To ask what you are supposed to do

[drspouse]

DS has an EHCP.
It's not very good and we have a tribunal coming up.
He has some challenging behaviour. We admit this and we are doing our best.
He moved school in Sept after we looked at 8 new schools, including 4 special schools.
The new school has just permanently excluded him. They have not tried all the suggestions of EP, OT etc and we know this is illegal but it doesn't help with the fact that he now has no school.
They are suggesting he goes to the PRU. I'm sure it's very nice but he has only just started to settle at the new school.
He's 8, in year 3, and loves to play with his teddies. We were told some of the older children at the SEMH schools we looked at had pulled knives on teachers. If there's any child like that at the PRU it will break him.
We both work, I've just been told I can't reduce my hours any further and DH has just started a secondment which will be for a year. The PRU has no after school club. We both have meetings at any/every hour of the working day. Giving up either of our jobs is not an option.
So we can't HE (and we don't want to, and we shouldn't have to, and it would be awful for DS).
What are parents of a child with SEN actually supposed to do? Is the idea that we are both supposed to sit at home with our child and keep him away from other children/schools/the public? Are we not supposed to work? Is the country going to pay us our (fairly high, which is partly why we aren't giving up work) salary for not working?
Note before you suggest it: yes we know we can look at out of area schools. We did, they are included in the ones above. We live quite rurally. We can't move (I have tried to move jobs for years). But we need school for DS NOW. Not in 6 months time after we've moved/fought for a private school place (there are none suitable anyway)/I've lost my job.

In my experience, society just expects you to educate your child yourself. I can't work, I did have to HE for around a year. It was not something I chose to do, there was no other option on the table. After a lot of fighting he got a school place. However, his condition means he probably attends around 80% of the time and on the days he does attend, it's a shorter day than at a 'normal' school. It's a nightmare!

I am a single parent so can't work evenings either.

People with 'typical' children just don't realise how fortunate they are.

How is the teacher?
Is she ok? What did she have to say on the matter?

Reading the thread properly, it appears that the school are at fault for not managing his triggers. If they are failing to meet the terms of the EHCP, and your son's behaviours are clearly defined in the EHCP, how can they possibly blame him?

To the poster who suggested taking a child with SEN to work, you obviously have 'typical' children or are child free. I can't even take my son out of the house without constant supervision and he's a teenager!

You are very understandably angry and frustrated OP.

As awful as it sounds, the truth is that when you have a child with SEN, you need to change your whole life to accommodate them. You say he can't travel far, he can't cope in different settings, he needs this, that and the other which is all well and good but majority of schools just CAN NOT provide this level of care. There isn't the funding or time, or the cost to other students is too high. It's not fair, and it's outrageous that our government cuts school budgets and SEN provision etc but that's the way it currently is.

Every family I know with a child with significant SEN has had to make massive adjustments such as one giving up work or going part time so that they can be there for meetings, phone calls, to advocate for their child. You say your currents jobs don't allow for wraparound care; what does your son do before and after school currently then? How was he coping with that? When he was excluded for 9 days, what did you do? Who was with him during that time?

The sad fact is that society just does not support families like this. Holding down a full time job is hard enough with a NT child who flourishes in school and can handle wraparound clubs and care and I can't for the life of me figure out how you have coped up until now if he has had such a disruptive school experience and is still only 8?

It is disgusting that you have to give up so much of yourself in your quest to sort out proper education for him but every other parent in his schools deserve to know that their child is safe and able to learn. It sounds like he needs better provision than a mainstream school can offer but that will take time so by all means be angry and frustrated at the system but you also need to be practical now and make plans to cope from Monday. The school will not just let him back easily and you can't magic up a place over the weekend so you need to plan plan plan now for the possibility of him being off for a while.

But the OP said from the outset that the EHCP is not fit for purpose and they are having to go to tribunal for amendments. So the school is presumably trying to work with what they have. They will make mistakes, everyone does, and not every situation can be foreseen. Perhaps this one could have been avoided, perhaps not. I find it hard to believe that the intention was to deliberately provoke the child into attacking a teacher. ( There are less risky ways of excluding a child!)

