My DD was injured at school, school want a meeting, what will happen?

[CupCakeForTheBirthdayGirl]

DD is 9, in Y4.

On Friday it was my DDs birthday and I put a small cupcake in her lunchbox*.

Another girl in the class, pushed DD off the bench thing making her bang her head and meaning DD was sent home. The girl also got DDs cupcake out of her of her lunchbox and ate it.

DD has told me but this hasn't been confirmed by school or the other girl, that the girl asked DD to swap the cupcake for a chocolate bar and DD said no because the school rules are you don't share or swap food/

For context both girls have an EHCP. I am friends with the other girls mum and she will not allow the school to apply for further funding for a 1-1 at lunchtime for her child – she’s told me this several times, she thinks a TA would hold her daughter back and she doesn’t want it, she also only allows a TA in core subjects at school (English and Maths). My DD doesn’t have 1-1 at lunchtime as the only help she would need would be with packaging or cutting up (when shes on hot dinners) but the lunchtime staff are aware she needs this help and it’s part of their job description. DD does have 1-1 in wordy subjects like English, History and Geography she also has help in a small group in other subjects which is funded by her EHCP.

DD was sent home from school, and I had to take her to A+E. For context DD is the youngest in the class (not the year though, 3 classes per year) but also the smallest in the entire year. She’s the size of your average 4-year-old. DD was ok, just had a bad nose bleed and sustained a concussion, due to her medical issues she was at risk of breaking her nose, or fracturing her cheek or eyesocket so had to go to for an X-ray.

School now wants a meeting with me tomorrow to discuss “going forwards” I’m terrified, they’ve always said I co-operate and they’ve never had issues with discussing things with me. I’m worried they’re going to say DD now needs lunchtime supervision, I’ll take it if they offer it but it does seem unfair DD is going to have to be supervised because the other parent won’t allow their child to be.

It's a mainstream state primary school, cofe if it makes a difference.

*This is as per school rules before anyone says anything - policy says “Please only give 1 of cake (slice of, cupcake or 1 packet of the prepacked mini cake bars), or 1 of chocolate bar (such as a penguin or 2 finger kitkat) or 2 biscuits (2 disgestive with or without chocolate on) or 1 packet of crisps. All products including sandwich fillings must be nut, peanut and sesame seed free” – it was a small cupcake with a small amount of icing.

How would your DD having a 1-1 stop another child throwing bottles?!

The other child is the one who needs supervision and it's not your fault that the child's parents won't allow it!

I cannot believe the school are being so ridiculous about this! I think you might have to play hardball here, OP.

I agree with the above PP. You need to tell the school that your DD does NOT need a 1:1 but that the child showing violent tendencies DOES need it. Only if the VTC has 1:1 does the risk for every other person in the class go down. Only her 1:1 could stop her (VTC) from hurting another child, yet again.

Schools love to manipulate the person they assume is the easy mark and put the blame and solution on their shoulders. It beats them needing to be professional and stop the problem where it starts; which is with the VTC.

Repeat this ad nauseam - do not be bullied into something that is to the detriment of your child because you're a softer touch than the other parent.

I would have completely lost my temper with the school over this. They are discriminating against your daughter for her physical vulnerability, failing in safeguarding her, blaming and essentially punishing her for it???
That is disgusting.

I think if the parent of a child who displays violent behaviour should push back on a 1-2-1, then so should you.

I snorted at the idea a 1-2-1 was going to be able to catch any hurtling missile like some kind of jedi/ninja.

If you don't think it is in her best interests, I would not let them browbeat you. That is their job How would DD feel about it? At 9 she will have an opinion.

They have gone this way because you’ve always just gone with what they say where as the other mum just refuses.

A 1-2-1 would of not protected your daughter in either of these incidents of being attacked by another child, they need to put steps in place to your your child safe while not punishing her as the victim to their lack of safeguarding from a violent pupil.

What consequences have been put in place for the child that keeps injuring your daughter?

This.
ask how this 1-1 would protect her from a bottle being thrown at her head?
ask why they are not
protecting your dd?

They don’t need the other mum’s permission to supervise and discipline her daughter, otherwise half the kids at school would never get disciplined.

They just CBA.

I've got two DC with EHCPs, one of whom has a 1:1 for the whole time in school. We've seen huge benefits with the 1:1 - but my DC doesn't have the social skills that your DD does, they do need the support of a 1:1 the whole time.

Insisting on a 1:1 for your DC is discriminatory. If SALT has said that she needs to have the opportunities to develop her language and social skills by integrating during school time without adults, then the school are actively going against expert advice and putting barriers in place which will hamper her development.

