What happens when a school can’t meet a child’s needs?

[tiddlerislate]

Child is in reception but repeating the year. Severely autistic and non verbal, not toilet trained. He has an EHCP.

Parents want him to attend the local primary school but they have expressed concern they can’t meet his needs. I guess I’m asking what happens then - whose views bear most weight? Can parents insist he attends the school they want him to?

Not necessarily that specific school although the LA do take parents views on board

When parents of a child with an EHCP want mainstream the LA should place them in that type of of school

They will send the EHCP to schools for consultation and the schools reply stating yes they can meet need, no they can't but if they had appropriate support from the LA (funding) then yes they could, or no they can't even with adjustments in place

They can only say no if they are unsuitable for the child's specific SEN or if a placement would be incompatible with the efficient education of others

It may be one mainstream says no because they already have lots of children with EHCPs but another mainstream says yes because they can meet need within the balance of their cohort. In this instance the LA would usually place them at the mainstream school that said yes

If all mainstream schools say no but the parents preference is still mainstream, the LA would usually then direct one of the schools to accept the child

Thanks for that information, it’s really helpful.

In my experience. If parents want mainstream (no matter how severe sen) they will force a mainstream school to accept the child (may not be school parents want). Then placement usually falls apart in mainstream by year one or two and parents then have to fight for special school place.

I know someone with a non verbal autistic child who was insistent about mainstream schooling with one it one support. By the age of 7 the school strongly recommended the change to special school. The developmental differences were huge vs his peers, at this point.
While very unhappy at the advice and change, it’s been a great success, happily. He has progressed more than they could have hoped, and the mother is now training to become a special needs speech specialist.

But I didnt envy the school having to cope with the first two years in mainstream with a child so obviously in the wrong environment.

This. Parents like that are selfish. They put their lride over the child’s needs (as well as the wellbeing of the other children in the class and the poor teacher) “cos we know our rights” and they don’t want to accept they have a different child who can’t be educated like the majority.

I may be being really ignorant here so I apologize in advance, but, I have to ask. Why would someone want to send their child to a school that has pre warned them it cannot meet the child's needs? Surely it would be better to find a school that could? Or am I missing something?

The problem is that schools can state very clearly that they cannot meet a child's needs but the child is placed there anyway with insufficient funding for the right support. This is not fair on anyone.

There are all sorts of reasons.

In my experience we requested the local mainstream comp (mostly because the LA laughed at me when I suggested special needs school.) The school said not without a lot more funding than the LA was willing to give and then the LA ignored the school and named the mainstream comp anyway.

Like?

Being in denial about their child’s ability compared to peers, or lack of awareness of peers’ ability, lack of awareness of expectations of what children learn in school eg ‘reception is just playing’, belief the school just doesn’t want to accomadate the child’s need and belief ther child will catch up.

Because they refuse to accept that their child is not like the others. They want to bury their heads in the sand and call their child’s SN ‘quirkiness’ or whatever and expect the school to suck it up.
The child suffers, the teacher suffers, the other children in the class suffer. Then you get those same parents on here bemoaning that their child never gets invited to parties.

Visit the specialist school - put the childs needs above location - consider the childs peers and where they likely to thrive

I don’t necessarily need to go through them all - many won’t apply to everybody, but things such as being able to get there, friendships, term dates, wraparound. Things that matter to parents of children who aren’t disabled too. I’m not saying I necessarily agree but I can see why a parent might want a particular school.

That isn’t a particularly pleasant post.

It’s not a pleasant situation

"9.79 If a child’s parent or a young person makes a request for a particular nursery, school or post-16 institution in these groups the local authority must comply with that preference and name the school or college in the EHC plan unless:
• it would be unsuitable for the age, ability, aptitude or SEN of the child or young person, or
• the attendance of the child or young person there would be incompatible with the efficient education of others, or the efficient use of resources

Efficient education means providing for each child or young person a suitable, appropriate education in terms of their age, ability, aptitude and any special educational needs they may have. Where a local authority is considering the appropriateness of an individual institution, ‘others’ is intended to mean the children and young people with whom the child or young person with an EHC plan will directly come into contact on a regular day-to-day basis. " SEN Code of Practice page 172.

The parents would carry most weight, unless the LA can prove that there is an incompatibility with the efficient education of others, or that it would cost far in excess of the cost of a special school place to place the child in mainstream.

That means that generally, the parents would get what they want. But honestly, most parents don't realise the benefits of special school places, and by the time they do, the schools are full and they have a massive fight to get a place that they could otherwise have got in the first place.

• Being able to get there - transport would be provided if the child lived further than 2 miles away or 3 miles at secondary age.
• friendships - bluntly, a non-verbal, severely autistic child is not going to have 'friendships' with NT peers. It's not going to happen. Even kids with autism that doesn't impact developmental levels makes a difference and most of those children struggle with friendships.
• Term dates - special schools have the same term dates as mainstream schools.
• Wraparound - frankly, a terrible reason to choose a school if the 32 hours of school time is wasted, which it is likely to be.

Special schools have as standard all the stuff that a child like this in mainstream would have cobbled on just to try and meet their basic needs, let alone make progress.

Where does the best possible education fit into the decision? Schools aren’t babysitters.

I know of a situation where an autistic, non verbal, potenially violent child is in a mainstream school, in year 1 as her parents refuse to even accept that she has any additional needs at all.

She has 1 to 1 support (actually job shares as working full-time with this child is so difficult, demanding and exhausting) and has her own room. When she spends any time with the rest of her official class the other children are frightened of her as she is physically big and strong and often lashes out and tries to hit or grab other children.

It's a terrible situation for the child herself, the other children in her class and the staff involved.

It depends on what options are available. Usually in the UK there’s fuck all for autistic children, so usually they are binned (made to be ‘home schooled’) as long as it doesn’t cost the LA anything they don’t care. It’s fucking shit.

If a school is directed to take them, it will usually be the catchment school, especially if those named are full in the year group and have a valid case for not bring able to meet need.

The system is just terribly broken. It's no good for anyone.

This is my experience too. :-(

Parent views bare the most weight in this situation because it'll be cheaper for the LA (and they couldn't care less if it's not right for a child as long as it saves them money).

However, it is neglecting the child's basic needs and the parents should be given a swift kick up the arse imo.