Government proposes biggest reforms to special educational needs in 30 years

[CQrrrnee]

online consultation closes tomorrow - last chance to reply
here

Dolfrog-good point. Many teachers have no training in this filed which should be definition attract the brightest, and most analytical, as it is so challenging.

Star, yes, it's about control.
In defnece of lEAs and PCTs i think it is important to remember that for every paretns who is switched on like you lot, spending hours reading, researchnig and working with their children, there are 99 who fail to turn up to appointments, do not carry out simple tasks requested of them by physios, OTs, s/lts and so on. They either can't be arsed or exp[ect someone to di it for them, Naturally this gives them a somewhat jaundiced view of parental 'engagement' to use one of the dreadful buzzwords in vogue.

What can you do? One or a combination of the below:

1. Cut your losses and move away or opt out of state provision

1. Follow complaint and litigation procedures throguh to the bitter end (if you have an iron will and a heart of concrete)

1. Work on not only your own child but systemic change. Get onto boards and school councils and PTAs and those sorts of things and lobby furiously-if you have the energy

1. Continue at every stage to firmly but courteously ask for quantifiable evidence. Ask for or announce that you will be perusing their professional guidelines as you know that all the professionals involved in your child's care have a professional responsibility to pursue evidence based practice.

Stuff like what follows is useful-taken from professional guidelines.

'Evidence-based practice can be described as: the conscientious, explicit and judicious use of current best evidence in making decisions about the care of individual patients? (and) means integrating individual clinical expertise with the best available external clinical evidence from systematic research. (Sackett et al., 1996).

The RCSLT recognises the need for more work in this area (Communicating Quality 5.3.6, 9.2.3 2006). Additionally, it recognises the need for SALTs to access regular professional support and expertise from outside the profession (Communicating Quality 9.5.2, 5.3.3, 2006).

In 2008, the RCSLT stated that: knowledge of research and evaluation plays an essential role in the quality of healthcare. Increased involvement with research institutions is central to improving the evidence base for speech and language therapy in view of the fact that many SALTs have insufficient experience in or knowledge of research methods, evaluating evidence, and incorporating evidence into practice.

There is recognition that within the profession there is insufficient attention to and development of evidence-based practice (The Bercow Report 3.17, 3.45, 3.76, 3.77, 3.78, 3.79, 2009, Resource Manuals for Commissioning and Planning Services for SLCN, RCSLT, 2009, The Darzi Report, 2008). The Cochrane Review (Law & Nye, 2003) concluded that there was an insufficient evidence base for most speech and language therapy interventions used with children with language delays and/or disorders. The most recent edition of the International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders carries a research report into the culture endemic amongst SALTs of using traditional intervention methods over evidence-based practice and considers the perceived barriers to its implementation. Therapists interviewed cite several reasons for the present situation, including lack of support by management and a reluctance by colleagues to work as a team in implementing evidence-based practice.

Following its publication, the Department for Children, Schools and Families conceded also that very few PCTs collect data on efficacy of therapeutic interventions and highlighted the lack of cohesion both across the board and the United Kingdom. It stated that: the existing research literature is insufficient to act as a base for a robust estimation of the costs and benefits of investment in services for children with SL&CN. Far more research is required to understand for whom and under what circumstances treatment is effective.

" Continue at every stage to firmly but courteously ask for quantifiable evidence. Ask for or announce that you will be perusing their professional guidelines as you know that all the professionals involved in your child's care have a professional responsibility to pursue evidence based practice."

I can only repeat that I have done this and done so politely and with explanation as to my purpose. This is what has had me branded vexatious.

I am sorry but I don't accept that providers have any intention of answering these types of questions. They don't see they have any reason to. They are no accountable and, save for complaints, there is no way of making them be. Even if you complain, they will cobble together some fudge about collaborative working and all that crap. So you keep asking the questions and eventually YOU become the problem.

There is NO way any service round here has any intention of answering such queries. You get what they decide is appropriate and that is that. They haven't a clue if it works so why are they going to start committing this to paper?

'So you keep asking the questions and eventually YOU become the problem.'

AT, I know what you are saying and I agree with you, which is why i say you have to consider this in the context of other options.

I owuld suggest quietly and meticulously collecting all your evidence and sitting on it until such time as it will come in useful because it will.

BUT this means the whole things becomes a game of revenge and retribution and meanwhile the clock ticks and your kid is still getting a shit service.

I know.I've lived it myslef and I can only reiterate how terrible an experience it is, how I feel for you all and how I post here to try and help other parents in the same position.

I would really hope your Tribunal will help you resolve some of these issues and show your LEA that you will not be cowed or dismissed for raising perfectly valid concerns.

I'm really keen on helping where I can with that group "measure up". I know local Mums on anti-depressants cos of the stress of fighting our local authority. (Their kids are a a few years older than mine.)

