in thinking that refusal of a Special School place for your SEN child is totally mystifying?

[notanumber]

I read this article about the growing numbers of children exluded from primary school in The Telegraph today.

It is absolutely beyond me why some parents are so hellbent on keeping their child in mainstream education when alternative provison would clearly be so much better for all involved.

"Then the head teacher called to say that she had found a place for George at a most excellent school ? a special school for children with moderate to severe learning difficulties. David was 'appalled'. Not only had the school negotiated a place without consulting them, but also 'it showed a complete misunderstanding of George,' David says. George, he stresses, 'is a mainstream child."

How is a child who bites and scratches, lashes out when asked to hold a pencil and bolts from the classroom "a mainstream child"?

I'm not saying that they are wrong to question and be critical of the way the school handled their son. Mainstream education is, I think, often woefully inadequate for (some) children with SEN.

But if they are so disgusted at how mainstream school is handling their child's needs, why the blazes are they doggedly keeping him there and not jumping at the chance for him to go to a special school?

I'm a teacher and if my child had SEN that were causing him the horrible difficulties that the family in the article describe and he was then offered the chance of a specialist tailored education in a Special School I wouldn't think twice.

This is not an attack on all parents who have children with SEN. I know there will be lots of posters who are desperate for their child to be offered a Special School place but have to work with the mainstream system as best they can.

I also know that inclusion has worked really well for many children. Please don't think that I am airily saying that if your SEN child is in mainstream education this is automatically the wrong place for them, or that you don't care about their wellbeing.

I am just genuinely bemused by this couples' attitude. Do they really think that they are acting in their child's best interests by refusing the Special School place he was offered?

no I meant "taught" as it taught lessons as apposed to stitching or colouring(we had a place near us when I grew up called the school of stitchery)
sorry I wasn't very clear was I

Surely it is impossible to judge and individual case at face value. The parents may be in denial or the situation different to how it is reported. Such offers are not made lightly in the same way as most aprenting decsions are not. Maybe they think once he starts down that road there is no way back to "normality" ?

ahh I see - I know my aunt benefitted greatly once she was moved to mainstream school. There wasn't a great need for her to be in special school. She needed physical support rather than learning support IYSWIM.

The point I'm trying to make is that special needs doesn't always mean special school is the most appropriate method of education.

don't always believe the "experts" when ds was little(reception) he was reffered to a pead as they thought he had sen......
he was referred by a teacher who had only just met him, to an education phycologist(sp) over the phone, who reffered him to the pead whithout meeting him.......because he was clumsy.
the pead lol when she met him ,
so not all so called refferals can be trusted.

A good point Liz, but how "normal" is his life at the moment? The current situation in a mainstream school is clearly very distressing for all involved.

The need to prioritise a "normal" education of their son's wellbeing seems questionable to me.

Though I do quite agree that there may be many other factors at work which are not touched on in the article.

2shoes, of couse parents should not blindly accept any old diagnosis that happens to be thrown their way, but it does seem that the child (and, I'd imagine, the other children in his class) is having a horrible time in mainstream education.

There clearly is some problem somewhere.

The problem may well be the school and not the child (though the journalist's description of his behaviour as well as the parents' own comments about their son would indicate otherwise)

But either way, if he's not coping with mainstream education, why be so resistant to the offer of an alternative?

I do realise that the article concludes with the child being much happier at another mainstream school.

If this is the solution then I am very happy for them.

It is still very early though and I wonder though if the child's behavioural issues have suddenly vanished.

I'm not saying that the Special School was absolutely and definatively the best place for him. Just that I was concerned by the parents' refusual to even consider it as an option.

What most people don't realise is that most people working in either a m/s or an s/n setting haven't a clue how to deal with or educate a child with special needs and/or behavioural problems. This is not because they are mad or bad or blinkered, it is quite simply because there is no evidence based training for people in these fields.

It's a disgraceful hotchpotch.

Most kids lean in spite of how they are taught, not because of it.

I read the article this morning and it is apparent that noone knew how to deal with the child properly, least of all the 'trainee educational psychologist' employed to support him.

Bear in mind that schools in the UK are teeming with 1:1 support workers which looks fantastic on paper of course.
However, most of them haven't a clue what they are doing.

YABU to jump to this conclusion because of one article.

