Email from my child’s infant school uk? I’m sorry but this all seems wrong?

[Frazzledmomma123]

Dear Families,

I wanted to address a concern that has understandably been raised regarding the use of a ‘safe word’ to move children out of the classroom. On reflection, we recognise that terms such as safe word and evacuation can raise anxiety and concern.

We agree that children should not have to leave their own classroom in order to feel safe. However, there are times, though not daily, when moving the class is the safest option for all children. This has happened a few times, and only when absolutely necessary. We fully accept having to go to such measures is a worry, but it is a system that schools are having to turn to more and more. I appreciate this provides little comfort, but hopefully helps you hear that supporting emotional regulation has become a real focus and factor for schools nationally.

The children themselves were involved in choosing the word, and the purpose was to minimise panic and keep the situation calm if it needed to be used. Our aim is always for every child to feel safe, happy, and able to learn in their classroom, as is their right. We are putting a range of steps and strategies in place to work towards this, and we do not intend this approach to become the “go‑to.”

We also want to reassure you that we are supporting children to understand that behaviour is a communication of feelings, but the way those feelings are shown must still be safe and appropriate. We do not condone unsafe behaviour, and we share parents’ concerns about children seeing this as “normal.” I have spoken with the class to reiterate that message and reminded them that they should always talk to a trusted adult if they feel unsure or worried. In school, children choose five trusted adults; it may be helpful to have a similar conversation at home about who your child feels they can talk to at school.

We are very aware that things are challenging at the moment. We do not want this to continue, and we are actively putting support in place to help all children feel safe and settled in their learning environment.

Thank you for reading, please keep speaking to us about your concerns.

This is the real crux of it. We need to commit more resources into providing specialist schools (or units attached to existing schools) with teachers equipped to deal with the additional demands of children with additional needs.
Nobody can believe the current system works? Children with SEND who are under supported, expected to cope with the demands of a busy classroom and NT children whose education is being sacrificed at the alter of ‘inclusion’.

So would I. But in the real world the safest solution can be to move the class.

You've obviously not tried to move a child who is either totally dysregulated and/or badly behaved/violent. It's not safe to remove the child, and where you think the 2/3 extra adults needed to forcibly remove them, even if they are allowed, are going to come from, I don't know.

It's not accepted as normal, there are consequences.

I think the biggest problem is the huge expenses that are attached to EHCPs. They're simply unaffordable for the country, so LEAs fight to avoid diagnosing and being forced to pay for 2:1, 3:1, 4:1 ratios.

Perhaps we need the LEAs to be able to dictate 'not suitable for mainstream education' and then a much cheaper provision of SEN. Smaller, calmer class sizes, but more like 2 staff to 12 kids. That would hopefully provide for the majority of SEN kids at an affordable cost for the nation. Mainstream schools could then return to normal.

Those children that can't even cope with the cheaper SEN schools without 'big feelings' may need a more secure environment where their extremely expensive bespoke educational needs take a back seat to staff and child safety and the reality of budget constraints.

That’s great if you can afford it. Which most of us can’t.

But some are more equal than others it seems.

Of course we use the term infants in England; I am a teacher in an infant school.

I still don’t think my child’s safety should be put at risk. Children who are violent shouldn’t be in mainstream school they should be at an alternative provision where people can handle their behaviour.

There are an incredibly small number of places outside of mainstream schools so the majority will be attending regular schools. Unless any government finds a pot of gold, the position won’t change.

The school system, environment and pressures are hugely different than when I was at school (i am mid 40s).

I'd have really struggled to cope at school if it was like it is now.

There are so many children, ND and NT, with and without SEND who are being damaged by the current educational system - as well as staff, hence the huge recruitment and retention crisis in the sector!

The whole system needs a huge overhaul! Expecting 1 adult to teach 30 kids the same material, at the same time, in multiple ways so as to meets the learning styles, starting points, developmental and intellectual abilities of each learner, so that they all get to a least the "threshold" by the same point in time is an utter nonsense!

Children aren't homogenius beings -yet the system seems to treat education like a factory - same raw ingredients in (child) plus same input in (education) = same input out (achievement at agreed level).