Sorry, I think you need to face up to the fact that your son isn't suitable for mainstream education at the moment, and may never be. You seem to be very against PRU's and special need schools without actually giving them a chance. I went to a PRU and it was the making of me, I am very thankful that they had the belief in me as well as the skills to change my life around. The sad truth is, with a child with severe additional needs, one parent is normally forced into giving up their job, or at least work reduced hours / different role etc. I would go off sick from work for as long as you / DH can get paid for and carefully rethink things. The likelihood is, the whole family are going to have to make big lifestyle changes.

OP contact SOS!SEN. They started JR for DS1 when his indi ss placement failed and the LA washed their hands - EHCP is worthless, he will probably never attend school etc. He never did return to school but had a bespoke package for 20 hours private tuition, plus 1 hour each of OT, SALT, and specialist ASD counselling per week

Are you using specialist SEN solicitors?

The FB group EHCP experiences provides legal advice.

It is a crap and time consuming experience. Eg to bring Judicial Review proceedings against the LA for failure to implement the EHCP you really need a water tight EHCP with unambiguous wording (only usually achieved following tribunal).

I suspect that you are justifiably angry because you think the school are deliberately not meeting need knowing full well he will be overwhelmed and that his reactions to being overwhelmed will result in exclusion.

Ime schools would initially try to say 'no' to attendance based on the well being of other students but this is a difficult legal position as the school has to identify which pupils and exactly how they will be impacted. So schools are forced by the LA to take students they don't want because they have already spent their devolved SEN budget on the local offer and have not planned for meeting the first 6k of a new pupil with an EHCP. So they either say the EHCP exaggerates need (if the child internalises stress) or exclude the child and claim that what they have provided meets a wishy washy inadequate EHCP (if the child externalises). Either way the EHCP is not met.

Even following tribunal the EHCP is not met. Even after Tribunal, schools will not meet the EHCP. Secondary is even worse if the school is an academy. We had a Tribunal, legal support etc but still the school failed to implement the simplest of things. Unsurprisingly, the placement failed. The most stupid arguments will be accepted as valid reasons not to provide support - needs to learn independence, needs to learn not to be autistic or pass as NT because difference/disability won't be tolerated at work so can't be tolerated at school.

Having done several Tribunals, JR and numerous failed placements, m/s, ss etc I have concluded that mental health is for life (DS1 is now 19 and virtually housebound and has weekly hour long home visits from CAMHs (they go up to 25 with a diagnosis of ASD) and that education can take place out of school (DS2 attends internet school). On a personal level, I have had to give up work (educated to PG level) but we are all still alive. I don't say that glibly.

On a social/political level it is a scandal. Mothers on local FB groups still find the strength to campaign and help others despite the personal tragedy of their DC self harming, being admitted to mental health secure provision hundreds of miles from family and kept in isolation or even taking or losing their lives.

Thank you for posting in AIBU. If you have never experienced this, please empathise - surely you can imagine how you would feel if your child did not receive support for a diagnosed condition because the NHS was strapped for cash because failure to do so wasn't immediately life threatening eg a broken bone not being set leading to lifelong problems with mobility.

Sometimes a perm exclusion is for the best as it means that your child will get access to the support that they really need and that the existing school are not able to give. Try to view it positively.

I get what people say about seeming to lack empathy. But honestly as a send parent you do have to emotionally switch off and deal with law only. If parents weren't doing this up and down the country the numbers forced to HE would be increasing.

The government decided to provide education free and so they can't pick and choose who they do it for and who they provide it for in a timely manner or not.

If a MS kid with no send didn't appear at school due to sickness they'll ask for evidence from gp for attendance. When a send kid wants school and their parents want school they'll happily dig their heals for 2 years as it's cheaper.

The point here is that behaviour occurred as a result of the school not following procedure. Not using strategies recommended by professionals or following behaviour management plans.

Take away the adhd or autism.

Replace scenario with a child who is a wheelchair user. School leaves them isolated in corridor as they can't access classroom children have gone to (eg computer suite) or leaves them sat alone in playground as no one to push them around.
Child has a meltdown and is excluded.

