Statutory Assessment Procedure - Ed Psych sees hardly anything wrong in DS

[Soutty]

Hi all

Having a bit of a panic, hence posting at 4am...

I'm going through the statutory assessment procedure with my DS atm, he has just turned 5 and started school in September. He has been diagnosed with ASD by Daphne Keen, plus a severe language disorder by a well respected private SALT, plus sensory processing disorder by a well respected OT. It took about a year and cost thousands of pounds to get him assessed by these people, get their reports and apply for a statutory assessment on the back of them.

During the first few weeks of school DS had a lot of meltdowns and hit out a lot at other children and staff. This has now settled right down, however school think he needs 1-1 25 hours a week plus speech therapy. The Ed Psych went in to school on Monday, observed DS for less than an hour and spoke to the school and then phoned me this morning to discuss her findings.

The first thing she said was that from the reports she'd seen she was expecting a classically autistic child - none of the reports say that. She went on about how he didn't even stand out at first, how she can't believe he has a language disorder because she saw him process complex instructions and answer appropriately - I could go on but you ge the picture.

She asked what I wanted for him. I said 25 hours a week 1-1 and - here she drew a sharp breath and told me that just because he was having a statutory assessment doesn't mean he will get a statement.

The mainstream school he is at now is my closest school and it has an outstanding ofsted and has had the same head for yonks. The parents are very involved. DS's sister is in year 2 there, is very happy and as she and DS are close it makes him feel secure to know she is there. They play together at lunch time sometimes. Ed Psych wants me to move DS from this school where he is just starting to settle and send him to a shit school with an ASD unit attached. This school is consistently Grade 3, heads change every 6 months, it has a reputation for being rough - I do not want DS to go there. Ed Psych was going on about how wonderful it would be for him because the staff are all trained. I know where this is going - it would cost the LA nothing if he went there.

How influential is the Ed Psych when it comes to getting a statement? TBH, she didn't sound all that bright/experienced to me, eg she thought it was "amazing" that he carry on doing phonics at choosing time instead of play like the other children and said she's never known a child with ASD to do that? Letters and numbers are part of DS's obsessions and from what I've read this isn't exactly uncommon...

This issue of EPs commenting on SLT and vice versa is one that gets to me.

My not so good EP was very much, "well read the SLT report" rather than comment, which considering how little faith I had in him, worked out for the best, and I think I would prefer all EPs to keep it that way.

My son has lots of mild/moderate S&L needs which in turn makes it far more complex than people realise, however because he can read well above his age, and you can have a reasonable informal conversation with him, people say "he fine" I cant begin to tell you how many times I have wanted to punch my GP's where where they see him and he is having one of his turns they say "well he seems intellegent and get his point across" its as if they think Speech and language impairment must mean mental impairment. I have found that most professionals other than SLTs do not get this and just see him as fine and dandy

They do not realise that as he is getting older he is finding it difficult to work at a more formal level as the language is becoming a tad more complex, his working memory is in the 3rd centile and his maths is that of a 8 year old..he is 14, manily due to his poor WM, and if like my useless EP they decide to compare his WM using the BAS when his last test was with the WISC then your really stuffed..lucky I had the funds to correct this, but my xmas holiday is out the window.

I might be swinging in the wind here, but want to offer my side of things...

On paper, Bee is a train wreck. Stroke as a baby, CP, epilepsy, sensory issues, feeding challenges, diagnosed with ASD at 2, medical issues by the boatload requiring a 1:1 nurse while she is at school just to attend to her medical care and on and on... If you see her for a brief period most of the time, however, none of that is evident. The EP saw your DS for a brief period.

The other professionals who saw him longer saw evidence of different concerns, and their opinions, of course, carry merit. The EP, however, may only legally report what she observed at the time - the rest is just hearsay...

