

Integration, Not Injustice

Across the 20th century, Britain welcomed families from the Commonwealth. It opened schools, built the NHS, and offered citizenship and opportunity to millions. Generations of immigrants and their children became part of the shared national story — proud to call themselves British while bringing their own heritage with them.

That story includes Lenny Henry. This country gave him a stage, an audience, wealth, honours, and the security to speak freely. He is not a victim of Britain; he is one of its success stories.

Why Turn on Your Own?

To call for reparations now — two centuries after abolition — is to reopen wounds that most Britons have spent decades healing. It tells young people to inherit guilt instead of pride. It risks turning unity into resentment.

The claim that modern Britain owes a financial debt to its own citizens for crimes abolished generations ago is morally hollow. The past should be studied, not invoiced. A society that continually apologises for its ancestors eventually forgets how to stand tall.

The Cost of Fashionable Outrage

What drives this? Partly fashion. In a culture that rewards grievance, outrage is the new currency. Accusing your own country of moral debt makes headlines; praising it for progress does not.

Henry could have used his platform to remind us of how far we have come — of shared decency, humour, and fairness that still bind this island together. Instead, he has chosen to join the professional mourners of empire, people who mistake moral noise for moral action.

We Are Better Than This

Britain abolished slavery, defeated fascism, rebuilt Europe, and continues to send aid across the world. We have integrated cultures without erasing them. That is not the record of a hateful nation.

Lenny Henry owes his platform to that Britain — the one that opened its arms, not clenched its fists. To turn on that legacy is not justice; it is ingratitude. He has chosen the easy applause of division over the harder work of gratitude.

History will remember who built bridges and who burned them

Reform's Deportation Policy - 10's of Billions to UK Taxpayers?

REFORM and Deportation- The costs
Liz Lucy Robillard

The Real Legal Limits of the “Restore Britain” Deportation Plan

A new paper by Restore Britain calls for mass deportations of everyone living in the UK without legal status.

It sounds decisive and patriotic, but the plan breaks far more laws than it fixes — and would very likely collapse in the courts before the first charter flight took off.

This post unpacks what’s lawful, what isn’t, and who would actually make or lose money if any of it went ahead.

1. What They Want

The Restore Britain report demands:

Leaving the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR);

Repealing the Human Rights Act 1998;

Repealing the Equality Act 2010;

Introducing a “Great Clarification Act” letting Parliament override judges;

And deporting up to two million people within three years.

2. What the Law Actually Allows

Most of those measures are unlawful under existing UK and international law.

Here’s why.

A. Rule of Law and Separation of Powers

Courts, not ministers, decide if a detention or deportation is lawful.

Cases such as R (Evans) v Attorney General [2015] UKSC 21 and R v Secretary of State ex p Simms [2000] 2 AC 115 confirmed that no minister may overrule the courts or act contrary to fundamental rights without explicit parliamentary authority.

B. Unlawful Detention

The Hardial Singh principles (R v Governor of Durham Prison, ex p Hardial Singh [1984]) limit immigration detention to what is reasonable and necessary for removal.

Abolishing these limits would not legalise indefinite detention; judges would apply habeas corpus instead.

C. Equality and Fair Treatment

Even if the Equality Act 2010 were repealed, the courts would still enforce fairness through the common law (see R v Home Secretary, ex p Pierson [1998] AC 539).

Race-based or nationality-based mass removals would remain unlawful.

3. Leaving the ECHR: What It Means and Doesn’t

Restore Britain argues that leaving the ECHR would “unshackle” the UK from Strasbourg judges who block deportations using:

Article 3 – protection from torture or degrading treatment;

Article 8 – right to family life.

They are half right: those articles do restrict deportations.

But quitting the ECHR would not suddenly make mass removals legal.

Under Article 58 of the Convention, the UK must give one year’s notice before withdrawal.

During that year, all judgments still apply.

