figcake: 8yo bullied at school; LA website ultre vires

[SDeuchars]

figcake posted on the de-reg topic at Thu 23-Dec-10 22:41:42:

I have a question on behalf of my lovely neighbor who is non-MN. Her DD aged 8 has been bullied at primary school for the last 2 years and it is definitely not getting any better or being addressed by the school. Outside school she is really lovely, friendly, bubbly good com skills - infact, people stop her in the street/supermarket saying how they wished their Dc was "that lovely" "friendly" "chatty"etc.

Because she is increasingly ostracised and bullied at school and neighbor complained on a few specific occasions, they placed her DD on the SEN reg as they insist that she has difficulties socializing and none of their pupils would have said any of the horrible things she quoted as they sound too "grown-up" and effectively accused neighbor of lying even though she is a very honest person.
They have really been pressurizing neighbor into agreeing to external assessments (and made her sign a referral form) even though she was dead set against it as nobody anywhere else thinks there is an issue and is more to do with the school (btw no places in other schools in LA as there is a shortage of places here). They have not relented and have now written to say that they will be looking into other official ways in which to force her to agree to the assessments they require if she does not comply.
She has been talking of home-edding for a while and def feels equipped to do it but she now feels that LA will be 'on her back' even after she deregisters DD and not leave her alone as things are too far gone against her. We looked at the procedures for our LA and they def mention "home visits" with EWO (where DD would have to be present) in order to gain approval to Home Ed, submitting suitable ed philosophy, min 25hr/wk schooling and periodic visits thereafter in which examples of work must be shown; this all seems to go against advice on MN re LA rights. I don't home-ed so I can't help any further really.

Could anyone help us separate fact from fiction?

E/P isn?t actually washing her hands of the child, she?s seeking professional back up, and throwing her weight around doing it. Once the child?s been seen, E/P (or an E/P) will be back in the loop. (if child remains in school.)

Whatever they are looking for, it smells of covering their backs to me.
No they don?t need a diagnosis, but do need a statement, in order to secure any additional money from LEA. Everything else is covered under general funding for school action and SA+.

It?s standard to involve the G/P, and ask for reports from all professionals the child is known to, and is very much in the parent/s interest to have G/P involved as it?s ?evidence? of being fine ?engaging with services?, (just not necessarily one?s who parent doesn?t feel act in child?s best interests.)
Being seen as ?Failure to engage with services? is virtually a crime these days as I discovered.
(Why didn?t I take my child to the Dr?s when he was being bullied? Because I didn?t know Dr?s had a cure for it, and demanding the head took action seemed the more appropriate thing. Wrong.)

There will be no blood tests (unless child shows some sign of medical condition necessitating them)

If referral has been made, paed appointment goes ahead if child removed from school.
If not yet made and child removed, referral?s likely to be continued/ fast tracked anyway, and they should go (or it will become safeguarding matter.) However, they should ask E/P and schools details to be removed from ?to be CC?d to?, and G/P, any new placement/professionals put there instead. (don?t be surprised if doesn?t happen until 2nd/3rd request)

We?d been referred by E/P to CAHM?s (for help for son to cope with school problems) when we jumped ship for H/E. (already had Gt Ormond st diagnosis) It?s common for parents on the cusp of H/E through SEN to have appointments still coming through.

We attended appointment, checked that there was nothing on offer that might actually be of use to us, (there never ruddy is!) and thanked them for their time. They checked my understanding of my son?s condition, admitted that my chances of getting meaningful services where unlikely, and failed to send out the one possibly helpful article they?d promised, wrote reports that are mouldering away somewhere in the system, and two years later sent me a letter saying he?d been discharged from their service.

Is it worth her putting in her own application for a statement at this stage so that it will be more favourable to her DD or is it too late now? Does a statement def also mean a diagnosis?

Is there still scope to do what OMM said re saying that you accept that her DD is not NT but don't want to push for diagnosis?

I understand that if it gets to statements, my neighbour is adamant to go all out for everything she can get and def wont sit back and allow them to gain the extra funding. There is a Polish boy in her DDs class with f/t 1-1 and believe you me, he is getting nothing from the school. Apparently, he is often just dumped in a corridoor for hours to "calm down" even though he is doped up and completely tranquil and not needing this. Some of the less effective TAs really have a great time doing very little for SEN kids.

