If you have mental health problems that stop you from doing things do you get sick of people saying they can’t do things because of their mental health.

[Toothiehurtie]

No trolling genuinely wondering. There are kids in my kids classes at school who are starting to get attention for mental health issues and there are more kids than not now with a reason why they need to be treated differently tk the majority to the point where the kids doing what they are supposed to be doing are in the minority. If you’re the one who normally gets an allowance for your mental health does it piss you off when it’s allowed for everyone or do you feel like it’s great that mental health is being acknowledged. The example I’m thinking of is a kid at school who was allowed not to wear school shoes and now most of the class wear trainers and the whatsapp grouo mums are saying their kids are much happier if they get to wear what they want, and now school are clamping back. Not trolling not fishing just interested if you or your kid gets treated differently to everyone else and allowances are made fo you then does it ruin it for you if lots of people get it too

It is very unlikely that a child who has needs to the extent that an ehcp has been granted, does not have a disability. We all know that LAs do not want to give those out.

It is in the benefit of every child in the class that children with additional needs are properly supported.

This. If schools are getting it right for their most vulnerable, then they'll be getting it right for children across the board.

Some of the anger and unpleasantness on this thread directed at "naughty" children, "lazy parents" would be much better directed at the Government, who have systematically decimated the budgets of services that support children and families with complex needs for over a decade.

I think all the kids should be able to wear trainers. They do in our primary school. And no, I don't think it matters if a child with SEN gets to be the only one wearing trainers or if they all wear them. As long as the child with SEN who needs to wear trainers gets to what does it matter?

I agree with you RE the good girl comment.
My DD is a good girl, she's hard working, engaged at school, and is often sat next to the worst behaved in her classes.
What this in turn means is that she is the closest verbal punching bag "I'd rather kill myself than sit next to little noway out" "UGH I HATE littlenowayout" "Youre punishing me, making me sit next to HER!!!" "I wish I could sit next to SOMEONE NORMAL!" "SHES SO BORING!" is the sort of shit she deals with day in and day out because she isn't going to talk and disrupt the lessons.

Teachers ignore it. Doesn't mean she is capable of dealing with it. She comes home and tells me; oh I'm dreading x lesson tomorrow, I need to sit next to x/or y or z. I wonder what they'll say tomorrow.

It makes her anxious going into school, being saddled with kids who are going to be arseholes to her, because she's a good kid trying her best.

You don’t need a diagnosis or recognised condition or disability to get DLA. Cerebra guide clarifies this. Where does the guide say that, it is talking about children with a brain condition and states if your child has a disability, health condition or developmental disorder?

You can doubt as much as you like I know what I see. I am a strong advocate of DLA providing evidence and legal argument to support the claim. I know the law and the regulations. I see the struggle that parents have to be heard and have their child assessed.

Totally agree that carers allowance is pitiful and DLA doesn't cover the costs of all additional need. However for means tested benefits the rewards can be very generous. I have undeniably worked with families where this has been the driver behind their child's additional needs.

Bottom left of Page 6 states ”Your child does not have to have a diagnosis of a recognised condition or disability in order for you to claim DLA…”

The guide is helpful for all parents completing DLA forms, not just those with brain conditions.

I don’t know whether it’s still the case, having not dealt with the code of Practice for SEN for a while, but it used to be the case that some children require something that is ‘additional to, or different from’ what is available in general to a class. Maybe you could argue that if over half the class require that, it becomes the norm rather than the additional need.

@Imitatingdory

Bottom left of Page 6 states ”Your child does not have to have a diagnosis of a recognised condition or disability in order for you to claim DLA…”

The guide is helpful for all parents completing DLA forms, not just those with brain conditions.

Yes the guide is helpful, it also states does not have to have a diagnosis of not or. One letter big difference and yes it matters.

The starting point is that the Social Security Contributions and Benefits Act 1992 require the claimant to be “so severely disabled physically or mentally'

The rest is determined by evidence etc and while no need for a diagnosis the needs have to arise from a disability.

Sorry yes of, not or. But it still means a diagnosis is not required in order to claim. If one had a recognised (i.e. one you could put a name to) condition or disability one would have a diagnosis.

The starting point is that the Social Security Contributions and Benefits Act 1992 require the claimant to be “so severely disabled physically or mentally'

The rest is determined by evidence etc and while no need for a diagnosis the needs have to arise from a disability.

This goes back to the legal definition of a disability I posted above. A child displaying behaviour at the level of need posted here and with functional impairments to the level an EHCP is in place would be covered by the Equality Act’s definition of disabled, and would meet the criteria for DLA.

I know a diagnosis is not needed I have never said it was.

This goes back to the legal definition of a disability I posted above. A child displaying behaviour at the level of need posted here and with functional impairments to the level an EHCP is in place would be covered by the Equality Act’s definition of disabled, and would meet the criteria for DLA.

You would think, wouldn't you? However If it was that easy there would be no parents wringing their hands and desperately trying to convince the DWP of their child's needs. The law is open to interpretation and that includes the legal definition of disability. The DWP also have varying opinions on level of need and how much control the child has over their own actions.

