School "lost" my vulnerable ADHD/ODD son today!

[3Daddy31982]

Head was nice to me. That in itself isn't normal. She said XXXX played a game with us today. I was a bit lost. Turns out they'd lost him for quite some time. He'd hidden in cupboard. Other child told us they'd been out shouting his name. Class children were also searching for him!

He has ehcp and meant to have a one to one. I've previously not been happy with TAs not watching him.

He also came out in huge sobbing tears.

When he'd calmed down he told us noone found him. He didn't want to go to assembly and they'd said he had to. He said he was on his own! Which he must have been if they didn't know where he was.

Gut feeling is he isn't safe at this school. Felt that way since Sept when my Dad went to pick third child up and saw him solo and unwatched.

'It is LITERALLY the job of the 1 to 1 to 'watch a child constantly' for goodness sake.'

No. Nope. That's literally not what 1:1 means.

It is NOT the job of a 1:1 to constantly have eyes on a child. That would require 2:1 or 3:1 supervision because TA's are not superhuman.

did nobody read the message from @Periwinkletoes where she explained a real life scenario where despite everything being in place, a child still managed to evade their 1-1, who is never meant to act as a guard?

I completely understand the panic when a child disappears, even for a second (still recovering from losing a toddler for 30 seconds in Woolies in Abingdon around 2004). But rather than going in to school all guns blazing, or removing the child entirely causing more upheaval and upset for a child who is already struggling at school, I would advise working with them to put more strategies in place.

@LindaEllen the OPs child has 17hrs a week 1:1, so that nowhere near covers a whole school week.
They've said in another post that they don't think mainstream is working out donator this is the point where that has become clear and her DS needs to be moved. I don't think it's the fault of the school.

@toppkatz

Maybe the TA was sitting quietly waiting for him to come out?

Er... the OP's dd says she heard them calling his name for some time, and the head admitted that they couldn't find him.

The 1-1 is there for a reason, and that is so they don't take their eyes off him for a second. They neglected in that duty of care.

The school didn't neglect the duty of care. The 1 to 1 TA is for 17 hours a week. With covid rampant in schools at the moment, it's entirely possible this happened when one teacher was with a class of 30 six and seven year olds. If the teacher spent their whole time never taking their eyes off of op's child, even accompanying them to the toilet, they would be neglecting their duty of care to the other 29. Many of the posters suggesting op takes an adversarial or aggressive attitude with the school would be the first to whinge if schools were shut due to safety and safeguarding reasons!

At the end of the day if you feel your child is unsafe at school then you need to pull them out and homeschool them until you can find somewhere else.

I think if he has a 1-1 for all his hours then you need to get clarification on what happened. Although if he was hiding in a cupboard then he needs to be told to not do that (unless he has a learning disability that means he can't understand).

All those saying schools are locked etc, they are locked to outsiders, they are not locked on the inside, and things vary depending on where you live.

"No one can watch a child constantly"

Some children do need watching constantly. That's what full time 1:1 or 2:1 is for.

Specialist provision is not allocated on the basis that it prevents children running away and hiding in cupboards. Obviously, the child’s mother may feel that the school are not meeting the child’s needs for a range of other reasons, but we do not know what these are. If the EHCP provision is for 17hours 1-1 support then the level of support is not automatically adjusted because of the change to setting. I would seem a stronger argument to request additional hours of support within the current setting. This would be the next step after seeing whether a reasonable adjustment for this child might be that they do not have to go to assembly.

"It is LITERALLY the job of the 1 to 1 to 'watch a child constantly' for goodness sake."

No it really, really is NOT. Are you an education or SEN expert?

www.teachwire.net/news/send-teaching-assistants-should-you-use-the-velcro-or-helicopter-models-of-teaching

You generally won't get specialist school if you only need 17 hours of support.

Just seen it is not full time. If the child cannot be kept safe on the hours allocated then the ehcp needs reviewing for extra hours or staffing. It depends on if this situation was unsafe. My child went from 1:1 to 2:1 because of safety needs.

Why did he Hide?
Have you discussed why this is wrong.
Kids are fast. Not the fault of the TA they aren't body guards. If there are repeated incidents then maybe look for another setting

@Burnshersmurfs

Specialist provision is not allocated on the basis that it prevents children running away and hiding in cupboards. Obviously, the child’s mother may feel that the school are not meeting the child’s needs for a range of other reasons, but we do not know what these are. If the EHCP provision is for 17hours 1-1 support then the level of support is not automatically adjusted because of the change to setting. I would seem a stronger argument to request additional hours of support within the current setting. This would be the next step after seeing whether a reasonable adjustment for this child might be that they do not have to go to assembly.

Well, it can be.. it was part of the consideration where my son is concerned as the local secondary schools are too easy for students to get into/out of during the day, and it was felt that his habit of bolting during a meltdown meant that they were a safety concern.