And rather than address, or even acknowledge, THIS
blatantly obvious flaw of system design (because money!) unfortunately it is the children who struggle THE most who are being forced to endure unsuitable environments. Not only does this have devastating impacts on these children, it also seriously impacts on everyone around them.

I fully agree that dangerous and violent behaviour is not ok for anyone to experience or witness. However , please note that for the majority of children who display these extreme behaviours, it is not a choice. They are very often experiencing unbearable trauma simply from being in the school environment and simply cannot cope.

Forcibly removing these children from the classroom in front of their peers as you've suggested will likely create further trauma, not just to the child themselves but to all other children who witness it and to the staff members who have to do it. Far safer and less traumatic for others to calmly and quietly leave to allow the situation to diffuse/not escalate further? It is far from ideal as it doesnt solve the root issues and it does have an impact on the education of all learners, but what it does do is minimise immediate harm and mitigate trauma for all.
Unless the system changes, these issues will continue, and will worsen.

I must say as well, I wonder if the school has also been using a safe word system for when they practice internal lockdowns. Uk schools do now need to practice thrse regularly as they do with fire drills - and in these cases no alarm can be sounded. So maybe there is additional context than just behaviour related evacuations?

Perhaps they could have used the VAT on private schools for this, this would have a real positive impact on all children

I have taught for over twenty years, and when I started the only screens around that were in common use were tv screens or pc computers.

autistic people were still autistic.

you can go back to Kanner or Asperger’s original research which was in the 1940s so only just after tv had been invented.

screens don’t cause autism. They don’t make it better or worse.

parents are much more aware of this kind of behaviour than they were in the past and this is largely because schools have moved to evacuating the whole class rather than restraining the single child.

the violence is I think a bit more common than it was but the big difference is that where before staff would come in and the child would be restrained and taken out to the Sen hub/wherever now the whole class moves and all the children have the learning disrupted and they talk about it to their parents.

this is largely because the restraints used which were taught led to some deaths and injuries of both children being restrained and adults doing the restraining and so could not be used anymore. So schools were left with no (legal) option but to evacuate.

this makes it much much more obvious to both parents and other kids what is going on and also imposes a big cost of disruption on the learning of the whole class.

so nobody dies due to being restrained, the teachers are not injured…. But the whole class gets disrupted.

parents understandably do not like this and at primary school a class with a violent kid will usually see parents moving to another school( or going private if they can afford it) as while there’s a lot of violent kids around once you get past year 1 they aren’t in every class.

(Nearly every reception class will have a kid who pushes/bites/hits but that’s on a different level to the eg year 4 kid who throws chairs).

See eg this govt guidance on child restraint.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/812435/reducing-the-need-for-restraint-and-restrictive-intervention.pdf

I work in a school and came close to evacuating my class. A large autistic child screaming and shouting for over half an hour. No TA for them. I felt sorry for the other pupils and I felt intimidated by the pupil myself.
School staff are becoming more and more accepting of these ridiculous behaviours - violence, screaming, demanding, swearing and the list goes on.
As you can tell, my sympathy lies with the other pupils who regularly feel intimidated by these behaviours.
I cannot wait for my own child to be out of the system.

I am a social worker in front line child protection, if he stays at home I cannot work. What does front line mean?

now I genuinely do have a lot of experience with SEND so I really hope you take this as straight talking - but if you’re trying to say you need to be at work to protect children, and therefore leave your child who is clearly damaging other children (and thereby impacting their whole lives going forward too) that is just an absolute non argument.

you are, in fact, doing the opposite of your job.

you know when you’re six, it is as awful to be attacked by another six year old as it would be for you being attacked by someone your own age. Why do we all act like children should be subjected to this? This utter nonsense that kids must “go” somewhere, as you say. Why? You have a child who is disabled and that’s what we all sign up for when we become mothers - if your kid was physically disabled and unable to go to school you would have to stay home and be their carer, so why is this any different? Going to school is not fantastic - the goverment have tricked everyone into thinking it’s the best palce for them and in doing so are forcing children to sit in classrooms where they are being abused, witnessing intolerable behaviour, and getting mentally unwell themselves.

if you’re getting calls weekly saying your kid is out of control, I hope you know you are allowing many six year olds to go home after school each day crying, or feeling scared walking into school in the morning. To sit filled with the anxiety of threat waiting to happen. If your son can’t be safe and controlled around other kids, you are responsible for that. That’s sucks for you - and there’s no blooming help from the goverment and we live in a society where they’ve also convinced us we don’t need a village so most people have no network but for fucks sake! Homeschool him! Don’t let little kids go home and feel dread upon waking because you wish things were different and are prioritising yourself. I’m so sick of little kids being attacked and everyone trying to justify it! It’s unjustifiable.