Child has VI or HI. School doesn't use loop or doesn't provide Braille or audio alternative of work. Child is just sat there disengaged and ignored.
Child has meltdown and is excluded.

Why is it different because someone sat in the child's seat and then when they became upset they didn't handle it correctly and then used a reward they knew he couldn't transition from (which leads to punishment) and didn't even attempt to transition him from it using the agreed techniques.

Of course no one should have to accept violence. No one is suggesting they do. But legally you must meet a child's send and you cannot exclude if the behaviours are related to a disability because the support wasn't there.

Seriously your best bet is SAR, school exclusions project (I'd be going for PEX being removed and change if school rather than reinstated tbh) and getting yourself signed off sick.

Don't discount the SEMH schools.

I had to give up my proper 'career' 3 years ago for the exact same reason, he was in mainstream with a fulltime TA funded via his EHCP but they could no longer cope. He wasn't learning and was completely segregated. They cut all wraparound care and also put him on half days. So we had to become a 1 person working family which was devastating to us and we've never really caught up. We had to use a food bank for a year.

we looked at every SEN school available and I just left every one sobbing in the car as none of them were right. Then we relented and looked at the SEMH that everyone was very negative about for the same reasons you stated(violence, knives, drugs). As soon as we saw it we knew it was right. He had a rocky start, got beaten up, like your son he's been quite sheltered and he had to become streetwise very quickly, he loves it and he's actually learning and may get some gcses.

EHCPs are very rarely fit for perpose!

Parents seem to think that they are magic access to 1-2-1 for their child.

What does the EHCP say in regards what they MUST do, because that is the crux - its not what would be ideal or what MAY be offered - its what is actually written as a MUST.

You havent explained why you moved your child from his last school in sept? Because that school didnt exclude him and it worked well with the after school clubs. Can he not return there?

There are suggestions in the EHCP, but unless they are written precisely as ' Joe bloggs Must have X Y Z' then the school is not obliged to stick to those rules.

Im not sure what you are after.

You cannot magic up a school that doesnt exist. There is going to need to be some compromise. The PRU is going to be the best first step for you, especuially as you want a resolve now.

You cant jump the queue. The waiting tiome is what it is. You will need to work with that. You need to be looking at the longer term picture, because, believe me, the choices get less and the distances to travel get more when you hit secondary, and the stress levels crank up 100X for the kids. You wont have the choices of primary school.

What are you doing out of school to help your son cope with his behaviour? Because he is going to need to learn strategies and ways to cope with things. These things are not the schools responsibility. Their job is to teach, especially if you are in mainstream school. You seriously cannot expect a school to have someone who is there all the time watching out that nothing upsets him.

And I say that as someone with ASD myself, and 2 childen with ASD one with an EHCP, who spent 4 years outr of school

itsgettingweird

Of course no one should have to accept violence. No one is suggesting they do.

Actually many do, and its frequently put out there that the victim is to blame.

But legally you must meet a child's send and you cannot exclude if the behaviours are related to a disability because the support wasn't there.

Isn't the term that is actually used

Make reasonable adjustments?

Which is different to "meet a child's SEN"

I get that you are only trying to do the best for your son, but you don’t seem to have any empathy for the children or teachers he attacks? You just say “it is illegal to exclude if they haven't tried to meet his needs EVEN IF he has hurt other children.” What about their rights? The children your ds has attacked have the right to be educated in a safe environment, without worrying about when they will be subjected to more violence from your son!

I know you don’t want to give up your well paid job, as you would lose “hundreds of thousands of pounds,” but maybe your son needs YOU! Maybe he needs to be the priority instead of coming second to your job?

the amount of money that your child's school received for his EHCP wouldn't not have been enough to cover a full time
With the notional SEND budget it has to be. This is the law. The school shouldn't have taken him if they thought they couldn't afford it

Having recently had a conversation (albeit in secondary but its unlikely to be staggeringly different at primary) about a student who, in his time with us, has caused almost 15k's worth of damage to school, staff and pupil property, EHCP's bring about 6k to the school per year. That is not enough to deal with a child who has as many issues as yours. It doesn't cover the one-to-one support needed. Schools rarely have a choice about who they take either and I've been teaching long enough to have seen many children who shouldn't be in mainstream. It may be the law but if the money isn't there, and it isn't, the law doesn't magic it up. Perhaps if people considered aspects like education (more so than the hollow promises of 'more money' which never materialises) when they voted, we might not be facing further drains on our resources. But here we are.

