ASD child reduced timetable primary school

[Redwineandcheeseplease01]

My ASD diagnosed son has just started reception at a mainstream primary. Has an EHCP and 1:1 due to impulsivity and lack of danger awareness. Since he started 2 weeks ago he has been on a graduated start, so he spends a couple of hours in school and then I pick him up. The other children are obviously in all day.
just wondering if any other parents of ASD diagnosed children who have also started school in this way would be able to please
advise on how long this approach usually lasts? I have had to leave my job to facilitate this and can’t afford for the household to be
down an income for long!

every day they report he has done well, sits well at carpet time, yes has moments of hyperactivity where he is taken for a calming activity by his 1:1
he started last week, for 2hrs a day, then this week 2hrs 15mins/2hrs 30mins and next week was meant to be moving to 3hrs a day.
I don’t understand the decision to delay this increase of hours if he is doing well.
he is bright and sociable, yes he is diagnosed ASD and likely to be diagnosed with ADHD when he is a bit older (under review for this)
I agreed to a soft start for him but very much stated I wanted him to be working towards a full day asap which his teacher was in agreement with and as mentioned he is funded for a full time 1:1, who doesn’t get her bag and coat and leave when he does but instead stays and supports other kids in the class (who’s mum didn’t drive themselves to the edge of insanity fighting for an EHCP and 1:1 to be in place before he started school, or planned numerous transition visits to school before he started to help familiarise him with his new environment)
I feel really sad and deflated and unsure what to think

Schools can still follow due process and show they can’t meet needs. In some cases, it is actually easier to show they can’t meet needs because they have more evidence (including formal suspensions where appropriate).

Agree with PPs who say not to jump to the assumption that school are doing a slow settle purely for their benefit.
School is a huge exhausting change even for a lot of NT kids and very different to nursery/childminders.
Even if he did cope well full time straight away, you might find he masks all day and home life is unbearable due to meltdowns (this was my daughter and I regret rushing her into it looking back). Hopefully not though if he has a good 1:1 etc.

Maybe find a date to aim for him being FT so you can start to plan for work, and constantly review this to see if it’s realistic based on how he’s settling.
If he is doing well at that point and school are still insisting on a part time timetable, then I would take the advice of posters directing you towards his legal entitlement etc.

Wishing you and him best of luck this term as it’s very hard to manage work and all this x

My own son did his first year in reception like this. It was meant to be temporary but it was worked best for him. He started this year full time but again has since dropped to part time.

He is legally entitled to a full time education however my sons school are also using this as evidence that they can not meet need to get my son into specialist provision.

I don’t understand the decision to delay this increase of hours if he is doing well.

Maybe it’s precisely because it’s going well that they are taking it slow? Remember schools will have gone through the settling in process with many, many kids, maybe it’s because they’ve seen it suddenly go very wrong with other kids when they’ve suddenly gone to full time. Either that or they could be telling you what you want to hear when you get feedback and perhaps he’s not coping quite as well as you think he is?

Either way, speak to school and ask them, and remember even if your DS does have an EHCP that doesn’t mean he’ll just be fine now- it may not offer enough provision, it may not be the right setting. It’s often a long road for ASD kids to find the right place. And even if they do agree full time more quickly, if he’s not coping you’ll have to step the hours back down again immediately.

But on the up side he does have an EHCP which is great, well done for getting that, and he is coping with the shorter school day, these things are really positive. Take the small wins!

On a legal front you can tomorrow drop him off and not collect him until the end of the day (bar sickness or health and safety incidents). They’d have to formally exclude him to force you to leave even an hour early.

More realistically, ask for an emergency EHCP review

If he is not yet 5 he does not have to be offered full time school.

The child comes first, I agree. The school clearly don’t think he’s ready yet to cope with full time school so they’re continuing with the reduced timetable. If the OP disagrees then she can send him in full time but I’d rather trust the opinion of the professionals who can see how he is coping in that environment. If he isn’t ready he isn’t ready, regardless of whether that impacts OPs job. I know that sounds harsh but it’s the reality. I’d rather it take longer and he was settled than thrown in and overwhelmed.

She has given consent for a soft landing.

Exceptional circumstances is very subjective. One persons exceptional is another’s normal.

Read the admissions code. It is the OP’s choice whether DS attends full-time or not.

“2.17 Admission authorities must provide for the admission of all children in
the September following their fourth birthday. The authority must make it clear
in their arrangements that where they have offered a child a place at a school:
a) that child is entitled to a full-time place in the September following
their fourth birthday;
b) the child’s parents can defer the date their child is admitted to the
school until later in the school year but not beyond the point at
which they reach compulsory school age and not beyond the
beginning of the final term of the school year for which it was
made; and
c) where the parents wish, children may attend part-time until later in
the school year but not beyond the point at which they reach
compulsory school age.”

Until there is an EHCP that names a different school, he's on roll at the school named in his EHCP and therefore, they can't just exclude him because he might not cope.

We have the opposite problem ! School want dd in full time we are insisting on part time (she also has ASD)

If DD is not yet compulsory school age, you have the right to send her part time. Point the school in the direction of the admissions code.

You can always spot the school staff on these threads. Peddling unlawful nonsense, making excuses and saying school know best. The school have known the child for two/three weeks. I'm pretty sure parents know them better.

The school said he’s doing well eg sitting for carpet time. BUT in the 2/2.5 hrs he is currently attending he regularly struggles and has to be taken out of class by his 1:1. Please consider how much this could spiral if he was at school a full 6 hrs. He is very young and it could simply be too much for him. He won’t gain anything from being in school longer if much of that time is spent away from his peers/ teacher with the 1:1 support having to calm him down. There is a danger he will start to resent this and his behaviour could escalate and he won’t enjoy being there.

i feel for you, being in the position that work is untenable and placing pressure on the family financially. It is easier (on the child) to build up time positively in new environment than rush them and have negative associations with school as this will make full time harder in the future. A couple of weeks isn’t long, it sounds like the school have a plan they are working towards. Keep regular, frank open dialogue going with them but I think give it a little longer to see if it’s working.

