Trying to get my head around this

[santaclaw1]

Am in the process of going through core assessment of SW.

It states that core assessment was completed on 21/11/12, chronology ends there too. But includes lots of information of dates and events which took place after the 21/11/12, the latest being 12/12/12.

So this proves that core assessment was not completed on the 21/11/12/, but on 12/12/12. So why would it state it was completed on the 21/11/12?

SW raised it to CIN on 22/11/12. How can a social worker raise it to CIN on 22/11/12, if the core asssessment hasnt been completed until 12/12/12?

see the other thread but can't you pull out of sw involvement / CIN and in effect get core assessment cancelled?

I know you still want to point out inaccuracies but perhaps you can just pull out of the whole process?

The Core Assessment is the process. The document relating to the core assessment will have been completed afterwards. If the SW has other relevant (to her) information, then she has included that when writing her reports.

SS have a duty to carry out core assessments for children in need - which technically covers any child with a disability or statement. So it's not something that Claw can just decide to pull out of.

Sorry, I have no idea about that date discrepancy. Why not just ask the SW?

Claw, it's the material errors re the 'real' events (medical visits, certs etc) that matter. Lougle is right re the December dates, she can't easily ignore updated info, whether or not the typed-up report was overdue. Don't let school push you and thus woman into bec

The core assessment period ends when SW says it does (within reason) since she's the one doing it. And breaching a deadline for assessment is relatively easy to justify in a child whose needs evolving.

Aargh. Stupid tired fingers-phone combo.

'Don't let school push you and this woman into becoming enemies'.

Well this core assessment has taken from July to December to write.

Which makes me think, it had taken her 5 months to write something that should have taken 36 days according to ss guidelines. I made a complaint about SW visit after she stayed for 2 hours, bullying and threatening ds.

5 days later i am called to the office, told now, not only has it been raised to core assessment, buts heres the draft core assessment report, after being handed the report, i am then told its been raised to CIN. Not only has it been raised to CIN, but the meeting that SW arranged a month previously was in fact a CIN meeting.

Wow we have progressed to core assessment, to CIN, to CIN meetings in 5 seconds flat.

So why is she giving me a draft core assessment NOW, when it was raised to CIN over a month ago according to her? I thought a core assessment had to be completed before it was raised to CIN?

I thought progressing to core assessment parents were supposed to be told at the time, not 5 months after?

I thought progressing to CIN parents were supposed to told at the time, not over a month later?

It seems to me, it was never a core assessment, it was never a CIN. SW decided to make it a core assessment and then CIN 5 days after recieving my complaint?

Would also add up to the meeting in her office SW had told me numerous times, its not a CP issue.

claw - you are performing reduction by repetition.

From the pov of the other side the SW became involved as a result of referral as the school had concerns (founded or not) and each escalation has occurred as a result of the 'failure' of the actions preceeding it. Futhermore they believe that previous 'resolutions' have failed because you have sabotagued them.

This has been going since June but there would have been other stages that officially preceeded core assessment per se (ie initial assessment). The issue has been 'raised' over this period as this is one of the options of earlier assessment if the issue remains unresolved. In other words the SW couldn't act as she had done without a referral in the first place and also having carried out initial assessment. You have had 6 months to strengthen the report/advice of your GP either via CAMHS or consultant paed etc but have either not done so or are unable to receive authorisation for current absence from CAMHS.

If this is the bigger picture then your arguments about chronology are going to be seen as evidence that you are missing the point. ie if the SW report was amended to a chronology that you could agree with would you be happy for the reintegration plan to be put in place? What would need to happen in order for you to comply with the reintegration plan?

Criteria for Core Assessment:
A Core Assessment must be undertaken by a qualified social worker and will be required when:

1. A child has complex needs, level 4 (A child has high level needs which require fuller assessment before the most appropriate intervention can be identified is part of level 4) and above and information is required as to how these needs should be met

1. Categories of Children in Need

These legislative definitions may be summarised into the following categories of children in need:

1.Significant Harm: Children who have suffered Significant Harm
2. Disabled Children: Children with physical disabilities, sensory disabilities, learning disabilities or emotional and behavioural disabilities
3. Parental Illness/Disability: Alcohol or drug misusing parents, Acutely ill parents (short term), Chronically disabled parents, Chronically mentally ill parents, Children assuming responsibility for chronically ill, addicted, or disabled parents

