To not want him to go to this school

[Warwick82]

Hi. So I have 3 beautiful children. 2 daughters aged 14 and 11 and my son aged 7. My ds was diagnosed with adhd and autism last year. He is a gorgeous little boy but his mental health is shattered from the way he has been treated at two separate schools and left to struggle from day one. I won’t make out for a second my ds is an angel because he isn’t, but then again how many kids are, however my boy didn’t start school as an anxious, angry confused little boy. Don’t get me wrong he was stereotypically hyperactive, he couldn’t concentrate for very long, touched anything and everything and he flitted from one thing to the next. Fast forward three years however and he is a comepletely different child. He is anxious, low, and has to be encouraged to do the basic things in life like eating a meal or taking a bath.

He was “asked” to leave his first school as they couldn’t cope with him. He was excluded regularly at age 5, put on a reduced timetable, meaning I had to cut my hours at work and ultimately lost my job in the end, was treated badly by staff, including one teacher who decided to try and restrain him and ended up hurting his arm. He was then forced into another mainstream school further away, meaning I could no longer walk him to school and I had all 3 of my children at separate schools. Fast forward a year and despite me telling my local authority that the school placement would inevitably fail, my ds was left to struggle and despite the head teacher writing to the LA countless times stressing that they could no longer meet his needs the LA chose to do morning until now. I knew full well what was happening. The LA wanted my ds to go to their in borough specialist school but there were no places available, but come September there would be. So my son has been left all year falling further behind with his learning, feeling panicky not wanting to go in and being taught by several inexperienced TA’s who didn’t actually have a teaching assistant qualification or appropriate training.

My LA then invited me to go and visit the school they wanted my son to go to which I did. The school itself has had a bad reputation for years and the general consensus is that the majority of kids who go there come from chaotic families backgrounds ie cases of neglect, substance abuse, attachment issues, families who’s kids have been in care etc. But I thought it best not to judge a book by its cover and so i went to have a look around. I was hoping I would be pleasantly surprised but no. The building itself was disheveled, dirty carpets, pokey classrooms, very little in terms of play equipment, in fact my son’s mainstream school had more facilities, staff who seemed disinterested in showing us around the school etc.

AIBU to refuse to send my DS? I’ve already refused and I’m heading to court to fight it but I keep doubting myself. I’ve seen other schools that have so much more to offer my ds yet people, including my family, think there is no point in fighting the system and I should simply agree fot my ds to go there. But he has already had 2 failed school placements at the age of 7. If I were to send him to this school I’m convinced it would be another failure yet my LA are doing their best to try and convince me. My ds does have behaviours I don’t deny it, but he comes from a loving support home and me and my DH have worked tirelessly to support his needs and to provide a stable family unit, yet my LA feel he would do well in a school that to me at least, is only a few prison bars away from being a youth detention centre! Honestly when i picture my ds there I just want to cry. Surely he deserves to go to a school with children similar to him with similar needs and abilities, not simply to be sent to the cheapest possible school with kids he may pick up even more behaviours from.

herculepoirot2, of course OP needs to prove that the school nominated by the LA is not able to meet her child's needs. In your eagerness to disagree with me you've ignored my posts saying precisely that.

I was responding to the statement that she needs to work on the "mismatch" between her child's needs and what the LA school can provide. The point is that she doesn't, because she's entitled to challenge it instead.

OP, you might find this booklet on SEN appeals useful - www.sossen.org/shop/product_info.php?products_id=32

I was responding to the statement that she needs to work on the "mismatch" between her child's needs and what the LA school can provide. The point is that she doesn't, because she's entitled to challenge it instead.

You appear to have leapt on my words without understanding them. This is exactly what I was saying: she needs to challenge it, not by focusing on why she doesn’t like the recommended school, but on why it doesn’t meet her son’s needs.

Sorry it's moved on a lot since I read and posted . You need to email the Local Authority and advise them they are failing to provide for your child as is their responsibility under Section 19 of the Education Act 1996 states that "Each local education authority shall make arrangements for the provision of suitable education at school or otherwise than at school for those children of compulsory school age who, by reason of illness, exclusion from school or otherwise, may not for any period receive suitable education unless such arrangements are made for them. Then direct them to the LGO report Out of School Out of Mindhere that states that provision must be put in after fifteen days of absence.
Make it a formal complaint now so that you can pursue to LGO later. Our LA are paying me over £100 for every week they failed to provide a tutor to my daughter as a child out of school. Are you in Derbyshire by any chance there is a parents support group with many parents in the same boat who I could point you to for support.

