Formal School Complaint - AIBU

[Schoolproblemsagain]

NC

Yesterday, I finally submitted a formal
complaint to my DS secondary school.

It has been a long time coming, but I’m having a major panic that I’ve done the wrong thing and they will treat my younger DS differently.

AIBU to have complained?

I won’t go into all the background details as it’s too long, but the catalyst for finally raising a formal is as follows:

DS Year 11, in the midst of his GCSE’s, has an EHCP and a Pupil Profile. ASD Diagnosis.

School phoned me and said:

At lunchtime, two boys were throwing food at him, he told them to fuck off, he was asked to leave the lunch hall, he refused. He explained to the teacher that he would not leave as he hadn’t done anything wrong and food was being thrown at him. This then escalated to three teachers within his space, who were asking him to leave. He was still refusing. He has been suspended for disruption and is not allowed to return to school unless to sit an exam.

The two boys, who were throwing food and their entourage, who were laughing, have received no punishment.

His EHCP and Pupil Profile states that he will not manage public confrontation with strategies on how to manage such events.

AIBU to have raised a complaint on the grounds that his EHCP and Pupil Profile were not followed, that he has been punished when the other students have not and that he is now missing vital support sessions during his GCSE’s?

The OP has said and actually it’s neither here nor there suspension is massively out of order for all the reasons mentioned and going to impact his future as he can’t attend vital support lessons which he is entitled to with his EHCP.

The OP knows for a fact that the other pupils are still allowed in school during study leave. This is very important in the context of illegal treatment under the Equalities Act.

Punishment for the bullying/food throwing is irrelevant and I agree that OP has no right to know about this.

I agree. It’s standard lazy advice by schools and teachers that bullying victims need to stand up for themselves and “fight” back. OP’s son has fought back as best he can and is being punished for it. Typical school/teacher lazy victim blaming!

Absolute nonsense. Year 11s have reached the end of their legally required attendance to school by the time of the first week of GCSE exams. Schools can direct students however they see fit from this point onwards.

Are you suggesting that all the schools that give their students study leave are suspending them all??? Of course they aren't.

Again nonsense. Just because they are still in school doesn't mean they haven't been sanctioned. Food throwing is at a significantly lower level than defiance to multiple members of staff so clearly the sanctions applied will be different.

“Multiple” members of staff only because the first didn’t deal with the initial event properly and escalated it rather than de escalating it!

You’re missing the point completely.

The issue is that just one child has been asked not to attend. This is discrimination.

If all Year 11s were told not to attend then this is totally fine and I agree with you.

You are totally missing the point.

Please justify why it’s ok to ask one SEN child not to attend school during study leave (when there are study support sessions being put on) but everyone else is allowed to attend?

Wow so standing up for yourself when you’ve got a disability, have been physically assaulted and are going to lose your lunch is worse than the physical bullying and assault itself!!!

Yup, lazy victim blaming which is typical of schools and why bullying remains such a huge problem, especially for SEN children.

But it's ok to throw food? You can't think it's ok for the other kids to have no sanctions.

So I appreciate I teach primary instead of secondary but this seems like such a categorically clear case of mishandling a situation that I can't believe any posters are disagreeing.

I haven’t seen OP saying anywhere that she expected her child to get no consequence at all but in what world is it acceptable for the instigators who (we assume from what OP has said) are not vulnerable to be punished less severely? I just don’t get it. This isn’t how it would be handled in my school at all - I understand the kids are younger but the actual ethics (probs wrong word - just woke up) of it stay the same.

Interesting that it’s all the teachers that seem to think “defiance” against school teachers is much worse than physically bullying an autistic kid

If this happened in my classroom, for example, I actually don’t think I’d even mention the swearing. I would be so cross with the children throwing and I’d just pass them onto SLT for consequences. I genuinely don’t think I would even attempt to remove the child with ASD unless it was offering for them to move to a quiet space. Sounds like a lot of posters would disagree with this.

Apparently it’s also absolutely fine for those kids to still attend school for study leave but totally fair and legal for the OPs child to be told not to attend

Shocking isn't it. Surely it must be illegal to treat him so unfairly given his diagnosis and EHCP.

You’re clearly an awesome teacher. Thank you for the job you do for our vulnerable kids

It is illegal

Good. I hope the school are given appropriate advice and act on it or they face the consequences.

Thank you! Thats such a kind thing to say.

Nail on the head and helps explain why bullying is still probably the main problem in schools. Teachers don’t take it seriously.

This would be our approach too.

But the school hasn't said that. You are not party to how those students have been handled. A school, in fact any organisation cannot run safely and effectively if students defy those in charge.

And why bullying stats for autistic children are so high.

The school has said that. They’ve told the autistic child he is not allowed in school for study leave. The two bullies are allowed in school for study leave

You are ignoring the fact that punishments cannot be meted out for behaviour caused by unmet SEN needs. This is simply a fact of law in the UK.