Headteacher and five staff suspended!

[Educationalshame]

Have name changed so not to out myself. My children go here :(
I received a letter and that is it. Teachers will not really speak about it to me. What do I do?? Reading the attitudes of the other members of staff "What are teachers supposed to do?" Does not reassure me. Advice? Thoughts? Anyone..

My point is that children in care can and do continue to experience behavioural difficulties once they have been removed from their parents; and they still have to go to school. Removing children from abusive homes does not mean that behavioural problems disappear at school

Absolutely.

It takes a lot of work to undo damage in children and sometimes even then it is partial, but good foster parents and a good school that is on board and supportive can make a difference.

Feelinggood, of course you are allowed to touch them- why on earth would you think that you weren't?

As teachers, we can restrain children if:

-A child is injuring others

-A child is injuring themselves

-A child is damaging property

-A child is behaving in a way that is likely to disrupt good order.

Any physical intervention taken must be reasonable, proportionate and necessary.

This means that if a pupil is charging at another holding a knife, you are justified in rugby tackling them to the ground- if they are verbally abusing you, you are not.

The vague definitions do not help- 'damaging property' could mean smashing a window; it could also mean snapping a pencil in two. Legally, you could restrain a child for this, but ethically? It would be completely inappropriate. The legislation relies on teachers' judgements of what is reasonable, proportionate and necessary, and there is rarely any provision to train them to effectively make that kind of decision.

As a teacher, you have a duty of care to keep children safe, and act in loco parentis.

This does not mean that you are required to restrain a child, but that you cannot do nothing. Even fetching someone else to help is something.

So, leaving aside a number of non- physical interventions which may have worked with this particular child, staff could have restrained him and/or sat with him until he calmed down. There is no need to seclude a child in such a way unless (possibly) it was an emergency reaction to a dangerous situation. Given the information we have, we can safely assume that it was not an unplanned reaction.

learnandsay

When we were at school (I was at school in the 70s and 80s), children with SN of just about any sort were routinely sent to special schools which had very low expectations for them. That's why you never saw them.

My 9yo has ASD/ADHD and SEBD. He is also highly intelligent. He needs to be in an environment where he can be nurtured and intellectually stimulated, not pushed to one side and forgotten about. With the right support, he has the potential to be a brilliant engineer, or whatever he wants to be. If he were pushed to one side because of his meltdowns, which are brought on by panic, rather than pure naughtiness, he would probably spend most of his adult life in and out of prison.

In the 70s and 80s, he would probably have been sent to a correctional school, which would have made him even angrier and more aggressive than he can be, now.

Use violence against him (ie the cane) and all that would do is reinforce that it's OK to be violent because that's what adults do to children.

Amber - my home life was far from perfect though it was pretty stable - my Mum threw my Dad out a few times - he had alcohol and gambling problems and sometimes would take his wages and go on a bender. But as an adult I can see why he did it and forgive him. I do believe he loved us though. I think back in the 60s/70s when I was brought up, nobody had "special needs", they were either good or naughty or had a disability. I wonder if the jails were fuller - I guess what they did have was residential units where the "naughty" children went - childrens prisons probably. I thnk we are probably all a bit more understanding now but maybe we have gone too far the other way and still failed to tackle the root of the issue?

learnandsay sorry not v well put - that the children in the unit used to be away off site for a start and have access to alternative curriculum such as DJing and yes go on trips and used to be seen doing projects around school such as gardening.

"Also, asking again, and a genuine question, are they harmed by being put in a 'safe' room?"

Some will, some won't. You won't always know which child will be fine and which is locked in a cupboard for hours on end at home, or has a pathological fear of confined spaces, or was brought to the country in the boot of a car.

Would you want to take that risk when there are a whole host of other strategies you could use?

It must be hard explaining unfairness to the other children. Somebody once said that a child in school would get shouty sometimes and be allowed to go out and play. The other children couldn't understand why this happened.

I'm glad I don't go to school today. When I was at school we had school rules and if you broke them you got in trouble. Everybody knew what was expected of them and they got on with it. Simple.

Tether yes true re all those situations, but I have been in two situations where I could not physically restrain a pupil, they were older 11/12. Also with a verbally aggressive 14 and barged past me before I had chance to move.

There are some circumstances where this is not possible, or the child may respond badly to being sat on. Many school have isolation rooms. The first school I worked in did, it was staffed by a senior member of management team. A student would be removed from classroom and escorted there, where they would reflect upon their behaviour may complete a form then continue with work sent from classroom.

Every secondary school I have worked in has had a staffed isolation room (used by mainstream) but not locked. Policy would be to stay there for lesson or whole day, sometimes until parent got there to discuss a mor serious incident such as a fight. Every school has also had some sort of unit to offer alternative curriculums to children with different needs who can't cope with mainstream classroom.

IMO closing the 'special schools' led to schools within a school being set up to lesser or greater degree, some slow to do so and teachers lacking the specialised training required to teach differently to accommodate a range of learning needs bloody differentiation....