I'm afraid the problem with threatening the LA with section 19 of the Education Act 1996 is that they can and probably will say (once lawyers are involved) that they are offering full time education via the special school.

But to be honest it was the LA themselves who have said they have a duty to provide education whilst we go through the appeal process. Why would they say that if that’s not the case?

But Warwick, they have made you an offer - the specialist school - which you have chosen to turn down. I think this means they have discharged their legal duty. I mean, if you changed your mind, he could start at the SEMH school tomorrow presumably?

Their duty is to provide an adequete education that meets the needs/outcomes/provisions in the ehcp on a FT basis.
Op is challenging that the SEMH school is not adequetly able to meet the needs of her child with ASD. Would you feel the LA had discharged thier duty to a blind child by sending them to a unit for the deaf despite it not offering braille, cane walking lessons and the like.

If the LA think they have a duty, fine, keep nagging them to provide one. I'm just concerned that if you start quoting the law at them they will go to their lawyers who will advise that they have a strong argument that they have fulfilled their duty.

To be clear, the fact that they have offered the local school doesn't mean that they necessarily have fulfilled their duty. But the problem is that they have an argument that they have, and that argument can only be resolved by the specialist tribunal. If you tried to enforce this through the courts, they would say it will just have to be left to the tribunal.

grass
OP has stated a number of very good reasons why in her opinion this setting doesn't meet her child's needs and she is fully intending to appeal, which is the right thing to do.
However she hasn't said these problems with reference to what is laid out in her son's EHCP. I assume the LA thinks this is suitable to meet the described needs.

If they have a case that "in theory" this school matches the needs that are described in the EHCP then they have offered a school they consider suitable. The school thinks it can meet need having looked at the EHCP and also seems itself suitable. Therefore in legal terms, a suitable school has been offered.

The OP may very well be correct that it isn't the right school for her son. She may well be able to demonstrate this and win her tribunal.

She has not YET demonstrated that the offered school is not suitable and therefore by offering it, the LA has discharged it's legal duty.

It is in no way equivalent to your comparison on a blind child which tbh is a bit silly. The advice I am giving is not saying "the LA school is obviously perfect". I am talking about the legal obligation to offer a suitable school, which according to the LA, they have done.

Looking at my son’s Ehcp it does read that the needs can be met at the specialist school named. But there’s s reason for that. The La have wrote in such a way that it reads like this. They have purposely left out observations made by a specialist Asd teacher and her recommendations and they have many included any recommendations and proposed outcomes from SALT either. They didn’t request an up to date educational psychology assessment despite my ds’s needs changing dramatically and the initial EP report being almost 4 years old. They know that if they had agreed to new assessments and included all of the professionals findings then the Ehcp would point towards a completely different setting from the one they has been named.

Yes - and that is why you need to appeal!

So you need to appeal against not only the school named but also the contents of the EHCP on the basis that professional advice has not been included and that there is not an up to date Ed psych report to advise.

@Tonerre our LA offered dd unsuitable provision too, still didn't stop them having to pay me compensation for every week they didn't provide under section 19 because dd didn't attend the school named. It won't stop the LGO ruling either that should also make a payment to dd for lack of provision and hopefully a penalty as well.
LA lawyers spout all sorts of rubbish when the law is clear you just have to be persistent and pursue the complaints procedure and get it to LGO if necessary.
Currently pursuing another complaint regarding failure to make provision in the EHCP because even when dd isn't in school the LA are still obliged to provide for her at home. I've had a lovely flowery reply about how the provision was available in school but it makes no odds dd wasn't in school and the law is clear. Will pursue this one to LGO before I start my next one because whilst LA's continue to disregard the law then they give a parent plenty of ammunition for a complaint.

DS1 'failed' transition to ms secondary and was out of school until Tribunal hearing. He had 5 hours per week tuition through EOTAS. I had to provide medical evidence - a GP letter was not sufficient and they wanted a consultant's letter. Luckily I had a recent letter (ASD) and it was accepted.