What the heck is all that about ? Why do the class need to evacuate. Very odd .

Unless parents "taking it seriously" looks like writing to MPs and voting for the party that creates more SEND specialist places, including voting for the tax hikes needed to pay for them, nothing will improve.

Now one of them has fixed upon the phrase 'safe word' because they automatically thought of what they do in bed. Sorry, when we did this, we didn't have anybody into kink in the meeting.

😂 You win the thread.

One of the schools near Rampton secure hospital is Wellington College, a very posh independent boarding school. So it's not even a given that going down the fee-paying route will spare you from the codewords and drills.

Then write to your MP and fill in the SEND reform consultation.

Wha t about all the other children and the poor teacher who are being terrorised by one child . What I don't understand is that this behaviour is relatively new , well probably the last 10 /15 years . What's gone wrong that young children are behaving in this way . It definitely didn't happen when I was at school nor when my children were . A disruptive child would have been removed from the classroom not the other 29 kids . The are no consequences for bad behaviour at all . Something has gone seriously wrong .

And so much for “inclusion” there are two diagnosed autistic children in the class who cope very well with adjustments and are thriving and learning until the disruptive child kicks off - literally, and they fall apart.

I was that autistic child, although I wasn't diagnosed because female in the 80s. I could cope in a calm primary classroom but would meltdown if another kid kicked off. All-girl grammar is basically the entire reason that I was able to cope with secondary.

There were special school places for the high needs kids 20 years ago. That's the difference.

I have only read the ops posts. I think it would be useful to know the age of the children you are talking about.

I had a son who I think twice had to have the rest of the class evacuated, he was 5 at the time, he has ADHD and Autism but was undiagnosed at the time.

To answer some of your questions yes it was explained to him his behaviour was not acceptable, I was called by the school and he was excluded for the rest of the day and the next day.

He never hit another child but did throw chairs I beleive once so it was dangerous. He would also run out if the class (reception classes are noisy and he was overwhelmed) but there was no understanding at the time he was just seen as 'making bad choices'

I think it is hard for schools and all involved.

Luckily my son got a 1 to 1 for most of the day, from age 6, and they learnt to notice when he was becoming overwhelmed and could take him out to help him resettle. By the time he left year 6 there was a sensory room in the infant side so children like him could get a time out to self regulate in there. His one to one was often used to help other children struggling academically too as by then he was more able to voice his needs and was academically able, so I think his funding benefited the whole class in the long run.

This was 10 years ago, he is now doing very well in a mainstream high school where luckily all staff have had training in Autism and that understanding has meant he is thriving, he is very well behaved at school, 1 detention in the 4 years he has been there (using his phone while sat out of pe with a broken bone).

Yes there were children like this when we were at school, but more separate sen provisions to house them, my primary had a 'unit' where the sen kid would be placed.

I dont know which government decided to integrate sen more into mainstream, it has worked well for my son but the funding needs to be there to provide the training and staff to manage the needs of the pupils.

Oh and school tried to punish him by making him go litter picking with the headmaster. My son (5 or 6 at the time) loved it, he did not understand it was a punishment to him he was spending 1 to 1 time with the most important person in the school, he was all smiles. The head told me my son had a wire loose, I was offended at the time, thank god that head has now retired, horrible man.

Sorry this is long, but to end, I think the letter from your school is good in the sense they have a plan to keep the children safe if needed, I dont think its as they think its normal and ok behaviour. They should really be looking at what is triggering the child to make them so disruptive and adress that, but they often dont have the funding for the staff and training needed.