Here is a good example - when Bee started school this year, she was a month and a half late because she had been in hospital. She came in to a class that was already settled into a routine with a new teacher, new layout in the room, and a lot of personal anxieties. If she had been observed by an EP in the first few days, they would have seen a VERY distressed, self-abusive, volatile, inattentive and disruptive child who required extensive support beyond what was already in place for her at the time. Fast forward to the first couple of days this week - Bee has settled in, uses a visual schedule to transition from one activity to another, is happy and helpful, willing to work and making gains. Her sensory issues are not overwhelming and she has found her comfort in the classroom. If the EP came to see her now, she would say that she transitions well, in engaged in the tasks at hand, seems happy and social - certainly not what the scores of reports that are filed away have to say about her. Is this is a different child? No, but she is coping well in this setting (and so are the TA and the CT) without additional support beyond what the class has in place as a whole.

The EP is professionally obligated to observe, assess if warranted, and report. They are not the gatekeeper of the LA funds, and frankly would probably like to see your DS in a MS school. However, I am certain she was trying to open the door to the fact that, because your DS did have a difficult beginning to the year, but seems to have settled well now, the likelihood of him getting 1:1 support full time is not very strong. If you are that adamant that he needs 1:1 support, then she is not out of line suggesting that he might get the support you feel is appropriate in a SS setting. All of this, of course, is based on her 1 hour of observation - just a brief snapshot in time.

Statements from the CT are crucial - about incidents, about disruption, about educational time being denied to the other children in the class because of the need for excessive attention to your ds (It stings, but that is the kind of thing that the LA will pay attention to, particularly if there is standardized testing the teacher has to prepare the entire class for, kwim?)

Like I said - perhaps she got him on a good day, perhaps he is settling in exceptionally well and has found his niche after all... but don't shoot the messenger.

I believe that I also said that it came from someone with 30 years' experience as a SALT specialising in complex language disorders and special needs. You chose to focus on the length alone although I too have found some of the extremely brief reports from SALTS and Paeds (not had the pleasure of an Ed Psych report yet) to be pathetically scrappy - embarrassingly so for people who are supposedly professionals. In comparison, the private reports I have received are not just more detailed, they are far clearer. I did have one private SALT who was crap and I didn't bother using her report so I'm not saying that everyone private is good either.

You're very defensive and it appears that you've come on here to tell us what a great job Ed Psychs do (and I don't doubt that many do). I know when I'm being patronised and you did patronise me. You deliberately ignored the other things that I said and chose to focus solely on the length of my SALT's report. She is well used to appearing at tribunals so she knows what needs to go in reports and what doesn't. I seem to be having to justify myself at every turn to you - why?

I don't have an issue with Ed Psychs in general - just the one I've got. I came on here partly to let off steam and partly to get advice. You seem to be taking my post personally. Not that it's any of your business, but I don't want to report the Ed Psych because (a) doing so will probably only harm DS's chances of a statement as it will put me on the wrong side of someone who whether I like it or not has a say in my son's future and (b) There is the possibility that when I see her report it isn't actually as bad as I'm fearing as she may have taken the comments that I made on board. A reasonable person would give her that opportunity and I am a reasonable person albeit that I have concerns which I thought I could express on here without being harangued. The tone of your "advice" here implies that I shouldn't do this unless I am also prepared to make an official complaint. Well I'm not, for the reasons just given but thanks for the advice anyway.

I am a bit miffed that I came on here for some advice and support and end up having to respond to snitty questions from you about my son's language disorder and arguing with you over whether long reports are better than short ones. I really don't want to argue with you any more. I should be able to vent on here about a complete stranger without another complete stranger in the same job taking my comments personally,subtly sneering at me to undermine what I've said and then step back and say oh but I was only trying to help.

The advice I asked for in the main was whether the LA can refuse to give DS a statement if I refuse to move him into another mainstream school. That seems to have got lost in the mix but that was the main thing that was keeping me up at 4am this morning because I really don't want DS to go there. If anyone knows anything about this I'd be really grateful.

Beemom, I take what you are saying. I honestly didn't realise that Ed Psychs were under a legal obligation to only report on what they see in class. I would argue though that very little weight ought to be given to such reports unless they see a child many times at school in many different settings.

I think she just got my goat with her generalisations about "these children" and the dismissive way she talked about the speech and language report. If what you say is true and she can legally only talk about what she sees then surely she shouldn't be making reference to the report of another professional in the context of what she saw? I guess it's okay provided she doesn't actually do so in her report but it made her come across as extremely arrogant.

