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.

As every school has pupils whose behaviour means the other pupils have to be lead out of the classroom from time to time, where are you proposing these pupils should be removed to? And what are your funding proposals for whatever accommodation you deem suitable?

Everybody, including the child, their parents and the school, would rather the child was in a more suitable setting.

I definitely don't want to forcibly remove a dangerous child as a teacher or TA though. Despite having had restraint training, there's a very good chance I and the child would get hurt.

And put where?

LA special schools started closing in the 1980’s for dubious “inclusion” policies. Some independents have sprung up to fill the gaps, but the LA’s don’t want to pay their costs.

Creating new specialist places costs more money than the government is willing to find. No easy answers, unfortunately.

I'm a teacher and reading between the lines this class is only going to get worse. If you can, I'd move schools. I moved my son in y2 and I've never regretted it.

How would you suggest removing the pupil who has lost control?

Exactly. A splash in the ocean (or canal) but where does the private school vat go (its a constant source of income for the gvt now) - it's not been spent on state schools that's for sure. Just another hollow vote winner in lieu of actually doing something useful. I'm not sure which party would do something useful.

What consequences can you give a child with such severe SEND that they are not aware of and not in control of their actions?

To give you an idea of how difficult it is to ‘just send the child elsewhere’ in our case, DS was suspended at pre school several times. Professionals were involved from the LA (specialist teaching service) and he was on a waiting list for ASD. Everyone knew he also had ADHD but the NHS don’t consider it until 6 so at that point that was in the background so to speak. He was 3 when this started.

I applied for the EHCp as pre school wouldn’t and despite all the evidence, he was given a mainstream school.

I shan’t bore you with the unnecessary but it took a further 3 years, cost over £22,000 (our entire house deposit), my career and was utterly horrific for him and the mainstream schools in the meantime before he got to a specialist.

We are proactive and ‘on it’ parents in terms of not wanting DS at a mainstream, worked with the schools and at no point did I (nor anyone other than the LA) think he should be at a mainstream and it still took that. If the parent/school disagrees with any of it, it slows it down more. There is no solution that is just ‘move the child to another school’.

I repeat again, if you don’t want my son in your child’s classroom (you don’t, he doesn’t and I don’t) then it’s mainstream parents who need to respond to the white paper. Not just SEND parents and SEND organisations. It’s really, really important. Schools are bad enough in the current state with children having to fail before they can receive support. It will be worse. Please respond. Your concerns are valid, I’m not offended you don’t want him there, I don’t either, but he will be if these proposals go through.

That is a terrible waffly email though - did it actually come from a school or did you ask ChatGPT to write you a hypothetical email?

I am team TEACH trained so can step in if needed and where absolutely necessary physically intervene if the child poses a risk to themselves or others.

But manhandling someone in that level of distress should very much be a last resort as it is very rarely likely to help the situation.

Safely getting the other children out for an extra playtime is not ideal but it is the best option.

@Frazzledmomma123 also do you not realise that forcibly removing a child is extremely traumatic for all the children and the risk of injury to the child, staff and others is far too high. Not all schools are trained how to safely restrain a child, it should only ever be used as a last resort, therefore it’s much safer to move the rest of the class.

England has seen increases in special school places since 2015 but this follows decades of decline since the 1970s when mainstreaming Sen kids became policy.

https://schoolofeducation.blogs.bristol.ac.uk/2024/10/24/theres-a-crisis-in-special-educational-needs-provision-heres-the-situation-across-the-uk-and-ireland/#:~:text=England,of%20money%20by%20early%202026.

If this is the case they are not safe around other children. I refuse to believe all SEND kids are unable to understand rules and consequences. If we’re not going to address dangerous behaviour and educate them on correct behaviour we’ll end up with a generation without any boundaries who expect to be able to do whatever they want without any repercussions

These kids should not be in mainstream schools. It's not fair to traumatise so many young children.

Honestly, I’m so shocked reading all these posts. I had no idea that the problem was this bad and that it has just become a normal everyday occurrence in schools. I feel for everyone, pupils and teachers alike - I knew that there were issues, but not to this extent. I now understand why it’s easier to move the class than the pupil.

Unbelievable that Labour then made it even worse by stopping thousands of SEN kids from attending private schools, which their parents could just about afford but which VAT made impossible.

Exactly. The learners I have mentioned are (I am not going to go into details) learners with particular vulnerabilities and/or SEND backgrounds that mean they should not be in a mainstream school. There are routines and procecured that are followed. But every new year group has a wider array of needs and students that require certain provisions - into an already stretched and budget-locked school and education system.

Yet if the white paper happens, more children are going to be forced into mainstream schools.

This is only the beginning if it goes ahead.

You're right it is traumatic for these children to be put through mainstream school when it's the wrong setting for them. It's often clearly the wrong setting before they even start Reception, but LAs don't have the budgets and want to do what is cheapest. Even with dedicated parents fighting for the right setting children are often forced into traumatic mainstream settings.

Some send kids are able to understand rules and consequences.

some are not.

the primary where I used to work had a kid start in reception who was non verbal, and was working at the cognitive age of about six months.

there’s a limit to what mainstream can do with a child like that and consequences will have no impact.

eveybody knew it was the wrong place for him but demand for special school places is high.

The setting is clearly inappropriate, the school does not have the resources to look after this child. Specialist settings are available (Resource bases seem have sprouted in many places too as a good in between option), and whilst I understand how difficult it can be to find a place, the solution cannot be to put the rest of the class at risk on what seems to be a very regular occurence.

Instead of focusing on the child in question, how about we focus on a school system that is failing ALL children by insisting that child is in mainstream education and failing to make sure they have the right support. Those who proclaim we can’t afford it, seem not to understand it is these children who end up with poor education, few life skills, who will have to rely on disability benefits, that they also claim we have to cut because we can’t afford them either.

In some cases, you're absolutely right, they're not. Try convincing the LA that, though, as they are the ones who refuse EHCPs, forget to mention that behaviour if they are reluctantly forced into consultation, manipulate a parent to admit that what they really, really want in the deepest recesses of their heart is for their child to be 'normal' (the parent's words) and then use that to state that mainstream with the lowest tier of funding is the limit of what they will do - and then issue a direction to the school that's already said they would be unable to meet needs.

Honestly you need to remember op that there for the grace of god go I. You are lucky enough to have perfectly healthy children and if you weren't lucky enough you wouldn't want your sen child dragged and manhandled out of the room at any age. You'd hope that your child would be in a suitable setting but if they weren't lucky enough ( lots are not) you'd hope they would at least be treated kindly in what ever class they were placed.

Both