I agree with PP, I would go down the bullying and discrimination route. You need to directly raise the issue of this other child - they need to be dealing with her more effectively. The issues around her parent refusing more help are not your concern.

I would also raise a safeguarding concern. Ask them to explicitly detail how a 1:1 could have stopped a flying bottle from hitting your child's face? Or have prevented the previous injuries? If they are insisting that the TA will be hands-off - how will they also safeguard your child? They won't be able to explain because even IF you agreed, your DD will still be at risk because unless they're hiring a ninja, she'd still have been hit by the bottle. So then there's the double whammy of STILL being at risk from this other child AND having her speech, language and socialising development curtailed.

Not acceptable at all.

Oh also, ask them how they plan to secure the extra funding when you, OT and SALT are all explicitly saying it's not required. Even if you already have an EHCP, it's not easy getting extra hours. You have to be able to demonstrate a need - and without backing from professionals, I don't see how the school will be able to do this. And in your case you have SALT saying that it would actually be detrimental to deprive DD of opportunities to socialise - I don't think they'd have a chance of getting an application approved. They wouldn't with our LA anyway.

As well as having two DC with EHCPs, I was also the SEND school governor for 5 years+. If needed, I would be referring the matter to the school governors on the basis of failing to safeguard, bullying, and discrimination.

I'm genuinely furious for you.

Exactly this. I'd tell them their suggestion for safeguarding your child isn't effective or appropriate and therefore you'll be making a complaint based on a lack of safeguarding to the governors. That will focus the mind in the short term, I'm sure. They won't be able to tell you if they've followed their behaviour policy correctly for these incidents, but the governors will be able to investigate as part of your complaint (I only say governors as your complaint concerns the actions of the HT).

I agree they are attempting to use you to circumvent the real problem which they apparently don't have the strength to deal with. If what they were suggesting, to get round this, would also work for your DD then fair enough but you've more than adequately explained why their proposal is potentially even harmful to your daughter's development as well as not resolving the issue in any case.

I wish you luck and strength in this, you know you are right to push back!

I'm afraid it would be gloves off from me now. Formal complaints regarding failure to safeguard and disability discrimination. You have to allow the school to follow their formal complaint procedure but you can include your local council and ofsted in the communication. You should also report to 101 the repeated assaults. The school will not protect your child unless you make them. Far easier to blame her for the assaults. Their reaction is totally unacceptable and they know it.

I think that is a terrible thing to happen to your daughter, sounds like the other girl is a bully, is that allowed in school nowadays????....mine are all grown up now, but I would have found that quite difficult to handle....thinking of you x

Well done for keep on pushing back.

Time to get this is writing now. Put the ball in the schools court.

Dear HT,

I am writing to you formally to discuss your request for me to agree DD has 1:1 at lunchtime.

On x date dd had a cupcake which another child wanted and she injured dd on the process of achieving her aim.

We had a meeting at your request on x date and you said you felt a 1:1 for dd in the background would help prevent such incidents.

I disagreed as the problem didn't occur due to dds disability it occurred because another pupil wants something that wasn't theirs to have.

On x date the same pupil threw a bottle at dd and she was injured again. You called me and requested again I agree to a 1:1 for dd to prevent this.

This is not acceptable.

You have a duty to safeguard dd and discharging this means you deal with the behaviour of the perpetrator - not to have the victims freedoms reduced by having a 1:1 (you are basically describing providing her a bodyguard).

Dds salt and OT both agree that dd needs to develop more independence and therefore she needs lunchtimes to develop skills being taught. She has a right to be safeguarded from harm during these times by the school taking action to prevent other pupils harming her. This should be by dealing with the pupil harming her - not by reducing her independence.

So please inform me in writing what steps you will take to safeguard my dd from harm that doesn't include reducing her independence.

I'd also be interested to hear how you propose a 1:1 watching from a distance will protect dd from other pupils violence.

Thanks for your cooperation

Xxxxxxx

The school are being ridiculous. They should be dealing with the problem behaviour not punishing your dd for her vulnerabilities.

What does the schools behaviour and safeguarding policy state? I’d start from there OP

They assumed that you'd say 'yes' to their plan because you've always done so in the past. I agree with PP that specialist advice should - if anything - be resulting in fewer hours support than more. Your daughter couldn't have been protected from that bottle being thrown, unless an adult was stood directly in front of her to block and catch etc.
Keep pushing back and I'd challenge the 'this is what we were...' rhetoric, the issue here is them not supporting/supervising the other child sufficiently. Not your daughter's ability to eat lunch and mix socially with her peers.