My DS2 was lucky enough to attend a SN nursery last year that was attached to a SN school specifically for chidlren with ASD. During that year, he had so much help and support, it was amazing how much he progressed. He is now in MS school, with full 1:1 support, because he is capable of learning and, as his EP said, he would have plateaued his with his learning because of this. It's early days yet, but he is doing ok.

Some VERY good points made on this thread.

The problem is that a lot of special schools, well a lot that I have seen anyway are (not to put too fine a point on it) SHIT!

Their expectations of the "poor little SEN kids" are woefully low: they expect no real academic or other achievment out of the kids, and cluck patronisingly about how cute they are. They do not want to make the effort to help them learn to talk/read/write, as it is an extremely intensive and painstaking process with an autistic child like mine. I found that they would spend a lot of time showing me the swimming pool, or mentioning the horse-riding option, or the other great sporting facilities, so that I would think "oh great, a fully-rounded education" and not ask too many questions on literacy or numeracy or SPEECH!. I would move mountains to keep my son out of these places, which are often no more than glorified child-minding till he's 18. If I had left him to their clutches, I would be surprised if he even learned to wipe his arse by the time he left.

Sorry to those schools which are making the effort, but in the autistic world in which I live in one of our largest cities they must be few and far between.

I remember visiting one "special" school and observing an autistic boy spend a solid 30 minutes licking a window. "Do you just let him do that?" I asked the coffee-swilling teacher. "Oh yes, he has a sensory need so we give him time to do it." she said, using some half-baked little nugget of knowledge she'd picked up on some half-day course which had qualified her as an "SEN specialist". And that's when she was out to impress, with a visitor in the classroom. God only knows what else goes on when she's not on best behaviour!

The only exception to this woeful picture is ABA schools, where consistent behavioural methods are used to teach the child every possible skill from the ground upwards. But as a lot of their work involves a 1-to-1 ratio, the state just can't afford to build them. And to get your kid into one of these schools can often involve a legal battle for which you'll need to set aside around £30k (so of course only the very rich, or the very feisty get in!)

On mainstream inclusion, I think that aggression is an absolute no-no in any kid, and I have worked hard to ensure that my child is NEVER aggressive (in fact, from what I see, I've worked harder than quite a lot of the parents of normal kids in my son's mainstream class!). But I think it's good for him to be in with the mainstream kids, learning alongside them if not always at the same speed, and I think it's a good thing for the other kids and for society as a whole as well that SEN kids are included in the mainstream classrooms. There are at least 30 kids in my son's class who are now growing up open-minded about disability and totally unphased by autism. Perhaps those kids, and others like them, will help us to build a more tolerant and enlightened society.

No longer is my son flung into an institution and forgotten about, as would have happened not so many years back.

I think choice is the main thing - some pals of mine have been desperate NOT to put their kids in mainstream, but I think it's right that a kid who can cope there in a meaningful way, and who will not disrupt the education of the others, has a legal right to go there.

It's not his fault he was born autistic, why should he get a sub-standard education just because of that?

This is definitely a hot potato though.

As always Sick, I agree wholeheartedly with all you say.

notanumber you don't seem to have followed the article properly either because you say

"Therefore I am taken aback by his parents' refusual to contenance that the school, the LEA, the Special School might be trying to do the best they can for their child. That they are offering him a precious place because they really think he'll benefit from it.'

The school in question was a "special school for children with moderate to severe learning difficulties" in which "The majority of pupils are not reading, not writing;". How is that an appropriate school for a very bright child? It scares me that you are a teacher but don't seem to be able to understand this situation.

My DS2 wasn't quite as bad as George and was never expelled but we frequently had calls from his first school to say he'd absconded or done something to another child. He transferred to a private school with very rigid routines in Y3 and we never looked back.

It sounds like the school couldn't cope with George and wasn't very effective in dealing with him. He is now at a different school and doing well.

a) We only have the parents' word for it that George is "very bright".

b) We only have the parents' word for it that "the majority of pupils are not reading, not writing" in the Special School. How do they know?

But yes, I suppose that a Special School which has hundreds of hopeful applicants every term probably would arbitrarily offer one of these rare-as-hens-teeth places to a very bright child for whom they could not cater.

They probably get a real kick out of denying a place to a child who really needs it and then offering it to a child who clearly doesn't need it at all.

