School are revoking my autistic son's five minute early pass and he's full of anxiety. Please help.

[Sweetchildofmine123]

Hi,

I'm looking for some advice please.

My son is 13, and autistic.
He's a very young 13, not anywhere near the same maturity as most of his peers.

My son's school are taking away all five minute early passes to all children who have them, and replacing with five minute LATE passes.
This has had a huge impact on my son, he's not coping at all.

He used to be able to leave lessons and school five minutes early to avoid crowded corridors, and the crowds at the beginning and end of each day, and it's the only thing school have ever offered that's actually helped him.

They've replaced this with a five minute late pass.
Which means he has to wait behind in lessons, potentially leading him to be late to the next lesson.
Furthermore, and more crucially, they've taken away the leave early pass, so now he leaves school in the crush along with 1,900 other children.

It isn't working for him, he's in a high state of anxiety and is not sleeping well.

I've begged school to keep the early pass for him, as all children are different, and what works for one child may not work for another, autistic or not.
They point black refuse this.
So he's lost the one and only aid that really helped him.

I've contacted CAMHS, WMIM, and SENDIASS, asking for urgent intervention, but nothing is fast as they've all overloaded with work.

So I've requested a slight adjustment to his timetable with the school's SENDCo, and I don't think it's unreasonable.

I've asked if he can get in to school early (which he already does) and to be able to leave at the end of the school day five minutes early to avoid the crowds, which he cannot cope with.

After speaking with my son, I've agreed to the five minute late during transition between lessons, but I've asked school for this one little adjustment at the end of the school to help my son.

He masks at school, so they don't see his meltdowns, he saves them for when he's home.
They have no idea how badly he suffers, though I've tried to tell them.

Am I being unreasonable in asking for this small adjustment to help my son's mental health?
I'm not asking for a reduced timetable, just for him to be able to leave before the crowds start.

So far, school have failed to reply.
Also, when I spoke to the SENDCo yesterday, who has never even met my son, she suggested some ridiculous ideas, and she was having none of him keeping his early pass.
She even mentioned him leaving mainstream school, when there's no need for this - he is a perfect student who gets good grades and never causes any trouble.
That's really upset me - Can they push him out even though he's a model student?

And by law, can I ask for this tiny amendment to his timetable to help him with his anxiety please?

Sorry to waffle on, I didn't want to drip feed.

Thanks in advance for any advice you can give me, as waiting for replies is a nightmare, and I need this sorting before the new school year starts in September.

Thanks so much.

Some children with additional needs take a packed lunch and eat it away from the dining room. And some who don’t, have an early lunch pass &/or a pass to skip the queue.

Lots of children who are unable to cope with busy places attend lunch clubs to avoid the crowd. Many schools have a specific club for SEN DC.

OP’s DS may attend a school where pupils aren’t ordinarily allowed in the building during lunchtime. Therefore DS would be able to move to the next lesson whilst the corridors are quieter.

And some DC can cope with so much before their cup overflows. For some, it isn’t an all or nothing and unstructured times take up all the ability to cope with overwhelm. So they can cope with lunchtime but not more.

The problem is that adjustments need to be reasonable, reasonable to accommodate the needs of everyone else as well. 1/3 of a school demanding “reasonable adjustments” in the form of early or late passes is not going to work because it’s distracting the other 2/3 students, causing resentment and not helping those who needed the adjustment as too many students are in the corridors. My dd had a reasonable adjustment to enter the school via main reception and go straight to her form room and to leave classes 2 minutes early but there was only a handful with this provision. She waited in the school reception for 10 minutes at the end of the day and was walked to the bus stop or I collected her as she couldn’t deal with the crowds, bespoke for her (had other things too) but there were not many others 15 years ago

Well if the school can't meet need for this very simple accomodation they need to do a needs assessment and push for an EHCP if an EHCP is not already in place so then they can acquire funding for this support.

Not all autistic children meet the threshold for specialist provision, but that doesn't mean that the need for additional resource is not there.

This is purely an administrative issue between the school and the LA to sort, it is not an issue that falls on this child to resolve, and it is unreasonable to expect him to behave more neurotypical in order to get through school. We've books and books worth of literature that explains how that leads to trauma.