Not what you want to hear OP, but my dd was in school FT until year 9, then spiralled and only spent 45 minutes a day in school until she left in year 13. I had to give up work completely. I strongly disagree with those saying you could just drop him off and let them deal with him. If he's not happy/settled then everyone will suffer, especially him.

Agreeing with you both. There's a limit to what the school can do but it sounds like they're trying to phase him in and gradually build his tolerance. If you throw him in full time he's more likely to crash out completely.

The half days will last until the school feel that your child will cope well with full days in their setting with the support they can offer. This could be a week or two, a few months, a year, some years.

In regards to those saying the school is breaking the law. The LAW is that the Local Authority, have to provide education for the child which meets their needs. If one school cannot meet those needs, then it is the LA's job to find an alternatives placement for the child. The LA would question WHY, that school is not able to meet the child's needs, and that could have several outcomes:

• The LA could determine that actually the school could try something different and then would be able to meet the child and would get them to do that.
• The LA could determine that the school could meet the needs of the child with support from the LA, and then the child could be subject to a Education, Health and Care Plan (EHCP) which would mean that the LA would support the school in meeting the child's needs.
• The LA could set up the EHCP with a view to sending the child to specialist provision in the area.

In terms of whether the half days are reasonable, if at the moment, the only option is this school, and this is the only way they can cope with his needs, then YES they absolutely are reasonable. Longer term, if this school will only offer half days, the LA needs to be involved with the process above.

But if they can’t meet his needs they need to say they can’t meet his needs, not take the funding and have him in 2 hours a day for the next 7 years.

If you read the thread, OP’s DS has an EHCP.

Look at the section of the admissions code I quoted in a pp. The school cannot refuse to allow OP’s DS to attend full time. Until OP’s DS is CSA, it is her decision whether he attends part time or not. It is not the school’s decision.

The amount of people on this thread that say that op child would be better off in specialist although it’s some sort of choice you get is laughable, clearly people who are lucky enough never to have dealt with the Sen system ever. For most children there is no choice, it is mainstream even if parent wants specialist.

I mean this in the kindest way as both a parent of a child with an EHCP and a teacher: there is NO money in schools. Your son will always have to share his 1:1 with other children in the class, primarily because it's actually not best practice to provide 1:1 support, the research is clear on this. You also have no idea how those parents have fought for their children and potentially lost.

Unless you fight even harder for specialist, this is the reality you are going to have throughout school. If you truly think that's not right for your DS, start making noise about special now. Because it will take you years to get there if he is verbal and academically able to 'cope' in mainstream.

I'd also bear in mind that working full time with a child who has significant SEND needs in mainstream school is nigh on impossible. You might need a contingency.

Children with EHCPs can still be excluded both fixed term and permanently, so the 'school have to do x' doesn't work I'm afraid. Yes, they do have to follow the SEN code of practice, and they do have to follow procedures. But they know the loopholes and they will use them if they think they want/need to.
Likewise "the school need to say they can't meet needs" is shite. They DO say this. Frequently. LEAs then force it, and this is what happens. There isn't the staff out there to meet as much need as there is. There aren't enough specialist spaces to meet the need. This the real reason attendance is poor and home education on the rise. The system is broken - for all involved.

No, they don't. They know the child at home: staff know the child at school. Believe me, they are two VERY different things.

If 1:1 is detailed, specified and quantified in F it can be enforced. Any school sharing that 1:1 support is leaving themselves and the LA open to legal action. It isn’t for the school to decide the SEP detailed, specified and quantified in F is not provided.

LAs and some schools like to misrepresent the research including Sharples et al., 2015 that government guidance is based on. A well trained TA correctly deployed does not lead to dependency. Michael Charles, a well regarded SEN solicitor, wrote an excellent piece and how LAs like to misrepresent the research on this.

EHCPs can be fully funded. The LA is ultimately responsible for ensuring the provision is provided and that including funding it at an appropriate level.

Yes school can suspend and permanently exclude, but not based on the information in the OP’s posts. And a formal suspension instead of an unlawful, informal exclusion will a) force the school to follow due process, b) provide the OP with evidence of unmet needs to support her pursuing additional SEP/an alternative placement, c) limit the number of days the school can suspend for, d) allow the OP to challenge any suspension, and e) ensure DS receives alternative education for longer suspensions once CSA.

@MoreIcedLattePlease

Firstly, everything @EndlessLight said 👏

What other parents have fought for and lost is not OPs responsibility.

It doesn't take years to get specialist. We got one in less than a year, we used the Special Educational Needs and Disability Tribunal to do so. Many parents do. We did this twice. You just need to be clued up on your child's legal rights and enforce them.

Lots of send CYP are verbal and academic, as are mine, this is irrelevant as it's literally zero indication of a child's actual Sen needs.

Clearly school don't think he can cope as they've got him on a part time timetable.

Why and how would a well behaved Sen child get excluded? Exclusions can only be for behaviour and then all possible support and RAs would need to be in place otherwise that could also be deemed unlawful and discriminatory.

There are no loopholes to get out of following the law.

I'm sorry this happened. The Local Authority should have been ensuring suitable full time education was in place or as much as your dd could manage via alternative provisions/learning.

It's not unusual for them to do nothing until legally forced. Schools blindly follow anything local authorities tell them even when it's unlawful (I had a school tell me recently they couldn't put alternative provision in place until we had medical evidence. This is what the LAs educational welfare officer had told them but it's untrue and unlawful).