Thanks - I suppose that comes at a cost and should have been done before. Her GP surgery is nice enough but they see so many patients they would not be able to vouch for her good character etc.

What could a GP do to help in this situation?

Don?t know how helpful any of this is but; deciding you don?t want your child formally diagnosed as not NT, is seen as perfectly reasonable by many.
(If she?s remaining in the school system, not IMO a good idea, as even if the statement doesn?t bring actual help, it does at least bring understanding that the child is like this because they are, and it?s normal for them, not because someone?s done/doing something to them.)

There?s plenty of visibly ASD children in H/E without diagnosis, some of whom have parents in denial, who insist their child is just highly eccentric.
It?s a choice and dislike of labelling is a reason for h/e I?ve heard a few times.

A statement won?t be more favourably written because of who applied for it or not.

It?s contents are decided and argued over by LEA and parent/s based on all reports sought, including ?parental views report?, regardless of who seeks it.
How good its contents are (unless you?re lucky) depends on just how much a parent will learn, and how hard and far they?re prepared to go tbh.

Our 1st referral for one, was reception when bigotted SENCO decided he was bullied as a result of ?emotional damage due to background and parenting.? Fur and feathers flew, and suddenly he wasn?t even school action, leaving confused parent licking wounds. I couldn't see my child's very real problems because I was to busy defending us against false one's.

Years on by now diagnosed, ?proper? draft statement was originally set to cover the symptoms of the results of ignoring son?s condition, and gain school funding, not cover the actual problems preventing him from accessing the curriculum, which they insisted nothing could be done about, and I insisted was what any funding should be used for.

His statement now reflects what?s actually different, why, and what?s actually needed for him to fully access the curriculum and achieve his maximum potential. You make them do this, if they wont do it voluntarily. This is what tribunal?s for if you have to.

I?ve big issues about those needing the most specialised help being dumped onto the least qualified to receive it, (there are some brilliant LSA?s, but they aren?t the one?s my son got) which is one of our reasons for H/E, as while I?m just as unqualified, I care about my child?s future, and will and have gone and learnt whatever?s needed to give him the best chance of a decent education, which it seems I couldn't expect school to do.

Good GP will refer for assessment's of if there are genuine problems, sometimes suggest other places for help / support.

May add their own knowledge of LEA/ CAMH's if seen similar before.

May write a report for you about their opinions on best interests of child.

Take on the role of 'professional in contact with child and parent', help diffuse incorrect child protection concerns, and support the parent's choices where appropriate.

Keep an eye on and comment on request about the sanity of the parent under pressure.

Remind you that it's inevitable you're in this state if under that much pressure, and that it's normal.

Prescribe sleeping tablets for the week leading up to tribunal etc without labelling you.

All very useful Justgetting and I could not thank you enough for your insight into a matter I obviously don't know enough about. I am keen to learn and it is in the vested interest as I have an eccentric little DS myself who may be in this position a few years down the line - I really hope not though, and even if it does come to that, I shall not be pleading ignorance.

Do you have any experience of SEN lawyers by any chance - just an idea I have.

They exist and some come highly recommended, (but completely out of mine and many others reach) There?s a whole sen industry out there.

At the moment she could do with a good experienced parent advocate to take to meetings. Has she checked out what her Parent Partnership is like?

Chances are that by the time your little one is at a point of possibly needing additional provision there will be virtually no statements available and a whole other provision system in place.

Would you rec that she applies for a statement herself now - prior to any referral coming through, get a sen lawyer who will commission their own tests given lack of professionalism of agencies involved to date...as a possible strategy? Sorry can't explain properly as I am holding an 8 month old DN atm!

TBH though I understand you're trying to help your friend, (which is laudable) giving more than genral advice (which is always just someone who doesn't have to live with the end result's, opinion) on a 3rd parties understanding of events is fraught with problems.

Best thing to do or not depends on a lot of variables, but it needs to always be what is best for the child, which can include parental needs, but there's a fine balance.

Do you mean so she's 'in control' of the process?

Does she believe her child has specific problems?

