I want to deregister Y10 DD, we'll probaby lose EHCP

[Elephantstatue]

DD is in Y10 and really not coping at school. She has EHCP for cognition and learning - mainly dyslexia and learning anxiety. She goes to school but not really to classes so isn't learning.

Last year she was anxious and self harming. Private therapy really helped with that v. expensive though. She is currently depressed and has suicidal thoughts. Is known to CAMHs but shes stuck in cross referrals between them, well-being service and gp.

As whole point of KS4 schooling is to push her through GCSEs and given the fact she has missed most of first 18 months, failing has become self fulfilling prophecy. I think we should get her out of there. Unschool her, allow her to follow her many talents and interests and try again in college at 16+

What do you think?

I’d absolutely take her out, let her decompress and then study for GCSEs in a year or two.

There is a difference between require and able to engage with.

If he is unable to engage with provision it is unappropriate. Eotas may be able to fund it but its bugger all use to DS if he is too ill to engage with it.

I would be interested to know why you think this because EOTAS packages are bespoke to an individual’s needs so can meet all needs.

If you think this. You haven't been through the situation where it isnt. That's where we are. If you read what I wrote I haven't assumed how well or ill you child has been. Simply that you have not been in a position that EOTAS is inappropriate.

If you can't imagine a situation where Eotas can't meet need you haven't been where we are. That's OK. Everyone has there own journey

You posted ”but what we're going through just isn't within your sphere of experience.“ when it is, your assumption is wrong. Just because I disagree with you doesn’t mean I don’t have experience of it.

I stand by EOTAS always being an option. The provision will vary, but as it is tailored to individual needs and is about what is reasonably required not what is available then it can always be an option. If the young person isn’t able to engage with anything, there is still EHCP provision that can be provided.

OP if you do go down the EOTAS route and are interested in the case law detailing parents not being responsible for provision it is A v Cambridgeshire [2002] EWHC 2391, [2003] ELR 464. It is mentioned in the Noddy guide here (pg36).

R v London Borough of Harrow ex parte M [1997] ELR 62, A, R (ON THE APPLICATION OF) V CHAIR OF SPECIAL EDUCATIONAL NEEDS TRIBUNAL and TW and KW v Hampshire County Council (SEN): [2022] UKUT 305 (AAC) are also relevant to the having an absolute, non-delegable duty.

You stated you can't imagine a situation where Eotas wasn't appropriate.

It was you that stated that fact.

I am telling you we are in a situation where it isnt appropriate.

Given you said it was outside your sphere of experience it is reasonable to assume it is outside your sphere of experience.

I have made no comment on the illness of your child. Only the illness of mine. I actually have made no comment on your experiences other than what you have stated that you couldnt imagine.

Unfortunately you are simply wrong regarding Eatos always being an option. In our case, at this precise moment in time it is not a viable option

I said as EOTAS packages are bespoke one can always meet needs, and I stand by that. Just because you disagree doesn’t mean I don’t understand or have experience of such situations (which I did not state I didn’t have).

This is exactly why my head is hitting a brick wall....

You may think that.

However all the experts involved in DS' case disagree. The experts that are expert in both the system and know DS' case well. On all three sides.

You are simply wrong. You may have experience of cases with aspects similar to DS but if you think every case EOTAS can always meet need you don't have experience of one where EOTAS is not appropriate.

DS is one where EOTAS is not appropriate. You may not believe it, it may be out of your sphere of experience, that doesn't mean it doesnt exist. Just that your experience is limited to where EOTAS can.

Yes, in basis, this is right it's called EOTAS.

You'd need to prove OP, I believe that your child is medically (and this can be on MH grounds) unfit to attend any school by way of a professional report confirming this.

Don't de-reg. if you do the local authority no longer has an obligation to provide the education. You do.

You're better fighting for alternative provision.

Again, just because I disagree doesn’t mean I am wrong.

How strange a child with such complex and significant needs he has a psychiatrist, struggles to get out of bed and an admission is being discussed yet… doesn’t reasonably require any supervision, care, therapeutic input or support with personal care or other ADLs.

Just because he needs significant imput, doesn't mean EOTAS is appropriate.

As I said. If it isn't within your sphere of experience it isnt within your sphere of experience.

I've never seen a blue whale, doesn't mean they don't exist or that, when someone tells me they have seen one, I tell them it's impossible.

You dont need to be right on this.

Again you are making incorrect assumptions about what my experience is.

Anyone who needs significant input can have said significant input via EOTAS. Of course, that doesn’t necessarily mean it is the most suitable or only way of delivering said input, but that it is possible.

Your bizarre statement about blue whales is just that, bizarre. In no way comparable.

You dont need to be right on this.

