School won’t/can’t do anything about SEN child causing distress

[Rantypanties]

I had a phone call from my child’s primary school stating that the SEN child in their class touched them & another child ‘over their clothes in their private area’. This is the 3rd incident of this nature happen in the class (first 2 were ‘tickling in that area’) and the 4th time something serious has happened that has involved him being sent home. It’s never witnessed by the teachers or his 121 assistant (but bullying at the school never seems to be so it’s not just this child).

The child is a lot taller and bigger than the children and although they’ve grown up with him for the past 3 years and they’ve all muddled along with no problems, there are now occasions where children have been scared of him chasing them/hitting out and shouting in class.

He has got a place at a local SEN school but apparently the LA won’t fund the transport for the 26 mile round trip so he can’t go according to his mum (they can’t afford the petrol and the dad’s banned from driving).

So my question is what can we do with a reluctant school? Can we, as parents, put the pressure on the LA to get his transport fully funded so this child can get the best out of his schooling and move to a school more suited to his needs. The school are keen to downplay the incident and I’ve seen the child is back in school today so I’m not sure what lesson has been learnt here, but they obviously cannot cope if he’s being left long enough to touch other children inappropriately and scare children into not wanting to play outside because he’s out there.

Just looking for advice because it seems to me this is escalating and something needs to be done for the safety of all of children in the class.

Whose accepting that, the LA should be providing transport end of
I suspect there, s more going on than the op is aware of anyway and she probably isn't in full possession of the facts.

Responsibility in what way? They should have transport provided since there are no other suitable schools nearby. If a typical child only had a school available that took 100 miles round of driving every day I’m pretty sure that would be seen as not good enough? So why is it okay just because the child has severe disabilities.

If transport was provided that would be the obvious solution for EVERYBODY involved in this. I don’t understand why some people seem desperate to blame or punish the parents for the sin of having a severely disabled child.

Indeed and I dont thinksomr posters even take into account other siblings that need to get to school
My sons special school has always been within 5 miles of where we live ,but when both my kids were in primary school ( one mainstream, one specisl) how could I get two kids to school on time when both schools were several miles apart if my son wasn't provided with transport.

The age of criminal responsibility is 10.

Whether the perpetrator had the understanding of a two year old, or was a normal nine year old, the police would not be able to do anything and the complaint would be passed on to the LA and SS.

That said, this is an awful situation and it seems to have been dealt with very shabbily indeed. Follow the complaint route set out by the school governor upthread.

That way you will be helping your child, others in the class, and this obviously highly troubled boy himself.

• age ten in England and Wales, that is.

"The LA have found him a place?
But the parents appear too feeble to actually get him there."

The LA has a legal responsibility to get him there. It's not the parents responsibility.

No, he needs the local authority to comply with its legal duty to enable him to attend the school which they apparently agree is able to meet his needs. Chucking him out of education altogether is not any sort of answer.

So what do you say should happen in relation to this child's education?

If a perfectly sensible solution was available for that man and he was prevented from accessing it because the body responsible for paying for it was breaking the law, would we seriously be saying that man should be banished from society instead? I would hope the answer to that is "Absolutely not", too.

Surely you mean the council is too feeble to get him there? They are the ones with the relevant legal responsibility.

Why are you so keen to demonise the parents?

When did OP or anyone else say they have turned down the school place? As I read it, they want the child to go there, it is the LA which is preventing that from happening.

It's irrelevant. The parents can't take him, and anyway as a matter of law they aren't required or expected to.

I don’t believe the LA has not offered transport. Alternatively they are lying about a place. These are only available with a ECHP naming this school. Parents don’t have to get SEN Dc to sen schools because frequently they are miles away. The current school needs to get involved to find out what is going on but something isn’t right. Probably parents don’t want the Sen school and haven’t told the truth. The existing school needs to intervene.

What are they supposed to do? They have a legal responsibility to ensure their child receives full time education. Are they supposed to deprive their child of education and risk prosecution?

Of course the other children need to be protected, but the responsibility for that lies with the current school and the LA, not the parents of the disabled child.