Do you have an SEN advisory service such as SENDIASS available to you? Their advice and guidance may be useful to push back at the school to ensure they’re meeting your DD’s needs effectively and as per the outcomes of her plan as opposed to seemingly pandering to this other parent. Not saying at all that you haven’t got it handled yourself as it sounds like you’ve advocated excellently, but sometimes external support adds more gravitas to the argument and if nothing else it’s another person in your corner at the meeting.

You need to write a formal complaint and send it to HT, class teacher and governors.

As well as all the excellent points written above you need to ask directly if child B's parents have been informed of the attacks on your child and if not when they intend to tell them.

What they are going to put in place to prevent child B hurting your child again? Does child B need 1:1 at lunch? (yes we can all see they do but ask anyway) Surely this would be more appropriate than victim blaming your child.

If child B's parents will not accept the 1:1 what measures do the school intend to take to ensure your child is safeguarded against child B.

Don't let them turn it back onto protecting your child at lunchtime. Keep the focus on preventing Child B being abusive.
So, yes maybe a (ninja) 1:1 could have protected your child when the bottle was thrown BUT the bottle should never have been thrown in the first place that is the issue!

It’s absolutely true. You can’t do anything without parental permission.

Ultimately this.

Or if the girl is persistently violent it becomes a concern which social services are relevant.

Have a look at this document to get an idea
https://derbyshirescbs.proceduresonline.com/p_abuse_by_ch_yp.html

Look at point 4 and the various bullets underneath. These are really crucial points for consideration. If you can find a similar document for your council then all the better.

You can say this is a child that is posing a risk to others - they are not behaving in a normal way - they are deliberately and intentionally harming your child and it needs to be addressed as such.

Frame as a bullying complaint with a formal complaint as to how the school are handling it. Mention discrimination against your daughter and a failure of the school to act in line with their bullying policy (pick their policy apart for that - you'll find something they've failed on). Mention outright you feel the school are also failing in their duty of care to safeguard the other child by not treating this case appropriately and trying to palm off responsibility onto you to provide extra funding rather than treating this as a case of a child who causes harm to other children. If you know of multiple other incidents mention them.

Say that the duty of care lies with the school to look into the safeguarding of the other child as well as your own and to act accordingly. If it is true that the other parent is resistant to appropriate supervision through a TA at breaks say that's not ok and that it needs to be elevated to social services because of the failure of the school to address the violence and how the violence is persistent.

Mention that someone spotting your daughter either would not have stopped the problem or it would be a misuse of the ta to be used to control the behaviour of the other child and is discriminatory towards your daughter - this is a discipline matter not a SEN matter. If it is a SEN matter for the other child they need to call a meeting with the other parents to discuss in those terms with social services because this is a child doing harm to her peers.

State in no certain terms they are trying to make the behaviour of the other child your problem because they can't be arsed to go through correct procedure as the other parents are less compliant and you are not having it.

Do it all in writing making it clear that you think that it likely there will be another incident involving other children if this happens you are warning that they will be liable. You daughter needs safeguarding but this child also needs safeguarding and palming this off to you to provide funding is an abdication of that responsibility. You have a moral responsibility to put this all in writing.

Blah blah blah.

I'd be doing the same.

Schools rarely get enough SeN provision and what often happens is that one child’s sna ends up stretched across several other children as well.

My ds (secondary) has an SNA who keeps a discreet distance because he has goals around fostering independence. These things can be carefully specified.

I think the school are trying to leverage an opportunity to get another adult on the ground.

Reading between the lines, I think you’ve been influenced by the other mum’s reluctance to have 1:1 provision and I think she’s misguided. And honestly I think you are too.

My advice is to take the extra support. Get the slt/or input on the wording so that your dd is getting subtle scaffolding. I would lay money that your dd’s sna will have her hands full with other dc. But it’s still a benefit overall.

I have been in a similar situation but my dc have less severe needs. My dc with EDS often ended up getting injured by a child in his class with behavioural problems. Mainly because he was the slowest in the class and just couldn't get away fast enough when the other child decided to throw something at the nearest person. Giving your dd one to one at lunchtime isn't the answer.

Have a look at the school policies - such as behaviour, disabilities, bullying etc to ensure the school are following their own policy over this matter.
Absolutely fight back against the school, especially when recommendations have been made by others about what she needs to improve things like her speech.
School need to be dealing with the other child and her parents about her behaviour, not pushing to changing set up for your daughter, particularly when they are not in her interests.
Good luck

Were the incidents witnessed by staff?
taking it away from the other child for a minute I can see why they think your daughter might be vulnerable. If she really is the size of a 4 year old (under 4 foot?) and fragile she will be vulnerable to accidents. It’s not uncommon for kids to start puberty and be adult sized (and clumsy) in year 5. That’s why younger classes play separately.