Please help!

[Nenora1979]

Our son is adopted and has additional needs, which severely impact his ability to attend a school setting, including SEMH schools. He started at a mainstream setting but was expelled at the age of 5 for hospitalising a teacher and a child. He attended a 16-week placement setting for behaviour and then moved to a SEMH trauma-informed school. (25 miles away) He had 5 children in his class and 3 teachers. Over the 2 years he attended this setting, he was continuely in fight or flight mode and was extremely hypervigilant. He never settled and learnt more destructive behaviours. He moved backwards educationally and emotionally. He was removed from the school's books as they could no longer meet need. He struggled to travel by taxi and even had the police called on him whilst travelling. This has caused him further trauma.

I have home educated him for the past 10 months, as the LA could not provide any support. This has been a very stressful situation as I have no restbite for him as his needs are so complex. The LA agreed that he should be put forward for an EOTAS package as no schools were able to educate him. We were happy with this decision.

The LA then came forward and stated that they would not provide an EOTAS package because he had not attended a SEMH school that specialises in Trauma. We stated that he had attended such a school for 2 years, and then they said that they had found an SEMH school (30 miles away) which could meet need. He would be required to travel for 2-3 hours a day to attend this setting.

We attended a meeting at the setting, and although we agree it is a good school, the facilities are set up in the same way as the last SEMH school, and there are 10 children to a class with 2 teachers and no places for our son to regulate.

We have stated we do not want our son to attend this setting as it will only end in the same situation as the last setting and cause our son further trauma and attachment issues. This would have a knock-on effect in our home lives and could lead to a family breakdown. But the local authority will not budge. We have an adoption social worker and a highly specialist CAMHS psychologist who have also stated they believe this setting is not right for our son.

We have been told that if we refuse this school placement, we will have to EHE our son. This is not something we can do due to the complexity of our son's needs.

Does anyone know where we can go with this?

Thank you so much.

Edited as posted on wrong thread.

You do not have to EHE if you don’t want to.

Do you currently have the right of appeal so you can appeal to SENDIST about the EHCP? If so, have you appealed? If you don’t yet have the right of appeal, where are you with the EHCP?

Is the LA currently providing provision? If not, inform the LA in writing you are not EHEing and they need to make provision to ensure he still receives a suitable full-time education and anything detailed, specified and quantified in F of the EHCP.

We have an adoption social worker and a highly specialist CAMHS psychologist who have also stated they believe this setting is not right for our son.

Do you have this in writing?

The maximum recommended travel time for primary is 45 mins. Although many do travel further this doesn’t sound suitable for DS.

HI,

Thank you so much for the response.

I am not sure if we need to appeal the EHCP? We have an EHCP in place, but the local authority (last Sept) refused his last SEMH schools' recommendations for him to have a 1-to-1 in lessons and a 2to1 in the playground.

The LA offered a home tutor for 2 hours a week, but the specialists involved stated that they don't think it would be appropriate for our son, so the LA said they offered him support, but we refused it.

The CAMHS worker state in writing that school was not the best place for our DS. The social worker has now left, but did say it at a meeting.

You don’t have the right of appeal at the moment. Request an early review of the EHCP using one of IPSEA’s model letters. Following the review, if the LA doesn’t make the necessary amendments, you can appeal.

If you inform the LA you are not EHE, the LA’s duty is to provide a suitable full-time education. If home tuition isn’t suitable, it doesn’t relieve the LA’s duty under section 19 of the Education Act 1996. And, 2 hours is not full-time either. Email the Director of Children’s Services using the relevant model letter from IPSEA’s website. If that doesn’t work, you need a pre-action letter. SOSSEN can help with this, but there is a waiting list, so you may want to look elsewhere. Then, if the pre-action letter fails, judicial review proceedings will resolve the situation.

As well as this, if you are not electively home educating, the LA has a duty under section 42 of the Children and Families Act 2014 to ensure anything detailed, specified and quantified in F of the EHCP is provided. In your email to the Director of Children’s Services, you can incorporate another one of IPSEA’s model letters about this. If that doesn’t work, you can take the same steps as in my previous paragraph to enforce the provision.

The CAMHS worker saying the setting is not right for DS isn’t quite the same as the school not being the best place for DS. The LA doesn’t have a duty to provide the best possible education. They do, however, have a duty to provide what is appropriate and reasonably required. For EOTAS/EOTIS, you need to prove it is inappropriate for provision to be made in school.