Bloody S&LT

[appropriatelytrained]

Bloody, bloody S&LT.

DS is out of school while we consider moving areas away from the useless bastards of LA, S&LT and school.

DS had S&LT as part of his statement but we heard nothing from them and have instructed our own S&LT.

NHS S&LT came digging around the other week offering an appointment and wanting to speak to our S&LT.

I was very polite (although suspicious) and suggested we would work wiht them.

Letter comes this morning, from head of team discharging him as we have our own S&LT and he's not in school.

How does this change his clinical needs?

[StarlightMcKenzie]

Appropriately So what? You didn't want them anyway. Just be thankful that they aren't getting paid by the LA for him any more.

Goodbye and good rid!

I know why you are riled. But there is nothing to gain here except your own distruction.

[appropriatelytrained]

Yes, you are right and I agree. I'm not intending to do anything about it. Just wanted to express my contempt for these good for nothings who pretend it's 'all about the child'.

It saves us having to work with them as they got rid of us. We'll do our own work and gather our own evidence without them.

[SNM]

Although if it's in your statement and they're not providing it, they're actually breaking the law - it's not part of the statement that you provide your own. Can understand your anger.

[appropriatelytrained]

It is in his statement but I understand that if he is not in school and is being HE then that is not enforceable so they are not breaking the law.

I think that it is a matter for the LA to decide how much support they will offer a HE child but there is no obligation on them to honour the provision.

However, the S&LT team should not be making the decisions as their decisions about discharge should be based on clinical judgment.

I raise it to illustrate what this dept is like. They don't give a toss about meeting a child's needs if they can get away with it.

[BurpingHerbert]

I may be wrong but I thought that if a child is being home educated the LA still has a responsibility to arrange the provision in a childs statement and that the only exception to this is if the parents have made their own arrangements to cover the provision. Therefore the LA are not breaking the law as you have put that provision in place, but were up until the date of your childs first appointment with the speech therpist.

[appropriatelytrained]

Well, without NHS provision, we had to use an independent S&LT.

The NHS team are useless so it is no great loss.

From what you say, I wonder whether this was actually the local authority's decision rather than the S&LT's decision to make.

[tiredoffightingwithjelly]

Sorry that you continue to experience this sort of behaviour AT - I understand your anger too, I find that it's so hard not to be angry with the manner in which professional power is (mis)used to the detriment of parents and the children that are supposed to be being supported.

Is the non provision part of your LGO complaint (I know you dont hold out much hope) but it does sound to me that the LA were not making provision available prior to you instructing your own SALT's.

[appropriatelytrained]

No, I don't hold out much hope. You can't do anything if everyone is prepared to lie against you and after seeing the LGO's rubbish letter to school this week, I think this is just extra stress with no benefit to DS at all.

[BurpingHerbert]

We have just come to the end of a 3 yr battle with NHS therapists. My son didn't communicate - except through temper tantrums - so the local SALT said she couldn't assess him which meant she couldn't determine what therapy he needed so her advice for the statement was that she would ' assess him when he is ready'. 12 months on she still hadn't so we started pestering them to assess him.

After about 6 months we got an independent assessment done. It took about 2 hrs and she detailed what he needed. Immediately the speech therapy dept sent out 3 specialist speech therapists to see ds at school. Fortunately his SENCO understood that the LA had sent them to undermine the private report and contacyed us, giving us the chance to allow them access. None of the therapists had ever seen ds and yet they still wrote a report saying he did not need weekly therapy and probably didn't need any speech therapy.

We had to go to tribunal.

Of course, when the tribunal members heard the CD we had made of him and the teachers account of his language and intelligibility they gave him more speech therapy than the independent therapist advised to make up for what he had lost. 2 of the speech therapists were in the room and they looked like they wanted to crawl under the table when they actually heard his speech.

We make sure we keep tabs on when the SALT see's him and for how long. It is a atrained relationship but we have to make i work. On the plus side we can now understand what he says without too much of a problem. You have to fight for what you are entitled to. It is a really sad state of affairs