Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

the school are using 5yos to accompany an epileptic classmate going to the toilet [long]

221 replies

owlbegoing · 08/05/2014 11:43

Yesterday I had a call from the school saying my DD had shut her finger in the toilet door, she was fine they were just applying a wet hand towel to it. When I picked her up at home time her fingers seemed fine if a little bruised so I asked her how it happened as we walked home. She told me that Claire namechanged had needed to go to the toilet and my DD was asked to go with her as Claire isn't allowed to go by herself. I asked my DD if she knew why Claire wasn't allowed to go by herself and she didn't know. Later I remembered that Claire has epilepsy, which I knew from helping on school trips.
So I talked to the teacher this morning...yes they are using other pupils to accompany Claire on her trips to the toilet during lesson time as they can't spare an adult to go with her! Angry
But it's ok as Claire goes into the cubicle by herself!! Angry
Apparently during during lunch etc they do have an adult to go with her.
When I said that she's just as likely to have a fit while washing her hands as sitting on the toilet that didn't seem to have occurred to her!
The children aren't aware of Claire's condition so how traumatic would it be for a 5 year old to witness when it's just the two of them let alone if it happened during a lesson with adults around!
The teacher tried to justify it by saying that Claire hasn't had a fit in school yet
This teacher only started in January and this system was already in place so she didn't question it! Shock

Would I be over reacting to try to speak to the head of EYFS about this?

If you've managed to read this far, thanks.

OP posts:
Pipbin · 08/05/2014 20:41

Please remember that the children you are talking about Capsium have only 6 months ago been able to go to the toilet whenever they wanted. It would be unreasonable to expect them to hold on for over an hour.
5 year olds don't have enough warning often.

Assuming that this child doesn't have SN funding (which I don't expect they will do) I would imagine the best solution would be for a TA to go with her, or for a TA to come from another class if there isn't one in her class.
However, I would be very surprised if she was entitled to a 1-1. So other children will be disrupted when the TA goes with her, but it's only going to be for a few times a day I guess.

My concern would be at break times rather than during lessons.

Original poster
owlbegoing · 08/05/2014 20:41

Claire does have an adult to take her to the toilet at snack time and lunch time. Just not during lessons.

OP posts:
Pipbin · 08/05/2014 20:44

She said that she'll be talking tomorrow to the specialist teacher (I forget what she called it) and the class teacher before the weekly meeting (which is also tomorrow so I think she might have her days confused.)

Why do you think she has her days confused? She can talk to both people before the meeting.

YouAreMyFavouriteWasteOfTime · 08/05/2014 20:48

"I wonder what amount the school are putting by for their SEN budget..."

there is a metric that you use to calculate the figure. HTs dont just make this stuff up according to some whim.............

this is not based on the SEN needs of the school and works out at much less than 6k per child.

so that's your first shortfall.

Then you apply to the LA, whose pot of money for extra funding, again is much smaller than it should be.

so however much any poster puts on this thread - it works like this that and the other.

No it doesn't

6k would fund roughly 12-16 hours 1to1 exclusive support, the cost goes down if a TA is supporting a group.

I have just asked DP how much 6k would get from a TA 1 to 1 and he says 'they could work 25 hours per week and cost the school 18k so that's 8 hours possibly 12 but the question is how many children do you have like this in your school. you dont get money for all of them because the SEN budget is a funding formula based on number of puplis and levels of deprivation - not how many children you actually have on the SEN register in the school'

so .....once more..... it does not work like how you think it works....anyway....ta ta...enough of this.

capsium · 08/05/2014 20:49

Please remember that the children you are talking about Capsium have only 6 months ago been able to go to the toilet whenever they wanted. It would be unreasonable to expect them to hold on for over an hour.
5 year olds don't have enough warning often.

I am not suggesting this, at all. I said the school should have a member if staff available to accompany at other times to. However I think Reception is not too young for children to begin to learn to go to the toilet at break times, as in being sent to the toilets at the beginning of break. Not as not being allowed to go in lessons.

Pipbin · 08/05/2014 20:49

Going back to the funding issue.
I remember a child in my year group a few years ago who had no bladder or bowel control. He wasn't entitled to full time funding, even though he needed to have his incontinence pads changing and was unable to deal with this himself.
I very much doubt there would be any extra funding for this child.

zzzzz · 08/05/2014 20:51

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Original poster
owlbegoing · 08/05/2014 20:56

Pipbin
She said that she'll be talking tomorrow to the specialist teacher (I forget what she called it) and the class teacher before the weekly meeting (which is also tomorrow so I think she might have her days confused.)

Why do you think she has her days confused? She can talk to both people before the meeting.

She said that she'd speak to the class teacher at the weekly meeting (which happens on a Friday) then corrected herself and said that she'd speak to her tomorrow. These are obviously the same day. As we've had a bank holiday this week it's not uncommon to lose track of the day i.e as it's only the 3rd working day of the week thinking today is Wednesday.

