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.

My posts I have made are based on the law. Not just opinion.

The law is an ass in the case of SEND.

@frenchnoodle
Knowing this, what exactly do you want done with this hypothetical child throwing chairs?Teachers should not be expected to harm the child or themselves, what option is left? It's very easy to say "send them to a special school" but it practice that takes years

I would like to see a system where the offering child is removed & excluded after the 2nd outburst. Not because I don't have compassion, because at the moment the welfare of one child/ family trumps that of the rest of the pupils in the class. Think about it: What are we teaching our children? Johnny kicks off & throws stuff around- well you just have to endure it and hide away. So when Johnny is Joh and has turned into a manipulative bully , work colleagues, partners & friends have to ensure it because that is what they have been taught from a very young age. Not ok.

@Coffeeandbooks88
Of course I do but that child is also being failed and you display a big lack of empathy towards them
I don't think anyone should be made to show emphathy towards a child that is potentially harming other children physically und mentality. We should never accept or excuse violence. But that's what we are trying to teach our very young children. Not ok.

And for the record both my DC sufferd from being in a classroom with such a violent child. So yes, I will always advocate for the quiet, sensitive children. The ones who are anxious to go to school, the ones who struggle when learning gets intrrupted and the ones who are exposed to violence at home and at school.

You might think that, but it is currently the law.

And if you think the situation in MS will improve if the proposed changes are brought in, think again. Forcing more DC into MS with less support and limiting the legal rights to challenge decisions won’t help any DC.

I would like to see a system where the offering child is removed & excluded after the 2nd outburst.

Right, and then what? As soon as they go back into school it will happen again. And again and again.
From school to school.

The issue here is mainstream school. These kids have a right to be educated, the correct place for them is a specialist school.

Everyone knows it, the LA prevent it.

Ok but it's obviously not working well! What good does it do not to discuss they myriad of issues surrounding this?!

Excluding a child because they are disabled is discrimination unless a school can prove that they have tried everything and the setting isn't suitable for the child which it can then happen. 2 outbursts gives no chance at all for schools to put things in place which may help them as it unfortunately takes time.

If the child is correctly supported and in the correct setting, it isn't a given that they will always be violent.

I didn’t say you couldn’t discuss it!

The situation is dire. I have already responded to the white paper.

Things would be much better if the LA followed the current law rather than acting unlawfully so often.

My child is about to start mainstream whilst waiting for a autism diagnosis. He is four but acts like two. To say you have no empathy for a disabled child like my son is not nice. Why are you even working in a school for god's sake?

Yes, absolutely.

If the White Paper said “too many children are successfully using the current law to obtain support packages that are bankrupting LA’s. We need to change the law to stop this happening and them’s the breaks” I could at least engage and challenge (although I obviously would not agree). Instead, the narrative is that it’s all in the best interests of children and that teachers can deliver all things to all people in MS. We all know they can’t, it’s more disingenuous lies. Another example of Labour treating the electorate like we’ve all been lobotomised into moronic levels of credulity. Pull the other one Bridget.

If you don’t want disruptive SEND children in MS, tell Bridget and vote accordingly. If you’d rather moan about screens and parenting, get ready to spend a great deal more time hoiking your bosom about the table-chucking antics of the ND child in your DC’s class. Because that is literally Labour’s plan to fix the SEND system.

I don't have emphaty for a child that repeatedly endangers other children. But I do have emphathy for disabled children. These are 2 different things.

And in the meantime this child is allowed to interrupt classand endanger other children & staff. To make everyone compliance, they are told to tolerate & endure because it's discriminaton. It's not reasonable adjustment to let a violent child attend school.

At best, that’s a non sequitur. At worst, it’s ableist nonsense.

Violence can be a presentation of a neurological disability, particularly in young children. It’s not chosen behaviour and can no more be cured by discipline than myopia or chickenpox.

Blame the LA's for insisting children who clearly don't belong in mainstream attend mainstream and the fact they often fight parents for years before they finally agree to a suitable place for the child.

Blame the government for the white paper which is going to take away EHCP's from some children and force even more children into mainstream when it is clearly unsuitable for them.

It is going to get worse, much worse.