All I'm saying is that in this case, based on the information available (which is just a newspaper article, and I am fully prepared to accept that it may not be properly representative of the situation), it seems as though the child had been assessed by lots^ of people who were all in agreement that a Special School was best for him. The LEA looked at its waiting list of the many children who wanted that place and put this child to the top of it.

I've already said that schools aren't infallable and that inclusion works very well for some SEN kids. I just think that if all those people, including some random child psych employed by me had said to me that my child would be better off in a Special School that was prepared to take him, my instinct would not to be start roaring about how my child is "a mainstream child".

As others have said, even if a child could benefit from a special school, it doesn't mean that they would benefit from any special school.

The closure of schools has meant that parents are faced with either no choice or an impossible choice. A friend of mine has a child with ASD. Behaviourally he is a quiet little boy who wants to be left to get on with things.

His parents were refused a place at a special school where he would have been taught things like life skills as he was deemed to be too able academically. It is expected that he is unlikely to be able to live independently as an adult. Instead they were offered a place at a school for children with EBD. Completely innappropriate for his needs so now they are left with either a m/s school or Home Ed.

On paper it would read as though his parents had turned down a place at an SN school and insisted on m/s even though the latter is completely unsuitable.

Oh how naive you are Notanumber.
Your entire argument is based on premise that 'professionals' know what they are on about.

I refer you to Sickof's post to give you some idea of what is really going on in the world of SEN.

Oh, ok then. Let's just shut all Special Schools because they're crap.

We'll educate them all in one place. We'd better give this a name though. How about "Inclusion"? That's got a nice ring to it.

Let's get rid of 'professionals' while we're at it too, shall we? They know fuck all.

I'm not saying Special Schools are perfect (or even any good) in all cases or for all children. I know that plenty of families have had a rough time at the hands of the education system.

I'm just suspicious of these parents who seem to want to keep their child out of a Special School simply because they have decided that he is a "mainstream child".

If your argument is that parents always in all cases know best and that they should disregard any professional advice and opinions then I really an gobsmacked.

dd goes to an sn school, she has been there since she was 3(she is 14) now and it is brilliant, yes I moan like everyone sometimes, nothing is ever perfect, but it is as near as.it is the best place for her, they have worked with us and she is now a very confident /outgoing/gobby friendly teen. ms was never an option as far as we were concerned and we were "lucky" to have this option. alot of parents have to battle to get their childs needs met and it is a battle, and sadly it is all down to money, ms is always the cheaper option.

Hi smallwhitecat,

re your comment:-

"I had to sit and endure an educational psychologist on friday telling me my son was "too young" for a diagnosis of ASD - despite having reports from 2 paediatricians in front of him telling him otherwise. I don't think I'm deluded in saying I know more about autism than that man does and he is a complete and utter waste of taxpayer's money".

Did you challenge his assertions?. Hope so!!
You likely do know more than this man does about autism. EPs are not medically qualified to diagnose (I note from the article that George's EP stated that he was not autistic). I wonder whether George was ever seen by a developmental paediatrician (as such people can make diagnoses); this is not stated in the article.

I think that he also came out with this tripe to you as well because EP's in many LEAs are under pressure not to issue statements. EPs report carries clout when it comes to recommendation for statementing.

re your comment as well:-
"The norm, I'm afraid, is to get the authorities to acknowledge that there is a problem, and get off their arses and do something about it".

I agree entirely.

smallwhitecat we have had the opposite our educational psychologist, school doctor and teachers questioned the psychiatrists refusal to diagnose my son he has autism but it is undiagnosed his teachers he has now say he fits all the criteria for autism and don't know why he's not got a diagnosis. his educational psychologist fought to get him into a school for autistics he was that convinced we are now waiting until he is 16 next year and no longer under the child psychiatrist for a reassessment.

One of our local SN schools was due to be closed. The solution was to make it a 'specialist' school. Great, only problem is they made it a specialist school for children with autism and deaf and hearing impaired children.

So the two groups (each with their own subgroups) were lumped together. How is this appropriate? Why assume that because children have SN/SEN that they can be educated together?

Children with SEN are as individual as those without.

Back to the original subject. Aggressive or 'difficult' behaviour in SEN or non SEN children occours for a reason. Why treat the child as a problem child, causing problems rather than try and find the reason behind the problem and address it?

Why was this child being agressive? I do not believe its 'just because' he has SEN. Has the cause been removed and is this why he is more settled in his new school?