To be annoyed with SiL and to think that she hasn't got a clue!

[KathrynU]

Hi there, I've been posting in the SN a bit recently and I've had some great advice but I feel that this is an AIBU issue. Basically my ds age 4 has just started reception. He is on the Asd pathway for further assessment, he clearly has additional needs but we are having to battle to get diagnosis.

Anyway I left my job to be a sahm when ds was one so I've been a full time mum for three and a half years now and I'll be honest, due to ds's behaviour, meltdowns and aggression it's been bloody hard work. So understandbaly I've been looking forward to him starting school full time. Before the summer holidays i got a call from the Senco at ds's new school and he told me that if they feel that ds won't cope full time then he'll be put on a reduced timetable and will do part time hours until he turns five and is compulsory school age, which as ds is a March baby it would be April after Easter when he's be able to go full time. I wasn't at all happy about this at all but as ds seems to have settled and he was due to start full time on Monday I thought all was well and it wouldn't happen. Well this week ds has had a couple of incidents and I'm being told again now that he still may be made to go part time if he doesn't behave, I felt devestated.

Anyway last night my SiL came round to our house with my nieces to play with my two kids and we gets to talking. I told her i was worried that ds will be forced to go part time and that it's not the answer for my ds to exclude him. I'm currently on medication for anxiety and depression (this only started since things became worse with ds) I feel unwell almost daily and I'm exhausted all of the time, my SiL knows this and she knows how ds being made to go part time would have a huge impact on me but she had nothing supportive to say. She instead turns round and says that oh it's only another six months or so, that's not very long!

Considering I have been at home full time for so long and have been through so much with my ds AIBU to feel rather ticked off with my SiL's comment. Six months is a long time, and for me to have be back and forth again after already doing it for 18 months whilst ds attended nursery (for only 2 hours a day) then I feel deflated. My SiL knows how some days are bad for me and that I have little energy and I mentally, physically and emotionally need my ds to go town, but she makes out that it's no big deal, I honestly felt like slapping her.

Nothing wrong with it at all op.

But it can often appear on here that schools can do no wrong even if they have

because your son has more needs than most other children

do you just want him in school regardless of what suits him best at the moment

if the school recommends fulltime later than others that is what is deemed best for him,not whats best for you

sorry but thats how i see it

I have 2 kids without special needs, and was a SAHM. I was bloody well looking forward to the respite. It's OK she is looking forward to the respite.

OP is vulnerable at the moment, feeling unsupported. Please go easy on her

And the school are qualified to asses this with a child they have only known 2 weeks are they?

More qualified than his mum who is far more likely to know how he responds and what works for him?

And all of a sudden when they legally have to take him he will strangely be sooooo totally ready every thing will be fine?

Oh and I hadn't mentioned why i think it would be in my son's best interest to stay full time as I thought that was kind of obvious? My ds was made to go part time at nursery like I've already said and he hated it because he'd be dragged away from whatever activity he was doing ie playing in the sandpit with friends to be told he's got to go home. I had to stand in the hallway (wasn't allowed actually in the nursery!) for my son to be brought out with the teacher by which time ds was sobbing as he wants to stay. He would become instantly agressife hitting and kicking me as he was all worked up and he'd tell me that he wanted to stay with his friends and would repeatedly ask why he had to come home and all the other children were allowed to stay, needless to dh I don't what this agai for my son. Plus the fact that I genuinely think him staying full time with the right support (the school have advertised for a 1 to 1 TA) will benefit him and help him make friends and feel settled.

I think you are overreacting. she was probably only trying to be reassuring. I think YABU by judging her to go to work.

rather than investing your energy into flaming your SIL, I would use this energy to get to grips with the current legislation.

Give IPSEA a ring but legally school cannot force a part time timetable on your DS. School are just trying this on with you.

well im sure the school are pretty well qualified within what goes on in the classroom and how it can effect those children that need extra support

the mother im assuming was not in the classroom while her dc was there,so she does not know how they reacted in that enviroment

the poor child may be finding it very daunting and frightening but sod what the teacher/senco think they know nothing and have never dealt with this before

disappointed - what do you mean oh no they don't. As far as I am aware that is the law. They have to be in education the first term after their 5th birthday, unless you know something about the law that everyone else does not??

Hi OP I was in a similar situation with my mother all summer. It has just started to become very clear that ds was on the asd spectrum and everything my mother said at the time just grated on me big time. It was all this look at the positive shite. Drove me mental.

I am a total and utter realist and a really practical person so while I was trying to find the information I needed to start gathering and frankly I was going through all of the emotions of dealing with my non 'NT baby' I was frankly raging with her.

It has improved now that I am in a better place and finally she has moved to a more realistic viewpoint mainly because I let him visit a bit more I have come to realise though that we all walk our own journeys and I don't think it is helpful expecting others to understand what you are going through who are not experiencing it.

I on the other hand am very sorry to hear about the school and the difficulties you are facing and you know what that just sounds shot for you to be experiencing that. Keep pushing for his hours to be built up and see if you can get them to change their minds.

"AIBU?"

'Yes'

"fuck you! You know nothing about my life!"