I work in a school to teach and I love it. I also have sympathy for children whose needs aren’t being met. However, there’s an alarming trend where more and more children are being left to it. To learn, to cope, to sort themselves out. It’s almost expected of them. My sympathy lies with them having to work when someone is shouting and screaming, and not being able to support them because of fire fighting behaviour constantly. The younger ones get scared and look to the adult for reassurance.
I’m not really bothered if you think I should work in a school or not - I’m more bothered about the system not being fit for purpose. It needs £££££ spending on it, but I’m sure it won’t happen and instead, we’ll be convinced that being called a c**t is the norm.
it’s very real.

It's very reasonable to have compassion for the victims.
It's not abelist nonsense to point out that young children should not be exposed to violent behaviours at school or being scared frightend. School should be a safe place. Young children do not yet have a concept for neurological disability. Their cogitive understanding is simply not developed enough.

I don't put blame anyone. I just think it's not ok to expose primary aged children to a level of violence from one child that warrants evacuating the whole class.
These children need to be removed until they can either have the right support or there is a suitable school place elsewhere. We should not tolerate this type of behaviour in the classroom.

There are less specialist schools. They’ve either closed or places are taken up with medically complex children. We’re now saving babies at 22 and 23 weeks who are incredibly complex and/or are have huge additional needs. Which means a lot of the SEND children are now pushed into mainstream school. We are not set up to cope with babies who previously died.

I’m in a ‘naice’ middle class area. So many of the well educated, intelligent, well off parents in good jobs, just don’t seem to know how to help their children self-regulate. I am always shocked at the number who allow endless screen time, and say it helps their child to regulate, when what actually seems to happen is it distracts / numbs the child, then as soon as they are off screen they become massively disregulated. One came over at the weekend with her son and I had to ask them to leave, as whilst she is lovely and I was looking forward to coffee with a potential new chum, her son was out of control and she was doing nothing to stop him, just murmuring about ‘big feelings’ whilst I was trying to stop him from trashing my house because my daughter wouldn’t let him have (to keep!) something she’d just been given by her grandmother at Easter (a pretty brooch of her great, great grandmothers, with a horse on, and this boy loves horses apparently). This child is 12 and at a mainstream secondary school with my child. His behaviour was appalling, and his mother just, did nothing. I understand that he probably has ADHD, but so does my autistic daughter and she would never be allowed to behave like that! The mum did admit that my not having a gaming console he could use was a problem, as “it’s how he regulates”. I don’t have one because I saw how disregulated screen time left my child, and so there are no computer games and the screen time there is is extremely limited. My daughter admitted afterwards that the boy is a nightmare in school, and I’m not surprised.

Having compassion for the victims does not preclude also having compassion for the disregulated child (who, whether you like them apples or not, is disabled in the eyes of the law and of society). Denying that a disability exists is ableist, I’m afraid: what you really mean is “undeserving”.

I am certainly not advocating to make schools unsafe and I agree that some children should not be anywhere near MS. I got my SEND child out of MS as soon as I decently could, for his benefit and that of his peers. However, it took 4 years of fighting the LA (and I am a lawyer of many years, which presumably confers some advantage). The point I and others are making is that school will be even less of a safe place if the White Paper proposals become law, and you will be even more likely to encounter DC like my DS in mainstream, for the simple reason that their parents will no longer have enforceable rights to alternative provision.

That is the only thing on this thread that it’s actually worthwhile to get snippy about. Most parents do their best, and most children want to be good (including ND ones). Not everyone succeeds.

Leaving disabled children without an education isn’t something schools can legally do. They may try and encourage parents to deregister their child but that would mean the LA having no responsibility to give them a suitable education so it isn’t something the parents will generally do unless they feel it is the right choice for their child.

Removed to where though? There is nowhere, that’s the problem. It would usually be their own parents dream that they were removed and put somewhere suitable, but that rarely exists anymore, with scores of children ‘competing’ for a spot. So where are they going?

No one is saying it’s okay, no one would think that but what is your solution? Keep in mind, there is legislation that dictates that every child has access to education. However, by taking away suitable schools/places they have now made it that everyone has access with problems (both the special needs and the other kids), but it allows them to give that aspect a tick. Shit all round.

@HoppingPavlova absolutely, I was encouraged to off-roll DS by the LA and constantly invited to collect him early or accept a reduced timetable by the school. I did neither - my response was a polite and consistent variation of “that sounds like a you problem” and yet it STILL took 4 years to get a specialist place in the independent sector. If I’d been a 20 year old single mum, I doubt I’d have mustered the cajones.

No parent is leaving DC in an unsuitable environment for shits and giggles, or because we delight in spoiling little Timmy’s enjoyment of lessons. There is simply no viable alternative.