To think they may as well say "don't send children with additional needs back in September"

[drspouse]

The current plan is:
All in bubbles of 30
All in the classroom together
All facing the front (WTF has that got to do with virus protection)
No use of shared spaces except at your rota time and after it's been bleached.
Teachers at the front, 2m away
AND focus on behaviour.

My DS has an EHCP and needs a space to escape to when the classroom gets too much. He's often been using a work space outside the classroom. We just looked round a lovely mainstream primary that has a behaviour base and a nurture base. Oh and a library and an ICT suite that children can access at lunchtime.
His previous school had very little space and the corridor was the library etc.

So how are schools supposed to cater for children who need time out of the classroom to prevent meltdown?
This includes children who are having a hard time at home, can't cope with playground noise etc. Not just those who have a diagnosis of SEN.

And children like my DD who have small group teaching outside the classroom most days - you can't do that with 2m separation and all facing the front even if you can disinfect the break out area.

So I'm guessing nobody really wants a child like my DS in their child's classroom if he's not allowed to go out to his calm down area when he needs to?

Well, I guess I knew the government didn't really want to deal with inconvenient children who don't fit their mould, but this confirms it.

I really feel for teachers, yet another impossible task.

[Grasspigeons]

I apologise if i misunderstood. Perhaps your writing wasnt as clear as you believe particularly in the context of all the 'cater for a majority for a change' on a thread where parents of children with SEN were sharing genuine concerns about leaked guidance and reduced legal protections.

But you are right. It is 'my problem'. My son did part time school for year 3. No school at all for year 4. Did part time for year 5 until lockdown and is now facing a year 6 where schools and local authorities are even less likely to support him.

[Sirzy]

Without 1-1 available my son wouldn’t be able to attend school it’s that simple. And his 1-1 needs specific training in order to meet his needs before they can work with him.

It’s a complex situation but children with additional needs can’t be left behind in the rush to get everyone back. All pupils needs need to be taken into account

[10brokengreenbottles]

Teadrinker have you tried contacting school? His new teacher could speak to him. Photographs of his new classroom etc.

Drspouse, DD2 can't find the specific link she saw on twitter, but I have found this TES article in which concerns about the changes being made permanent are raised.

Also, this article which also hints at the tribunal changes remaining permanent. I can see, for some families, permanent virtual tribunals are going to leave them at an even greater disadvantage. While this article doesn't mention GW saying the 'best endeavours' policy will remain it does discuss the Children's Minister telling the education select committee the changes could remain post lockdown.

Janice by removing 1:1 provision you deny provision to many pupils with additional needs. What other provision pupils need in order to access education do you think it is OK to remove? A wheelchair? Hearing aids/loop? Glasses/material in Braille? AAC?

I already have one child for whom there isn't a suitable school for (and hasn't been for years). If provision in EHCPs isn't in place I may end up with 2 out of school.

[drspouse]

Parents are free to keep their children home or chose a different school if they prefer a different approach.
And if there are no schools with the approach that my DCs need? I can't keep my children home and have them learning and developing. We already know this doesn't work. I also can't keep them home and keep my job.

You cannot reasonably expect one-to-one in the current climate
Well, you are now saying my child cannot go to school, because the psychologist, the LEA (and the tribunal judge has confirmed) say that he needs 1:1.

One adult for 10 would ALWAYS be a lot better than 1 adult for 30, and 1 adult for one specific child!
Well, if your definition of "a lot better" is "that pesky child with SEN is at home because he needs 1:1 and can't cope with 1:10", then I suppose, yes, it is.
But that's not my definition of "a lot better".

[BankofNook]

You cannot reasonably expect one-to-one in the current climate

Children with additional needs aren't just given a one to one because a TA happened to be going spare, they have a one to one because it's been assessed (often at the end of a long hard fight) that they need one in order to be able to access education and that not having one is detrimental to their education, health, and social care needs. It is not unreasonable for parents to expect school to meet their child's needs including provision of required one to one support.

PS: no one "got your post deleted", it was deleted for breaking tall guidelines which is a moderator decision not a user decision.

[SomethingNastyInTheBallPool]

You cannot reasonably expect one-to-one in the current climate, whilst it would benefit everybody a lot more to have smaller groups. One adult for 10 would ALWAYS be a lot better than 1 adult for 30, and 1 adult for one specific child!

What the
actual? My daughter would be completely unsafe without a 1-1. She has as much right to attend school as any other child, and according to government guidance, as a vulnerable child she is actually a priority for being back at school full time.

[FizzFan]

You cannot reasonably expect one-to-one in the current climate

Newsflash, children’s additional needs don’t go away just because there’s a virus.

I don’t know why I continue to be disappointed at the ableist rubbish on this forum, but I still do.

[MintyMabel]

Our primary school has added 2 additional nurture spaces to the two they have already in the plan for return.

[WellTidy]

Many children, already struggling due to how lockdown has affected pretty much everything in their lives, simply cannot attend school without a one-to-one. This is fact, not opinion, as agreed with the LEA.

As if things are not hard enough.

[Grasspigeons]

MintyMabel - that's fantastic to hear.

[Legoandloldolls]

As someone e who has done over SEN appeals to tribunal, no the government has never given a shit about children with additional needs and never will.

Under the bus they go.