The SALT that wrote his report made it clear to me that while she has and does deal with many children with ASD and other disorders, she is not qualified to diagnose anything other than speech and language disorders/difficulties. This woman seemed to determined to give the impression that she knew better than everyone else. Had she prefaced what she said by "Of course I appreciate that I have never met X, that I have never assessed him 1-1, that I saw him only briefly in a small class with a high ratio of teachers but I can only comment on what I saw and..." then I would have accepted, okay, she saw him on a good day. It was the fact that she extrapolated what she saw to say "he has no sensory issues" "he has no attention issues" "his language problems are no worse than some other children his age" and so on. Not I saw this and I saw that but actually saying he does not have this or that problem because I didn't see it in that hour. That's what I find so worrying. What's the point of having him assessed by so many people if one can come in for such a short period of time and say that everything that has gone before is meaningless because it's not what they saw? It's madness.

These are the arguments I will make on appeal I suppose if it goes to that - which it sounds like it will.

Hi Soutty..

Try not to get too annoyed, we are never all going to agree and most of us on here will have expericened what you have at one time or another, I have, so I know exactly how you feel and why you feel so annoyed.

Im not 100% sure, but did not think they could refuse the statement, they can refuse (well diagree to part 4), but if the child meets the criteria and need it then they should give it to him, then let the battle commence over where he goes.

Sorry they can refuse the statement if they do not think he needs it, but what I mean is if they agree to him having a statment, they cant pull it and say he does not need it unless he goes to xxx school.

Soutty

If that is what she said then you are right to be concerned. No EP should dismiss information in multiple reports on the basis of one short observation in an atypical classroom.

I accept I am whistling in the wind but will you accept that tone doesn't come across on emails? I was actually just interested in your sons lang dx plus ASD dx as I had thought they were mutually exclusive unless it was, for example, a verbal dyspraxia. I'm interested to hear that I was not up to date on that info, and will be doing some research about it to get up to speed.

I do get a bit defensive but it wasn't just your post (or in fact your 1st post at all) but the three or 4 that followed it that made me feel that way. I was actually trying to explain, not as well as Bee did above, that we are at the interface and don't make gatekeeping decisions and have to write evidence-based reports. We can take others' pov into account though (our proforma has sections on for info from parents, info from schools, and info from other profs).

I have obviously struck a wrong chord but at no point was I being snitty, nor engaged in arguments about the length of reports - it was one line!!

Best of luck with your son.

Thanks Hoxtonbabe. I probably am being unnecessarily grumpy. Had a sleepless night and got a bad cold which probably doesn't help.

I'm also very disappointed because while I was initially prepared for a fight, the school have been so supportive both of my attempts to get a statement for him and in doing their absolute best for him meantime that my faith in human nature went up and has now come crashing down again.

Is there a way you can have a chat face to face with this EP, or perhaps to her superior? You have raised some valid points, and clearly there is a lot of emotion behind this too (having a child like Bee brings out my "momma bear" in the worst way, so I can relate).

Do you have the written report from the LA EP? Is this based on that or a phone conversation? Pardon my laziness, I probably should have gone back to check that myself. The reason I am asking is that the formal report may turn out to be more helpful than you realize. Ultimately, she is only reporting on her initial observations, but will summarize and interpret all the information she has at her disposal. So, what the report may say is on whatever date, DK performed these assessments and found ASD... SALT performed these assessments (and please refer to the extensive report from the SALT for further information) and diagnosed DS with SCD... OT reports and assessments indicated sensory processing differences in these areas... CT reports the following behavioural and educational challenges and strengths... etc.

She should then follow up with her own observations - setting, activities, interactions, behaviour, etc. After that, her interpretation of the observation session, and then a final summary of the entire report. Extensive, but in all honesty, much of it is re-hashing and interpreting others' reports... and how she ties it all together might make a big difference.

Now... with that said, it sounds like this particular EP might be more than a little full of herself. She can say whatever she wants (I keep a jotter beside the phone for conversations like these) but you are right in her limitations as far as formally making or rescinding diagnoses. It is right to remember, however, while there will never be anyone more expert in your DS than you, she likely does have, through education and exposure, more experience with children with SEN in general. Even Bee, who everyone will say is unique in her uniqueness, can be compared in drips and drabs with other children - frankly, it is in learning what has helped and hindered children in the past that we have come as far ahead in supporting them now. When I was a child, you were punished (sometimes corporally - particularly for attention issues) for not being able to do the work, now you are supported... we have come a long way, and EPs have played an important role.

