Advanced search

Here some suggested organisations that offer expert advice on SN.

Back from meeting, Star, Agnes, Keep, Maria and others

(110 Posts)
claw2 Thu 10-Jan-13 11:55:39

Room full of people this time, about 10.

Basically, they are offering home tuition now, 5 hours, tutor available immediately. But ds would have to stay on roll at this school.

CAMHS are saying if i home ed, seen as ds doesnt have anxiety/self harm when not attending school. They dont see what they can offer. They would make referral to medical needs for home tuition, if i want them to, then stay involved.

SW is saying ss will be involved long term, passed to another team (she would tell me which team later) to ensure that all of ds's needs are met.

Meeting was TAC, is that the same as CIN?

claw2 Sun 13-Jan-13 04:35:41

Maria, your experience is exactly the same as mine.

mariammama Sat 12-Jan-13 22:00:26

Love 'New Truth'. So true. DS firstly 'didn't have' the behavioural difficulties that they'd flagged up, then he didnt have ADHD, then he 'didn't have' asd, then 'doesn't show' anxiety, then 'didn't need much' at SA+, didnt need SLT/OT/EP, then didnt need statutory assessment (twice), then didn't need a statement. Then he didn't need quantified and specified provision. But their previous reactions to all those things are lost in the Dark Ages; the 'New Truth' has been understood for millenia and everything was in his best interests hmm

mariammama Sat 12-Jan-13 21:48:29

"School felt the anxiety was all my fault, because i kept fighting, whilst I felt it was all theirs, because they knew so little about educating a dc with ASD". Succinct, reasonably accurate, sound even-handed, but isn't wink.

StarlightMcKenzie Sat 12-Jan-13 18:26:29

What Keep said. The past happened and will no doubt still haunt you, but your frustrations are going to be that the past is denied and implied to be in your head, rather than continuous referals to it from now on.

claw2 Sat 12-Jan-13 16:50:43

True Keep, thanks, youre right, i dont have to explain myself anymore. Thats a hard habit to break after 2 and half years of it, i need to take a chill pill and relax smile

KeepOnKeepingOn1 Sat 12-Jan-13 14:07:25

claw everything is OK smile

Medically authorised home tuition is both an objective material fact and is written. This will become the new truth.

Nothing that was previously written (in the Dark Ages before the New Truth) is relevant. Nobody in the public sector has the time to read the backstory. Think year zero. Where are we at now? Often asked by a new team that DS has been referred to. 'OK this is our case now' and is seen in a different context. It's OK to roll with it. Can it really do more harm to your ultimate goal?

You cannot cause school anxiety. The other side tried to shift the focus from DS to you. The focus is now being returned to DS. Fade away...

claw2 Sat 12-Jan-13 13:22:59

That is what school/LA are trying to prove now. They have moved on from denying that ds suffers with anxiety and self harms and are going for yes we totally agree he has school anxiety, but mum is the cause of it.

She needs help from CAMHS and SW to put this right, rather than ds's unmet needs being the cause.

claw2 Sat 12-Jan-13 13:16:14

zzz thanks for support smile

Keep, I have found that once something is written, people dont take the time to read the overwhelming evidence that its inaccurate.

So it will transpire, CAMHS saying ds has overwhelming school anxiety, which no one can deny. BUT mum is the cause of it and i will be back to square one in no time.

KeepOnKeepingOn1 Sat 12-Jan-13 11:04:16

I agree that you should wait to see what the SW has written. Even is she has gone with the Mum is barking approach it is a non-medical opinion that is over-ridden by medically authorised absence.

DS is known to CAMHS and so does not require an assessment carried out by the consultant pysch but medical authorisation has to come from them rather than more junior staff. This is good - had you not got the GP to re-refer DS last summer you would have no current consultant to provide authorisation and would have to pay privately or wait months to get authorisation.

Medically authorised absence is proof that DS's needs are genuine. This 'proof' becomes stronger over time by the fact of authorised absence. Just like the 'proof' that you were the problem was given credence by the absence of medical authorisation.