I would raise a complaint as schools are underfunded and understaffed at the moment and your child’s 1:1 may be being used as a class TA and 1:1. In my school class TAs are covering different 1:1 roles due to absence and lack of supply staff (covid) and not knowing the child you are responsible for is causing ‘issues’ that SLT ignore. Hope your dc is ok.

Special schools don't generally provide 1:1 so they are not the solution for a runner unless being in the special school means the running and hiding doesn't happen ( these often happening because a child isn't coping with the mainstream environment ).

@LetHimHaveIt sorry if I confused you.

You responded to my post saying curious question. I was simply responding to that & saying why I asked the question & imo didn't think it was curious. I'm not sure how you extrapolated from that that I think employment is utopia & everyone should be happy all of the time.

Personally, I'd be nothing but grateful to teachers and TAs to using their best endeavours to help my additional needs child in their learning.

I certainly don't believe in being blindly grateful without critical thinking when the circumstances are so vague so we all have to disagree there.

However I'm also not sure where I've made a particular judgement on the TA in this thread. My criticism is how the school responded to the incident & the lack of detail seemingly provided.

Most schools' budgets wouldn't run to 2:1 provision. The child was not lost, he chose to hide, and that behaviour needs addressing, unless of course, his additional needs mean that he can't understand.
Moving schools isn't the answer either. Where does the OP go when her son decides to hide in a cupboard at his next school, or the one after that?

Have you had any issues around supervision before OP? If not then is it covid related due to staff absences? If there’s been no previous problems and you have felt he’s safe there then I’d speak to the head and see what they are able to do. If you generally don’t have confidence in the school to keep him safe then you are right to not send him.

It's possible the TA isn't covering adequately. it happens, not everyone is good at their job, if it happens again I'd be very concerned.

It could also be that they are being asked to do things other than their delegated job, that happens too, and will be less likely to happen if parents are demanding answers.

Schools are underfunded and understaffed. Some shortcuts and cover situations happen but some are not safe and the school should be pulled up on it.

If your child doesn’t have FT 1-1, and you think he needs it (he does, by the sound of it), you need to ask for an urgent review of his EHCP and ask for increased hours. If his school say they can’t meet his needs, even with this funding, or you have good reason to think they can’t with increased hours/support, then ask for a specialist placement.
My son has very similar diagnoses, and does have FT 1-1. He is a runner, and his 1-1 cannot always be ‘on him’ 100% all the time, not least because it’s not good for his development to be attached to her all the time. At no point can he (or has he) left the school grounds. His school have done a thorough risk assessment and they have strategies in place for when this does happen. You should ask your son’s school to do the same, as part of the emergency review.

Our ADHD DS couldn't cope with Assembly, it's quite common with this condition as he has sensory problems and can't cope with crowds or singing. So any school should be able to accommodate that if he has one to one then the TA should be with him. He may well have gone into the cupboard to try and keep safe as he couldn't cope in the class on his own. Poor lamb.

@StationeryMagpie agree- secondary is a slightly different situation as there is an expectation that young people will be much more independent by that phase. In some cases, it’s not able to meet the needs of children who are runners. I’m assuming this one is a primary child.
Specialist provision is not a gold standard for all young people with SEND, though. There are downsides in terms of a broader range of outcomes which might make it a poorer choice, in balance. This isn’t to say they aren’t excellent at meeting specific high-level and complex needs- they are. However, inclusion is the preferred option for a reason as it genuinely is advantageous to the majority of children in the long term.

your son shouldn't have hid. if he has to go to assembly..he has to go to assembly, typical mum blaming disorders on Childs behaviour, teach him some boundaries ffs.

Yes, you certainly have confused me: I'm very, very stupid, though, so it doesn't take much. Thank fuck I'm just a TA!

You asked why I took the job. Most people work in order to secure money for such things as goods and services (and I'm no different. I don't, for example, enjoy a private income from clever investments in my 20s). If they're lucky, they enjoy that job all, or most of, the time. More often, they like it some of the time, with periods of dissatisfaction and resentment. Some poor sods must surely hate every second (abbatoir workers; chuggers; advisors to Boris Johnson). I'm in the middle group. I also work in a field in which I feel I am competent, and I work at a realistic level for me. You stated: ''It sounded like you weren't happy with the post & had some resentment' in tandem with asking why I took the job, which of course doesn't take anything in the way 'extrapolation' to understand - 'Why did you take the job if you were unhappy? Why did you stay if you were resentful?' - which are things seldom have the luxury of allowing to colour our career decisions. And, of course, I wasn't unhappy or resentful all the time.

I also don't quite understand your point about the 'circumstances being vague' although I'd agree there are a few things I'd like answered by the OP (unless I've missed them) including but not limited to a) why her son was sobbing when he'd elected to hide and knew he wasn't missing, b) how old he is, c) whether his condition is so severe he requires, eg, accompaniment to the lavatory (v unusual).