My concern now is that you do appear to be focused on the financial aspects of this, and your desire to not give up your lifestyle. Entirely understandable but there is a reason so many parents of child with complex needs don't work. Not all children should be shoehorned into mainstream education and clearly mainstream is having a detrimental effect on your child. Give the PRU a go. Your child shouldn't be forced into mainstream; it's fair on no-one.

Reasonable adjustments are a law under equality act.

Ehcp and needs being met are a separate law and separate point.

But you cannot exclude for failing to make reasonable adjustments either. That contravenes the EA and is disability discrimination. And if you've agreed to make an adjustment as you've stated it's reasonable you can't suddenly remind that and then exclude because of resulting behaviours.

My point is that unless you've experienced the system you really cannot understand how often children and families lives are turned upside down because the adults haven't acted correctly resulting in the child's behaviour.

An example would be a child being allowed to change for PE in a room by themselves because of sensory needs and not managing the environment. One day suddenly saying child has to go in main changing room. Child has meltdown and physically harms others.

Of course it's absolutely not nice for those harmed - especially the collateral damage for whoever decided to change the arrangement. But neither should (and you can't but may still have to fight a long battle) exclude the child.

It's not a case of you can't EVER exclude a child with send. Sometimes you can literally do everything a professional has recommended to the book and it's not the right setting.

I understand the resistance re the job. I was FURIOUS (when on my own and not around my daughter) when plans I had for work had to be shelved and I had to rely on tax credits and cut hours. I was furious at the family who's child had bullied my daughter which was the final straw before the school refusal kicked in, I was raging at the unfairness of the school not allowing her the support she had been promised.

But it is what it is, and we need to do what we can to help them.

Some people, on here had no idea about kids with SEN, the law, how schools work! You do not sound entitled, you sound frustrated and rightly so!

Op what are you going to tribunal for exactly? Were you going to tribunal before or after he was excluded? I ask this as perhaps you were poorly advised at this stage.

Have you appealed against the exclusion? There was a landmark case 2 years ago where the school illegally excluded a student who was very aggressive because the aggression was a symptom of their SEN and therefore protected. Sorry can't find the link but your solicitor should know- if you gave one.

The law says that LA's have to put education provision in place no later than the 6th day post exclusion. Have you discussed this with you SEND department?

OP my DD is a teenager now - her MH issues mean that if upset she will simply sit in a corner and stare at the floor. She doesn't speak to anyone or challenge anything, let alone kick off, but her needs are still not being met, simple as they are. I currently uses resources from 2 national and 1 local charity to try to persuade school to help her. I've done all the things listed here by those posters who are knowledgeable, SOSSEN, IPSEA, local MP.

If your child has SEN every day is a fight. I think as you aren't answering posters who are talking about using resources to help you in that fight, you are aware of them in any case. I feel your pain, may mums and dads I now have been forced to give up work and are in crisis because of it.

I really think you need to go and visit the PRU and see for yourself.

itsgettingweird

My point is that unless you've experienced the system you really cannot understand how often children and families lives are turned upside down because the adults haven't acted correctly resulting in the child's behaviour.

So how are the school supposed to make all these adjustments, when there are multiple children with multiple diagnoses, that contradict each other?

And do you really see other children/teachers being assaulted as collateral damage?

We can also go further and talk about the rights of an employee at work.

And also the rights of the other children to be educated in a safe environment.

Many times these legal acts conflict with each other.

Sounds like sending him to the PRU is the only option. And tbh it sounds like the best option. They are, by nature, better equipped to deal with complex situations and behaviour. He would probably get on well there.

In any case, he can't go back to his former school on Monday, so you'll have to send him somewhere.

