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.

And if you ARE new, you're probably running for the hills after Justa's post which makes us all sound like mad conspiracy theorists............

Sadly, she speaks the truth however.

Blooming hell, are the social rules of this site anywhere for newbies so they aren't seen as having strange agendas or arouse suspision. Seems a bit unfair to me if new folks are judged against unspoken rules they mayn't be aware of. I thought this was a board for people to offload and help each other goodness knows there is enough opportunity to be judged in RL

No one was being judged by 'unspoken rules'. If people want to come and say what they want they can do.

But equally, I have the right to respond if I don't like what they say.

That's not an unspoken rule - it's life, anywhere, everywhere. Just because someone has posted for the first time doesn't mean they're beyond reproach.

Herebenson isn't new.

I think it is just sensible social etiquette to get to know a message board before diving in tbh. It isn't a rule.

Even I don't just jump into the other topics on MN without 'getting to know' the scene a bit.

2tired please don't worry about any hidden rules. It's just that some posters here have had some experiences with this board & RL so can be a bit cautious. But there is no secret code to posting here or if there is I am totally ignorant of it and I for one would hate it if new posters were discouraged from seeking advice because of fears of seeming ungenuine. I also think people here are pretty quick at realising who is genuine and who may have a less-than-honest agenda

Thanks bialystockandbloom for your response.

Yep. Someone on this board decided that I shouldn't be getting higher rate DLA so reported me to the benefits office and to social services, giving my username from here.

HT of new school that Ds was to attend told Governors I had been banned from MN for SN propaganda, and that I had had DLA removed for lying.

When I moved LA, old LA gave new LA my username and new LA told tribunal some things from my posts.

I kid you not, on any of this.

Bialy - it's also that when some people come here and use their hobnail boots to jump in, you do suspect their motive.

Maybe they have just tumbled off the AIBU board

As Ouryve says, the bit about children with average cognitive ability comes from the stuff on the SOS SEN website, which in turn seems to come from something Melinda Nettleton has been sending round, and that in turn comes from something that "a well known Local Authority solicitor" has been saying when training local authorities. I have strong suspicions who that solicitor is (a friend of mine had a dreadful time when he was representing the council in her appeal), and it wouldn't surprise me at all if he has been telling local authorities to refuse statutory assessment for children with average cognitive ability, because he knows that will mean more parents appealing which means more work for his firm. I can't see anything at all in the draft which justifies this.

2tired - you've been around here long enough to know we don't 'pick fights' with people - surely?

I know who that solicitor is too Veritate. It isn't that he's even a very good solicitor. He just knows how to introduce enough ambiguity and circular arguments that everyone wants to slit their wrists before they die of boredom at the nonsensical witterings.

I must say I was quite startled at the hostile response to Delalakis for the crime of not knowing the backgrounds of regular posters on here. I understand why people worry but I couldn't see anything in her posts that made her look like a council snooper or indeed someone jumping in with hobnail boots. Yes, she made a mistake on one point but, as people have acknowledged, she was quite right on others. Mumsnet is usually a very welcoming forum and it would be a pity to put new contributors off by treating them as being automatically the enemy.

Is that really how legal people would behave, I must be really naive but I find that obscene. I have scoured my inbox for the email that had the CDC link but I can't find it but am sure I havent dreamt it and they were saying the same about cognitive functioning. I suspect there is a lot going on that we aren't being told (maybe I'm not as naive as I think!) in terms of responses to the call for submissions, to be safe, could questions to establish if there is any truth in this not be put to the committee?

Star I am so sorry to hear of your experiences that stinks.

AE yes I guess I should know that.

Starlight, in my friend's experience it's not just ambiguity that that solicitor uses. She had him deliberately flouting tribunal rules and orders, putting forward information about costs which turned out to be totally wrong, and coming up with demands that she make her autistic child available for examination by the local authority educational psychologist at the eleventh hour giving one day's notice. He then accused her of being deliberately unco-operative when she reasonably pointed out that her child needed more time if the EP was to have a hope of even persuading her son to come out of his bedroom. Apparently it's none of it uncommon with him. I do hope the tribunal is getting his measure.

Is that the solicitor from Cambridge?

Yes Veritate, he represented our LA against us. The only sanity-saving feature in out lost tribunal was that had the LA had no solicitor and no witnesses we would still have lost as our appeal was dismissed on the basis that no-one from the LA had recommended what we were at appeal for. Doh

I have been told by my experts that upon hearing who the panel were they woukd have expected nothing else.

But the ordeal was the most twisted and evil and laws were completely fabricated to scare the judge into playing safe.

Bialy, I don't expect anyone will want to respond to such a direct question.

Milton Keynes, though I think he was previously employed directly by Cambridge.

I know many solicitors laugh at him because his legal arguments are contrived and daft, but he makes up for that by bullying and intimidation.

So the cognitive/iq thing is a red herring put about by a solicitor?

hothead - i think regs expected around xmas.