Here some suggested organisations that offer expert advice on SN.

Draft SEN legislation - worrying!

(318 Posts)
AgnesDiPesto Tue 02-Oct-12 20:22:18

SOSSEN views on draft legislation here

If you have views you can submit them to Ambitious About Autism by 11 October here although probably other routes too.

SOSSEN urging everyone to complain to their MP about removing parental rights.

eatyourveg Wed 03-Oct-12 09:10:16

thanks

I think the 'parent penalties' are partly an interpretation of the giving LAs control of the mediation, both in terms of the mediator and who is allowed to attend.

This means that the more you disagree with the LA, the more unpleasant the mediation will be, and the less support you will be allowed.

If ever there were a time for parents and schools to unite it's now.

Should this be placed on the main board?

justaboutiswarm Wed 03-Oct-12 09:48:38

That makes my blood run cold.

lionheart Wed 03-Oct-12 10:15:38

Yes, parents and schools together.

And Teather's replacement to come and answer some questions in a friendly web-chat.

FrancesMumsnet (MNHQ) Wed 03-Oct-12 10:16:37

Hello

Edward Timpson has agreed to come on for a webchat after party conference, so we're just in the process of firming up dates.

Blimey, - that was quick.

Presumably this will happen on the main board, - and presumably this webchat will highlight these issues to others who are interested in the webchat.

Perhaps a campaign could follow if there is obvious interest.?

appropriatelyemployed Wed 03-Oct-12 10:23:40

Great - perhaps we should 'caucus' on our questions guys?

I am hoping to work on a submission to the Select Cttee and will read through proposals properly this weekend.

HereBenson Wed 03-Oct-12 10:27:33

If schools and parents can't request Statutory Assessment, who can? Confused by that.
I would have thought schools will be up in arms, not only because of that aspect, but because of the implication that there won't be provision for children with high IQ. My DS' old school has numerous students with AS who will probably be destined for very high things academically but because of their condition present considerable challenge behaviourally and need support, not just for their own sake, but for everyone else's.
Thanks for bringing this to our attention.

RowanMumsnet (MNHQ) Wed 03-Oct-12 10:53:22

Hello

Thanks for drawing our attention to this one - we will have a look.

Do please keep posting to let us know what you think.

MNHQ

HotheadPaisan Wed 03-Oct-12 11:16:52

Thanks MNHQ. I will email this thread to SOSSEN to see if they can come and shed more light. I had not got the message that parents would not be able to request an assessment or that there might be penalties. I really need to understand that. Also the mediation should not be used to delay SENDT appeals. It already takes the best part of an academic year to get support in place.

Will also ask IPSEA and Special Needs Jungle to come and comment too so we can get some clarity and decide how we might challenge this.

zzzzz Wed 03-Oct-12 11:26:10

Totally mad!

Previously Psych would have written "at least normal IQ" in an attempt for everyone to aime high for the child, now the self same phrase will mean "requires no help" ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!

My ds has at least normal IQ and is severely language disordered. Without 121 support he cannot function at all. How would a school cope! We would be drummed out of town, because his disability would impact the education of every child in his school.

There are no special schools in our area (Devon) for normal IQ up children with neurological rather than physical. Now there will be no support in ms schools.

Where exactly do we go?

If you don't educate the children they will cost you a fortune long term.

WAKE UP!

lexy444 Wed 03-Oct-12 11:27:06

This is very worrying and not what parents had expected from reading the Green paper...
I have emailed the SOSSEN link to the Council for Disabled children who run the following:

The Making Ourselves Heard participation network
The National Parent Partnership Network
The Special Educational Consortium
The Transition Information Network
We also host the Every Disabled Child Matters campaign.

Surely they should be all over this....????

ouryve Wed 03-Oct-12 11:34:54

On a purely selfish angry mum level, this has made up my mind that DS1 needs to be moved out of mainstream into a specialist placement sooner rather than later. Waiting until secondary school transition is likely to leave him stranded with nowhere suitable to go if this goes ahead.