(Sorry if not following discussion well my one year old has turned into a poo machine)

It is very easy to explain perceived unfairness to children.

I think back in the 60s/70s when I was brought up, nobody had "special needs", they were either good or naughty or had a disability

Disability? you mean a physical one?

Thank all that is holy that things have changed then.

There certainly were children with special needs in the 60s-70s, you just didnt see them as they were in institutions.

I thnk we are probably all a bit more understanding now but maybe we have gone too far the other way and still failed to tackle the root of the issue?

Some of us are more understanding now yes.

I dont think its gone too far the other way.

What is the root of the issue then?

Hello everyone,

Thanks to all those who have brought this thread to our attention. We've gone through and deleted some disablist posts, some personal attacks, and posts repeating personal attacks.

As ever, please report anything you think we've may have missed.

Incidentally, many ie the majority of adults in british prisons have a learning difficulty, hopefully the way things are now, this will lessen.

Hopefully with the right support, children with LDs/SNs will do as best they can at school and have a chance of a productive life in society.

Hopefully.

I know a child who has shocking behaviour and does not have any special need disgnosed though he has been tested. His "reward" is that he gets to have his own desk at the front of the class labelled Xs Office, he is allowed to leave the classroom when he feels like it and gets away with things that other children don't. He has been expelled from Cubs/Scouts as they couldn't do anything with him and the other children started not wanting to go. he swears and is abusive the police visit regularly - when he and my son were about 4 he thumped my son hard enough to bruise and pushed him over on a driveway where he banged his head, the provacation being that he wanted my son to smash a bottle on the road and he refused. This boys mother made them apologise to each other and then put the boy on the naught step for 4 minutes and told me I should do the same.....really?

I really don't know what the answer is but putting him on a pedestal isn't it imo.

My Mum was the Head of Special Needs department in a school. The school was in a very deprived area and a lot of her pupils had difficult family backgrounds. She was well liked and well respected by her pupils and I think this was because she would never take a confrontational approach with the pupils. She thought this was particularly important when there was suspected abuse and SS, CP were involved. To resolve an angry situation with aggression is both ethically questionable and illogical.

'Time out' for a toddler is ridiculous, they are babies why don't you show them some love, cuddle them, be kind and stop watching or reading about shoddy ideas on discipline imported from the USA!

Feelinggood, I am also a secondary teacher and have restrained many teenagers- although not always on my own!

Staffed isolation rooms are perfectly legal- it is forcing a child to be alone which is not.

I also have a tiny poo machine to deal with

I should add that I'm not at work today!

Amber a physical or mental one and yes it is better that people are not hidden away or imprisoned in homes now. What I mean by gone too far the other way is that there seems to be a tendancy to put every behaviour down to a special need that may or may not exist. That doesn't mean that individuals shouldn't have to conform to the same boundaries as everyone else. Some individuals take advantage of a diagnosis to indulge in bahaviour they clearly know is wrong but that they know they can get away with.

and as for what the root is - I have no idea....I was hoping someone else would know :o

My son has had his own workspace in the past, he has also been able to leave the room if he was finding the classroom difficult due to sensory overload.

That sounds like what is happening with that boy amck5700.

Sounds like the school are trying to support him and manage his behavior.

Not having a diagnosis doesn't mean he doesn't have any special needs, diagnosis can take years and schools can certainly provide support for a child with symptoms who does not yet have a diagnosis.

What I mean by gone too far the other way is that there seems to be a tendancy to put every behaviour down to a special need that may or may not exist. That doesn't mean that individuals shouldn't have to conform to the same boundaries as everyone else. Some individuals take advantage of a diagnosis to indulge in bahaviour they clearly know is wrong but that they know they can get away with

With all due respect, you really don't know what you are talking about.

That is just how you see it from your uninformed opinion.

If you were either the parent or teacher of a child with SNs or was involved in a professional capacity with a a child with SNs, you wouldn't see it that way, because you would know that the behaviors are not wilfull.

and as for what the root is - I have no idea....I was hoping someone else would know

A suggestion- leave it to those who are qualified to decide.

You have a right to an opinion, but be aware that an uninformed one isn't worth a lot.

amber - a friend who works in the child psychiatry service - who knows this boy but not in the course of his employment, just from being in the same environment, reckons he has a personality disorder rather than ADHD etc. But i don't know.

Well a personality disorder comes under the spectrum of mental health and is still a special need/disability is it not? But really your 'friend' shouldn't be discussing this with you anyway amck

Amber, that'll be me told then!

So my opinion is clearly not as valid as someone elses then? I'll just feck off and keep paying my taxes.

Interesting tether I never have and I'm not little! I left three years ago. I have talked round plenty stroppy ones and parents!

golden depends how you use timeout, can be time needed to diffuse a situation. I don't show approval of undesirable behaviour through 'love' either