I can honestly say I have seen schools under sustained pressure from parents to complete an ehcp. Whether the LA agrees is another matter, the plan is already written for DLA purposes. I can also honestly say I have seen children with complex needs or a disability with no ehcp. In the geographical area where I work the teachers are exhausted I really don't know where they get the time to teach.

I didn’t say it was easy, I was challenging your assertion that “not every child with an EHCP has a disability”, which is frankly baffling if you are an expert and believe that given the legal definition of a disability, and therefore not all with an EHCP should get DLA, which as another poster said you would expect them to be eligible for some level of DLA.

Just because DWP say a child isn’t eligible for DLA doesn’t mean the child isn’t disabled and doesn’t have needs that meet the criteria for DLA. If it did no one would be successful at Tribunal when 2/3rds of DLA appeals are upheld. It’s why parents should always be encouraged to ask for a MR and if unsuccessful appeal. Just like just because the LA say a child isn’t eligible for an EHCP doesn’t mean the child doesn’t meet the criteria for one.


I can honestly say I have seen schools under sustained pressure from parents to complete an ehcp.

That’s often because many schools say the pupil is ‘fine’ or believe the LAs unlawful policies and refuse to apply saying the parents won’t get one or the pupil doesn’t need one yet when the parents apply themselves they successfully go on to secure an EHCP. These parents should just apply themselves, they don’t need to school to apply.

I can also honestly say I have seen children with complex needs or a disability with no ehcp.

No one on here has said you haven’t, of course there is, but that doesn’t mean support should be taken away from other DC. Instead more support should be given to support the DC and parents through the EHCP process.

Behavioural needs only form a small part of the Dla assessment so if a child has no other needs they will not get any of the higher dla rates. Eg to be awarded higher rate mobility under severe mental impairment criteria you have to show medical evidence that the behavioural difficulties are from a disability such as a significant learning disability. A child in a mainstream school is very unlikely to meet the criteria.

Haven’t rtft so this might have been raised already but a significant barrier for dc with sn taking advantage of adjustments is that they feel different and don’t want to stand out.

Sometimes letting all the dc wear comfortable shoes is a way of helping the one who needs it most.

No one here has mentioned only HRC or HRM, and no one specifically focused on SMI rules. In fact @Squeakywheels specifically said “some level of DLA”. And it is possible for a child with ‘only’ behavioural needs to meet the criteria for HRC. A child with behavioural needs may need supervision and care throughout the day and night therefore they may be eligible for HRC.

But not likely just at the parents say so. Need at night requires evidence from professionals. Some people seem to be saying there are loads of grabby parents saying how difficult their child is just to get benefits.

It wouldn’t be at the parents’ say so if the child has an EHCP. There will be evidence from the EHCP and other evidence.

Some people seem to be saying there are loads of grabby parents saying how difficult their child is just to get benefits.

Exactly, I don’t believe there is when the child has an EHCP. A child with an EHCP will have significant needs that would meet the DLA criteria.

I have two children in secondary school. One being assessed for ASD and needs a certain amount of support with regard to self esteem after being bullied for things she says, how she looks hobbies etc. My other child in the same school has no referral but is under cahms because of an overdose. LOTS of children are hugely struggling and there is a very very long waiting list. Personally i think school have totally fucked up. Instead of spending maybe two weeks at the start of the full post COVID restrictions education really we orking with ALL children on mental health they ploughed into work, increased the pressure putting in place compulsory revision and catch up sessions. A very very high number of students are now cracking under pressure.
Tutu once said. We need to stop pulling people out of the river and go upstream and find out why they are falling in.

Children's mental health is treated as a joke by the government and the department of education. Children with great home support are going under. It's totally wrong. I wouldn't resent ANY child getting support in school anyway my children are under CAHMS so have other avenues of support for their need.

@Girlmumdogmumboymum

I agree with you RE the good girl comment. My DD is a good girl, she's hard working, engaged at school, and is often sat next to the worst behaved in her classes. What this in turn means is that she is the closest verbal punching bag "I'd rather kill myself than sit next to little noway out" "UGH I HATE littlenowayout" "Youre punishing me, making me sit next to HER!!!" "I wish I could sit next to SOMEONE NORMAL!" "SHES SO BORING!" is the sort of shit she deals with day in and day out because she isn't going to talk and disrupt the lessons.

Teachers ignore it. Doesn't mean she is capable of dealing with it. She comes home and tells me; oh I'm dreading x lesson tomorrow, I need to sit next to x/or y or z. I wonder what they'll say tomorrow.

It makes her anxious going into school, being saddled with kids who are going to be arseholes to her, because she's a good kid trying her best.

That's awful. It makes me so cross. These kids can't blame 'additional needs' for that behaviour. It is rude and bullying and that's a lack of parental input or accountability. Now perhaps your daughter should have additional support to manage the impact of this behaviour and so it goes on. But I don't expect she will because being well behaved and contributing to society doesn't get you much in the way of help.