Admissions - what constitutes 'adopted?'

[Twistlethant]

Hoping one of the admission experts will be able to help with this one.
A friend has adopted a child from abroad. She's now at the stage where she has to apply for primary school. The child currently attends a nursery attached to the primary school my friend would like her daughter to go to - only thing is she's not that near, certainly not in catchment, at any rate.
Friend was under the impression that as child is adopted she'll be top of the priority list and get in - and consequently only needs to put this one school on the form. I thought I'd read somewhere that 'adoption' for these purposes only applies to children who were in local authority care, not overseas adoptees or step -children.
Can anyone out there clarify this? Needless to say, I have already advised her not to put just this one school on the form and include a couple of realistic local options she'd be prepared to accept, just in case.

i said it SEEMS unfair, but asked for clarification and did say that obv there was something I was missing, having never experienced it!

I think it's unfair that children with SEN have to fight for statements to get into the best school for them, while adopted children don't have to go through that process.

I don't think it's unfair or wrong that adopted children should go to the right school for them.

if that makes sense!

And if an adopted child for example would benefit from a specialist school perhaps a residential one - we'd have the same problme with funding. We only get priority at usual schools within local authority.

no Kew, my child doesn't get priority!

he's currently struggling with a teacher who doesn't understand autism. the likelihood of him getting statemented is low because the LA don't want to pay for it.

the likelihood of him getting into the secondary school i want is minute.

it isn't really the same.

put it this way... we have 7 secondary schools in our town. ONE of those has a specialist unit.

my son needs a statement to get in. and it's always over-subscribed so even with a statement he's unlikely to get a place.

so, that's what I think is unfair I guess. LIke I say, yes, clearly from what I've learned now adopted children SHOULD go to the most suitable school for them, and totally agree parents know best!
I think it's unfair that kids with SEN don't also get to do that :)

YEs that does make sense - but as i said it doesn;t access any special pot of funding just priority in usual schools. I'm not sure I can commetn on the difficulty in getting a statement.

It is part of the governements plan to encourage adoption - becasue so many parents are unsupported once adoption is final. There have even been many cases of parents refusing to go ahead with adoption so that they can continue to access services provided to looked after children.

Children with a SEN would still outrank LAC so if they are oversubscribed with SEN then LAC won't get any priority

totally get them wanting to encourage adoptions. really the whole system is messed up!

if only mumsnetters were in charge

Hi OP

The admissions rules go like this (last time I looked)

• The child has to have been adopted under the Adoption and Children's Act 2002, in order to get priority admissions (children who left care under SGO's, or RO's also get priority)

This means that the child

• was in the care of a Welsh or English local authority (the countries that were affected by the Act)
• was legally adopted after the 30th December 2005 (children adopted on before 30th December 2005 were not adopted under the terms of the 2002 act)
• is applying to an English school, as long as it doesn't use solely academic selection and faith schools can have different priorities as well

Therefore children adopted internationally are not covered, nor are children adopted by step parents. Your friends daughter won't get priority.

It's very unfair to children adopted from abroad, because all of the extremely good reasons to give adopted children priority admissions, also apply to children adopted internationally, who might have been neglected in orphanages, deprived of good care, exposed to substances, removed for abuse etc.

it seems unfair It's not unfair. Children who are taken into care are traumatised children, who have frequently suffered neglect, abuse, witnessed violence, exposed to drugs/alcohol in utero etc. These children frequently have long term issues with various things- attachment, social skills, behaviour etc. Being adopted doesn't change that - sadly, a loving family will not make these issues go away. Priority admissions mean adoptive parents can find the right school to meet their childs needs and be confident they will get in. Finding schools who are really understanding of the needs of former LAC children, have good pastoral care etc can be hard, assurance is needed the child isn't going to be landed with a wholly unsuitable school.

"Priority for 'previously looked after' children

The new School Admissions Code (released in February 2012) introduced a new requirement on all admission authorities to broaden the existing priority for 'looked after children' or children in care, in accordance with section 22 of the Children Act 1989, to also include 'previously looked after' children, for 2013 admissions onwards.

Children who were 'previously looked after' are defined for the purposes of the legislation as those who immediately after being in care became subject to an adoption, residence, or special guardianship order.

Required Evidence for a 'previously looked after' child

an adoption order under section 46 of the Adoption and Children act 2002; or

a residence order settling the arrangements to be made as to the person with whom the child is to live under section 8 of the Children Act 1998; or

a special guardianship order appointing one or more individuals to be a child's special guardian(s), under section 14A of the Children Act 1989."

The name of the social worker has to be given on the application, etc.

So, for example, babies adopted straight from the birth family wouldn't qualify. Children adopted from care have generally been with foster parents and may have experienced neglect or worse, may have attachment disorders which require support and intervention and a particular environment.

oh sorry, didn't realise conversation had moved on, ignore last paragraph. I will try to track down document which outlines all this for future reference :)

From experience, being adopted counts for nothing in terms of getting a statement - it's a case of ticking the right SEN boxes for your local authority, and schools (and LAs) are a total postcode lottery.

overall I am just left with a sense of overwhelming sadness thinking of all these children who, for various reasons, need so much extra help. :(

shouldn't be like this

cannot always get a school to agree to be named

I know its not relevant to this thread but can you explain that Tiggy.

BTW - I don;t think clanger was saying that adopted children get a statement, but that if they need one then adoption doesn't confer any advantage to getting one.

No, it's really crap for anyone who doesn't fit the right mainstream box

Yes Kew, that's what I was saying.

'crap' comment was for bundaberg - believe me I have complete sympathy.

Thanks Lilka, won't go into detail here, suffice to say my friend's DD certainly did not have the best start in life, the fact that it wasn't in this country is irrelevant.
Having said that, I am acutely aware that the system can be stacked against any child with needs, be they SEN, in LAC or adopted. As mentioned previously in this thread, it's so often down to budget constraints... Doesn't stop those of us working with such children doing everything in our power to help and try to make a difference, however small, though.

Getting Statements is so bloody difficult. I had to fight for so long to get my DD2 a Statement on grounds of EBD (she also has a mild learning disability and other effects of foetal alcohol exposure) so she could move to a specialist EBD school, and god knows there aren't many of these schools around. While I fought she was at a totally unsuitable useless mainstream primary who, I kid you not, made faces when me and the SW explained that DD had PTSD, and then told me that they didn't believe it, because PTSD is that weird and rare thing that soldiers get, not small children. And opinioned that all her issues were a behavioural problem. Requiring punishments. No understanding, no extra support, shit all. They permanently excluded her in the very end, not long before the end of summer term. She was in her new EBD school in September.

It would have been fantastic if I could have moved her schools, but no admissions priority and other school full so.... my son is at this other schoolm and they are fab at supporting him :)

So Tiggy - although admissions criteria say SEN as the first priority in fact it is only SEN for those with that specific school named on it?

Live and learn.

If it helps, Bundaberg (I know it doesn't) I've learnt something new too!

Wrt to mobility disability, DS. Was always destined to spend at least one whole year in primary Ed as a wheelchair user. One flat school turned us down at appeal on the grounds that within 5 years every school had to have an Action Plan to be accessible and therefore they would not admit on grounds of being accessible . Obviously the A toon Plans were to have been stacked up and fashioned into a ramp....

Luckily another flat school offered a place on first application on the same medical evidence.