If yes:

a) Does she believe her childs problems are because of the educational setting, rather than anything to do with the child?

b) child would have them anywhere,

c) A bit of both?

Does she believe her child has special educational needs?

If so can she define why?
and really same question for if not.

Betelguese they don't come cheap do they? I think that's why sometimes schools are apt to hang on their every word and forget that they aren't infallible and suffer the same stress, pmt, row with wife this morning, etc as everyone else.

Take a look at how much the private one's charge.

Check out the seminar circuit for some really eye watering stuff.

Do you mean so she's 'in control' of the process?
Yes - it seems to be all about boosting budgets rather than turning individual situations around in the case of this school.

She has conceded that child may have a social problem in large school setting, def does not have them elsewhere. Her DD has always been really independent and until a ,month ago they were saying that SAplus was more than enough. Last week, out of the blue, she apparently needs "full time 1 to 1 input". With all due respect to children who actually do, this is an inconsistent and bewildering detour.

She strongly believes child does not have SEN though and school seem to be massively pushing on this button in order to get SEN additional funding. They are obv focussing on a massive warts-and-all national curriculum which does have social targets built into it- she is focussing mainly on trad subjects and will not let them get away with trying ti imply a "learning difficulty" (their words) all of a sudden when her DD is actually one of the brightest children in her class.

I was just considering whether a fearsome sen lawyer would put the fear of God into them and encourage them to backtrack. It should not be that others who are much needier are slowly provided with p/t 1-to1 for several years whereas her DD goes straight to paed just because her mum showed some resistance to their intervention. They could back her into a corner every time using the threat of referring to the safeguarding nurse because they have identified this as her great fear. There is something very wrong about their tactics. Don't know if SEN lawyer would help redress the power balance.

There is a PP contact though she is known to be a good buddy of the SENCO and sits next to the EP back at their base so it would not be worth going there. Infact the SENCO kept recommending her - they are even top friends on a social networking site

There was also the issue of them having written negative things about her parenting and relative's opinion of her parenting and attributed this to her - she wrote to them without mentioning DPA for fear of sounding too challenging and pointed out the errors - they ignored this. She flagged this at the meeting this week - they said something to the effect of "well, we made our own notes of what you said at the time so we are not going to take it out". At this point, she mentioned DPA and they qualified this with "your letter will be put on the file with what you just said".

Firstly; the only thing that truly redresses the power balance is when mum stops allowing SS (or safeguarding equivalents) to be mis-used against her.

Being investigated carries it?s own stigma but in the end you learn to live with it. We?ve been investigated repeatedly now, and either I must be a perfectly competent parent, or they must be incompetent at investigating. Which would they like, they can?t have it both ways can they?

SS kept making negative comments, (usually relating to my views of them as a necessary evil rather than as my new best friends) but finding nothing wrong, and the last ?urgent investigation? referral (minuted) remains unfilled 3 years later. (just as well kids aren?t really chained in the basement!)

All sorts of very unpleasant claims have been made, including untruths claimed by school had in fact been said by me.

You ask for meetings to be recorded to ensure consistency. (they refuse)

You bring in your own minute taker. ( If they try to refuse, you ask them to explain on paper what the problem of having an independant minute taker is?)

You keep a paper trail going refuting any incorrect stuff again and again and again, and ask them to put their claims onto paper please, keeping copies of everything. Keeping good files and being able to refer to them is one of the things they don?t expect from parents. They either start behaving professionally (yay, mission accomplished) or get very unnerved when they realise you?re keeping files on them too, and someone higher may see them.

Eventually they screw up and show themselves, because a parent maintaining a file of the whole truth, (warts and all) is a heck of a lot easier to pull off, than members of an organisation maintaining a file of carefully edited lies/perceptions masquerading as facts.

Since we went into H/E there?s been no more SS, though there was an attempt to claim us as ?missing from education? rather than H/Eing. (oh bring it on, please!)

Yes safeguarding?s often misused as a way of intimidating parents, and L/P?s, disabled, and working class parents are particularly at risk of buying into being bullied by it (which then makes their claims about our parenting abilities less untrue!) Their tactics don?t look good in court, judges aren?t stupid.

AFAIK SEN lawyers talents are usually in gaining suitable provision for SEN children, rather than defending children from being labelled SEN.
The game you?re talking about?s a right can of worms that they?re unlikely to make money from, so less specialists.

