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.

He's apparently been allocated a place in a suitable setting although, as has been pointed out, it is to say the least unclear whether the LA has actually agreed that. But in any event he can't access it. If he does not stay in his current school he gets no education at all. And you said that in that event "his academic education is not going to suffer unduly by being removed from the current classroom" and queried whether any education was actually accessible to him.

I'm not making anything up.

@JessiesJ99 but what is wrong with families of severely disabled children needing and relying on supportive services? These services exist for a reason and it’s often inevitable that somebody who becomes a full-time carer to a severely disabled child suddenly needs a support network or to utilise the relevant services, even if they were extremely independent before. I just can’t get my head round this viewpoint, especially from somebody who has zero experience or knowledge of this. You have no idea how you would fare in this situation.

I queried whether the education currently provided in his mainstream school was accessible, not “any”.
You’re either making things up or struggling with reading comprehension. Only you know which.

My point is that with the information we have been given, we are able to form a judgement/ opinion. Given this information, it seems unlikely they are particularly proactive as parents when it comes to fighting for their son. Also, by allowing him to watch inappropriate stuff, and setting a bad example, they are making a bad situation worse.

If he's got a space at a specialist provision it sounds like he has an EHCP (rare to get a specialist place without one). If this is the case he should have funded transport. Plus he'd have to attend the school named in his plan, he can't just carry on where he is. Something doesn't add up there.

My apologies if I have misunderstood you. What I hate about this situation is the sheer cynicism with which local authorities choose to break the law because they perceive that they will get away with it, and they choose to shut their eyes to the reality that it is an incredibly vulnerable child who will suffer as a result. I realise that they are in a difficult situation due to inadequate funding stretching back a long time. However, if they would stand up to governments to lobby for effective funding, possibly bring legal challenges against them, and didn't roll over with idiocies like safety valve agreements, we would not now be in this horrendous position.

And I really hate it when posters on here choose to close their eyes to those facts and demonise the parents of disabled children instead. That is not of course directed at you.

The trouble is that you have such an unrealistic idea of what the parent can do to resolve the situation. And rather than try to inform yourself, you would instead assault the parent. I can't even work out how you think that would help anyone. Don't kid yourself that the judge would be impressed when you turn up in the dock.

Absolutely . In this case it's at least two vulnerable children suffering, one with SEN, one with distress and possible trauma. I think the lack of provision for both kids is shocking.

It's OK, thanks, it's neither of the possibilities mentioned in your second paragraph.

I agree. Sadly it’s necessary to do battle to get any funding and that is still insufficient in most cases.

it’s a lose-lose situation all round.

I was speaking only about this particular family. They don't sound like the kind of people who are necessarily doing what they should be doing for the boy. This, in turn, is putting others at risk of his problematic sexually harmful behaviour.
I don't like this idea that someone's child is someone else's responsibility. It doesn't sit right with me. This may be a cultural thing, though.

So you are just looking for sticks to beat them with, including things which you admit are sheer speculation. That's all a bit desperate, really.

Absolutely . In this case it's at least two vulnerable children suffering, one with SEN, one with distress and possible trauma. I think the lack of provision for both kids is shocking.

This.

There is an obvious solution that would solve the problems for ALL OF THE CHILDREN involved.

All of us posting on here not wanting to demonise the disabled boy or his family ALSO believe the other children should not be suffering and want the obvious solution to be put in place that would also stop the problem for the non-SEN pupils.

Yet for others that’s apparently not good enough because it doesn’t involve some sort of punishment or blame on the family of the severely disabled child.

You don't like the idea that anyone should receive help with their disabled child? Why?

Hm okay it was just the wording of ‘these families’ along with mention of ‘SEN caseworkers’ which seemed to be referring to disabled families in general.

Perhaps it’s cultural or perhaps just the viewpoint of somebody without disabled children? I had a neurotypical child without disabilities first and it’s very very easy in that situation to parent well, to be fiercely independent, to take full responsibility of your own child etc etc. So I can see how somebody with zero experience could not grasp or understand how reliant and vulnerable you can become once you are parenting a severely disabled child. Thankfully our society does see that it needs to help support both disabled adults and children and nobody is just left because it’s ’their own responsibility’

Your comprehension skills really do need sharpening, that’s not what she said.
There’s a difference between receiving help and abdicating responsibility entirely.

My only concern would be my own child, not trying to 'inform myself' about someone else's situation - that's not my problem. And I would walk into Holloway with my head held high!! I go hard for my kids. Old school but it works.

They clearly say in a previous post they don’t know what these families would do without help from support services like Sen caseworkers in a critical way. Of course lots of families of severely disabled children would crumble without this support? What is the issue?

No, it's about taking responsibility for your own, which quite a few of you on here seem to be struggling with 🤭😂

Almost all parents want to advocate for their children. To suggest those who don’t commit violent acts so severe they’d end up in Holloway isn’t “looking after their own” makes you sound like an absolute feral idiot.

Come on.

Lord, help me!! 🫣
Did you actually read my first sentence? The one where I said this particular family?

I don't believe they should be given unlimited taxpayer funds if they're not even prepared to do the very basics of parenting (supervision). Especially if they're not working, and not contributing anything to society. These people are a drain on society.

But when it comes to ‘taking responsibility of your own’ you simply cannot compare non-disabled children to those with severe disabilities. It is something completely different and if you have no first-hand experience you just cannot understand.

As I said I experienced parent a child without disabilities first and it’s so very very easy to take full responsibility and not rely on anybody else. Any average (or even below average) parent can manage this.

Bring a severely disabled child into the mix and it’s completely different. Suddenly even the most capable, fiercely independent brilliant parents can find themselves dependent in many ways (on their SEN caseworker, their child’s TA, their DLA payments, paediatricians, therapists, their relative who provides respite sometimes)

It is not a sign of weakness. People without disabled children cannot confidently say they would independently manage and take responsibility because frankly they have no idea.

If be horrified if someone grabbed the front of my jeans in that area. I'd be traumatised if someone stuck their hand in my knickers and grabbed my actual vulva.

So yes, I think there is a difference.

The parent of the child with SEN, who I referred to as useless early - I spoke to her when her son was causing problems for mine. I told her quite clearly I did not expect it to happen again. And guess what? It hasn't. So clearly, the kid was in control of his own actions. And was choosing to behave in this way. I'm more than happy to look like a 'feral idiot' if it means keeping my children safe - I'll take that.

For me both were damaging. From a child's point of view. Those who work with trauma and sexual abuse would say both have potentially the same outcome for harm. Same as physical and emotional and verbal abuse are all damaging.

The child is feeling distressed, so I would say it's the same.