It sounds shot

Kathryn perhaps you need to speak to the school to understand their reasons behind it. No one is criticising you for wanting a break, you are right, most parents breathe a slight sigh of relief so I think we can all understand why you are disappointed and frustrated particularly in your circumstances. That said, they see a lot of children and can probably gauge that he isn't ready. If he wasn't full time a pre-school it is likely he isn't ready for reception yet either. If you don't think their reasons are good enough you need to take it up with them. I doubt any school tries to blanket discriminate against kids with SN, I am sure they are doing it for the right reasons, you just need to understand what they are.

One of my friends has just had this happen to her son as well op he is used to full days at nursery and was thriving with them now all of a sudden they can't handle it because they don't legally have to now he's on reduced time table and has regressed significantly.

I think you can't have it both ways, you either can cater for special needs and disabilities in which case fantastic or you can't if you can't you should admit it and make it easier for the parent to get a specialist setting or another placement that can.

Far to many children are allocated inappropriate placements because the authorities prefer not to have to come up with additional funding they are not offered the same opportunities their none disabled peers are then all of a sudden they get used as guinnea pigs when the school have to pull there fingers out of their arses, then it takes so long to get the correct placement.that child can lose years worth of education and so many people have no clue it happens

OP, so your son also did only two-hour nursery stints, even though you wanted him to stay longer? And now school have also suggested he go oart-time against your wil? Rather than dismissing them out of hand as discriminatory, is there a chance they are right, even if it's not what you want to hear, and that part-time hours are better at the moment? You've mentioned 'one or two incidents' at school, and by your own account, your judgement is not entirely neutral, as you desperately (and understandably) want more respite...

I never said "fuck you" not was I implying such. I appreciate people's opinions i really do, and I agree with a lot of them.

well im sure the school are pretty well qualified within what goes on in the classroom and how it can effect those children that need extra support

I think you are being kind in thinking this is anything to do with the childs needs, at least most of the schools that do it admit that it's because it's easier for them to cope part time and very little to do with the child. If the child has a ECHP a reduced timetable is likely to be against the rules, it's usually a practise that SN tribunals frown apon.

the mother im assuming was not in the classroom while her dc was there,so she does not know how they reacted in that Environment

So what will miraculously change when he turns 5?

the poor child may be finding it very daunting and frightening but sod what the teacher/senco think they know nothing and have never dealt with this before
ASD is a huge huge spectrum, it is highly possible they will not have come across another pupil like the op's child, if you've met one then you've met one the same goes for if you've met 50.
The op will know what her child finds daunting and what he finds frightening far better than anybody else.

Oh and just a point, what if my ds happened to be a September born as opposed to a March born and school had to legally take him full time as he were five, what would happen then? I assume they'd have to make it work, so can you not understand my frustration?

The incidents I was talking about was that ds hit out at another child and he ran off and hid in a corner when he was suppsped to be going out for play time, which for a four year old I don't think is that unusual. My ds don't forget isn't officially diagnosed so they can't even use that as an excuse and he's excited every morning to go into school not having meltdowns and kicking off, surely that's a good indicator that he likes it there and wants to be there.

If he was September born yes they would have to take him, but he isn't and there is a huge difference of maturity at that age over 6 months. What you describe is not a justifiable reason not to have him, are you sure there is nothing else?

Op if your child was already 5 then they would have to meet his needs and he could not be treated less favourably than his peers a reduced time table would not be an option for them.

Then you are looking at informal reduced time tables and exclusions when ever the 1:1 is off sick, (this is also against the rules but it happens)

Needs - what makes you so convinced the school isn't doing this for the benefit of the child. The op doesn't know, or hasn't shared in detail why the school think this is better. Lots of children benefit from starting school later because they are not emotionally mature enough to go full time immediately. If this was not a child with SN you would be saying good on the school for looking after the childs best interests, but because he has SN it MUST be discriminatory

There is absolutely nothing else to be honest. Like I said my ds has been rather good these last few weeks and hasn't done anything "bad". Nursery initially suggested that ds do part time at school but considering he wasn't going to that school I thought it was unacceptable and a bit out of order for the nursery manager to influence the school in any way.

Of course its not out of order for nursery to suggest, ds starts school part time. Surely they had got to know your ds and in their expert opinion this is whats best for your som

Like I said my ds has been rather good these last few weeks and hasn't done anything "bad".

The incidents I was talking about was that ds hit out at another child

These two statements don't match, OP.

No I wouldn't be saying that at all with a none disabled child.

I would be saying the same thing that the parent is best placed to know if a child is ready for school.

The parent is saying he is ready.

If the op was saying "my son is not ready but I want him to go anyway" then I would be telling her to give her head a wobble.

The reason why I am so convinced that is it discriminatory is because in the last 3 weeks I have heard this same story time and time again with so many disabled children it is shocking. Usually it is presented to the parent as a foregone conclusion with no reason at all just "he/she is under 5 has additional needs so we are only taking them half the time" if a disabled child is using your services you are meant to accomadate their needs not get rid of them for half the time.

Erm, these two statements DO match, if you had bothered to read my posts up thread thoroughly! I said that my ds had been good and had no issues for two weeks but then a couple of days ago he had an incident, that being that he hit out at another child.