Moondog and working - record keeping advice again

[appropriatelytrained]

After persistent chasing, I have received a letter from a manager at the Trust in response to my questions about the meeting the S&LT service attended earlier in the year.

The head of the service said that at this meeting my son's head claimed he had had a programme ongoing all academic year. She did this in an attempt to head off complaints from me about the lack of provision.

This was completely untrue. There was no provision until May. But I have had to go to the PHSO and then chase the S&LT and PALS for 5 months to get disclosure .

I get a letter - close of business today of course - saying it was a meeting with the LA for Tribunal witnesses. It was just to discuss Tribunal preparation and as it had no therapeutic outcome, it was not recorded on the file.

This is clearly crap. Not only has the head of S&LT already said that my son's programme was discussed, but that it was discussed with the attendee from the S&LT service, a senior S&LT who the LA was trying to list as a witness. They failed because the Tribunal refused as she'd never met my son.

Would you expect that type of discussion to be recorded when it was in dispute? Wouldn't you expect the S&LT to know if there had been a programme in place any way?

There has been a succession of poor practice which I am determined to pursue. The NHS S&LT filed a report supporting the LA's case when she'd never even met my son!

Interestingly, it was two days after this meeting in June, that I received a vexatious ban from the LA preventing me from corresponding with them.

Oh good grief!

Although much less surprised to read these things these days....

I am determined to pursue this as I cannot see why these people should be allowed to get away with this kind of unlawful practice.

Getting together to cook up evidence for Tribunal - it's tantamount to perverting the course of justice!

I know AT but where will it lead. What are your Aims and Objectives? Who are you going to use to achieve the outcomes?

I'm not saying don't keep going btw.

One of the things I've realised is that Perhaps the best outcome you can get from these things is to bring about change of practice. That means refraining from flogging them with all you have but putting the fear of God in them and then giving them a way out that involves working with you to resolve the issues iyswim.

It's less satisfying and will undoubtably involve compromise and building relationships but arguably the most productive way forward because as you know the regulatory bodies create paperwork but that's about it.

I think you are right Star. I think the problem is that they are so intransigent in their defensiveness that it is hard to think of offering a way out.

For example, they averted an investigation by the PHSO by saying they had not completed 'local resolution' and were going to offer me a meeting.

So, I wait and chase twice for this meeting. Now they write and say 'we understand you are insisting on a meeting'.

I would primarily like to see a change in practices. It is the only reason to pursue this but I really don't see a way of achieving this practically as they seem determined to front it all out by evasion and lies.

I have asked that someone 'independent' within the Trust now oversee this as the PALS service has failed dismally by ignoring me for three months and prompting the complaint to the PHSO in the first place.

The S&LT service is part of a community health service which was taken over by a big hospital trust in June. The manager appointed to oversee my complaint is part of the original community health service and I think this now needs to go through the Chief Exec's office.

I think you are right though. It is important to work on a list of objectives. This is primarily to ensure this poor practice stops

Ask for your child's case notes and plot what they claim against what is written.

I would think about what Star says too though.
It all turns into a web of lies and arse covering and bitterness.
If you have the strength to emerge unscathed then go for it.
If not, cut your losses, move to some other service and , when calmer, regather and lodge a complaint.

Going through this sort of stuff nearly killed me and I am as tough as old boots.

Thanks Moondog.

The thing is, I have my son's notes up to end of May and there is no evidence in them that any work was done with my son before the S&LT came in post statement issue in April/May.

A S&LT saw him for stat assessment in Oct and revisited this for further assessment in Jan.

She claims to have issued targets in Oct to myself and school. By January, I had not received them so I checked with school. In Jan, school confirmed in writing that these targets had not been received.

The statement was then issued at the end of Jan. It requires a programme designed, reviewed and monitored by a S&LT

A S&LT did not attend to set up this programme until May. She then set targets in a meeting with our own S&LT.

I attended every meeting of the S&LT service at school and I complained about the lack of intervention to the head of S&LT. At no point were the targets which were supposed to have been sent in October discussed, raised, monitored or reviewed. At no point did school say - we've been working secretly on these targets for the last 5 months.

In fact, the head wrote to Cerebra in April confirming DS had not had S&LT for the last 6 months. She also confirmed, in writing to the LA, in April that no targets had been received and no work had been undertaken on them. This was discovered by virtue of a DPA request to the LA.