Please don't get angry with Ilikemysleep, she came in here trying to help and is being attacked severally. She is not only an EP, but mom to a child with autism, so this hits her from both sides. Of course this is a heated topic - you are trying to do what you see is best for your DS, the EP is trying to do her job. You both have different motivations, but ultimately, no one becomes an EP with the distinct desire to screw people over.

Try to take a deep breath, frame your thoughts (things like what specifically would the 1:1 support look like to you? What does your DS need that is not being provided now educationally, or is it a supervision/safety issue?). If you can go into meetings with that picture very clear in your head, you might be surprised what you can accomplish (I know I was).

Thanks Ilikemysleep. Things can be taken the wrong way on forums.

I also should have said at the outset that my major concern was that she said "he does not have xyz issues because I didn't see xyz issues" rather than simply "During my observation your DS didn't display xyz issues". The former is, I feel, unfair. The latter entirely factual and therefore fair enough. I don't think I put this across too well in my initial post. Obviously I haven't seen her draft report yet and what she says and what she writes might be two different things.

That's helpful advice Bee and I'm sorry if I was harsh, Ilikemysleep.

soutty - you will got through the statutory assessment process and when you get the draft statement you then say which school you would like him to go to - so if you want him to stay where he is, name the current school and i cannot see why they would not name it as long as the school agree they can meet his needs.

i totally understand your frustration - i have a similar problem. my son is statemented and im trying to move him - ive come up against autsim outreach who have been sent in my the LA to say mainstream can meet his needs dispite the schools saying teh cant and no end of professional reports all based on her 'watching him' for an hour on 2 seperate occasions. she has never even spoken or interacted with my son. the LA do play games and anyone who thinks or beleive that they dont must have been very fortunate!

Thank you bjkmummy. If things continue as they are I will definitely name his current school. School's view is that they can cope with him now but that they don't feel that he will be able to access the curriculum to his full potential without one to one support in class - mainly because of his language problems. I'm pretty sure I can make a persuasive argument in favour of mainaining the status quo provided his behaviour doesn't worsen.

A change of subject here, but what are the chances of being flatly turned down for a statement following the statutory assessment procedure? His SENCO says only 2% get turned down in her experience which gives me great cause for optimism if true.

I have calmed down a bit now. I guess I need to regroup and keep a clear head and focus on what I want for him and how best to get it. I should say that I was extremely calm and polite on the phone and did my best to get my point of view across but I did feel a little bit railroaded and also some of the things I said she repeated in a slightly different way so as to change the meaning and then quickly changed the subject before I had a chance to correct her. At the end of the day if I think I've misquoted in her report I will say so as I will get to see it in draft first.

It is quite easy to start feeling a bit paranoid.

The ed psych did an awful report when I applied for a statement for DS, it was short and scrappy and said that DS had emotional and behavioural difficulties (he is very difficult to manage but he has ASD as the basic issue). I only met him once but he gave me a long lecture on the need to set boundaries for children which he explained in terms of sheep farming. I was horrified when this ed psych did the report as I thought he'd gone off sick and it was going to be a really nice professional ed psych who was supposed to have done it. I only got sight of this travesty of a report when it was send as an appendix to a very crappy draft statement.

I asked nicely, via parent partnership, for a meeting with the head of service as I explained that I was unhappy with the quality of the EP report. I couldn't say anything about him acting like a prize wanker or complain about him saying that DS just has EBD he's entitled to do both those things, but I pointed out all the ways in which the report was written without adequate evidence to support its conclusions and how the lack of analysis undermined the resulting statement by failing to suggest how DS might best be managed. I was a bit of a long sloggy meeting and the head of service didn't want to have to redo it as they're very under-resourced, but I kept at him nicely until he agreed to send in someone competent else. The second report was really useful.

I think it's a good thing that there is a RL EP on this thread. It's give an insight into things from the LEA perspective. Obviously, i've still got my personal experiences to go off so still feel the same about mine.

