To think this is poor from DS’ college?

[kzaurm]

DS has ADHD and ASD and mental health issues (anxiety and depression), he self harms and we are trying to get help for him. He has a 1:1 at his college as he was struggling a lot without it, the college also knows about his mental health but we all agreed for him to go in as his anxiety would be made worse by not attending as he wouldn't go out (this has happened previously when he was off school a few years ago due to anxiety) and also because DP works and I work a few days a week so there wouldn't be anyone to keep an eye on him.

DP called me and told me that he had a call from the college and asked him to pick him up, he was told that DS’s 1:1 teacher wasn't in and he had broken a ruler and when he was asked what he was going to do with it he replied that he didn't know. They sent him home as he was a danger to himself and they couldn't keep him safe.

Aibu to think this is poor? I know that the college has other students but we can't afford to miss work to keep an eye on DS everyday which is why him attending college is important

No one at the LA is going to be available in the middle of the day to come out and educate. Don't be ridiculous.

If the school genuinely can’t rearrange staff, nor get anyone to cover the LA should provide alternative arrangements for educating said child. Which does happen via medical needs tuition.

Right. But how should they do that? ^
^
In the moment, on the day. Without resorting to travelling back through time and the OP doing some paperwork what should they have done on the day?

Hercisback Now you are adding to your scenario, your original post did not say in the middle of the day.

Dear the college should have followed the law and their own exclusion policy, even if that meant formally excluding, which would have provided the OP with evidence of unmet needs.

He was not illegally excluded. What a ludicrous thing to suggest. Educational establishments (like all workplaces) have a legal obligation to ensure that all patrons and employees are safe. The college, through there assessment of risk decided that they were not able to ensure your son was safe and so sent him home. Schools are regularly closing whole year groups as they are unable to staff them (and therefore cannot guarantee student safety) due to covid. Do you think whole year groups are being illegally excluded (or suspension which is different to an exclusion)

He was not illegally excluded.

You do not know that, the OP hasn’t clarified. Even if there was a lawful reason for an exclusion unless the college followed the formal process it would be illegal.

Closing whole year groups isn’t the same situation.

OP, perhaps finding out (from both college and your DC) what led up to the ruler being broken in this instance might help you to put together a clearer picture of events.

Until you know this, you and the college won’t be able to help DSbuild the coping strategies to help him deal with this sort of situation another time.

This is about all of you (including DS) working together to make sure DS has the support he needs. I guess if he is at college then he is 16+, so being very involved in managing this rather than being managed will help to bridge the school to adulthood gap.

@BoredZelda

What do you expect schools to do when they don't physically have the staff to keep OP's son safe?

Why is OP’s son’s education less important than that of the non disabled students?

If the non-disabled students aren't safe then they should also be sent home

They sent him home as he was a danger to himself and they couldn't keep him safe.

YABVU

If they can’t keep him safe at college due to staff shortages or whatever reason then they absolutely should have sent him home.

The only alternative would have been to not send him home and he could end up seriously injured.

It’s a no brainer.

[quote OnceuponaRainbow18]@Imitatingdory

Schools can suspend kids if they think they are a risk. Also asking a parent to collect their child who the school haven’t got control of isn’t illegal. It’s also a suspension not an exclusion[/quote]
Suspensions are now called fixed term exclusions

Well he is presumably almost an adult male, how do you expect a teacher to stop him from self harming, if after college he carries into employment who is going to 1 to 1 him on a daily basis

@Morph22010

Our school has just changed from the term fixed term Exclusions to the word suspensions…. Education likes to keep us all confused with its ever changes phrases but since about month ago we are back to suspensions

@Imitatingdory

OnceuponaRainbow18 it is an exclusion - either a fixed term exclusion or a permanent exclusion. Of course they can exclude, but only if they follow due process. Pupils can only be excluded for disciplinary reasons, asking parents to collect because the college cannot meet the pupil’s needs without formally excluding is unlawful.

IPSEA link showing this.

This would not apply as it is a college and not a school

ginsterloo The IPSEA link also has a section for FE colleges. The college still have to follow due process and formally exclude, they cannot illegally exclude. Illegal exclusions are unlawful. They have to follow their exclusion policy which has to be compliant with the Equality Act.

@Imitatingdory

ginsterloo The IPSEA link also has a section for FE colleges. The college still have to follow due process and formally exclude, they cannot illegally exclude. Illegal exclusions are unlawful. They have to follow their exclusion policy which has to be compliant with the Equality Act.

We have not heard from the OP what the formal reason for the sending home was, so you cannot assume its an illegal exclusion, FE colleges have their own policies, as we dont know the college or the policy it would also be unwise to assume. The child may be 18 in which case he is legally an adult and the rules change then as well. Whatever the rights or wrongs are we do not have all the facts around that specific college and its reasons to make an informed opinion. Speculating does not help and neither does hysteria

We have not heard from the OP what the formal reason for the sending home was, so you cannot assume its an illegal exclusion, FE colleges have their own policies

I know, I have said we don’t know multiple times on this thread.