In May, the LA apologised to the LGO and myself for the delay in setting up the S&LT programme. On this basis, the LGO decided to discontinue its investigation saying the provision was now all in place. It was not. It has since resumed its investigation which it has made formal following my complaint regarding my vexatious ban and the further evidence I have supplied confirming that the provision was still not in place.

However, 2 weeks before Tribunal, in June, they all have this meeting. It then emerges that there has in fact been some 'secret' S&LT undertaken at school that no one, not even the S&LT appeared to know about. They then repeated all this crap in Tribunal reports.

None of this is on my son's records. I want to pick my battles wisely, I really do but this sort of collusion needs exposing and I am torn between walking away and taking on this battle because sometimes you just have to stand and fight for the sake of those who follow you or who can't do this for themselves.

Moondog - isn't it the case that even if these targets were received in Oct (which they were not), you would expect to see evidence of them being reviewed, discussed and monitored? The fact that the S&LT only seem to have been aware of this work in June means that it is not the programme required by the statement.

Also, how usual is it for therapists to attend meetings concerning children they have never met, discuss their programme with the child's head and then fail to record that discussion even though they know there is a dispute about it

What is the best way of proceeding with this? Back to the PHSO? Or to the HPC?

Anyway, thanks for listening!!!! Now, it's Christmas and I must go and drink some egg-nog.

I hope you will be doing the same and I hope you wonderful ladies have a fabulous Christmas!

AT we are being given similar run around with our SALT complaint where meetings about tribunal were covered up as other things. Clearly the actual meetings were to come up with a plan of parent and ABA bashing - its clear from the timing and wording of the defence to our appeal this is what the meetings involved but joining the dots is proving hard as they continue to lie to cover it up.

I KNOW that these meetings were against DS interests. But proving it is hard. I want to prove SALT did not have our consent to participate in these sort of meetings but as they are pretending they were about intervention we can't show they met and discussed stuff without consent.

I think all we can do is turn the campaign / measure up thing into a sort of healthwatch / Dr Foster website for SN and name and shame. Getting enough people to share their stories, dodgy tactics etc and make it public is the only thing long term which will change things. Getting it out there that again and again SALT depts do not work with ASD and do not implement programmes but just have contacts and meetings.

We have been refused sight of the block contract between SALT and LA, despite them quoting from it in the response to our complaint.

Anyway lets enjoy the next few days and regroup with an action plan in the New Year. We just need to join forces I think.

Happy Christmas everyone.

Accusing inveterate liars of lying generally begets yet more lies. As you've found.

Accusing NHS bodies of confusion, appalling record keeping, lack of continuity and dismal communication allows then to admit to piss-poor practice without losing face. Which may get you the outcome you need.

(but obviously write the chronology so that the untruths are self-evident; as well as your willingness to patiently receive and work alongside the excuses)

Thanks. Yes that is good advice. I mean they can hardly say their record-keeping is great when they've not recorded anything.

I am always torn between moving on and letting these people get away with it or fighting it out knowing that, even if achieves little in terms of admissions of collusion and lying, that it makes them justify themselves internally and gives them some moments of anxiety.

There doesn't even seem to be a defined complaints policy. I am aghast that there is no pretence at 'independent' oversight. The PALS team at this Trust have been part of the problem. Simply refusing to answer my emails for months even when I was asking for a copy of the complaints policy. Then, when they were forced to communicate with me by the PHSO intervention, they were like 'what us? what did we do?'

They're just constantly pissing me about - deliberately.

Agnes, I have a copy of their service level agreement which talks only of provision being on a 'consultative' basis. It's no wonder that these people then fight tooth and nail not to increase individual provision as they are clearly paid no more for it. I can't believe they think it's justifiable to refuse you a copy.

How did S&LT depts end up in this state, working at the behest of the LA? Other NHS depts have not been so swallowed up. They are barely more than an ed dept.

I agree Agnes, that pulling together is the way forward. Perhaps we should write approach a publisher with ideas for a book of common themes and tricks in the SEN process - written by parents for parents!!

'monitor' 'review' 'consult' 'support' 'advice as appropriate' 'supervise'

As a lawyer, you will know better than anyone that these terms mean exactly what the person defneding their input (or rather 'input') wants them to mean.
It is a sign of how insane it has all become that people consider them reasonable.

