Violent children should be stopped regardless of other factors

[Hamalam]

The part that struck me about the Southport findings was the way AR seems to have been given leeway because he had an ASD diagnosis. Oh he’s carrying a knife and a hockey stick but he has ASD, as if that’s ok. It’s an attitude I have met a lot with my child school, where they and other children suffer from violence meted out but other children.

Oh but they have SEND / are in care / have a bad home-life as though that’s excuses my child being a victim. I really hope that one of the lessons learned by schools, police etc is to look at the threat or the violence and the danger to others, regardless of any ‘excuses’ the perpetrator might offer.

Such a subjective topic - my perspective as a mum to an DS (5) with ASD who is often violent. If you haven't experienced a child with ASD you really have no idea what it's like. We don't have a TV, this is not about screens - he has been different since he was born. I was a devoted SAHM for the first 4 years of his life, and he was diagnosed age 3. Since then (we are abroad) we have seen an occupational therapist every week, a child psychiatrist and psychologist frequently to help support our child. He is in a mainstream private school where he mostly thrives - thanks to it being the right environment (small class sizes, no uniform, excellent staff to pupil ratio, lots of movement breaks and outside space, no school on Wednesdays). We have had 2 aggressive outbursts in 2 years and we always take it seriously because his school has zero tolerance sen or not. Infact one girl has been excluded for violence. That said my son knows very well the difference between right and wrong. He just cannot control his emotions due to his ASD - the best we can do is keep him regulated so that he can thrive in school - keeping him regulated is a full time job in itself. Conversely I see kids in his class who are violent and don't appear to have SEN but are poorly parented - allowed to do as they please by their parents. These things are different. It's so hard as a parent of an ASD kid to see how much hostility there is to kids like my son. At home I experience violence from him but I can't stop it, I can only try to redirect or disarm. It's not something I can parent away or minimise by reducing screen time. I wish people understood that.

Translation: lock up all those who are different. Worked so well before.

Silly thing I do completely get this point of view. You can understand why I don't really want to go in to the ins and outs of my specific example.

(Edited to remove extra word "completely")

They're not "different", they're dangerous.

Signed, a woman with autism who is fucking fed up of hearing it being used as an excuse for bad behaviour.

Dangerous is a convenient label.
Signed, an historian of learning disability.

Don't understand the silly thing comment?
Also dont really care for the specifics, if your child is violent they shouldn't be in a mainstream school where they put other people at risk

Or lock up people who have repeatedly proven to be violent so they dont hurt others or derail their education?

No more violence in schools.

Signed a mum who doesnt want her child hurt and terrified

If someone is violent where should they be? Around other children?

I am so tired of this. My daughter's head was spilt open by a violent girl in her class, she has been spat at, bitten, dragged by the hair. I exhausted every avenue but this child is always allowed back at school because you know...SEN.
This child causes trouble every single day. They cannot manage her but every single day her parent send her in KNOWING she is going to hurt and terrorise children.

I don't CARE where these children go, they need to be removed from a class where the kids cannot learn or be safe.

It’s just an idiom. I was actually saying I understand the point of view.

Yes lock up people who are a danger to others.

Lock up violent people.

Lock up people who have committed violent crimes.

In the case of children that should be less going to prison and more like a very strict boarding school (like a prison) where they live permanently.

So they can continue to be educated and hopefully rehabilitated without harming innocent children.

Far too many people are hurt and killed while Everyone just goes oh well they had issues… but doesn’t actually try to do anything about it.

I have a 13 year old child who has a learning disability and sen. He has a ehcp now but he had a lot of learned behaviour from his dad which was abusive mostly verbally but physically towards me too. His dad was violent towards me physically, emotionally and verbally and would still carry on the verbal and emotional abuse years after I had left him. He completely manipulated my son and used to tell him “Your mum had no right to take your phone off you, she treats you like a dog, shes a fat useless c, whre” you name it id be called it. Anyway during primary school especially year 5 and 6, this was when the process started for a ehcp, my son was extremely abusive to female students and teachers calling them the same names. He wasn’t allowed on the playground the majority of year 5. I kept on telling the school he had learnt these particular abusive behaviours from his dad. I pre warned his high school what he was like, I pushed to have him put in a Sen school because he was was working at year 1 work whilst in year 7 and I would have sought as much therapy as possible for him. His dad was causing havoc saying he didn’t want any of this to happen and again was putting these ideas into my sons head. My son is huge height and build. He is over 6foot and wears men’s large clothes. He was out of control but no one took me seriously despite asking for the support. Eventually ss were made aware of the dads abuse and my sons abuse to me and his siblings but were in a legal battle now. I used to tell the school I am worried how my son will turn out when he’s a grown man at 18. No one listened. I do fear he will end up being violent towards future girlfriends and how we will function socially with work ect. I wasn’t someone who defended his behaviour because of his needs and I made it very clear to him I wouldn’t hesitate having him arrested and sent away if needs be because he was out of control.

Maybe we should invest in the resources that stop them from becoming violent. Currently MH services are broken and non existent so conditions are left to get 100 times worse.

Or maybe they should get the treatment they need as opposed to being left to get worse.

Look, I know what you mean by this - that anyone inconvenient to the state or ruling power can be deemed as dangerous to get rid of them, hence the Soviet Union inventing all kinds of 'mental disorders' to label dissidents with - but if someone is and has been physically and sexually aggressive, I really don't have a problem with calling them dangerous tbh.

That child has nowhere else to go. The school must take the child because the local authority cannot find a suitable alternative placement. The school has no choice.

