Inappropriate schools being consulted with

[Whatsthisscotchmist]

I’ve posted on the SEN board but I’m going out of my mind here so hoping someone will be able to advise me a bit quicker if that’s ok.

My son has ASD/ADHD and I have just received the list of SEN schools that are being consulted with for him. They are all inappropriate for him - two of the schools mention supporting children who have SEMH issues due to trauma for example. This is not my son’s profile, his EHCP is very clear that he requires a school specialising in supporting academically able autistic children with communication difficulties. He has no SEMH needs. I am so beyond worried about this. What happens if these schools agree to take him, where do I stand then? If I refuse to send him there, does that mean I have to home school him? The school I have listed as my preference has agreed they can meet need but have said they aren’t able to advise on whether they have space until spring.
I am so stressed, if anyone could please advise I would really appreciate it. Thanks x

Why does he need specialist? I am not getting it. In my LA very few able autistic students in year 1 would need to be out of mainstream, and those who do it would usually be because of total overwhelm leading to complete shutdown, or severe behavioural needs.

I would be pivoting to ask about support in mainstream tbh

Especially as you say DC is friendly. If he makes relationships with mainstream peers, I really would hold off on moving him out to specialist.
Most kids in year 1 in specialist schools have either got very significant learning needs or behaviour challenges or are pre-verbal.

Hopefully you were far more ethical and made morally right decisions when you worked there but the case workers at the LA nowadays do almost everything possible to be as obstructive as possible.

Agree - SEMH is not just behavioural difficulties. My DD is ASD, likely ADHD, has EBSA and significant sensory issues, yet the only need really recognised by the school is SEMH. Despite (or maybe because of) the fact that she is a champion masker and apart from being a bit chatty at times, is outwardly the model student.

Have you got an offer from one of the places you want? I was in the exact same situation as you but without any offer. At tribunal there is no way they would go for a school £30,000 more expensive if you have an offer from a suitable school.

True, but have you worked in or visited any SEMH schools? The vast majority of the ones I've seen or heard about are primarily or almost exclusively for children with really extreme behaviours. I think OP's concerns are valid.

I worked in a SEMH primary and there were autistic boys there too. They fitted in very well. Go and see the schools before you get more into a panic.

Op I echo the posters above who are wondering why on earth he can’t go to mainstream? If he is academically able he should be attending maintain school with his peers with asd friendly reasonable adjustments put in place - if they’re considering tens of thousands on a special school place they could literally employ an additional teacher just for your son in the mainstream school to do Asd specific support or a full time LSA plus speech and language therapy every week. Special school wouldn’t be good for him surely?

You can say no i put in a complaint about the schools they were consulting with for my son they were up to 60/90 minutes away for children with a history of violence i needed local (we have loads locally) and ones that catered for autistic children with sen (he is five years behind academicly) it was a simple request realistically but they failed to find him a space in fact they found children spaces who could have continued in mainstream they got a school that costs a fortune he finally got one about 35 minutes away (we have a school 10 minutes walk away) and that took so much work for them to think of it its not even private! It should have been first choice not last

The system is so messed up

Also be aware transport funding stops at 16 and restarts at 18 just to add to the bullshit

but does not understand social cues such as doesn’t understand when he is being laughed at etc.

with what consequences?

Well, this provides an interesting insight into how the people at local authorities who obfuscate, dissimulate and otherwise keep disabled kids from an appropriate education justify to themselves what they do to make a crust.

It’s bullshit, of course. Local authorities weaponise bureaucracy as a money-saving measure. It’s understandable in some respects, as there isn’t enough money to meet need, but it is inevitable that if you make forms as long as possible, and refuse everything asked of you in contravention of the law (which you do, that’s why you lose all your tribunals), the only people left standing are those with the education and resources to keep on going. You do that. The fact that there are a few bruised, burned out players on the pitch throwing their life savings at giving their child a fair shot in life doesn’t mean we’re weaponising anything. It’s you with the weapons.

I’ve yet to teach an Audhd who didn’t have SEMH needs. It’s usually anxiety and nervousness. It’s not always about behaviour.

I used to teach mainstream and SEMH kids were usually scared of everything but no trouble to teach.

It sounds like the right place for him.

Hopefully you were far more ethical and made morally right decisions when you worked there but the case workers at the LA nowadays do almost everything possible to be as obstructive as possible
I wasn't involved in the decision making, just negotiating the placements so saw it from an uninvolved position.

Well, this provides an interesting insight into how the people at local authorities who obfuscate, dissimulate and otherwise keep disabled kids from an appropriate education justify to themselves what they do to make a crust
That's actually incorrect. It's not about appropriate education, it's about demanding the absolute best when the best was not be what that child was deemed to need. There are only so many placements and funding for these placements. When a parent fight for to top of the cream for their kid, it is sadly at the detriment of another one. What I saw is that money (as in access to it), access to legal advice and understanding on how to challenge the system not on need but matter of legal pointers, confidence to challenge and time to be persistent were the factors that got kids the best rather than their actual needs. I t was a shocker to see how far some parents were prepared to go because they couldn't have cared less about any other kid as long as theirs got the absolute best. A bit like those who lie, start to take their kids to church, rent so.ewhere close to school and really do anything to get their kid in the very sought after, excellent ofsted rated school when they would have done just fine in the local average school.

