To think this is not OK?

But it was possible to accommodate him on the trip? School was ready, willing and able to do so, and had arranged commensurate staffing.

Personally I think it's disability discrimination and I would not stand for it. I'd ask for a meeting with the head and if that didn't resolve matters I would complain formally to the governors. The 121 support should have stayed in school if it was not possible to accommodate him on the trip.

I would have to have built up a strong relationship with the person I was trusting to take my child out on reins. I wouldn't want my child to be pulled and spoken to in the way I witnessed in any area of life school or general.
I have no personal experience of accessing the community with a child on reins. I have worked in adult social care for over 20 years and have worked with fantastic carers and with carers I wouldn't leave a pet mouse with so I deem on the cautious side always. I also have a son who has been wheelchair bound for 15 years and I have seen the very best and the goddamn awful ways he has been treated out and about in the community. In any event I would always do what I felt right for my child or do my best to support my child.
But I don't particularly trust society today to do their best with vulnerable people.

Yes, you said “I personally would prefer DC not to go.” when talking about school trips.

My question was not just about school trips. It was about life more generally and, since reins are what enable some DC to access the community and for some the alternative is not going out or being in an SN buggy or wheelchair the whole time, if “you really prefer your DC to never go out or have to be in an SN buggy or wheelchair all the time?” You didn’t answer that part.

I set my feelings out there.

@Luddite26 as I said, my question wasn’t limited to school trips. It was more general. You obviously don’t want to answer. That is your prerogative. As I also said, how they were spoken to is a different matter.

If you only saw them on a school trip, you don’t know their needs or the provision they required well enough to know the alternative wasn’t them using an SN buggy or wheelchair.

Disabled adults do use reins/harnesses sometimes. This is sometimes needed in addition to 2 or 3 carers.

@perpetualplatespinning no I would not like my child on reins on a school trip. And I would not want my child going on a trip after the way I saw these boys being spoken to and restrained on reins. I'm still quite shocked and getting my head round it.

I had said I am not judging other parents at all. That is why I thought I had answered that sufficiently.

The boys I saw would not have been in a SEN buggy.

I would say it's possibly budget related as well . In adult social care it would be more likely that 2 carers are used and possibly will be in the future with the same boys.
In my experience I haven't seen an adult on reins.

I don’t think you have.

You posted about school trips, then said you would prefer they didn’t go.

My post was asking about more generally because some DC would never be able to go out without reins unless they stayed in an SN buggy/wheelchair the whole time. Not just no school trip, but not able to go anywhere. Would you really prefer your child never went out at all or to only go out in an SN buggy/wheelchair?

I'm not dignifying your supercilious tone with a response.
So, "nope", I have not changed my support for the OPs position.

I think I've already answered that.

💯

I went on many school trips because I knew ASNA wasn’t available/suitable and didn’t want my daughter to miss out. This invariably resulted in me being just another parent helper and got lumbered with other kids to look after, despite me always saying from the outset I wasn’t going to do that. Eventually I told them I would only look after her and a few of her friends, but I wasn’t taking responsibility for them. On one trip they got pissed off at me because part of the trip was an hour running about in a play park (which my daughter couldn’t take part in) so I took her and her three friends to the ice cream van and bought them something. The other kids were whinging that they never got one and the group leader told me I shouldn’t have done it. I countered with “you shouldn’t have organised a trip that excluded my child, but here we are”.

There is no world where I’m grateful for crumbs when it comes to my daughter being included.

@SchoolTripSENDramaTake this one all the way. School trips are not compulsory.

I’m a 1:1, at our school I would have stayed with your child at school and made it an extra special day for them.

I understand why you feel that way

Ime, allowing them go, encourages confidence, you cannot take him off whenever there is a school outing, unfortunately when a child is in mainstream they're forced along, sometimes it is worth it, other times not. The sna is trained to deal with the situation.

For some DC, reins are what enable them to be out in the community. For some, the alternative is they either don’t go out or they remain in an SN buggy or wheelchair. Would you really prefer your DC to never go out or have to be in an SN buggy or wheelchair all the time?

How DC were spoken to is a separate matter.

Schools often use other kids 1 to 1s as extra cover seen it for years.

Schools who do this when 1:1 is detailed, specified and quantified in F of an EHCP leave themselves and the LA open to legal action.

1:1 would be detailed, specified and quantified in F of an EHCP because it is SEP not a placement. Not in section I where the placement would be named.

Despite what LAs would have you believe, it isn’t rare for 1:1 to be detailed, specified and quantified in F.

If 1:1 is detailed, specified and quantified in F of an EHCP, the school should not be using the 1:1 for other things. If the child doesn’t attend a trip, 1:1 must still be provided. Whether that should be the usual person or not will depend on the wording in F.

I have never seen children older than toddlers being restrained in this way. I was shocked and uncomfortable by the way the children on reigns were spoken to.
None of my business if caregivers/parents agree/fully support/ want their children on reigns but I can still feel shocked at the sight of children on a school trip being controlled in that way.
I personally would prefer DC not to go.
But that's my feelings and opinion I'm not saying it's wrong if that's how they roll just saying not for me. Possibly has whiffs of restraint in asylums as I'm old enough to remember.

The child is entitled to a reasonable adjustment. If their primary care giver is saying the trip isn't suitable, there's no changes you can make for it to be suitable, then they should have permitted the child to stay at school. Even when we haul 200 kids across country on our annual pilgrimage to the Sea, not all kids go and there's adequate support staff to accommodate them. You can't tell me that with this child's 1:1, unless there wasn't a single other person in the school and the building was locked up, the child should have been allowed to access school.

That sounds like a good plan.
You want to be on the same side, with flexibility from both the school and you.

Can I ask why you were shocked about the kids wearing reigns?

Op first I do agree your DC should be allowed to go to school for the day. But I do feel a bit differently about pp saying they can easily be looked after by their 1:1.
I'm not sure if they are with the same 1:1 all day or more than one adult normally share a day. The latter would be trickier. Even the same 1:1, this adult will need break and lunch etc to be covered. So if everyone else in the reception team went on the trip it's not as simple as "1:1 should just stay and it's all sorted"
But again I still think your DC should be able to attend school. And school should have made an arrangement for him, as long as they have been told DC not going on trip with long enough notice.

Good.

I would have thanked you and said enjoy your authorised day.
They should have made provision for them at school.