I was underwhelmed when I went to see my own MP. SEN is not a social or political priority. It should be as 60% of all prison inmates are illiterate. Social care costs for adults with disabilities are astronomical (that autistic toddler that gets appropriate help may not need adult residential care). I've lost count of the number of teens I've met that "self-medicate" on drink/drugs. There is a high social and financial cost of the current failing system to our whole society, not just individual families.

We are currently picked off and isolated as parents - that's become standard sen culture. Parents are intimidated by the professionals and the complexity of the current process. As a country we just can't afford the expensive failure of the current system any more. We do need the strength of numbers that can only be gained from supporting each other as parents. This site has been amazing for me in my own journey, but the support we garner here has to be extended to other formats to reach a wider audience of Mums and Dads.

At the end of the day we are only asking that people do their jobs! That isn't unreasonable. Moondog made a VERY valid point about professional standards requiring evidence based practice.

It's cultural change at grass roots level that's needed or at the worst end of the wedge stories like that awful panorama hospital programme will be occurring when our kids are grown.

I'd rather be labelled vextatious, difficult etc than look back and wish I'd tried harder to help my child (pokes out tongue!)

What keeps me going in the face of difficult and frightening meetings is two things:

1. I will not lie on my deathbed wondering if I did enough for my child.
2. This person I am talking to right now, will not remember my child's name in 10 years, but I (and he) will be living with the fall out of their mistakes now.

Both of these things helps me put the meeting/difficult chat/horrible letter etc all in perspective and reduces the importance and power of the individuals I am dealing with.

I'd even go so far as to suggest putting together a loose network of people who are willing to mobilise and attend each other's children's meetings together. Turning up en masse with 'my representatives' wpuld have a significant effect.#

Think of it-a website where you post messages and say
'Anyone in Kent available to attend a meeting with me at XXX with my local LEA?

Bochead is so right about being 'picked off and isolated as parents'. The powers that be have more effective communication in temrs of a tacit agreement on how to join forces against difficult folk.

Letting them know that you are letting other peopel know how they operate is a great step. In similar vein, ccing letters to many people also effective. A lot of people place a lot of importance and value on their reputation. If you can dismantle tat, you play on their achilles heel-their vanity.

In similar vein, ccing letters to many people also effective.

This is another ground for calling you vexatious!!

I am very glad that I have recorded things. Even today, I got a crappy, pointless, self-serving letter from the head of S&LT in relation to some of the queries I've raised.

One thing she suggests is that they sent targets to school in November. I checked this in January when it was first raised and school hadn't had them, yet she repeats this, again, as fact. Now, I know that targets through the post is not provision anyway, but I am glad that school's response in confirming their failure to receive the targets was sent by email.

Interestingly, the stupid woman also bangs on about how their services are based on 'qualitative and quantitive' research. I've asked for this three times to no avail.

I can put up with that crap and stupid people more bothered about themselves and their budgets than the kids they deal with but HOW do I work with these people long-term? It's not healthy for me or my kids.

I think the problem with 'individuals' is two-fold. Many of them are not evil (some of them are).

Mainly they have just been used to working in a system that places more importance on their 'professional opinion' than evidence. Questioning parents who challenge their practice is taken personally and rocks the boat in an uncomfortable way, so they turn to those people who run and manage the ineffective system (who in many cases have got management positions in the system BECAUSE they maintain the status quo) who pander to their 'professional opinion' and reassure them that they are indeed wonderful and parents deluded and save themselves for having to look at their internal practices, or heaven forbid offer more support to the struggling challenged professional.

'It's not healthy for me or my kids.'

No it's not.It sours and embitters you and overshadows the joy of family life.
I think it is is indeed practically impossible-althoguh not always-to work with the same peopel after such a situation.

Have you asked for their guidelines/code of practice on the issue of 'vexatious parents'?

The LA sent them with their 'banning order' and the S&LT head now says - we've answered all your questions now go away or words to that effect.

There is no way of forcing these people to respond to perfectly legitimate points about (a) provision and (b) targets.

Oh, and despite the fact that DS's TA has had no relevant training as required by the statement, the head of S&LT says one of the therapists had a chat on the phone with the head who believes all her TAs are competent.

Seriously, where do you go with this sort of crap? I will spend £1000s contesting this at Tribunal for (if I'm successful) more crap to be delivered by a crap TA working to crap targets while everyone can't wait to confirm how much progress your child has made so they can yank the plug.

It really is a waste of money even if I win

I have visions of flying pickets of Mums descending on some of these meetings. Cool!

How I could have done with a few educated Mums in the "nursery" meeting - it would have been wonderfully instead of leaving me with mental scars.

It's cultural and could be changed pretty fast if the will to do so was there. I used to specialise in change management for large corporates - let me set up a programme at my local council and things would change sharpish with the flick of a gantt chart.

I can handle the pros that don't know what to do - it's the ones that lie that get me upset.

Yes, nothing wrong with not knowing something.It's an honest starting point.
I am always breathing a sigh of relief if someone says 'I'm a bit stuck here.'

The lies are indicative of their insecurity and terror of being exposed.It's a natural defence mechanism.