His last tutor was wonderful but the other 3 were awful. If you are going to Tribunal you have to remember that the LA are the other side and tutors work for them. They will collect evidence, try and get your child into a PRU or LA already existing unsuitable provision and at the hearing the LA will present signed Affidavits to the judge where the tutor will give their opinion.

The nasty ones act as spies. Data request to the LA revealed emails 'smearing' parents claiming parents were 'negative', 'exaggerating need', 'obsessed with Tribunal' etc. After an unpleasant incident between the tutor and a neighbour (I gave a statement to the police in favour of the tutor, she was in the wrong but racist, misogynistic verbal abuse is never acceptable) the union got mixed up and falsely claimed that parents were racist and had an 'attack dog' (ie docile and friendly 10 year old Doberman bitch).

DS1 did go to an out of county specialist independent school following tribunal (LA conceded on the day) but the placement failed when he as 14. EOTAS came back on the scene and a tutor visited every week for 6 months despite the fact that DS1 would not come out of his room. Instead of teaching he would sit in the kitchen and drip poison into my ear. He told me the EHCP wasn't worth the paper it was written on, DS1 would probably never return to school, it was too late, it was pointless and I didn't need the support of Family Carers because it was for the likes of me but for 'real' carers. Lovely guy

After JR with the help of SOS!SEN he had a personal budget for therapy, OT, SALT and 20 hours home tuition with tutors we chose (not EOTAS). He's just taken and passed 5 GCSE's.

Yes butterfly that’s right.

The LA don't commission reports because they work on the basis that if you don't identify a need, you don't have to meet it. The EHCP is written by the LA but is a cut and paste of what is in the evidence reports.

You need to commission your own reports. The judge can't rule without evidence. Some LAs do not adequately prepare for Tribunal and the judge adjourns while assessments are carried out either on the day or a couple of weeks before the hearing date if a telephone conference is held to check preparedness. Do not rely on the LA to collect evidence essential to meeting your son's needs if collecting that evidence increases the risk of them 'losing' the Tribunal case and having to pay hundreds of thousands over the educational lifetime of a 7 year old.

SALT needs to focus on the right assessments and you really need a report by a sensory specialist OT that assesses using SIPT. You definitely need an EP report. All your experts should be Tribunal savy and able to be expert witnesses at Tribunal. My EP also conducted school visits (LA and parental preference) and submitted reports.

Ironically, as soon as the LA know you have commissioned assessments, they will request counter assessments. You need to get in first as assessments can't be repeated within 6 or 12 months. My LA doesn't do reports beyond their own limited EP report, with minimal objective assessment unless the case is heading to Tribunal. With DS1 they had to commission a private SALT (NHS diagnose and then discharge where there are no articulation issues) who had to use alternative tests and just uncovered more need that the LA then had to meet in the EHCP. All sensory OTs were fully booked and so there was no counter evidence to the report by the OT report i had submitted.

We just don’t have the money for anymore assessments including an EP who are averaging between £1000-£1500. I’ve worked to get us out of debt slander can’t go back there again.

I didn't have to pay for the EP or any reports for the last tribunal - the LA agreed to commission them when I put in the appeal paperwork that the LA had failed to gain up
to date reports.

Really yeah. I was also advised by Ipsea that there is the option to ask the tribunal to order the LA to conduct new assessments.

It's their duty to complete the assessments so definitely put it in the appeal paperwork.

ime LA commissioned reports only carry out a small number of assessments or part of an assessment. As a result, the LA do not identify statistically significant needs (

I think that my sensory integration OT report was significant in achieving indi ss because it specified need and specified and quantified provision that could not be delivered at the school of LA choice. Therefore issues of a suitable peer group etc were not really relevant.

Regular OTs just do a parental tick list sensory questionnaire and recommend a sensory diet that is easily delivered in any setting.

I have never seen an LA commissioned report that properly specifies and quantifies provision pre tribunal never mind one that even recommends provision that the LA does not already or cannot deliver.

Well I've been to tribunal 3 times and the EP/SALT/ physio reports that were commissioned via the tribunal process all provided the necessary provision/outcome requirements - all of which ended up with specialist independent- out of borough settings being named...

In my professional capacity I've also seen reports commissioned by LA that led to suitable change of provision.

I've also seen rubbish reports....