AIBU to not want this SN child in the same class as mine

[PinkyU]

DD is 5 and moving into P2 which will be a composite 3/2 class. I’ve recently found out that a boy with severe challenging and frequently violent behaviour will be in the same class as a P3.

DD also has SN, cognitive, social emotional and physical needs. She is very vulnerable and significantly smaller than this other child. Small knocks and bumps can cause DD significant injuries such as dislocated hip etc. Their will only be 1 teacher and 1 TA in the class which in non negotiable due to staffing.

I’m concerned that not only will this boy take up a lot of teaching time (away from my DD), he is also a substantial physical risk to DD.

AIBU to discuss/request a change of class for this other child as DD cannot be moved to a different class due to her needs?

For a start Womb the SN child that is violent is unlikely to be in the work place so your scenero would never happen you are confusing issues disibility issues is not a general violence issue.

I am not sure if you are a troll or dense or both but you are trying to link two very different things together.

disability violence IS NOT THE SAME AS NT (neruol typical aka no additional needs) so please stop trying to combine the two because they are not at all the same.

NT can control their behaviour and actions but with disabiltiy related issues they cannot, and most of the time they are not attempting to actaully hurt anyone unlike normal violence.

Something like Happytea describes sounds like a very reasonable solution. Basically, you need to feel you can trust them to have come up with a plan even if they can't share the details.

As Bluebiros said, you need to keep repeating that you are concerned for your child's safety and ask to see a risk assessment.

manicinsomniac depending on the OPs dd's SN, changing schools may not actually be an option; the other local schools may not have disabled access which it sounds as if her dd would need.

No child should be placed in a situation where they pose a serious physical risk to other children, this cannot be a positive place for them and must also massively interrupt at least some other children's learning. I cannot imagine any parent wanting their child to be at risk of serious injuries whatever the reason.
You are not going to be able to have confidential information relating to other DC discussed with you. You can push for clear risk assessments relating to your DC and put clearly in writing what action you would take if risk assessments were not followed. It might be worth looking at the legal perspective, I don't know enough to about the school's duty of care to be sure but I would consider it in your position.

And a third example MelanieSmooter.

YANBU at all I wouldn't want my child in class everyday with a violent child. Don't they have specialist schools for uncontrollable students?

If you think that they might be sharing a TA and therefore sitting next to each other then that would be a different issue than if they are likely to sit at other ends of the classroom. I think that you should raise concerns about the proximity if you think dd is likely to be the first child hit, however if they can be sat at different sides of the classroom with your dd close to an exit then the chances of her being hit are minimised. That might be a reasonable adaptation, saying he needs to be in a different class wouldn't. I know what it is like to be dreading each time you pick up the phone what new injury they have, but ultimately it is a balance.

SalemBlackCat your posts are disgusting. Absolutely full of revolting offensive bile.

SalemBlackCat your posts are disgusting. Absolutely full of revolting offensive bile

But with a grain of truth.

I too find that if a child is disruptive/violent/out of control their rights to an education seems to trump everyone else's

" that if a child is disruptive/violent/out of control their rights to an education seems to trump everyone else's"

Lots of severely disabled children with distressed behaviour are on part time timetables. Many more are being educated in corridors and cupboards. Others need their parents to spend thousands of pounds in legal fees to secure funding for appropriate support.
Disabled children with distressed behaviours do not have a better access to education than NT children.

No child should be at risk of violence from another in school. The pendulum has swung too far. It's utter negligence by the LA to insist on inclusion without providing the funding to ensure it can be done safely.

Heads can no longer exclude children for injuring others and therein lies the problem. One head I worked for excluded children for all acts of violence and made the exclusion permanent after the third occasion. He wasn't heartless, he wanted the funding to keep all the children safe, including the child with SN.

Amazingly, as soon as there was a permanent exclusion the LA came up with the money for support staff if the head agreed to take the child back.

But in this case the ops DD will have her education disrupted when she is off sick when she gets injured by the violent child.

In a previous thread a whole class has to stop what they are doing and remove themselves from the classroom.

I wonder what would happen in that case if the first violent out burst of the day landed on the haemophiliac boy.
This is a dangerous situation.

I have been through similar and seen what happens when schools put the violent child first.

Sadly it seems to many would like a return to “out of sight out of mind”

Not out of sight out of mind.

