Petition Calls for Statutory Guidance to Protect Break-Times for Neurodivergent Children
More than 31,000 people have signed a petition calling on the government to make it statutory guidance that schools cannot remove break-times as a sanction for neurodivergent children. Campaigners argue that this common practice is harmful, particularly for children with ADHD and other conditions where movement is essential to regulation and learning.
At 100,000 signatures, the petition will be considered for debate in Parliament.
Why Break-Times Matter
For many neurodivergent pupils, movement isn’t optional — it’s a biological necessity. Children with ADHD, for example, often rely on physical activity to regulate dopamine levels in the brain. Play and movement help them:
Improve focus and attention in the classroom.
Reduce stress and anxiety.
Develop social skills in unstructured environments.
Build resilience and self-esteem through active play.
Removing this outlet doesn’t teach “better behaviour.” Instead, it can worsen dysregulation, increase frustration, and heighten the risk of exclusion.
As one parent put it: “Taking away break-time from my child is like taking away their glasses and asking them to read the board. It punishes them for a difference they can’t control.”
The Problem With Current Practice
Despite growing awareness of neurodiversity, many schools still use lost playtime or detention as a standard sanction. This means that children can be punished for behaviours linked to their neurological profile — behaviours that often require support, not discipline.
The education system is largely built for neurotypical learners, and sanctions like these reinforce that bias. When schools remove outdoor play for neurodivergent pupils, they’re not levelling the playing field; they’re widening the gap.
Government Response
The government responded to the petition on 3 September 2025. Their position is that:
Behaviour policies are a matter for school leaders.
Policies must be lawful, proportionate, and in line with the Equality Act 2010.
Guidance already exists to encourage supportive behaviour cultures.
While the Department for Education says schools should make adjustments for pupils with SEND, campaigners argue that without statutory protection, harmful practices like removing break-times will continue. Leaving it up to schools creates inconsistency — and children pay the price.
The Case for Change
Research is clear: early, supportive interventions cost less in the long run than exclusion, mental health crises, or alternative provision placements. Protecting break-times is a simple, low-cost step with huge potential benefits:
For children: better regulation, improved wellbeing, and stronger learning outcomes.
For schools: calmer classrooms, fewer behaviour escalations, and reduced exclusions.
For society: lower long-term costs linked to poor mental health and disrupted education.
Put simply, early support saves money — and saves futures.
What You Can Do
📢 The petition needs 100,000 signatures to secure a debate in Parliament. By signing and sharing, you can help push for change that will benefit thousands of children and families.
👉 Sign here: petition.parliament.uk/petitions/734327
Children should never be punished for being neurodivergent. Protecting their right to play and movement is the first step to building an education system where every child can thrive.