1. Family in Acute Stress: Homeless family, unsupported single parent, Death of carer
2. Family Dysfunction: Domestic violence, Inconsistent parenting, Family breakdown
3. Socially Unacceptable Behaviour: Disorderly behaviour, Offending, Truancy, Unsafe sexual behaviour
4. Low Income: Asylum seeking families, Non habitually resident status, Independent young people

8.Absent Parenting: Parents died, Unaccompanied child asylum seekers, Children Privately Fostered

1. Other: Step-parent adoptions, Inter country adoptions, Court Reports, Subject access to files, Historical allegations/complaints

2.The absence of a Core Assessment is likely to lead to a re-referral
3.Three or more Initial Assessments have been carried out within the last 3 months
4.A child is at risk of Significant Harm. In this situation the Core Assessment will inform, and be informed by, the child protection process.
5.Parents' inability to meet the child's needs, despite input (where extensive packages of family support have not worked), including where parents have learning disabilities.
6.Multiple needs of child, which cannot be met by the parent; this may incorporate a carer's assessment.
7.Where a Core Assessment would lead to transitional planning
8.A child is facing a family breakdown
9.A child has high level needs which require fuller assessment before the most appropriate intervention can be identified
10.The family circumstances are complex, or the child's parents are facing significant problems, which affect their parenting, and fuller assessment is required to identify the extent of the impact on the child's welfare and development.
11.There has been a significant change in the family, which requires a new assessment of the child's welfare.
12. 'Drift' is of concern in an allocated case, and a time limited reassessment is required to decide if the child's needs are being met sufficiently, and if not, how the intervention plan should be altered.
13. A child has been Looked After for the first time and no Core Assessment has been done here

So, to me, it seems logical that the SW has followed the following course:

-SW gets referral from school, possible CP issue.
-SW does initial assessment, and determines that your DS meets Core Assessment criteria (possibly because of complex needs and significant risk of harm - self harm)
-SW decides DS is a CIN because of his disability.
-In SW's opinion, you are not following professional advice and lack insight. She is warning you that she can raise the case to a CP level if you don't start to follow the advice (she perceives) professionals are giving you.

There is no oddity there. The inaccuracies can be challenged, but the process seems fairly straightforward.

Keep, each escalation has happened because school report whatever they like based on no evidence and are believed, i assume because SS do not communicate.

for example it started with School report that ds does not self harm and its my perception ie i am making it up. This is with a long well documented history of CAMHS involvment for a year and half and school ignoring all camhs recommendations.

school report i have refused a BEAN, i put it writing to them consenting to a BEAN. I wrote to manager of SS consenting to a BEAN and enclosed a copy of the letter i had sent to school. As no social worker had contacted me.

Next allegation I am removing ds from school to HE. I wrote to school enclosed a copy of medical certificate, told them ds no well enough to attend requesting school work. I wrote to LA requesting home tuition, enclosed copy of the medical certificate and told them ds not well enough to attend. I wrote to manager of SS enclosing copy of the medical certificate and copies of what i had sent to school and LA. As a SW had still not contacted me. I had made no attempt to deregister ds.

Then SW turns up at my house, asks nothing of the allegations. i show her copy of GP medical certificate, copy of CAMHS reports, all stating that ds self harms and she concludes ds's injuries are 'gnat bites' without even seeing his injuries (i assume this is what school reported) and esclates to core.

This was in June. Ds was signed off by GP for 4 weeks due to extent of his injuries. A referral was made to CAMHS in June when my GP signed him off. CAMHS 'lost' this referral.

Ds was returned to school in September.

In October sw went to school saw that ds was smothered in injuries, he told her he wanted to kill himself because of school. Emergency A&E CAMHS became involved. They had lost previous referral made in June. GP signs ds off school again, 8 days later SW phones my GP she tells her the plan to sign ds off until plan in place. SW tells me and CAMHS GP has withdrawn her medical certificate. A plan to return ds to school is made. My GP went on holiday for 2 weeks an hour after she spoke to SW (i assume she mentioned this to SW) so i could not check with my GP if she had withdrawn her cerificate.

Ds was in no fit state to return to school. I expressed my concerns about the plan, said ds was in no fit state and asked could SW wait for CAMHS to finish assessing and plan and asked for reassurance. None was given, it was impossible for ds to return to school.