I did myself until I dipped my toes into Behaviourism and learnt one of its central tents, in that language used must describe exactly what is happening. So it is no good to talk of 'supporting'. This must be redefined as perhaps something like this 'The s/lt will visit X's class three times a term to review the data taken by the classroom assistant on X's daily initiations with three peers.'

The other problem is too many people dealing with too many people so you have a bizarre spiderweb of activity but no action. Some children will have 10-15 people involved with them, and all of this interaction generates hge amounts of paperwork and meeting. Far better to have fewer people involved with each child but all directly accountable. I myself have responsibility for well over a 100 children all with very dfifferent problems. Now throw in their teachers, LSAs, parents, other public sector staff and it mushrooms into 100s and 100s of people.

The whole 'multi-disciplinary' approach is a nonsense anywhere. In reality it is disparate folk drifting in and out of a child's life either confusing and annoying the teachers or giving said teachers an opportunity to absolve themselves of direct responsibility for a child.

The other issue is how s/lt comes under the nHS. That is reasonable enough for a stroke patient or someone with a cleft palate ,but frankly nuts in terms of a child whose communication difficulties impact on their education. For years it was claimed that communication needs are 'non educational' (eh???) until a parent refused to accept this complete Orwellian bullshit and tool her PCT to court after which it was ruled that it is of course an educational need this ultimate responsibility falls to LEA.However, this will only apply in the case of a statement which is written according to SMART targets.
See IPSEA.
Here

It's a compete and utter shambles and I sense it will not exist in its present from in 10 years.

I hardly need to tell a lawyer how to tackle these things, but work methodically throguh the structure. If PALS are not doing what they shoudl, find out who their bosses are.

Go for a judicial review.

CC your letters to everyone.

Appeal to Chief Exec. directly.

You need a plan of action however and to deal with one thing at a time.

OT in my area follows the same pattern - she couldn't even produce her assessment for tribunal - even when the lea chased it, and don't get me started on Cahms or SS.

Please pick your battles - sadly I've met a few Mums locally who have ended up on AD's - at which point no help is EVER given to the kid as it's ALL parenting. The exact lies and methods used to get to this point vary but it's a definate pattern. Somehow the stress of the fight tipping Mum over the edge means no professional ever has to bother helping the child again in real terms - they are free to "review & monitor" for ever more.

You are bottom of the pile in the hierarchy of "professional opinions" and always will be unless you have the independent means to bypass the state health, social care and education systems totally.

(Acronymns - CAF = conspiracy against the family, TAC = team against the child etc. These people DO work together very well, sadly not in the child's interests. It's cynical but sadly very true. If the system was fair then heads would have rolled long before you arrived on the scene. It's a sick game. )

It gets dressed up in nice professional patronising jargon but that's the end result. You are discredited and your chidl suffers unless you are VERY clever, and being clever starts with smiling sweetly as they blatently lie yet again & focussing on outcomes. What bitter plls will you have to swallow to get the SALT you want? Does the NHS staff member assigned even have the skills needed to help your kid in the final analysis?

I visualise myself as a sheep herder, gently but relentlessly herding the sheep (various profesionals) in the direction I want, despite how many times they nip at my ankles.

I worry about you AT - they'll make you ill if you let them. You have a brain so are seen as a threat right now.

Thanks. I really appreciate your input.

Moondog - I have said I want them to pass this on to the Chief Exec's office and that if they do not confirm that they have done this within 7 days, I will do it myself. I expect they're just sitting on it, hoping I'll go away.

I agree with you about multi-disciplinary 'teams'. People being dragged in to 'help' because they have to more like. This means OTs who don't understand S&LT, S&LT who don't understand EP stuff and vice versa so everyone is stepping on each other's toes. But this becomes particularly complicated because NONE of them actually know the child they're talking about.

In reality, the parent is the multi-disciplinary team, yet we get sidelined/dismissed.

Fortunately, this dreadful S&LT team will no longer be dealing with my son as the school we have moved to is out of county and their service level agreement stops at county borders. We still live in county, so sadly we still have the same LA to deal with.

I think because we will not have to deal with them any more, it makes me feel like they have got away with this - again. That they lie and lie to undermine children's support while pretending to be the only ones who really care, is just so profoundly disgraceful.