You have no fecking idea do you? A common trick for LA’s is to offer specialist but put the onus on parents to get them to and from school and it can take over a year to appeal this in a tribunal where most parents win. Get your facts straight.

Any half decent parent would be absolutely horrified if their child was touching others inappropriately. Whether SEN or not.

This nonsense about getting him to the special school not being the parents 'responsibility' is weak and really not good enough.
If the boy is sexually assaulting other children in the mainstream setting, then the parents need to make it their business to get him to a more suitable setting asap.
They need to find the money to put petrol in the car - a good place to start would be to both find jobs, if not already. If they're both working, then they need to figure out a way of getting the money together to get the kid there. Or phoning SEN every day asking about transport.

This idea about things not being the parents 'responsibility' is absolutely mind blowing - they're the parents for God sake.

I do wonder what some of these people would do without a social worker, EWO, SEN caseworker, family support worker, housing officer sorting their lives out for them.

The LA should pay, and should be pushed until they do. But in the meantime, whilst they aren’t sorting transport, the child should absolutely not be in the classroom with the children he has abused and with others. That’s the immediate response that’s needed as the priority here is making sure the children are kept safe from sexual abuse. Someone’s education is not more important than others safety.

In my area we don’t even have SEN officers in the job long enough to build a relationship with and one of the biggest battles of all is actually getting to speak to one. Again get your facts straight ignored calls and emails are standard.

Why wouldn't it? If they needed to be in work during that time, they need to be in work.

Nobody is applauding being banned from driving and nobody is suggesting this behaviour carries on. Sick of explaining this to people who can't read more than a few posts or just the thread title. There is still a child in this and if the home life is dysfunctional the correct school place would make a world of difference.

I do think some people are projecting on this thread without really analysing the situation or the explanations people are providing. It is understandable as it is a sensitive subject for many, but this is children we are talking about here and the perpetrator is likely severely disabled.

If he’s functioning at the level of a two year old (as stated), his academic education is not going to suffer unduly by being removed from the current classroom.
What education is actually accessible to him?

I don't understand how you can force an LA to provide a suitable education unless you have been to a tribunal, which is often the case. Or transport. You can't just put them in a taxi and send them the bill. And on one hand you say the parents have to work but be available to drive 25 miles and back and then find a decent job that accommodates this. And what about holidays where there are no holiday clubs for children with complex needs? This is regardless of the fact that it is an expense that non-disabled children's parents don't have and the parent may have other children too, and that is why there is a legal obligation to provide transport in this instance.

Please think before you write.

With all due respect, I think you don't really understand special needs very well or special education and how the system works. A lot of the work that gets done with these children is to help them to learn to communicate if nonverbal, develop functional skills, have essential therapies for sensory needs, develop social skills (which you can't do if separated from peers. Some still have academic abilities but need a quieter environment to thrive.

If you just remove a child from education it is very hard to get them back into the system if they have SN. It just leads to further developmental delays.

What about all the other disabled and SEN kids who get free transport provided for schools miles away? Do you think that’s ridiculous that they get this for free and it should be down to the parents?

And my experience of sorting out special school etc is that you HAVE to contact and involve your caseworker and other authorities and jump through different hoops involving multiple people and bodies.

Or do you think it would be better if we just removed ALL help and support for parents who happen, through no choice of their own, to end up with a severely disabled child? Since clearly they should just suck it up and be responsible in the same way parents of non-disabled children are (let’s ignore the fact that those parents have it a billion trillion times easier in every way) and needing any kind of outer support or network makes them weak and feeble 🙄

I do wonder what some of these people would do without a social worker, EWO, SEN caseworker, family support worker, housing officer sorting their lives out for them.

You wonder what families of severely disabled children would do with zero supportive services? Well a lot of them would probably not cope very well… how terrible of them.

@saraclara I don't know, would the school treat it differently if it's over clothes? They won't be dealing with it as a criminal issue, as the perpetrating child lacks mental capacity, but in terms of the effects on the daughter, surely there is no difference? Unless you referring to rape, which is a whole other level of horror, there isn't a hierarchy in terms of sexual abuse trauma.