I'm sorry you feel the system has let you down - but the system is underfunded and not personalised. No LA can magic a 1-1 TA out of thin air. They school did what they could - but there are a lot of factors here. Briefing a new TA that they cannot sit on your child's chair or that he will not respond to verbal commands, only timers, is time consuming and probably not at the top of anyone's to-do list. Which is unfortunate but mainstream schools just don't have the provision for that. That's why SEN schools exist.

Boney an ehcp is a LEGAL document that outlines what a child needs. If school aren't following it and pupils get violent and school exclude they are - in law - in the wrong.

I have been injured by a child with send before. Because the adult who was their support decided they knew better and to do their own version of managing behaviour and not what was written down by professionals. It wasn't the child's fault they had a meltdown. The adult caused the behaviour. I asked my boss not to exclude and made complaint against staff member and asked they had more training.

What people are choosing to ignore here is that the school staff willing,y ignored the ehcp and behaviour plan. Therefore they were the catalyst.

If the situation happened when staff were doing everything they could as suggested and documented by professionals I'd have a different opinion.

The law if there to protect students as well as staff. It's to keep everyone safe. Staff would less likely be Injured if they'd have followed behaviour plan.

If the law didn't exist then students who didn't fit any schools idea of the perfect student could be excluded for whatever reason they decided.

Schools are just cleverer at this now (off rolling) but judges are also getting more wise to when they do this too!

I work with some of the more complex cases within my la. I'm a team teach advanced trainer with about 10 others in la. We have recorded 8n the 5 years we've been a team less than 10 advanced restraints. This is because we apply effectively the 95% to prevent crisis.

No one should have to put up with violence. But than again vulnerable people shouldn't be locked away because society won't support them.

When the government started to employ inclusion they should have actually correctly defined what this was and correctly provided the systems to allow it to happen. Instead they've thrown far more children in Ms school under "inclusion" without the support network, training and experienced staff needed to include them.

itsgettingweird
Boney an ehcp is a LEGAL document that outlines what a child needs. If school aren't following it and pupils get violent and school exclude they are - in law - in the wrong.

Yes, I know. But you haven't explained how the school should cope with contradicting ECHPs or the other legal requirements that they have to abide by that also contradict the legal requirements of this child.

PRUs are not schools. They are not a permanent solution and have to reintegrate into m/s asap. They are not a suitable placement for DC with a diagnosis of a known barrier to learning that is long-standing and significant with an EHCP that has not been implemented.

Pending tribunal, an LA will want a PRU placement with a reintegration plan because they know that Tribunal will likely order ss (LA, indi, out of county) if there is no education being provided because education is a statutory requirement. EOTAS or PRU teachers will then provide a sworn affidavit to present at the hearing AGAINST the best interests of the child.

Lots of posters are saying m/s is not suitable. It's definitely not suitable without support. It may be suitable with proper support,not easy to get, so surely this much cheaper option should be tried first. Plus, do you realise that in every single tribunal regarding placement, the parents have named a specialist placement that the LA spend thousands of £ to argue against? Sometimes they use solicitors like Baker Small to make sure that DC with complex needs are not given ss placements. An FOI request uncovered lots of LAs, some of which had spent tens of thousands for Baker Small advice or representation. All to avoid meeting need.

So, why is so much money spent to ensure that all the power and finance of the state is focused on denying need (assessments are frequently not conducted prior to tribunal) or insisting on placement that fails to the cost of the child and the wider family?

It is like an alternate reality. It is only when you get to Tribunal that the judge has the power to dismiss the lies and bollocks of an LA that gets a trainee unqualified EP to attempt to challenge an NHS diagnosis.

If you have never experienced this, it is normal not to believe it. To blame the child or the parent rather than the school or the LA. If you have experienced it, it is very real. If in any doubt, go to Tribunal. Parents and specialists are advocates for the child. The LA are the other side. I have had LEA EOTAS tutors who have been in tears and say their affidavit will state the needs of the child in opposition to what the LA want them to say even though this will negatively impact on future work contracts.

What people are choosing to ignore here is that the school staff willing,y ignored the ehcp and behaviour plan. Therefore they were the catalyst.

You can't know that, because you don't know what is or isn't in the EHCP; the OP hasn't mentioned any of the specific details.

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-england-37274971