Tutors are far more likely ime to accept that a child can't cope with mainstream/needs specialist placement. Also, the senco from the school that DS1 was to attend phoned me yesterday to check how things are and commented that she and the head thought his statement was rubbish, that it did not describe all of his needs etc. I am willing to bet that she would not be saying that if he did not have the official stamp.

zzzzz Sat 12-Jan-13 01:15:33

I think the whole set up is barmy, this whole blurring between medical and educational services is not in the best interests of the children at all IMO. Add a dose of postcode lottery and general heel dragging and you have utter rubbish provision.
I don't see SALT but probably could if I pushed, but I will probably ask for assessment in a few months time because ds is doing well and I would like some input on what to do to stretch him farther.

bochead Sat 12-Jan-13 00:40:40

zzzz I can obviously only comment for my area but DS ONLY has SALT aged 7 because I specifically won it for him via the Educational Tribunal process, otherwise he'd still be going without. I think I have the misfortune to live in the PCT from hell.

zzzzz Sat 12-Jan-13 00:15:20

claw finally managed to get some space to read all this. This is dreadful. I am of course totally useless and have nothing clever to add, but HONK!

claw2 Sat 12-Jan-13 00:01:13

Saying that it will probably emerge she has worked there for 20 years grin and was telling me a load a nonsense to avoid answering my questions!

Anyhow on a positive note, i can pick up copy of referral on Monday.

and we wont see that SW anymore.

Im happy.

claw2 Fri 11-Jan-13 23:52:18

Maria, i dont think she is bogus, just new to the Borough or maybe even the Country, as she has stated she is new, only just started, ds is one of her first cases etc, etc. Doesnt know the name of teams or 'how the system works with transfers' etc.

StarlightMcKenzie Fri 11-Jan-13 23:45:05

Well tbh it sounds like she has been drawn to the job for the power and abuse she is able to wield. She appears to be obsessed with undermining, terrifying and stressing you under the guise that it is all for your own good.

claw2 Fri 11-Jan-13 23:40:00

She is going to send me a copy of what she has written. I havent said a word to her, it was a case of being polite to her today, smiling, nodding and getting her out the house as quickly as possible.

claw2 Fri 11-Jan-13 23:35:28

Star, i have encountered some incompetent professionals, but she takes the biscuit.

Having to sit here with her today, i did want to wipe the manic smile off her face, she talks then out of the blue does this wild smiling thing. Its not about revenge on her, i would have been quiet happy, just to let her close the case and have an inaccurate core assessment report floating about, which i had replied to and left it at that.

I have smiled through gritted teeth, i have nodded, i have gone along with whatever. But now she wants to interfere and be detrimental to the help and support ds could recieve.

mariammama Fri 11-Jan-13 23:33:52

Perhaps not bogus after all, possibly just useless biscuit. Unison say that SW register has transferred over to a new organisation. With a block "registration valid" date for two years starting 1.12.2012.

StarlightMcKenzie Fri 11-Jan-13 23:33:00

Keep your powder dry. She HAS to write something. Don't trap or confuse her. Read what she has written then point out the things you require changing due to her mistakes.

StarlightMcKenzie Fri 11-Jan-13 23:30:56

Claw, tbh I woukd sit on this all until you have seen what she has written.

Better to discredit her nonsense than coach her IMO.

claw2 Fri 11-Jan-13 23:25:45

I will point out to her when i get a copy of what she plans to send a) she does not have my consent b) SS has not provided any services, she now has no involvement c) My solicitor lodged a complaint with her manager about her conduct and how views were obtained d) I have written to her manager about her inaccurate core assessment report.

Before she writes anything, my 2 complaints should be answered.

mariammama Fri 11-Jan-13 23:24:52

Perhaps they should go for a full multiprofessional team. I can source them Dodgy doctors and bogus SW plus a fake nurse and a pretend psychologist

StarlightMcKenzie Fri 11-Jan-13 23:19:49

Claw. You've every right to be angry, and you appear to have some dry powder for this, but be careful that you use it wisely and for a defined outcome, not simply to slap her in the face. (Which I've been doing in my mind quite a bit btw)

mariammama Fri 11-Jan-13 23:16:08

Agnes and inappropriately and other clever bods,
would sending a bogus social worker demonstrate incompetence and near-fraud sufficient to be judicial review type material?

claw2 Fri 11-Jan-13 23:13:26

And why she was planning a meeting and a return to school for a kid, who she was fully aware was self harming, having suicidal thoughts, subject to a safety plan with an 8 day old medical certificate stating he was not fit for school until he had a CAMHS care plan in place.

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