OP posts:
StanleyLambchop · 08/05/2014 20:56

Personally I think there should be a plan to ensure the child goes to the toilet at break times in which could cut down extra visits

trouble with that is that if the child has a seizure just before lunch, their bladder may be very full since the last break time loo visit. Therefore they are more likely to wee themselves during the seizure, increasing their embarrassment/distress. Much better IMO to let them go when they need it, to avoid this possibility.

capsium · 08/05/2014 20:58

You in some local authorities 6k does equate to 16 hours support. It is actually detailed in an example of LA policy in this thread (page37) I have also done some digging myself and have found this accurate.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/primary/1862438-Teachers-do-not-adhere-to-Statemented-1-to-1-support-do-not-believe-in-sub-levels-make-APP-assessments-up-How-much-of-what-parents-are-told-by-schools-about-teaching-is-a-box-ticking-exercise?pg=37

The trouble is, as the thread I posted highlights, children's individual funding is not always used for the child it has been allocated to. Schools are making their own unilateral decisions....and have been doing for some time.

capsium · 08/05/2014 21:00

Stanley I said they should be allowed to go whenever they need to too.

YouAreMyFavouriteWasteOfTime · 08/05/2014 21:03

capsium - 6k = more time for a 'badly paid' TA who might not be appropriate for a child with high needs,

and the funding is not 6k per child. its not 6k x number of children with SEN.

YouAreMyFavouriteWasteOfTime · 08/05/2014 21:07

capsium - "children's individual funding"

this does not exist.

Pipbin · 08/05/2014 21:08

But 16 hours support is not full time. And that is assuming that she is entitled to it.

capsium · 08/05/2014 21:10

It is a 6k demonstrated spend, per child, with additional needs, before additional funding can be applied for. 6k per annum is considered low level needs. This is what the government are expecting schools to budget for. There is some flexibility within budgets. Yes this will probably mean employing lower level TAs.

If it was just the toilet visits that required additional resource, this would be considered a low level need.

capsium · 08/05/2014 21:13

A member of staff should be able to be paged to accompany this child to the toilet occasionally, outside if break times. Hardly full time one to one support, for this issue alone.

YouAreMyFavouriteWasteOfTime · 08/05/2014 21:14

6k per annum is considered low level needs.

yes but the budget and the level of need are not linked.

DP funding formula is a total of 75k but that needs to be spread over a large number of children which means there is not 6k even for high level needs.

and the extra funding is only available for high level needs in this area and is inadequate of the number of children.

capsium · 08/05/2014 21:16

Pipkin all children in ms school are entitled to have their additional needs met. The school have a Duty of Care. If these needs require resource that exceeds 6k the school can apply for top up funding.

SDTGisAnEvilWolefGenius · 08/05/2014 21:16

"fair enough. hears hoping the other parents aren't so mean spirited to some poor girl wanting a wee."

What is mean spirited about thinking a 5-year-old is not old enough to be given this level of responsibility, without even knowing why she's being sent with the other girl, or what to do if there is a problem? It is mean to do this to either child - the one who might need help if she has a serious fit and the friend who could be really scared if this happens.

If this girl has a serious tonic-colonic seizure and injures herself, because there isn't someone with her who knows what to do (lowering her to the ground, as another poster mentioned, for example, timing the seizure, calling for help etc). How would the school going explain to the parents that their child had been injured whilst in the school's care - possibly seriously - because they sent a 5-year-old to accompany her to the loo?

A head injury, for example, could be life-altering, even fatal. That is one possible outcome - it's probably pretty unlikely, but unlikely things do happen sometimes, and if this child does injure herself seriously, the school could find themselves having to defend this policy - and I think they would have a very hard time justifying why they thought this was a safe way to care for this child's safety.

There is also the other child's safety to consider. What if she were to get knocked down and hurt if the other child had a fit? "oh I'm sorry Mrs X, but your child was knocked over and bashed her head/broke her wrist/gashed her head when we sent her to the loo to supervise a child with epilepsy". How many parents would accept that explanation happily?

Nennypops · 08/05/2014 21:19

You, what your DH is not taking into account is the right to top up funding if the child's needs can't be met within the normal SEN funding. The LA is not allowed to refuse to meet a child's needs for resource reasons.

YouAreMyFavouriteWasteOfTime · 08/05/2014 21:26

nenny - the top up fund is too small as I have said repeatedly. a parent may be able to get more money allocated to their child but all schools in an LA cannot get all their needs funded and have been told this.

Aeroflotgirl · 08/05/2014 21:26

If it continues after you have seen the HT you need to go to Ofstead and the LEA, it is nit right that they are giving a young child that level of responsibility

capsium · 08/05/2014 21:26

Annex 5b gives illustrations...

Nennypops · 08/05/2014 21:29

capsium - "children's individual funding"

this does not exist.

Yes, it does. There are three elements to funding for children with SEN:

  1. The funding per child that is available for all children in schools - what used to be the age-weighted pupil unit;
  2. Standard delegated funding for all children with SEN in the school, including children without statements;
  3. Top-up funding for children whose needs cannot be met with the funds within 1 and 2. This is money specifically calculated on the basis of what is needed to fund the support in each such child's statement and is therefore funding that is individual to that child. It cannot be used for other children.

In the thread Capsium cited, the issue was the third element, particularly the debate about whether schools are entitled to use the 1:1 funding allocated to children under statements to support other children.