non verbal children with asd and speech therapy

[lambsie]

My son who is 6, has asd, learning difficulties and is non-verbal, currently has no speech therapy. I am trying to get speech therapy (so he can be taught pecs in school) moved to part 3 of his statement. LA policy is to put in part 6 but health don't provide it. I am interested to know how much, if any, other children receive so I know what is reasonable to ask for.

[SallyBear]

I also have a 6yr old DS with non verbal ASD. He is at SS and we do PECS with him at home and at school. It's part of his day to incorporate PECS into everything. We went on the PECS course ourselves so that we understood exactly how to implement it at home. He is travelling with his PECS now and also discriminating between pictures.

[cansu]

I think there is plenty of case law to show that trying to place speech therapy in part 6 is illegal. My own LA tried this with me but moved it instantly I complained back into part 3. From your point of view the fact that NHS don't or can't provide is irrelevant. If it is part 3 LA will have to buy in an independent if they cannot come to an arrangement with NHS.

[drowninginlaundry]

here also DS with severe autism and was pretty much non-verbal at age 6 (lots of nouns but no functional language, no spontaneous language at all). We got 1 hr per week one on one SALT plus the usual programme monitoring and TA support into Part 3 via tribunal order. As it happens, it's been pretty ineffective (bless her the SALt spent a year following DS around the classroom trying Intensive Interaction, with zero effect) and only when we started Verbal Behaviour we have seen a big improvement in communication skills.

I'd say speech therapy for your DS is an educational need and should be in Part 3. They are dicking you around and breaking quite a few laws in the process, time to start making some noise.

what is reasonable to ask is what your child needs. As that is, by law, what they have to provide.

[moondog]

If you want s/lt (you may not-I certainly don't as an intervention that is by and large not evidence based or data driven is a waste of valuable time) ) then ensure it is in Part 3 of your statement as it should be as it is of course an educational need and not a non educational one (the stupidity of it passing as that for so long defies belief)

Thankfully, an intelligent family who wouldn't take any waffle about it being 'non educational' took the case to court and won, which has excellent implications for all.
See here

So get it taken out of that part and put into Part 3. Oh and cite the Lancashire Judgement to them if they ask what you are doing and why. They'll soon shut up.

[moondog]

Intensive Interaction.

Intensive bullshit

[lambsie]

Thanks for your replies. My son is learning pecs at home but doing very little at school. We are now trying to force the LA to provide either a speech therapist or speech and language teacher to teach him and ensure school does something. LA are trying to argue that they cannot provide this and they will only put on his statement things they can provide.

[inappropriatelyemployed]

That is unlawful. The Education Act requires the LA to identify the child's SEN and set out the provision required to meet the child's SEN. It does not say 'if that provision is available'.

If you follow the IPSEA link, you will see they also have a 'common SEN myths' section and this is one of them.