One could say the same about you…

Anyone who needs significant input can have said significant input via EOTAS. Of course, that doesn’t necessarily mean it is the most suitable or only way of delivering said input, but that it is possible.

But this is the exact point. I could write the most fantastic therapy input into an Eotas package, but if DS is unable to engage with that input it isnt possible.

If the provision within Eotas isn't possible to deliver, it isnt appropriate.

Hence EOTAS being inappropriate.

There is no provision you could Currently write into an Eotas package that DS is likely to be able to engage with. Hence Eotas being inappropriate.

Sometimes Eotas is not any better than the present situation. In that case Eotas is not appropriate.

Actually there is some more complex reasons in DS case as well.

*You dont need to be right on this.

One could say the same about you…*

I'm not the one telling a stranger, who they have never met, that they are wrong about their own child's, who they've never met, very complex legal case.

It's my child, whose case I know inside out, advised by some of the top medical bods in the country, with some pretty decent solicitors handling the case.

I don't need to be right because I am right. Eotas in DS' case is not appropriate.

Taadaa! You may not have had previous experience of a case where Eotas is not appropriate, yet here we are!!! We are your metaphorical blue whale!!!

And I’m not the one who clearly has little understanding of the law surrounding EOTAS and other SEN matters.

Again, anyone who requires any input, supervision, care, provision, therapeutic input, a psychiatrist… can have said provision via EOTAS. If someone didn’t need any of this they wouldn’t have a psychiatrist or an admission being discussed.

I’m going to disengage with you now, going back and forth like this is pointless. You don’t agree with me, I don’t agree with you, and that’s fine not everyone can agree on everything.

Probably best as we are hugely derailing the OP threads

What I will say is I may not be right on all the legal ins and outs because ultimately that's what Solicitors are for.

But I'd worry alot about the advice of anyone who tells someone the situation they are actually in isnt possible and that this is someone's lived experience is something you can "disagree" with. It's just unpleasant

Sadly I didn’t know any better at the time. However afterwards I informed the LA who were not impressed with the school and flagged the issue with school management, who in turn denied forcing us to make a decision between attending and deregistering. Historically the school has used this same deregistering tactic with other non attenders and I suspect they have got away with it for quite a few years, worming out of their responsibility in an attempt to make their attendance figures look better. I am tempted to let OFSTED know.

Sadly off rolling is all too common, but unlawful. If you do inform OFSTED it is one of the things they are interested in at the moment. You could look at a disability discrimination claim, too. Judicial review would also be a possibility at the time, but probably not relevant in your particular case now.

@Icedlatteplease

I find your posts very interesting.

My son was in a very similar situation to your son. He had months and months when he was completely unable to engage in any 'education' in the sense of learning because he was traumatised and suicidal.

During that time he had an EOTAS provision where theraputic provision was stated in section F including CAMHS, Psychotherapy and Occupational Therapy with the outcome being to 'support reengagement in academic work when the child's health allows'.

I'm not saying you haven't been advised differently but I wonder why you have?

EOTAS is for the purpose of children who can't be in school for any reason, there is no requirement that the child must be able to be formally educated to receive EOTAS that I am aware of and I'm pretty conversant with the law because I have had 2 children on EOTAS arrangements and have done the advocacy myself without engaging a solicitor, I have a legal background.

Is it that your child will be in a hospital or social care setting that is the specific reason you have been told by your solicitor that EOTAS isn't applicable? I'd just be very interested to understand why you have been advised it as it doesn't seem right to me either and it doesn't match my experience. I am not, of course , saying you are wrong.

Parents are often told they have to demonstrate there is not a suitable school, in my case with my seriously ill child he couldn't even be educated in the normal sense so it was clear he met that requirement. With my other child who was never in that position I had to demonstrate the schools couldn't meet need.

I hope you don't mind me asking, I just am really puzzled so wonder if the specific circumstances is that your child isn't at home?

OP I wouldn't deregister because you will absolve the LA of responsibility for your child's education.

My children have both had bespoke provision to meet what they have been able to access at the time, which has changed with the improvement of mental health and the trauma of school.

Even being in a hospital or accommodated elsewhere by health or social care doesn’t preclude EOTAS via an EHCP or s.19 provision.

Ffs

Whether something is possible legally doesn't mean it is appropriate or even helpful

My reply wasn’t to you, is was to @lifeturnsonadime posting about being elsewhere. As I said in my pp it was pointless engaging with you.

It was a post specifically @ me that you replied to. If you dont want to engage don't engage. Don't then jump on a post specifically directed at me 🤦‍♀️🤦‍♀️🤦‍♀️

Frankly @lifeturnsonadime that is exactly the reason I don't want to reply to you on this thread

My post was in response to lifeturnsonadime, not you.

🙄🙄🙄

👍