My GP comes back from holiday 2 weeks later, says she did not withdraw her medical certificate and the plan remained the same as far as she was concerned. She was confused as she had not told SW medical cert was withdrawn and didnt know what i was talking about.

x-posted with Keepingon, and I have to agree

Claw, I know you feel attacked by the profs, but even your accounts here are completely inflexible. You can't seem to see any possibility that these people could be trying to help your DS. Forget you, for a moment. This isn't about you, it's about your DS.

The school, the SW, even CAMHS are not closing the door to your DS returning to school. You don't seem to be able to even entertain the possibility that your DS could or should face some anxiety about returning to school and work towards it. If you are looking for a situation where he is comfortable at every stage, it just isn't going to happen.

The school would get a much better understanding of your DS if you tried to comply with the plan that was set - I told the teacher til I was blue in the face that DD2 was anxious about school change. She didn't believe me because DD2 masks it. I reached the end of my tether and had a short word with the teacher to tell her that I was a bit fed up of being seen as neurotic. The next day, DD2 went into school fine. I was amazed, and smiling, the teacher commented on it and I said 'this is the old DD2...it's amazing.' That afternoon she told me that the day before, she'd taken DD2 on a tour of school to look at the differences between classrooms and the difference between her old class and the new class. She had seen for herself the difference that made to DD2, because she hadn't told me about it. I couldn't have made her understand, but DD2 did.

The trainee CAMHS person attends the meeting, CAMHS havent even started assessments. They are told my GP has withdrawn her medical certificate, so a plan to return ds to school for one hour is made, with the agreement of CAMHS, as they believe GP has withdrawn her medical certificate.

SW twists this up and tells CAMHS i have said that CAMHS have signed ds off from school. CAMHS had not even seen ds at this time, only in A&E. I never said any such thing. I sent SW an email and a copy of the medical certificate, telling her my GP had signed ds off from school, until CAMHS had finished their assessment and put a plan in place. My GP confirmed to SW this was the plan.

SW then writes in her report, i am incapable of following professional advice.

Claw - bracket the chronology (stop repeating - it is like a one-woman Chinese whispers - you have started referring to DS as having a breakdown and it being impossible for him to return to school but you don't have evidence backing up these assertions) - where are you NOW?

I thought CAMHS had completed their assessment and the agreed approach of professionals was reintegration into his previous school?

Is any other professional suggesting otherwise (in writing)? (Indi EP and GP are 'trumped' by current and ongoing CAMHS imput)

Sorry to be challenging but better to be challenged here eh?

"You can't seem to see any possibility that these people could be trying to help your DS. Forget you, for a moment. This isn't about you, it's about your DS"

Exactly Lougle this is about ds, that is the whole point. SW and school have made it about me, not ds.

I am more than happy to follow CAMHS plan and have been doing so. CAMHS is return to school gradually, with the first step being doing work at home with ds, which i am doing. with the eventually goal of ds returning to school, with lots of tiny steps inbetween.

SW/school plan conflicts with CAMHS plan, its return ds to school immediately or CP proceedings.

I am providing CAMHS, SW, school with copies of my diary at exactly what im doing with regards to CAMHS plan and telling them how he reacts as in my OP

This isnt good enough for SW or school, they are insisting that i attempt to get ds to school everyday and phone school to explain the reason i havent managed it to various school receptionists. Conversation goes "i tried to get ds to school today, he punched himself in the face, threw himself off the bed, threatened to jump out of the window' Rec 'oh why did he do that' Me 'could i speak to SENCO' 'i will try to put you through.......SENCO is busy and says to explain to me'

So i am trying to follow two plans, SW/School plan and CAMHS plan. Even though CAMHS, SW, school are all at the meetings where plans are agreed.

CAMHS is tiny steps such as talking about school, introducing school work, getting ds up on time for school etc, etc.

SW/School plan is get ds up for school, get him to school for one hour or CP. Phone school and explain why i couldnt get him there.

The trouble is, that the CAMHS plan is so incredibly woolly. Without being mean, for SW/school it's not going to be very reassuring if you are in control over the number of steps, the type of steps, the evaluation of those steps, etc., is it?

Then SW who is responsible for updating the plan following meetings, doesnt up date the plan or provide minutes of what was said at meetings.