It is punitive to remove accomodations that have previously worked and it is short sighted to assume that leaving 5 minutes late is the same as leaving 5 minutes early which as a SpEd teacher I would expect you to understand and not minimise the distress this boy is facing as simply throwing the toy out of the pram because he isn't getting his own way.

If an EHCP is in place and this accomodation is mentioned in the EHCP then it needs to be upheld.

I understand the impossible situation that is being autistic in a mainstream setting, and having to accomodate hundreds of pupils with varying need but the failure to support is not the pupils problem to fix. It is the schools and the LAs. It is actually against EHRC guidance for schools to implement a blanket policy that disadvantages those who are disabled so a blanket policy like this is unlawful. Reasonable adjustments must be person centred.

There is a role though, for the parents and school to work together to extend the child's ability to manage some situations. I'ln our provenance setting, where pupils had difficulties managing situations (both in and out of school), we'd work on it together. So the child in my class who couldn't face the dining hall, was helped to progress from eating in the classroom, to eating at a table outside the hall (visible through glass panels in the doors), to a table just inside, to actually joining her classmates, and happily. And that's just one of many examples.

In this situation, there is room for the parent to encourage her son to work through what is difficult for him about leaving five minutes later. Him seeing it as a punishment seems as if it could be a normal and non-autistic response to having five minutes extra in school, so it may be that it's not actually a lack of emotional regulation around the situation.

Obviously I don't know the details at this point, but I did find parents at our schools much more open to supporting their child to move past some small specific difficulties, rather than managing the status quo and expecting everything to change for their child. But I imagine that they had more confidence in us as a specialist provision.

Anyway, I think the school will be more likely to be helpful if he's actually tried the five minutes late thing with his parents encouragement. if it doesn't work after that, OP has something to work with in challenging the rule.

I'm shocked that the SENDCO doesn't even know him though. That meeting must have been infuriating. I'd be tempted to take that further.

I disagree. I don't think we should be trialling whether something that is already causing distress causes further distress before something is done about it when a measure had already been put in place that worked. It is hard to come back from significant distress. The trust is broken.

In a specialist setting children are already supported through their distress with multiple provisions in place like sensory break areas, pastoral care etc. They're in a much better place to overcome obstacles because of the resources already there. This child has one reasonable adjustment and it is being taken away from him and is already causing distress.

Nobody at this school has this child's back. And it is shocking that the SENCo hasn't a clue who he is but it isn't uncommon for mainstream for SENCos to only know the pupils in an administrative capacity when they're reviewing documents about them.

My son's school have had 4 SENCos in the past 2 years and only the first one actually met him face to face and we have had to fight the fight for specialist almost alone with minimal contact and no face to face conversations. If he was a sen-betweener I imagine he'd never have any contact with the SENCo.

This is exactly why blanket policies are especially important to challenge because there is inefficient use of resource when handling pupils as individuals.

Exposure therapy doesn't work for sensory difficulties.

My dd fits that profile entered mainstream secondary very academically able with an EHCP that described needs and support required. Because she was academically able and well behaved school decided they wouldn't bother making the support in her EHCP because there were others not as able with behavioural difficulties who needed the support more but they didn't have an EHCP. Every reasonable adjustment they fought, even those that cost nothing they fought.
Dd's attendance dropped until she wasn't attending and I started the fight for out of County Independent Specialist. We won (our LA loses almost 99% of appeals) so LA then paid £75k in fees and £9k transport costs. But it doesn't end there dd had missed schooling when she couldn't attend and in the wait for SENDIST so when she left at 19 she was yet to sit A levels and so now LA are funding a large and expensive EOTAS programme of around £60k a year.
So school's inability and unwillingness to meet the EHCP and LA's failure to ensure school did so has cost them getting on for half a million so far.

👏👏👏👏👏👏

That's a discussion that's way too complex for this thread. But it's not quite that simple. Sensory issues might not go away, but some children learn to manage them in some situations. Supported carefully, collaboratively and with empathy it can be transformationally positive, as it was in the case of that little girl in the dining hall.