Must admit, I thought one of the reasons the LEA could refuse to assess was if there wasn't enough 'evidence' or they didn't believe that a child had SEN. although, i'm a tribunal/SEN virgin, so haven't got the full details, yet I do know of people who's LEA have never read all the documents that were sent in from the Parents and just rejected them as part of a blanket policy.

So, am I correct in thinking that EP's are purely educational and Camhs, Community Paed, Lasc and SALT are there to give 'medical/health' advice? . And should I really be trusting an EP who says "I wouldn't take too much notice of the code of practice if I were you, we're kind of doing stat. assessment already"

My DD crashed and burned within a week of starting High School. I was constantly on the phone to school, LEA etc, begging for help and they were only interested when she couldn't face going in. Her health/medical needs have not even been adressed, so who knows what will happen (certainly not me).

I do think it's not often we hear about the 'good' stories, but thats why we come on to forums like this. If I believed the school, EP, LEA then DD has no problems. I only started getting support when it started to affect her life, beyond normal measures.

MsNg Maybe it's a man thing.

DD's 1st temp one (man) has been off sick, then 2nd (real one, woman) went off sick. FF a few wasted months, and 1st temp come back, takes up the case (on a temp. basis) as 'we've been messed about so much' Had to sign all forms again today for the initial referral to the EP service and we've still not been given the details of the school's actual EP

We've had four EPs so far and DS is only in Y2 and they've all been the 'official' one! I've yet to meet the latest EP. Mind you, our LEA is about to make another one redundant due to budget cuts, so I guess they'll reshuffle schools when they do that too. In a way I was lucky as the one that wrote the first report was so clearly incompetent and easy to dislike that his boss (male, human being) was amenable to my viewpoint. I've had a lot more trouble coping with 'professionals' who are personally likable but lousy at their job as their bosses and colleagues tend to think they're doing a decent job just because they are 'nice'.

ilikemysleep As soon as I posted I realised that it might get your attention. From what you have posted on here so far, I do believe that you have the childrens best interest at heart, but I cannot believe that everyone else does too. I really hope that I haven't offended you because it is good to have people from the other side on here as well as I believe sometimes being challenged on your views is a good thing.

No, Dev, I'm not personally offended, I'm just really sad that firstly, so many people seem to have really genuinely had crap EPs and a crap time, and that they automatically perpetuate that opinion and smear the whole profession without a thought. For example, I've had crap GP consultations but if someone else came online saying they have had a bad experience with their doctor, I wouldn't post that all GPs are self serving hypocrites, instututionally corrupt, or that it is impoossible for them to ethical in non-private practice, all of which I have read on this site about EPs in just the few weeks I have been a member. No-one slates the entire profession of doctors even though I bet most of us have met a rubbish one. We all know that's because not all of them are rubbish. It's the same with EPs, that's all.

I must admit, I got listened to more, initially, when I asked to speak to Principal EP (think thats what he is). Think that's what I need to do again - He completely understood the difference with girls and boys, whereas, I had to point it out to EP and he just agreed then went on to tell me how experienced he was!

Dev9aug, Your last sentence is worded much better than my post!

ilikemysleep that was really my point too. There's a fair chance that if you've had a bad experience with an EP, it's like any other service, there are good ones and bad ones so a simple 'Umm, look, that's not good enough really is it?' can be all that's needed as the service I've had experience of is anything but corrupt. EP No 3 was great: she was willing to take on the school's entrenched views and practices and make expensive decisions about the right provision as well as making everyone laugh along the way which was a pleasant bonus. The head of service is more budget conscious but he really does want to do the right thing for the DCs he's working with and that's been my experience of several other LEA workers.

Well our EP has seen ds at least 4 times this half-term already and at least 10 times last year. Not all official visits - some just chats but anything helps really.
Am expecting to have to go to tribunal though as no ms school is looking like being able to meet his needs so perhaps that might make a difference.

Ilikemysleep the problem on here is that there is a very high concentration of people who have been deeply hurt by their experiences.
I read all your posts, and to me you came across as one of the good guys, but as has been pointed out, it is easy to misinterpret what people have said in writing, without the back up of tone of voice and body language. Bit like it is for our autistic children I suppose.