So her original plan of return ds to school for one hour or else, still stands, regardless of what is said at meetings.

Thing is Claw that if you stick to your plan DS is going to be out of school for a long time and is not going to have medical authorisation. Will you be happy to follow the CAMHS plan when the small steps involve actually attending school? The school you do not want him to attend? This will happen soon - long before the issue of appropriate placement is resolved.

Also I thought that DS was suffering from school phobia but was happy to do 'school' work? DS1 does not know when he requires help - this expresses as selective mutism with a tutor but active rejection of help with me (meltdown) and so I can't tutor him.

If your DS expresses similar anxiety in relation to school-work at home and at school I can't understand why you feel that context (size of class, 1:1) is the root of his fear/difficulty and is therefore crucial? ie he would display the same level of anxiety regardless. SALT/OT provision can help but are not magic.

DS1 displays similar anxieties relating to the work itself but this results from his having SpLD which of course manifest in both settings. Why do you think that the particular placement that you want will lead to a reduction of the type and severity of anxiety that you describe?

Exactly Lougle, the onus is put on me the whole time by CAMHS. CAMHS 'plan' is in the process of being written.

It seems CAMHS are reluctant to put a plan into place, before assessing ds needs more. They have seen ds twice now. Once with me, for a catch up of what has been happening ie A&E visits etc, etc. Then once more on his own for about 30 minutes before he indicated to them he was stressed and they had to stop. CAMHS have said all along they want to complete their assessment before a plan is put into place.

SW is pushing for a plan. Which is understandable CAMHS do need pushing. CAMHS are saying basically mum needs to assess on a daily basis, as we are not there to assess.

CAMHS told SW, school, me etc after 2nd time of seeing ds, his worries are very, very real and very, very big and they are relating to school. They will be writing a plan to address reducing his self harm, school anxiety and a plan to return to education.

In the meantime, i should talk about school, do school work with ds, etc,etc

"CAMHS told SW, school, me etc after 2nd time of seeing ds, his worries are very, very real and very, very big and they are relating to school. They will be writing a plan to address reducing his self harm, school anxiety and a plan to return to education.

In the meantime, i should talk about school, do school work with ds, etc,etc "

Right, so what is stopping CAMHS from writing a holding letter, saying 'Pleasure to meet MasterClaw. He is obviously experiencing some significant school-related anxieties. We will complete a thorough assessment but in the mean time we feel it is inappropriate for him to attend the school setting at this time. While we assess MasterClaw and formulate a reintegration plan, Mum should continue to talk positively about school and do x minutes of eduactional activities with MasterClaw per day.'?

Why won't they commit to that?

"Will you be happy to follow the CAMHS plan when the small steps involve actually attending school?

Yes i will be happy, just not this school. Ds cannot attend this school, they have no understanding of ds's needs. The fact they regard ds self harming and CAMHS recommendations as 'my perception of his needs' and report me to child protection. I have tried to communication with school over a long period of time. One of the CAMHS recommendations was that i was write in home/contact book any incidents of anxiety or self harm etc, to make school aware and school were to write any incidents in school, so i could help ds make sense of his daily experiences. They totally ignored and viewed this as 'my perceptions'.

I cannot trust this school, what happens if ds returns and at a later date i report he is self harming or getting anxious. They will report me to SS again.

I think its safe to say the relationship has broken down. Although school claim it hasnt. I havent even had a meeting with this school about IEP's, self harming etc in 2 years. I asked to attend IEP meetings, no. I have asked can we have a meeting, no, we are meeting needs, no need. I have written in contact book, ignored. They have not contacted me at all in 2 years, apart from to tell me they have reported me SS.

As you can see from my account in OP of school work. I can get ds to do school work, but he is not happy about it and it results in banging his head, spinning in circles, refusing for 20 minutes etc, etc.

That was with a days warning, ie visual being stuck up on fridge of what was expected of him the next day.

Ds has stated to other professionals he never wants to return to this school. So whether he has a phobia about all schools or just this one, remains to be seen. EP thinks he is school phobic and just cannot cope in MS without specialist support. Ds has never been given specialist support in MS.