There's a huge difference between a gradual approach and forcibly having a reasonable adjustment removed.

Also we don't glorify masking.

No-one is glorifying masking. The result we aimed for was a happier and less stressed child. Between myself, my team, and particularly parents, we made a positive difference to the stress levels and enjoyment of life for quite a lot of children.

But I'm thread-jacking, so will leave this for now.

But we don’t know it causes distress do we? It’s not been tried? It’s OP already getting upset rather than even attempting it……..the only reason op is against it is that her DC sees it as punishment. It is not related to a sensory issue like the crowd avoidance but the level of understanding.

lots of people in the world avoid crowds by leaving a little later than the masses - this may even help dc to realise that leaving later could even start to be coping strategy for going places like concerts or aircraft etc

But we don’t know it causes distress do we?

We do. It says so right there in the OP. “This has had a huge impact on my son, he's not coping at all.” and “It isn't working for him, he's in a high state of anxiety and is not sleeping well.”

I got it wrong. I thought she was talking about MY family 🙄

We do know it causes distress if we actually read what has been said.

Thanks to everyone who offered advice I can work with. I really appreciate your input.
Really, thank you.
Especially as there have been a huge amount of extremely rude replies.

As for everyone who's left disparaging replies, I'm not even interested as you have no idea what my son goes through or has gone through.
Shame on you.

My son has also been severely bullied to the point he told a friend goodbye, he wanted to end his life, I was and still am scared witless.

I'll not be reading any more, actually shaking my head at so many of you who do not have a clue what my son has been through.
Presuming is really offensive, so keep your presumptions to yourselves.

They’ve not tried it though - where has she said they’ve tried it?

It shouldn't matter if it's early or late. The difference is that it's when the majority aren't there. It's not a punishment, but it's also not a privilege or treat. If it's needed for a reason, you and he should accept whatever measures achieve the purpose.

It's a bit like parent and child car parking wlspaces being far from the supermarket entrance. You get the extra room between the doors to load and unload because that's what you need. You don't also get to stipulate being nearer, or as near as those with disabilities because it's more convenient.

“It isn't working for him” rather implies it is the current situation and DS has tried it. If DS hadn’t tried it and it wasn’t the current situation, the OP would have written something like “It wouldn’t work for him” rather than write in the present tense.

It shouldn't matter if it's early or late.

Well, it does for some. As has been stated in the thread, moving late doesn’t work for all.

Being a parent and having a child isn't a disability. It isn't comparable.

Okay, it OUGHT NOT to matter in the circumstances described, because he wishes to avoid the crowds that form the majority of the school.

His need is to cope with the number of other pupils, not have a shortened lesson through a phased return, or take his medication exactly on the hour, or any other very specific requirement.

The best way to do that is be on the corridor at a different time from everyone else. School set the timetable and it's up to them which children go where when.

Well it sometimes does matter regardless of what you personally think.

Well no, and that goes whether you're a parent or a poster like me, or you, on MN.

School will decide what they will allow as a reasonable adjustment, because they're responsible for educating all of the pupils.

It does sometimes matter. Just because you can’t accept that leaving late doesn’t work for everyone doesn’t change the fact it doesn’t work for all.

If the OP chooses to pursue it, it will be the courts who decide rather than the school.

The school would have a difficult time defending a disability discrimination case if OP pursued that via SENDIST.

Have you been in a secondary school? The crowd continues for an hour after the end of lessons which kids doing after school clubs just hanging about and waiting to be picked up

It does actually matter because removing a reasonable adjustment that has worked in favour of a blanket policy is against the EHRC guidance for schools that they should not create blanket policies that disadvantage the disabled, and also goes against the EA2010 which states reasonable adjustments are required to be tailored to the individual and what works for one person may not work for another.

A reasonable adjustment should be made to remove disadvantage and this change is already causing disadvantage by the way of distress and disruption to this individual, simply because they have changed their policy. They have made school less accessible.

I've already mentioned on an earlier post just how different leaving 5 minutes early and 5 minutes late are and the disadvantage faced by the change.