I don't have the answers AT. I wish I did.
I'd be asking for legal advice on the legality of that document.
Have you explored all the avenues for complaint in the LEA and the NHS?

Thanks Moondog. We have instructed solicitors for the Tribunal and they will also be reviewing the banning order - all my correspondence has now been sent to them so they can consider it.

The sad thing is, looking at the emails/letters, that it actually exposes a pretty dysfunctional operation on their part - not knowing if DS's provision is in place or what the level of training should be or what meetings are intended to achieve or why they have chosen one S&LT report over another.

I was stonewalled about this at every turn, every question raised received a lie or was sidestepped. Would you really want sunlight shone on these practices? Well that's what they'll get now.

As you say, not knowing is one thing, lying is quite another.

Interestingly Moondog, their answer to taking no baseline assessments or filing reports without having met my son was that the S&LT was undertaking a 'dynamic assessment' based on observation and reading other people's reports and was able to identify baselines mysteriously from that.

Wow, she must be really special and must save them ALOT of money as you would think you'd actually have to meet a child first to know what they need. She is very magical although you would never tell this from her crap and pointless targets. She filed a report when none was required because the 'LA asked her to'.

Do you think they are all so used to lying to people all the time and never getting taken to task for it that they don't see the point of telling the truth?

Maybe.
I can't fathom how in any profession such a thing would be acceptable.

The truth is that most s/lts are groaning under huge caseloads, are bound down by vast quantities of largely pointless paperwork and are pulled in all directions. I don't think one of them feels they arte gvinig all the time they would like to a child.

It might be a start if people just admitted that. Lelading people up the garden path pretending you can do things you can't is bound to go pear shaped at some stage, whatever the profession.

You see I understand that - big workloads, stress, feeling no one gets a fair crack of the whip.

But then there is the outright manipulation behind people's backs, not answering questions, doing reports to try and undermine you (which must have taken a day of someone's time) when they are not required by the Tribunal and of course lying.

That I don't understand at all

I agree.
It's a web of lies and deceit which doesn't achieve anything for anyone.
Believe me when I tell you that they will also be affected and stressed like this. Not like you, but they will be.

That is some consolation at least!

I have some consolation. It isn't much and it isn't nice but the Heads of Advisory Services in teaching professions are the ones most affected by the pension changes. Pot reduced without them having time to do anything about it.

Okay, that is mean of me and probably quite unfair on some, but when I bring up an image of the person who has made my life hell over the last couple of years - oh how I laugh..........

AT I have had the same experience as you. I ask one question in a letter. The letter is responded to but not in a way that I can make head nor tail of what the answer is. I reply myself to clarify and make myself even clearer. The response alludes to my lack of intelligence for not understanding the first time but still fails to answer the question.

I write again and the final response is to apologise but inform me that they have nothing else to say on the matter and they are far too busy saving children to enter into a drawn out dialogue with me and can I please go away or they'll have to 'take things further'.

Yes, and being stressed because you know you are right and someone else is lying is a whole different type of stress to lying and being worried if you might be exposed.

Not that I have ever been subject to the latter myself!

And there are just SO many issues that if I put them all in one letter they will summarise and gloss over all the issues with generic bull, and if I submit single issue letters too close together then they will summarise and gloss over with generic bull.

And if I wait until one issue is resolved before I write about the next issue, it can be literally months and they will inform me that I should have told them at the time and there is nothing they can do about it now.

AT I just want you to know that I KNOW!

Again, not to make you feel better that it is an corruption on a large scale but so you can take comfort in knowing it isn't you.

And Moondog, that is an excellent idea if a network can grow to a big enough size to have parents supporting each other.

The LA bullshit me and I am frustrated, but I know stuff and they know I know stuff. However, there are things that they wouldn't try with me that they do all the time with other parents I meet (i.e. we don't give statements to children under the age of 6) and I would happily sit in a few meetings if I can to support other parents not having to listen to that level of crap.

I think that might be where it starts. We're 'onto them' when they bullshit. The odds are so stacked against us but we are still 'onto them'. So many other parents aren't. Rather than thinking of a network to address the level of crap AT and I are dealing with it could cause a massive tidal wave to simply support/represent/attend meetings to stop the low level stuff such as mentioned above. I do think that could make a difference.

Yes.
That sums it up.
We're onto you and we know that you know we are onto you.

If that makes sense-good thing I'm on nowt stronger than Earl Grey.

Well I've been drinking since 1pm so well done if you made any sense of my posts.

Mrs Evil, mentioned below said in a meeting (where she also taunted me about the tribunal loss) 'I know you are very clever'.

I would have loved to ask her what she meant by that but it was at that point the 4th attempt at derailing the focus of the meeting and what I wanted and was quite determined to get. In fact, what I wanted (a weekly summary of the advice they were giving the school wrt my ds) was impossible for them to argue against when faced with their own policy documents and code of conducts, but instead of just agreeing on the phone or in writing, they had to summon me to a meeting with nearly their whole team to publicly humiliate me about the tribunal loss before then finally agreeing to do as I asked.