Speculating does not help and neither does hysteria

Good job I’m not hysterical then, and asked the the OP whether it was a formal exclusion or an illegal one in my first post.

Pointless droning on about the law when a young person is in distress and needs support NOW. Not after a call to the LEA or an assessment of needs.

The school were afraid for the young person's safety at that very minute. What else could they do other than phone a parent?

Perhaps they should have phoned social services and had him taken into care or an ambulance.

Utterly ridiculous to witter on about the law when help is needed immediately.

There is very little (if any) 'immediate' support. Where does that come from?
Not CAMHs that's for sure....
Any parent that has tried to get MH help for their child can confirm that.

When your child or young person has additional needs it's difficult most of the time to get even basic support. Securing things like an EHCP means that there can be longer term support, that LAs must provide. The OP should definitely be applying for an EHCNA.

Anyone that believes there is 'immediate support' out there to help an autistic teen with MH difficulties is kidding themselves.....most of the time it's a fight to get anything at all.

Andasifbymagic all I originally did was to ask if the illegal exclusion was lawful or not and whether the OP’s DS had an EHCP as that would effect further advice. To use your condescending language I only started “wittering on” when another poster started excusing unlawful behaviour and bringing up past posts. I’m not the one being “ridiculous”, but then if it is fine for Herc to bring up my other posts it is fine for me to bring up yours, and you have form for “popping up on these types of threads spouting” posts that excuse unlawful behaviour by schools and LAs “with no appreciation for” the law.

Exactly *@Punxsutawney, perhaps if less unlawful behaviour occurred DC would have their needs met in a more timely fashion.

OP we are in almost exactly the same position as you.

DD(17) had ASD and ADHD and missed two and a half years of school due to anxiety and panic attacks. I lost my job because I was constantly having to take time off.

She started college last September and the first 2-3 months went really well. I really thought we were getting somewhere. Since January she started missing odd days saying she felt too panicky to go in, she hasn't attended at all since the start of February and has now agreed with the head of her course that she is dropping out and taking some time to "get better" then reenrolling this September. Not sure what this will include as at the moment she is just living in her room and leaving it for food.

Not feally sure what to suggest I'm afraid as I'm completely at a loss. But just wanted to show some solidarity

I think the problem is not the one off phone call but rather that the one-off phone call becomes the go-to method of managing the situation without making sure that strategies and support are put in place for the student such that they no longer feel the need to self-harm. Given that teaching must be one of the most difficult professions to take time off during school terms it is amazing how they think working parents can be on call to rescue their children instantly.

The reason it needs to be formalized is not that you think the teachers are not working hard and doing the best that they can in difficult circumstances but rather that the student needs help beyond the existing resources and expertise of the college and to persuade the local authority of this you need a paper trail of evidence.

@Imitatingdory

Andasifbymagic all I originally did was to ask if the illegal exclusion was lawful or not and whether the OP’s DS had an EHCP as that would effect further advice. To use your condescending language I only started “wittering on” when another poster started excusing unlawful behaviour and bringing up past posts. I’m not the one being “ridiculous”, but then if it is fine for Herc to bring up my other posts it is fine for me to bring up yours, and you have form for “popping up on these types of threads spouting” posts that excuse unlawful behaviour by schools and LAs “with no appreciation for” the law.

Exactly *@Punxsutawney**, perhaps if less unlawful behaviour occurred DC would have their needs met in a more timely fashion.

Not sure why someone else's unethical behaviour excuses yours but carry on, pet.

You have form for banging on about the law when that just doesn't answer the question asked. I didn't need to check your history to do that. I've seen you do it and it's not at all helpful.

Schools don't want to behave unlawfully but if they don't have the staff I'm not sure what you expect them to do, frankly. Rub a magic lamp and summon a genie?

@AndAsIfByMagic Excellent post.

Very well put OneitEight.

Andasifbtmagic it does answer the question because it elicits further information from the OP and enables parents to advocate for their child and secure the support their child requires. You may not see it as helpful, but then you are one of the posters who appears to condone LAs and schools acting unlawfully so that’s not surprising, but for parents with DC with additional needs whose DC are not having their needs met it is useful to know the legalities of the system and how they can advocate for their child to ensure they get the support they need moving forward.

I expect school/college to act lawfully, that doesn’t necessarily mean having the pupil in school/college, it could include excluding formally, which as others have also pointed out provides the parents with evidence the pupil’s needs are not being met. There are options other than acting unlawfully and having the child in school.

What is good for the goose and all that.

TheDoveFromAboveCooCoo if you haven’t already you should apply for an EHCNA so DD can be supported reintegrating in to college, and if it doesn’t work out she can be provided for in another way e.g. online schooling or home tuition. An EHCP can also include MH therapies. If DD was still compulsory school aged the LA would have a duty to provide alternative arrangements as DD can’t attend, but post 16 you would need an EHCP for such provision.

It’s a college not a crisis centre. They cannot deal with someone who is likely to harm themselves