Withdrawal would also:

1. Breach the Belfast (Good Friday) Agreement, which embeds the ECHR in Northern Ireland law;

2. Undermine the UK–EU Trade & Cooperation Agreement, which assumes ECHR membership for security and data exchange;

3. Trigger legal chaos — the courts would still apply domestic fairness and proportionality tests even without the ECHR label.

So even outside Strasbourg, deportations would still face judicial review under UK common law and other treaties such as the UN Refugee Convention and Convention Against Torture.

4. The Only Lawful Parts

Not everything in the paper is impossible.

A few narrow reforms could legally accelerate deportations — but only for people whose cases are completely finished.

A. A “Returns Act” for Final Cases

A statute could allow a 28-day maximum detention window for people who have no remaining appeals, with:

72 hours’ notice before removal;

Automatic bail review by the Immigration Tribunal.

This would speed up removals and reduce costs while still respecting due process.

B. Expanded Voluntary Returns

Redirecting part of the Home Office budget into Voluntary Return Schemes is both lawful and effective.

These programs pay for travel and small reintegration grants.

They cost less and face no human-rights litigation because participation is voluntary.

C. Smarter Data-Sharing, Not Treaty Breaches

Instead of suspending EU data rules, the Home Office can use Prüm II and ECRIS-TCN databases to verify identities.

This works within the forthcoming Data Protection and Digital Information Bill, already cleared as “adequate” by the EU.

D. Legal Cover for Officials

When actions rest on Acts of Parliament and judicial oversight, civil servants are protected from misfeasance or false-imprisonment claims.

Everything else — like acting without court authority — remains personally risky and uninsured.

5. Who Would Benefit Financially

If mass deportations went ahead:

Private security and detention contractors (e.g., Serco, Mitie, G4S) would receive multi-billion-pound contracts for transport, catering, and guards.

Charter-flight operators and insurers would gain large emergency-service fees.

Litigation firms and human-rights barristers would also profit, because the volume of challenges would explode.

Taxpayers would foot the bill — estimates run into tens of billions over five years.

If the UK stayed within the law:

Home Office caseworkers, immigration tribunals, and voluntary-return contractors would still be paid, but at far lower public cost.

The Treasury would save money through faster processing and fewer lawsuits.

Britain would retain access to EU criminal-data systems and international trade privileges.

In short:

Leaving the ECHR might enrich contractors and create months of expensive legal drama; staying in, and using lawful fast-track removals, saves many billions and keeps the UK compliant.

6. Bottom Line

Only the court-supervised parts of the Restore Britain idea —speeding up removal of failed asylum seekers and expanding voluntary returns —can be done legally.

Once the plan moves into mass, automatic, or race-based expulsions, it becomes unlawful, uninsured, and politically explosive. Can't work.

Sources:

Immigration Act 2016

Nationality & Borders Act 2022

Human Rights Act 1998

Equality Act 2010

Key cases: ex p Hardial Singh (1984), Simms (2000), Pierson (1998), Evans (2015)

Treaties: European Convention on Human Rights, UN Refugee Convention 1951, Good Friday Agreement 1998

As with all stuff here- content subject to change

Liz Lucy Robillard

See my post on leaving the echr- who really benefits...

Who benefits from leaving the echr?

Whistleblower Press Contacts

Global SecureDrop & Whistleblower Submission Links

Use Tor or follow each outlet’s own guidance for full anonymity.

United States

• New York Times
• 
  
• Washington Post
• 
  
• Associated Press
• 
  
• ProPublica
• 
  
• WIRED
• 
  
• CNN
• 
  
• Bloomberg News
• 
  
• USA TODAY Network

United Kingdom

• The Guardian
• 
  
• BBC News
• 
  
• Financial Times

Ireland

• RTÉ Investigates

France

• Mediapart
• 
  
• Le Monde – Source sûre

Germany

• Der Spiegel
• 
  
• Süddeutsche Zeitung

Australia

• ABC News

Global Resources

• SecureDrop Directory – official list
• 
  
• Freedom of the Press Foundation guide

More soon