I suppose I know deep down that moving on is sensible but I also think that unless you take these points as you go through this process, these people continue their lies without a second thought. I'm not saying they will change or respond in a constructive way, but making them think and worry about it seems appropriate.

I just find it hard to balance doing what is right for me and what is the right thing. Many people battle systems for years, being stonewalled and lied to, but sometimes these battles make a difference. I also think that many people put themselves through much harder battles, with greater levels of sacrifice to achieve change.

I am not saying what I do will achieve change, but not doing anything certainly won't. I also think they have stonewalled for so long in the expectation I will walk away.

So I suppose I am saying I agree - pick your battles. But that knowing when it is time to fight is not easy.

I DO think you should keep up the fight whenever possible - subject to the following caveats

1/ Your own mental health doesn't crack under the strain (always remember there is no saftey net for your child if you go under).

2/ Fighting for what's right doesn't take so much time and energy that your quality of family life suffers (& by default your kids)

3/ You are sure you'll have enough strength to continue doing the day to day "home therapy" stuff every sen parent expends so much energy on yet never gets credited for by the professionals (says the Mum who spent a year teachng her son to make eye contact, 3 years teaching him the mechanics of imaginative play, 2 years sorting his pronunciation of b &d & V & w etc).

I know my own Tribunal win has made it easier for the child with similar problems & background to my son that comes after our family in my own lea. I can't agree enough with how infuriating it is that they masquerade as caring for the child when in reality it's often complete indifference they feel. The patronisation of them pretending they care more than I do has had me biting my lip more times than I can recount.

I agree with moondog - in 10 years the current system will have crumbled, trouble is our kids can't wait 10 years so we just have to do what we can within our own limitations today.

Thanks Bochead. I think that is really great advice. Anger can drive so much of what I do, or how I respond and it is hard to let things lie or to think rationally about what can be achieved and what is worth pursuing.

It is such a hard balance to get - prioritising your child's 'normal' family life and making sure their needs are met.

I wish more than anything that we could just start to get all these voices heard. This is a huge national problem - there is dreadful, unlawful practices, poor provision and indifference and all we are left with as parents is often a huge and well-paid industry of lawyers and private specialists riding on our backs. No matter how helpful they are, they perpetuate not challenge the system too.

AT, if you can possibly do this then I really think you should. The system relies on lack of challenge by exhausted parents and overpaperworked system participators.

If you have the drive and resources you are a rare hope for change. But I do agree with Boch. You must not render yourself useless to you family or allow the anger to eat you.

I spoke to my GP once about the tremendous pressure I was under in the run up to the last tribunal. She implied I might like a referal to a psychiatrist for a potential dx of personality disorder which incidentally a symptom of which is denial of a personality disorder along with a reputation for disagreeing with professionals.

This thing is deep. Be careful.

Thanks Star. I can very much understand where you are coming from with that. What a terrible GP!

I will press ahead robustly but in a measured way and would be grateful for your support as I go!

Reading this thread makes me feel so sad.

At present we have a system which is neither efficient nor effective but not open to any changes because only the users/parents want any major changes. This inefficient use of financial resource is at a time when the government is looking for ways to cut the budget. Perhaps we should get together and make recommendations on how the nation's money can be saved - eg. how much will getting rid of the LGO actually save the nation financially?

Good luck with the fight AT and remember to take care of yourself.

I don't think the GP was that great, but I don't think she was terrible either. My story sounds insane.

And I think you know that it got crazier.

An anon source phoned SS to say that I was a pushy parent trying to get things I didn't need. Then a week week before my dad died (which was known to the LA) I was summoned under false pretences to the job centre where I was surprised with accusations of benefit fraud and claiming DLA when I shouldn't be, and further encouraging others through MN to do the same. I had to make a statement on the hoof without the full details of the accusations and receive warnings that I might be videoed out and about and that fraud investigation were accessing my computer remotely (all bollox but scary to hear at the time)

Then I find out a few months later that the HT of the school ds is to attend has told her Governors that I record conversations in secret and have been banned from MN for spreading propaganda and that she asked a Parent Governor to befriend me and convince me to find another school.

Who knows what else is going on 'out there' that I don't know about.

I am choosing to believe, perhaps naively that I am a rare and unlucky case, but you can see that a label of 'vexatious' could well be the tip of the iceberg and you need to be sure you can cope with other dirty tricks if they come.