[x2boys]

My understanding so far but all this may change is that SEN do not have to follow government guidelines @drspouse,it's all a bit vague and I'm very unclear what will happen in my sons special school when he goes back in September ,his teacher rings me every week ,but it's going to be difficult to manage when all the pupils have learning disabilities ,many of whom cannot understand the concept of social distancing.

[x2boys]

SEN school,s that should be *

[IndecentFeminist]

Of course a child can expect a 1-1 if that has been mandated. My contract is specifically to work with my designated charge, if he leaves or whatever my job finishes. They can't just redeploy me without giving him someone else.

[drspouse]

I don’t know why I continue to be disappointed at the ableist rubbish on this forum, but I still do.

Even my attempts to suggest that if SEN children aren't happy, no children are happy, are usually met with suggestions that I shouldn't expect my DC to be at school with normal children or (in one memorable post) even at a school funded by the taxpayer at all.

[FizzFan]

the government has never given a shit about children with additional needs and never will.

Under the bus they go.

This. It is truly terrible.

But hey, got to “protect the NHS” so they become collateral damage in the fight against a virus with a 99% + survival rate. A disgrace.

[Davodia]

Davodia - can you not see how disableist that is? As long as the majority get freebaby sitting (of a highly skilled and good quality nature) it doesnt matter if the more vulnerable children cant access it and their parents are financially penalised
At the moment they’re saying they can’t provide SEN support. So either some children go to school or no children go to school. You’re suggesting that because they can’t currently provide schooling for children with SEN, that means in the interests of equality no children should receive schooling, which is unfair. The fact is, the economy needs parents to return to work, and getting some back to work is better than getting none back to work.

[JaniceWebster]

You cannot reasonably expect one-to-one in the current climate
Newsflash, children’s additional needs don’t go away just because there’s a virus.

You are missing the point I am trying to make:
There's is not enough adult for even a "bubble" of 10 or 15. There simply is not, even in schools where diner ladies have been recruited to be in charge of classes.

If you can't even have entire year groups at school for the most basic needs as is happening right now, you cannot seriously expect extra care and extra staff.

The fact that we happily accepted the school system to go down the drain, over-crowded classrooms for decades and wake up too late is another issue.

ALL the children (or near all) are struggling in a lockdown. There's no urgency to help any of them out. So yes, I stand by what I said, at least the majority should have a chance, instead of no -one at all.

[Sirzy]

@Davodia

Davodia - can you not see how disableist that is? As long as the majority get freebaby sitting (of a highly skilled and good quality nature) it doesnt matter if the more vulnerable children cant access it and their parents are financially penalised
At the moment they’re saying they can’t provide SEN support. So either some children go to school or no children go to school. You’re suggesting that because they can’t currently provide schooling for children with SEN, that means in the interests of equality no children should receive schooling, which is unfair. The fact is, the economy needs parents to return to work, and getting some back to work is better than getting none back to work.

No what people want is a system which can work for all children not one that pushes the most vulnerable children out. Ironically the very children that could have been attending all along because at that point it was noted that for many it was needed!

I am lucky, I have already had to give up my job to be a full time carer to DS and that job was as a teacher so I am in a position where I can homeschool him. I also have supportive family who can give me respite. Many many many other parents Aren’t in such a lucky position.

To suggest if a child needs high level support they shouldn’t be going is saying those with disabilities are less important than other children.

[TabbyMumz]

Surely where 1 to 1 is stipulated, they can still provide it? Or are you thinking due to other staff not being there from shielding, they might need to use that 1 to 1 staff member elsewhere?

[GinDrinker00]

YABU.
My DC has an echp and is back full time, they’ve made loads of adjustments to suit his needs.
Talk to your child’s school and ask them about it.

[JaniceWebster]

To suggest if a child needs high level support they shouldn’t be going is saying those with disabilities are less important than other children.

that's not what anyone is saying at all.

The fact that we let the education system be so out of budget, resources and staff is irrelevant in the short term. We can FINALLY try to make changes, but it won't happen overnight.

The point is trying to send as many children as possible back to school in the first place with the resources available. That has to be the priority, isn't it obvious?

[Sirzy]

@TabbyMumz

Surely where 1 to 1 is stipulated, they can still provide it? Or are you thinking due to other staff not being there from shielding, they might need to use that 1 to 1 staff member elsewhere?

The problem is the that at the start of all this the laws around EHC plans where changed so that now what is in section F isn’t what is legally required but what they have to make best efforts to do. That opens up a whole new can of excuses!

It has always been a fight to get 1-1 as a very specific clause in a plan anyway so now having that risk that even then it may not be actioned in worrying

[Sirzy]

@JaniceWebster

To suggest if a child needs high level support they shouldn’t be going is saying those with disabilities are less important than other children.

that's not what anyone is saying at all.

The fact that we let the education system be so out of budget, resources and staff is irrelevant in the short term. We can FINALLY try to make changes, but it won't happen overnight.

The point is trying to send as many children as possible back to school in the first place with the resources available. That has to be the priority, isn't it obvious?

It may be obvious to those parents who don’t need to worry about such things. To the rest of us it’s obvious that it risks being exceptionally discriminatory.

Measures need to be put in place to allow all children to get back to school not just those who fit into the boxes!