School are saying no problems with doing work in school. Although all expert observation have observed, he is confused, completes very little work etc. ds's account that he has expressed to SW and CAMHS clarify what experts have previously observed. School regard expert observations as a 'snap shot' rather than a pattern. And SW has written that ds has high levels of anxiety with coping with work. CAMHS have said high levels of anxiety relating to school and work.

DS has been to two MS, without specialist provision in place. I am hoping that return to a NEW school, will be managed carefully with expert input and trust building. EP has suggested TA to come home for an hour, instead of home tutor and that he will need 1:1 to ensure that his anxiety etc is addressed and noticed. At this school ds is in a class of 30

"Why do you think that the particular placement that you want will lead to a reduction of the type and severity of anxiety that you describe?"

They have experience of dealing with autism, they have expertise on site, OT, SALT, pyschiastrist, classes are smaller so ds wont go unnoticed, they are able to incorporate eating plans etc. Ds hasnt been able to eat in school, he has an eating plan from OT which school dont follow. Ds needs direct input from OT and a daily programme designed for him. He needs direct SALT input. He needs direct pysch input and anxiety management. All needs already id'ed and recommendations made.

The school i had in mind is a MS, not a SS as such with specialist provision. Although obviously this is a long way off and i am faced with what to do in the meantime.

"Will you be happy to follow the CAMHS plan when the small steps involve actually attending school?

"Yes i will be happy, just not this school. Ds cannot attend this school"

But the reintegration plan will be for this school. EP is pissing in the wind - there is no way a TA will provide home tutoring. And what if they did - what if the current school provided a TA for integration and provided 20 hours 1:1? What if this was what the statement gave you? You do not have the relevant proffs recommending specialist provision. So, will you be happy to follow the CAMHS plan if it says that DS should attend ms or current school under any circumstances?

Lougle, it would appear that CAMHS are fence sitting and not committing either way. My version and ds's version is totally different from school version. School have then involved SW who hasnt bothered investigating to find out if what school are reporting is accurate or not ie mum refusing bean, when i put in writing that i was consenting etc, etc. She has then written in her report the inaccurate info supplied by school, and her own misunderstanding ie me saying indef sick note, when i didnt say this, i put it into writing to her exactly what GP and I agreed etc, etc when it was issued.

So CAMHS are faced with two very different, very conflicting versions.

SW/School are saying mum is the cause of his school anxiety.

I am saying and so is ds, that school is the cause.

This is why i have been keeping a diary about interactions with ds and my responses and his responses.

SW has written a very different version of her turning up at my house and getting ds to agree to return to school to support her opinion that mum is to blame. She is saying it was a difficult decision for him to make and he had to leave the room and hid, then go and lock himself in a bedroom, but when he opened the door he was calm and laying on the bed. He then came down and spoke to her again and agreed to go back to school. She writes this as ds's views about school.

She makes no mention of the fact she got him to agree by telling him he MUST go back to school and he was a Law breaker and that her visit lasted for 2 hours and it consisted of chasing him around the house insisting that he MUST go back, no matter how many times he said he wasnt going back and how distressed he was. She makes no mention that in order to get him to open the door, i had to ask her to go downstairs, i stood there for 15 minutes telling him she was gone and she wasnt upstairs when he opened the door, so has no idea of whether he was laying on the bed or what he was doing and she told him upon leaving i will be back on Monday to pick you up and take you.

I emailed her next day, as she had requested i 'let her know how ds was' I told her ds was extemely distressed by her comments of breaking the Law and being a Law breaker and he thought the police would come etc, if he didnt agree to go back to school. He was withdrawn, shut himself in his room all night and refused to come out, wouldnt eat, couldnt sleep etc, etc.

She replied, "thanks for the update, see you Monday"

I made a complaint about this visit. 5 days later it was raised to Core assessment, CIN in 5 seconds flat.

Current school will not provide 20 hours or a TA to even be in the classroom with ds for one hour during the rein plan.

I do have the relevant proffs recommending provision, i have reports coming out of my ears, from OT, SALT, EP's they have been recommending the same things for years. I have EP reports from 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012. I have OT reports from 2009, 2010, 2011 (2012 will be updated at the appropriate stage) I have SALT exactly the same. CAMHS 2010, 2011. All recommendations have been totally ignored by school, as in their opinion, its not needed. This is why ds now cannot attend school, without self harming etc as a result.

I would be happy for ds to attend ANY MS school with specialist provision. Just not his current MS school.