Originally Posted by chachachavvy:
“Is Katie Hopkins going to reimburse the government for the money they spent on the time her children were in state education? If she really believes the well-off should eschew the state then I also hopes she only uses private healthcare, private toll roads, private refuse collection firms, private security and fire-fighting companies etc etc. As a British child Harvey is fully entitled to a state education regardless of the wealth of his parents.”
I agree with what you say Harvey is fully entitled to a state education regardless of the wealth of his parents. The thing is and what I think makes people emotive is the actual fact that KP is in an extremely privileged position. Many parents of disabled children don't have nannies, a team to help then, people to fill in forms etc and this is what rankles - the fact that she is claiming and many can't even be accepted for claims. Even worse KP has publicly criticised parents of disabled children saying this:
Quote:
Katie claims that there is plenty of support for parents out there, but most are 'too lazy' or 'ignorant' to know where to look or to fill in the forms in order to get it.
http://www.downssideup.com/2013/11/a...ant-carer.html
She caused great offence to the disabled parents community by her comments on the Radio and in some ways she is as cutting in her comments as KH. In the article I think the comments section some parents can't even get a statement as their children do not qualify for statementing but as one person says:
Of course she knows that her fame means that authorities wouldn't dare pass her son's needs by.
This is the crux of the matter. She has fame, can easily access the media, possibly has connections through her charity work and she has money. She is in an incredible position of privelege