Draft SEN legislation - worrying!

[AgnesDiPesto]

SOSSEN views on draft legislation here

If you have views you can submit them to Ambitious About Autism by 11 October here although probably other routes too.

SOSSEN urging everyone to complain to their MP about removing parental rights.

I think the 'parent penalties' are partly an interpretation of the giving LAs control of the mediation, both in terms of the mediator and who is allowed to attend.

This means that the more you disagree with the LA, the more unpleasant the mediation will be, and the less support you will be allowed.

If ever there were a time for parents and schools to unite it's now.

Should this be placed on the main board?

Yes, parents and schools together.

And Teather's replacement to come and answer some questions in a friendly web-chat.

Hello

Edward Timpson has agreed to come on for a webchat after party conference, so we're just in the process of firming up dates.

Blimey, - that was quick.

Presumably this will happen on the main board, - and presumably this webchat will highlight these issues to others who are interested in the webchat.

Perhaps a campaign could follow if there is obvious interest.?

Great - perhaps we should 'caucus' on our questions guys?

I am hoping to work on a submission to the Select Cttee and will read through proposals properly this weekend.

If schools and parents can't request Statutory Assessment, who can? Confused by that.
I would have thought schools will be up in arms, not only because of that aspect, but because of the implication that there won't be provision for children with high IQ. My DS' old school has numerous students with AS who will probably be destined for very high things academically but because of their condition present considerable challenge behaviourally and need support, not just for their own sake, but for everyone else's.
Thanks for bringing this to our attention.

Hello

Thanks for drawing our attention to this one - we will have a look.

Do please keep posting to let us know what you think.

MNHQ

This is very worrying and not what parents had expected from reading the Green paper...
I have emailed the SOSSEN link to the Council for Disabled children who run the following:

The Making Ourselves Heard participation network
The National Parent Partnership Network
The Special Educational Consortium
The Transition Information Network
We also host the Every Disabled Child Matters campaign.

Surely they should be all over this....????

On a purely selfish angry mum level, this has made up my mind that DS1 needs to be moved out of mainstream into a specialist placement sooner rather than later. Waiting until secondary school transition is likely to leave him stranded with nowhere suitable to go if this goes ahead.

Off to make some noise.

Thanks for the information.

Will write to my MP and have alerted various groups to the new information.

Perhaps I will write to the governors of my dc's schools to ask what they intend to do about it.

Lexy - I have had very recent experience with the Council for Disabled Children (which is an umbrella organisation for lots of charities) and I was hugely disappointed with their sympathetic stance to LAs breaking the law.

Perhaps we should draw up a campaign hit list? A few people have PM'd me already to discuss this further.

I have is a very helpful contact at national office at the NAS and I am sure people have other ideas/contacts.

Appropriately - very disappointed to hear that re. CDC. They do have a response to the paper on their website, detailing their concerns.

Hothead - totally agree on wording "best endeavours".
Difficult enough to get LA's to specify and quantify provision. At least once you got over that hurdle they were obligated to provide.

I think clarity from SOSSEN eg a webchat would be really helpful - I'm not sure if their take is the worst case scenario or fact.

I can't see any other published responses yet and surprised IPSEA etc not picked it up

Mediation is terrible idea in my view. I have used mediation as a lawyer and there are very few cases where its really needed. Either you can get round a table and sort it out face to face without a mediator because both parties want to negotiate and there is a middle ground. Or there is no room for compromise eg LA said DS very mild and could go to m/s with termly professional visits - we said he was severe and needed autism specific education & fulltime 1:1 - ie so far apart that mediation is pointless, you can't compromise by saying well lets meet the middle and pretend DS is moderate and split the difference because that would not have met his needs given they were actually severe.

Our LA have many blanket policies about using a very extended graduated approach before doing statutory assessment and outright ban on independent placements without tribunal so mediation when there is a policy not to compromise at all would be utterly pointless. I think mediation will make parents feel thats its expected that they compromise but that may not be whats best for the child if for eg they end up with only 60% of what they need because the LA has bargained them down.

Truth is if our LA had negotiated we would have settled for far less ABA than the Tribunal gave us. Never in our wildest dreams did we think we would win 35 hours a week, 48 weeks a year. But the Tribunal decided he did need it and I am really grateful that it was a tribunal who made that decision. I know lots of families in neighbouring LAs which pay for ABA without tribunal where they feel pressured to compromise and end up accepting less than needed / very part time programmes and topping it up themselves. I think that will be the result of mediation. Parents feeling pressured to accept less.

Parents should not be making the decision as to whether 15 hours, 20 hours, 35 hours etc is appropriate on their own without advice. There should be expert input into that decision.

Yes ABA is totally absent its not included in the list of provisions when it easily could have been

I found this on the NAS website. It says that the committee looking at this need replies by the 11th October. That isn't long for everyone to send in their views.

I have also mentioned this on the Yahoo ABA group, there doesn't seem to be a mention of it there either.