More to do with sending your DC to school in a safe environment.

""Don't they have specialist schools for uncontrollable students?""

Very few because of the agenda of inclusion for all, so many SN schools were closed because the LEA's refused to send children there, so they could say the SEN schools weren't needed.

My DD attended a SEN school. The violence of some pupils wasn't handled at all. Computer monitors, chair etc, would be thrown. One Girl, who frequently injured other pupils, had not consequence until she head butted the Head. My DD was extremely upset by aggression and subsequently going to school was a waste of time for her. She flourished in College and is now on a level 2 mainstream course.

Many of the pupils that were just left to behave how they wished (not all was caused by conditions) they got kicked out of every College they went to.

It's all down to funding and be willing to provide the correct environments for a pupils needs.

It happens in Adult Residential Care as well. Violent People are wrongly placed and other vulnerable people are injured.

No, Sirzy, it's about appropriate provision for children with additional needs and keeping everyone safe.

But even if a child can be violent that doesn’t mean that mainstream isn’t appropriate for them.

But I bet the parents who complain about it won’t join in any campaigns for schools to be provided with better funding/training/resources in order for that to happen.

It is in the best interest of every child that schools are able to adequately resource things but instead it turns into a “them v us” with the most parents of the most vulnerable constantly having to fight while being made to feel like their child shouldn’t be there anyway.

"The school, likely, know MUCH more than you about how to run a classroom with children with additional needs."

Oh, if only.

I wouldn't have had the battle with my two with SN, nor would many of the other Mother's I met during times of protest/support groups/ SN after school provision/SN clubs etc.

My friend wouldn't have to pay for private education for her DS with SN, because there isn't an appropriate Sn school place for him and they lied about what provision was being given in mainstream.

In your shoes OP I would approach this purely as a safeguarding question. It's not the other child's fault (or his family's) that your daughter is being out in a situation where her physical/medical needs may not be respected, and where she is therefore at risk of serious injury.

I would put my concerns in writing to the head teacher, lay out the potential medical consequences. Send a copy to the governors. Make sure you have proof that any communications have been received. If you have verbal discussions, write notes and immediately write them up and email a copy to the school.

Putting everything in writing generally makes it much harder for concerns to be ignored, because written evidence could be used to prove negligence if anything should happen.

Oliversmumsarmy I can't get past your agreement with a poster who wrote that hate speech.

One Girl, who frequently injured other pupils, had not consequence until she head butted the Head

I was going to ask what consequences there are to these violent outbursts.

It seems that for 29/30 pupils just talking back to a teacher, missing homework, etc the teacher will come down on the pupil like a ton of bricks but regularly throw furniture or punches and there seems to be no consequences.

As a parent have you tried to answer the question to a child who gets told off and sanctions for forgetting her homework but then sees someone punch several pupils only for the victims to be told to try and be friends with abuser.

"But even if a child can be violent that doesn’t mean that mainstream isn’t appropriate for them."

If support cannot be given to ensure that everyone is safe, without impacting on the other children's education (by taking the only TA), then they aren't rightly placed.

I was active in protesting against the closure of SEN Schools and the Professionals for it tried to brand us as "othering". But it was because we knew the funding wouldn't be there. We knew that the funding for physiological and MH services wouldn't be there. Nor would any funding for after school clubs which promote self esteem. The bullying wouldn't be tackled. The Teachers attitudes wouldn't be addressed, or any additional training given.

It's only got worse, since the austerity measures.

Now the funding for Colleges have changed and we are being fucked over on the tight margins for a EHCP, for those in College.

Inclusion is great on paper, but for many, it just isn't working.

Sirzy, children are vulnerable for lots of reasons. A child who is violent because of SN, may not be the most vulnerable in that classroom. Every child has the right to learn and feel safe.

It generally only "works" until the child gets to about 13. then they have to be moved to a PRU, which again won't meet that child's needs. These children are being let down.

Parents of NT children do join in campaigns for better funding. Those in power don't want to know. Just like the Young Male suicide rate is nothing more than collateral damage.

I know people working across Charity residential provision, for Adults with duel MH and LD conditions. It is happening there because they won't fund the places and support needed. One Man has ended up in Broadmoor when all he needed was better care. We are filling Prisons with people who just need more support and better care, starting from childhood.