Here are some suggested organisations that offer expert advice on SN.
Pls advise re LEA / FII worries?(116 Posts)
Copying in school dr is not that unusual. In rural areas, there's usually only a couple of community doctors who have half a dozen part time roles. This person has been involved in the past, and is probably the child protection lead too. This meeting could put "?FII" to bed and replace it with 'mum still wonders about diagnosis, but I don't' and end with 'agree to disagree, time will tell'.
You could legitimately ask about the other two people, and find out whether they will be attending / why they need the document.
find something positive to put in the stupid boxes: makes your legitimate complaints more likely to be heard
What ways has child been supported - list the support you were promised when your child started his current school on a single A4 sheet and staple it to the form. Make this purely factual and add NO opinion whatsoever to it. Make it bullet pointed and add the professional's name and role next to each point.
Put "awaiting implementation date (see attached sheet for action plan)" in teeny boxes 1 & 3.
Your son hasn't really gone backwards, as he's not quite as miserable as he was at the bonkers school so just put "no progress made, awaiting action plan implementation" in the "progress" box, (box 2) methinks.
That makes your point without getting anyone's back up. They said he needed help and haven't yet got their asses into gear on the delivery side.
At the MAC meeting just ask when what's already been proposed can be put in place and then stay calm and let each prof make their point. Listen take notes and respond afterwards in writing.
The less you say (but the more written evidence) you gain the better at this point.
Current school has made some (minor) adaptations which have helped (a very little). It's worth formally acknowledging these and saying thank you
love boch's suggestion btw.
if you can use their previous written minutes/ action plan, even better
I would be cautious about commenting or showing reluctance regarding the involvement of Paed from CAMHS. The Fabricated or Induced Illness by Carers (FII): A Practical Guide for Paediatricians, RCPCH, 2009 specifically lists this as a cause for concern in chapter 5.28 (pg 24).
In fact, it's quite scary reading. Thinking of DD2, it seems you're damned if you do, damned if you don't
so just put "no progress made, awaiting implementation of action plan".
At the meeting - the less you say the better, especially with nasty pead around! Your one pager will say it all for you. All you need to say is that you "are awaiting implementation of the action plan" until you feel like a stuck record & sit back. All you are doing is gently and unoffensively holding them to account.
Don't over think or overanalyse it, and don't let them rile you.
What Boch said. Keep your mouth well closed at the meeting. Look interested and as though you are giving each point consideration. Thank them for their time and inform them you will get back to them with their questions or to agree (or not) their recommendations.
Good grief Lougle. That document is very scary indeed. I'm pretty certain now that that was the route my LA was planning to take with me, and would have if I hadn't so many well respected PAID FOR Independent reports that were quite clear.
I can't say it is dangerous tbh. It's a worry at this stage, but my advice would be the same whatever kind of multi-disciplinary meeting it was.
The fact that there is no SW present makes me think it isn't necessarily sinister. (not saying all SWs are sinister either).
Yes. Put them in, but also follow boch's advice. You need to be clear that there are still massive outstanding issues and they need to be documented.
have a good grasp of the group of children they care for and have been helpful to ds when bullying occured
You aren't being asked to evaluate the staff - leave that bit out.
So be honest. Playground staff eventually helped out with the bullying.
Also, you don't have to be so positve about the lack of intervention that was promised.
Your concerns are:
Interventions promised in August have not yet been implemented and you have had no explanation as to why this is the case.
If you read the guidelines for Paeds, then if he had genuine FII concerns you should never have been made aware of them.
This means one of two things:
-The FII was a bluff and you are safe to ignore it
-The Paed is not following his own guidelines and has put your DS at further risk by alerting you.
Incidentally -are you getting copies of any documents they produce in preparation of this meeting, given that you have to give your document in 10 days prior?
There doesn't seem much point in saying that the school move was positive if you aren't going to want him to stay there in the long term - that will make you look barmy, tbh.
Join the discussion
Please login first.