Hopefully you were far more ethical and made morally right decisions when you worked there but the case workers at the LA nowadays do almost everything possible to be as obstructive as possible
I wasn't involved in the decision making, just negotiating the placements so saw it from an uninvolved position.

Well, this provides an interesting insight into how the people at local authorities who obfuscate, dissimulate and otherwise keep disabled kids from an appropriate education justify to themselves what they do to make a crust
That's actually incorrect. It's not about appropriate education, it's about demanding the absolute best when the best was not be what that child was deemed to need. There are only so many placements and funding for these placements. When a parent fight for to top of the cream for their kid, it is sadly at the detriment of another one. What I saw is that money (as in access to it), access to legal advice and understanding on how to challenge the system not on need but matter of legal pointers, confidence to challenge and time to be persistent were the factors that got kids the best rather than their actual needs. I t was a shocker to see how far some parents were prepared to go because they couldn't have cared less about any other kid as long as theirs got the absolute best. A bit like those who lie, start to take their kids to church, rent so.ewhere close to school and really do anything to get their kid in the very sought after, excellent ofsted rated school when they would have done just fine in the local average school.

Mine used to laugh with the people laughing at him then get upset and cry when they pointedly told him we are laughing at you retard he wasn't aggressive why putting him in a school where the first choice of communication was fists was ever thought to be a good idea is beyond me

If he is academically able, well behaved and friendly then why do you think he needs a specialist school? It sounds like he's well suited to mainstream, especially given he also has an EHCP to get some additional adjustments.

Parental preference carries huge weight when it comes to section I (naming a setting). If your preferred choice have said they can meet need then it’s very likely that they will name them in the final EHCP. If, like they say, they can’t offer a place until spring (‘spring term’ technically being January 2026 so not long to wait) then they will probably just say he can stay in his current setting until then. The other schools being consulted will most likely say they can’t meet need if indeed they are the wrong sort of setting for him (I.e. not SEMH primary need). It might be useful for you to phone your SEN caseworker at the council and explain all this to them as it sounds like they’ve got the wrong end of the stick somehow. Best of luck!

You’ve posted about him before haven’t you?

I'm assuming there's a lot more to it?
Its not easy to get an EHCP approved even with significant struggles, nevermind for a high achieving well behaved child. There's just no way they would be able to argue the child is costing the school so many thousands extra than other children in that situation.

I have an academically very able and perfectly behaved child in an SEHM school. You sound ignorant. Did you even bother to visit these sort of schools????

Take a pause and take a breath.

The LA need to consult a range of schools that are potentially appropriate. What consultation does is work out whether they are actually appropriate.

If a case worker thinks the outcome is likely to be independent, then if they’ve got any sense they consult a crazily expensive one so that when they’ve got any ultimately recommend an independent but cheaper than that one, it looks better to the decision maker.

It sounds like your first choice may not have a space, so wider consideration might be needed. It would be worth visiting and engaging with some of the schools being consulted with. That way you get better informed and they are also better informed about your child and able to give a more robust response to the consultation.

“That's actually incorrect. It's not about appropriate education, it's about demanding the absolute best when the best was not be what that child was deemed to need. There are only so many placements and funding for these placements. When a parent fight for to top of the cream for their kid, it is sadly at the detriment of another one. What I saw is that money (as in access to it), access to legal advice and understanding on how to challenge the system not on need but matter of legal pointers, confidence to challenge and time to be persistent were the factors that got kids the best rather than their actual needs. I t was a shocker to see how far some parents were prepared to go because they couldn't have cared less about any other kid as long as theirs got the absolute best. “

The SEN statement was unlawful. The solicitor pointed it out, I simply requested that my son be treated lawfully. The fact that I had to pay a solicitor to find this out it the shameful thing. Don’t try and guilt trip me for trying to get an appropriate education for my son. The light bulb moment was the fact that the LEA weren’t always right and every decision could be queried/challenged.

And yet, I've worked in SEMH schools (obviously not all of them) and there were children who badly injured staff, fighting, full restraints, highly explicit and racialised language, extensive property damage, children climbing on the school roof. Not all the SEMH schools are like this, but many are because they need placements with highly experienced staff to take children with these exceptional needs. I'm also not saying that these behaviours never occur in mainstream but it's the frequency and severity of incidents that requires the small ratios and trained staff of an SEMH school.

I really don't think it is unreasonable for OP to be concerned at these consultations for a child with no behavioural difficulties. I do, however, like other posters wonder why OP's DS can't go to a mainstream school with additional help, proper tackling of any bullying and good reasonable adjustments. Not blaming OP at all but it's a bit pathetic that a mainstream school can't meet the needs of a bright child with no behaviour difficulties and keep him safe and included.

That can't be the full background though.

he is in year 1, with an EHCP. Academically very able. Friendly and enjoys the company of others, but does not understand social cues such as doesn’t understand when he is being laughed at etc.

What is it that he needs that a mainstream school is unable to provide?

LA’s are so over budget, they are not going to offer a special independent for lack of understanding if social cues?

IME once LAs have decided they're looking beyond mainstream, they'll spam all kinds of schools. Even if the schools come back and say they can meet needs, that doesn't mean the LA has any intention of naming them.

Its all a bit of a pantomime performance, so if you end up appealing to tribunal, the LA can appear to have fully engaged with the process.