The parent has to send the child in because.... attendance, fines etc. The parent has no choice.

The LA cannot find an alternative but has statutory duties to fulfil.

I understand the frustration, but simply saying 'they need to be removed from class' is not a viable response because, under the current system, with its accompanying policies and available funding, there is nowhere else that child can go.

And let's suppose that child does stay at home, complete with all the violence hitherto seen in school. How long do you think it will be until we're seeing another 'child death that should have been avoided' headline?

We need root and branch overhaul of all existing services and provisions, because there is currently no legal or moral scope for simply 'removing' the child from the classroom. But reform on this scale costs money that nobody is prepared to pay. It's why you'll end up with the government putting even more responsibility onto schools that they have no capacity to meet. The first step being removal of EHCPs and expecting busy teachers to identify need - and parents with no legal backstop when schools inevitably fail.

If you think it's bad now, just wait until the current planned reforms go through.

If an autistic person is deemed by professionals to be dangerous then there is nothing 'convenient' about it. It's simply a statement of fact. Dangerous people with a variety of complex issues aren't being lumbered with a diagnosis of 'dangerous' as a convenient way of getting them out of everybody else's hair. Far from it, actually. The opposite it happening. They are not being separated from the rest of society quickly enough, because their autism or their MH diagnosis is used as a shield to protect them against the consequences of their behaviour. Even when they have already been charged with absolutely heinous crimes, it's still used in court by defence barristers as a mitigating factor to either avoid conviction or receive a lighter sentence.

We don't label all autistic people dangerous simply because they are autistic. We don't label all mentally ill people dangerous simply because they are mentally ill.

We label some autistic people dangerous because they are dangerous. We label some mentally ill people dangerous because they are dangerous. Whether the autism or mental illness is a likely direct cause of those people being a danger to the public is completely beside the point. They should still be locked up.

@Hamalam Spot on. My DS1 now 16 could push/follow/annoy others when younger. He's autistic but verbal. He really didn't understand that he hurt someone unless the person cried. Well, that was for me to deal with. I stayed right next to him ALL THE TIME he was playing outside with others to rapidly prevent "accidents". Some mums made fun of me- saying just let him play- they are kids. No, I wouldn't have my son hurting someone or annoying someone and also it was teaching moments irl
Today he knows how to behave and respects people's boundaries. It makes me mad as fuck when lazy parents let their young children cause havoc and say "well they are autistic/adhd so not responsible". Ok, but YOU are responsable so do whatever it takes to keep other children safe!

The things is that a school can receive an EHCP consultation where a child is not just going to suffer in a school but will absolutely be a risk to others (and there are throwaway comments or stipulations that make it very clear - like kept away from all other children, never hearing a fire alarm or sound above quiet speech, no access to school pets, to be searched 3 times a day with a metal detector, the younger sibling lives with relatives, must not be allowed to sit directly behind the minibus driver on trips, etc, etc), yet the LA has jumped on the parent's comment that they want their child to be happy and normal - exactly those words - and used it to not just consult on a mainstream place but then ignore the unable to meet needs response and issue a direction, telling the school to get in touch with the previous school and provide a visual timetable and group social skills lessons once a week.

There are 'consultations' like that every year. And every year, the LAs issue directions where it is obvious that it's going to go very, very wrong.

How much do you think the inquiry has cost? If that money had been invested in proper care in the first place how many crimes (which won't be restricted to just this one) will have been prevented: including all the police time and medical costs to victims?

It's not an additional cost to invest where needed to prevent issues arising in the first place.

No one gave enough of a shit to stop this from happening ultimately. Cos 'budgets' are more important - forgetting it still comes out of another departments budget in the long run.

It's just yet more buck passing and abdication of responsibility.

Locked away nicely out of sight by the sounds of it.

Like I said...I don't CARE. I have seen non SEN kids excluded for violence, no tolerance policy but not the same for SEN kids. I am saying this as a mother of a child with SEN.
This child's mother's attitude was. My child deserves an education and I am gonna be damn sure she gets it plus I need a break from her when she is at school. So my kid has to go in every day terrified and get hit, the class needs to be evacuated because this child wrecks it and the mother's attitude?? Not my problem, if you don't like it move your child.

Everything this post says - yep. We are in such a mess and there’s nothing schools can do about it, with very little support for parents too.

I know PPs have mentioned ‘punishments’ including hot chocolate or playing football with a TA. School teachers also think these things are wrong but we have no choice. You have a pupil who must attend school. They have spent the morning trying to attack everybody who walks past with anything they can get their hands on. A member of staff who has restraint training has had to physically restrain them several times. Every time the member of staff lets go, the child tries to attack somebody again. You can’t suspend the child. You either continue this horrendous cycle of attacking, restraining, letting go, attacking, restraining, letting go for the next 4 hours until home time or you say ‘do you want some hot chocolate and a game of football?’ to just get it over with and move things on. Staff feel forced to do the latter to just get into a situation where things are safe and the child is no longer lashing out at anything and everything. Staff know it’s not fair, staff know it doesn’t ’teach anybody a lesson’ but in that moment, torn between being relentlessly attacked for hours or giving the child something nice to do… These are fully trained members of staff too, who do amazing work with non-violent neurodiverse children / children with SEN. I’ve seen our most experienced SEN practitioners who excel at deescalation in impossible scenarios which just shouldn’t be taking place in schools.

They do but what happens to the other children and the staff if he gets dysregulated at school?

And what happens if, like another poster’s son he grows up to be a big man who could pose a risk to future partners, members of the public?

both sides are being let down.