They are obv focussing on a massive warts-and-all national curriculum which does have social targets built into it- she is focussing mainly on trad subjects

Right, so in other words she wishes a different educational curriculum, in which social skills are learnt as part of life skills, not educational achievement targets?

To have SEN status, her social skills would require to be bad enough to be impacting on her education. If her education is more focussed on social ability than academic, then that?s a quite low threshold, and the reverse is true.

Sounds like a very good reason to be seeking to provide either a very different type of school, or a (probably structured) home ed curriculum, whilst looking into if child may need specific teaching of social skills for whatever reason, and providing a social environment that doesn?t impact negatively on academic education, and an academic education that doesn?t impact negatively on social skills.

Am interested to know if mum thinks child would have flourished in an old fashioned grammar school?

It is a can of worms indeed and starting to feel pretty torturous.

However, we have now been considering that given that assessment is the only way to secure more funding and given that the latter IS their main interest in all of this, then what if we agree that she has SEN except very different ones from what the school/LA specifies. Could neighbour quickly apply for a statement centered around social needs (though without a firm diagnosis) and get a SEN lawyer involved to make sure this is favourable to her DD rather than a means of lining the school's pockets? The SEN lawyer would surely take on work where some kind of SEN is being acknowledged by the mother at the outset?

Perhaps the mother could name a nearby one-form entry school as her preferred choice for her DD so she could transfer there with whatever 1 to 1 is secured in the process? Or if the SEN lawyer is very effective, maybe friend could HE yet have some funding to arrange private therapy as part of her package (the relationship with LA agencies having broken down)?

Sorry if these are fanciful notions.

Btw, friend would be hoping for legal aid - unlikely to be able to fund a lawyer otherwise

Does she need a SEN? is the GP in agreement?

SEN - not sure what you mean?
GP - has had no known involvement in all this but she is considering contacting him next week to talk it through (he specialises in children, not sure how)

Right Home Ed - if she deregistered say, on Monday, how would this change things? Presumably, paed assessment is now unstoppable even though referral has only been verbally mentioned to her and not confirmed or arranged? What about further input of LA agencies? They would be unkikely to work with her DD further, am I right? But she would still have paed contact going forward? Would she stll have to have a statement or a diagnosis if she did not feel comfortable with all this?

I am thinking that this is a more viable option than ever before as I am not sure she would be able to hack it (esp as a single parent with several other children).

Her DD was clingy and upset by having witnessed the hostility last week - a battery of assessments/ stress/ labelling etc could be a step too for her as well.

Crucially how could this impact on the "welfare" thing?

As I mentioned, places (and places pending) have miraculously come up in 15 schools in the borough (including a few good ones) so she could easily couch it in terms of a gradual transfer

Was trying to edit down overlarge answer to last Q?s when you posted this one.

If she wants and has good reason to think h/e is the right form of education for her daughter she should do it, regardless, assuming that her daughter also wishes it?

Part of parenting?s being able to deal with what life throws up. (That also includes reassuring children that mum?s more than capable of dealing with whatever?s going on, and protecting them from fallout.)

There?s no reason for her to be unduly worried about a paediatrician taking a look at her daughter based on an ed psych being concerned. If paed says she does have SEN?s, then mum would be well advised to listen up and ask how best they should be met, then go look at adapting that to their circumstances.

A pead?s far more likely to listen to concerns over diagnosing unless there?s obvious and screaming needs, (I?ve come across a Downs parent, adamant that her child had ?just? been dropped on it?s head, ?looked funny? and needed no help) and no they don?t want to issue statements unnecessarily, as they?re expensive and about what?s needed for child to access education through schools. (unless you fight tooth and nail for it.)

If they decide they think mum needs investigating for welfare issues, they?ll do that regardless of what she does.

Important to stop seeing all agencies as ?them?. It?s just not that organised.

CAMHs spent most of their time telling me to ?keep fighting?. Unfortunately they weren?t able to tell me what I should be fighting for! They also asked me to write about some techniques we used, not to check up, but to see if they could be effective for other ASD children. In a more ?paranoid? frame of mind, this could easily be misinterpreted.