It may not be that you put people on the defensive but on the attack.

I seem to have survived. The thing about personal attacks is that you get used to them and thank god I am knowledgable and with it enough to be able to handle a benefit interrogation with confidence etc and explain exactly why ASD is a physical disability.

Or perhaps I am just a little bit insane after all. In the midst of all this we are having another baby whilst heading for our second tribunal.

I think the point I am making is that this nonsense needs to become a part of life, NOT your life.

And I'm sure you know that I will help you where I can. I really don't mind which LA I take on tbh. I'm getting the feeling that they are all going the same way because they are being allowed to and those that do not become the national suppliers of SEN by default which is not sustainable.

I don't know how viable this is, but I've often thought that publishing some of the correspondence between me and the LA would make interesting reading. There really is no shame in some of the things they have been prepared to put into writing. There must be millions of ludicrous pieces of paperwork that would make a good collection.

God Star, that is dreadful beyond measure.

I don't doubt the lengths that they will go to. One solicitor I spoke to said it was becoming 'more and more common' to have 'child protection issues' dragged into SEN Tribunals!

These people are accountable to their elected members. Maybe that is the way but, as Agnes says, one person alone is too easily dismissed as a mad hatter. This needs to be a joint issue.

I also think that part of the problem in terms of journalistic coverage is that those newspapers which might pursue investigative stories like this (e.g. Guardian) are always looking for the 'austerity cuts and poor heroic public sector workers' angle.

These types of practices have nothing to do with cuts. They are a result ingrained dysfunctional cultures and impunity and lack of accountability.

Yes. Perhaps you remember we had a 'pretend' CP investigation in the run up to the last tribunal with the sole purpose being to create social services 'paperwork' as evidence.

Personality disorder or not a dx of one would render me useless for my ds.

I don't think newspapers are out of the equation. There are two types of stories, the main will appeal to the likes of the telegraph etc. I.e public sector wastage and using legal teams to protect their own jobs and justification for existence.

The guardian will like stories where LAs are needed where they have improved practice to get outcomes and commission and monitor provision. Rare, but does happen.

I think that really is it AT - that many assume we should not criticise poor put upon heroines in NHS/LEA who are, supposedly, trying their utmost to help SN children and their parents. There are too many people who don't want to hear the truth about a corrupt and ingrown unaccountable culture - maybe because they have a vested interest in maintaining it ? All too often defending the public sector turns out to be defending the salaries and priviliges of the professional spider web that Moondog describes - all too accurately unfortunately

Legal teams that are funded by the tax payer I might add.

OMG, AT and Star.

One solicitor I spoke to said it was becoming 'more and more common' to have 'child protection issues' dragged into SEN Tribunals!

This rings so true. I went through tribunal earlier this month. A week before the date, I was referrred to SS as there was "serious concern about the welfare of dd" - this after 18 months of her being at home and no concern expressed by any of the profs directly involved. Even more machiavellian, the Ed department leant on the CAHMS service director to make this referral, and the local CAHMS team were not involved or even informed! A SW and psychiatrist were despatched "with utmost urgency" to make an assessment, and subsequently asked to attend as witnesses!

As I have nothing to hide, all turned out well and dd has the placement we wanted.

You are both right about collating experiences, and maybe it is best done off MN as I know LAs do go on MN and we may be identified!

God. It is awful isn't it?

I am past caring being identified as they know exactly what I think of their incompetent and unlawful practices.

It is interesting how journalists seem to hang out and quickly pick up stories from mumsnet when it suits their purpose, but no one really seems at all interested in the many, and consistent tales of poor practice and maladministration that surface here day after day after day.

I am a lifelong Labour supporter who believes very strongly in the public sector but the rogues we have all encountered in the NHS, in schools and LAs have nothing in common with the concept of committed public servants paid by the public purse to serve the public.

They have absolutely no idea about the most basic of pubic sector principles - the public sector ethos, accountability, due process, acting within your powers, fairness, transparency etc. They react with anger and outrage when their practices are challenged or explanations are demanded. They plot to undermine parents, they lie, they falsify records, they act deceitfully and reprehensibly because they are poor at their job, badly trained and overpaid and they cannot have anyone expose the myth of their 'SEN industry'.

It's a national disgrace. If it was 'old people', the media would be outraged. But children's rights are all too easily routinely ignored and abused. I really don't understand it.