Off to make some noise. angry

tryingtokeepintune Wed 03-Oct-12 11:52:40

Thanks for the information.

Will write to my MP and have alerted various groups to the new information.

Perhaps I will write to the governors of my dc's schools to ask what they intend to do about it.

appropriatelyemployed Wed 03-Oct-12 12:09:10

Lexy - I have had very recent experience with the Council for Disabled Children (which is an umbrella organisation for lots of charities) and I was hugely disappointed with their sympathetic stance to LAs breaking the law.

Perhaps we should draw up a campaign hit list? A few people have PM'd me already to discuss this further.

I have is a very helpful contact at national office at the NAS and I am sure people have other ideas/contacts.

HotheadPaisan Wed 03-Oct-12 12:52:45

I cannot find anything on parent penalties but it is very woolly on assessment, certainly doesn't state parents can request an assessment but then it doesn't state they can't.

The big concern for me, in addition to clarity on the above, is the use of 'best endeavours' where previously statements state an LA 'must' provide the contents.

Also the mandatory mediation will almost certainly lead to delays.

This draft needs a lot of work and much more clarity, it needs to be tighter and there needs to be penalties for LAs who deliberately avoid their legal responsibilities.

I am not convinced by this as it stands at all. There will be lots more litigation when the rules are already established and clear, even if not upheld because it is just too hard for individuals to keep going up against institutions.

perceptionreality Wed 03-Oct-12 13:15:13

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

lexy444 Wed 03-Oct-12 13:32:19

Appropriately - very disappointed to hear that re. CDC. They do have a response to the paper on their website, detailing their concerns.

Hothead - totally agree on wording "best endeavours".
Difficult enough to get LA's to specify and quantify provision. At least once you got over that hurdle they were obligated to provide.

AgnesDiPesto Wed 03-Oct-12 14:03:31

I think clarity from SOSSEN eg a webchat would be really helpful - I'm not sure if their take is the worst case scenario or fact.

I can't see any other published responses yet and surprised IPSEA etc not picked it up

Mediation is terrible idea in my view. I have used mediation as a lawyer and there are very few cases where its really needed. Either you can get round a table and sort it out face to face without a mediator because both parties want to negotiate and there is a middle ground. Or there is no room for compromise eg LA said DS very mild and could go to m/s with termly professional visits - we said he was severe and needed autism specific education & fulltime 1:1 - ie so far apart that mediation is pointless, you can't compromise by saying well lets meet the middle and pretend DS is moderate and split the difference because that would not have met his needs given they were actually severe.

Our LA have many blanket policies about using a very extended graduated approach before doing statutory assessment and outright ban on independent placements without tribunal so mediation when there is a policy not to compromise at all would be utterly pointless. I think mediation will make parents feel thats its expected that they compromise but that may not be whats best for the child if for eg they end up with only 60% of what they need because the LA has bargained them down.

Truth is if our LA had negotiated we would have settled for far less ABA than the Tribunal gave us. Never in our wildest dreams did we think we would win 35 hours a week, 48 weeks a year. But the Tribunal decided he did need it and I am really grateful that it was a tribunal who made that decision. I know lots of families in neighbouring LAs which pay for ABA without tribunal where they feel pressured to compromise and end up accepting less than needed / very part time programmes and topping it up themselves. I think that will be the result of mediation. Parents feeling pressured to accept less.

Parents should not be making the decision as to whether 15 hours, 20 hours, 35 hours etc is appropriate on their own without advice. There should be expert input into that decision.

perceptionreality Wed 03-Oct-12 14:37:51

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

AgnesDiPesto Wed 03-Oct-12 14:50:47

Yes ABA is totally absent its not included in the list of provisions when it easily could have been

HotheadPaisan Wed 03-Oct-12 14:59:46

I had a tweet from IPSEA, they will publish their detailed analysis early next week.

alison222 Wed 03-Oct-12 16:09:03

I found this on the NAS website. It says that the committee looking at this need replies by the 11th October. That isn't long for everyone to send in their views.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now