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?

My 'preferred' school would be the one i mentioned, but as i said a long way off and i need to do something in the meantime.

I am not saying this school or nothing, just that school would be my preference.

'my preference' IF i ever get to naming a school stage, is what i meant.

IF ds starts another MS school and they actually give the support he needs, in the meantime and he is happy there (well ds's version of happy, not self harming) i would be more than happy for him to remain there.

I would be more than happy to drop him there in his pj's if he was refusing to get dressed just because he didnt want to go.

I have had 2 other kids, i know the 'i have tummy ache, i cant go' and the 'the teachers all hate me' etc and know the difference between true distress and just trying to get out of school.

My other 2 kids have been dressed by me, given a spoonful of calpol and been told you go to school unless its broken or you are bleeding, if they have refused to go. I have been safe in the knowledge, once there they are fine.

Advice recommending provision isn't the same as advice recommending a specialist environment.

Claw, is this his second school? Reading the above, the current school look so bad, any competent primary could do a much better job via school action plus. So the outcome of SA would be managed move plus NIL plus blame mum "and we can always reassess if it doesn't work".

From what you've said, the ideal situation would be managed move plus very careful slow partial return, followed soon after by watertight statement allowing full time education (fingers crossed)

"Claw, is this his second school? Reading the above, the current school look so bad, any competent primary could do a much better job via school action plus. So the outcome of SA would be managed move plus NIL plus blame mum "and we can always reassess if it doesn't work"

This is exactly what happened at Claw's last tribunal in ??2011 for refusal to SA which Claw lost. Claw had DS just moved to this school from previous crap school. LA told tribunal 'it will all be different at new school etc etc' - school said support be available and fabricated IEPs / progress etc etc then almost immediately LA won tribunal school said he did not need any of it, withdrew all support, didn't do OT and SALT and DS self harmed etc etc DS been in and out of school until now suicide threats, school refusal etc etc

So LA ran same argument (mad Mum on misjudged mission for unnecessary statement) for second appeal against refusal to SA (given it has worked last time) and LA just conceded last week.

The issue is always going to be has Claw's DS genuinely failed in 2 schools, self harmed, got school anxiety etc etc or is it all Mum and is all this eg removing from school etc tactical for Mum to get what she wants. It will be for a Tribunal to decide if lots of failed schools was due to lack support or to Claw's alleged sabotage.

This is a live issue whether Claw takes the next step of taking her DS off roll of this school or not. Those accusations are not going to go away - its all the LA has in its arsenal against a statement and it has entrenched its position. So the question for Claw is whether the negative fallout of taking him off roll and asking for a fresh start elsewhere with gradual supported return is worse then keeping him on roll and having to put up with idiot sw, fabricated CIN / CP threats and continued involvement of nasty school. Claw and Sol need to weigh this up but the fact is even if she stays involved with CIN, current school and SW that will not change their view of her. They will not see this in positive light, they have already made their minds up and will write their reports to put in anything which supports their view and none of the opposing evidence.

If she withdraws and says ok fresh start, work with CAMHS, LA (Education but not social care) and EWO + new school then at least she will have new professionals involved not those whose minds and positions are already fixed - and also LA will lose two crucial witnesses - sw and nasty school because in a year's time or whenever next tribunal is (if needed) it would be pointless to bring people who have been out the picture for a year or use up 2 of their 3 witnesses solely on argument 'its all Mum'.

Claw is understandably outraged by CIN etc as it was not done for the right reasons / interests of child - it was done to bully, spy and threaten. SW herself said not CP matter, not know why school involved her but rather than close file no doubt thought (or was told) to stay involved and get Claw's DS quickly back in school. Pressure built up until a few days before tribunal when having failed to get Claw's DS back in school in time for tribunal the LA finally conceded and will do SA.

The LA have not done CIN on basis Claw's DS is disabled child - according to them he is not disabled / mentally unwell enough for a disabled child assessment, carers assessment, home tuition, SA, support in school, respite or even for a GP sick note etc etc He can't be both. He can't be disabled for CIN but not disabled enough for any other purpose.

If LA does have Claw's DS interests at heart they would accept a fresh school is more likely to be successful at getting the child back into education than the school he has negative feelings about. In some ways it is easier for Claw to argue against a school which has failed than against a new untested school, so it is a tactical decision about what the pros and cons are.

Will Claw withdrawing from sw involvement make things worse? I don't know it seems to me the LA already think the worst of Claw, she already has the mad / bad / manipulative label so perhaps standing up to them and calling their bluff eg about the basis of CIN when they do not accept he has any problems is not such a bad thing. Waving guidance and asking for clarification about the legal basis the LA is acting under is perfectly justified and may make them think twice before using underhand tactics next time. LAs like this rely on people not knowing their rights or the law - the LA cannot justify to a Tribunal not putting in home tuition, cannot justify offering no disabled child or carer assessment, cannot justify ringing a GP to try and overturn a sick note and this sw cannot justify harassing a child in his own home for 2 hours.

Its a tough decision but when you know people are involved only for negative reasons it can be a big relief to cut them out. Claw will have to live with the idea the sw will be knocking on her door daily otherwise.

Lougle im not asking for a specialist environment, that would be 'dream' school and i will aim high, the LA will aim low and hopefully we can meet somewhere in the middle, is probably more realistic.

Despite having all those recommendations, help ds receives in is a school an anxiety management group twice a week (school have changed the name of the social skill group ds usually attends since SS and CAMHS involvement)

They say he also recieves help with a motor skills group, this is doubtful, they have no evidence of it and ds doesnt know anything about it.

So best way he gets social skill group and motor skill group.

He used to get 20 hours of 1:1 anxiety management, have an eating plan, SALT input. One day school decided he didnt need this and stopped it over night. His self harming etc escalated again and here we are.

I would be grateful for a school who believed me when i say his body is smothered from head in toe in injuries. A school who dont ignore any of my communication attempts when his body is smothered in injuries, a school who can follow just basic CAMHS recommendations like a home/school contact book which costs nothing (i even paid that myself).

Well i am drafting my response to the SW core assessment setting out chrono in the correct order and asking for grounds of progressing it.

It really does seem like they have no grounds.

3 allegations and proved to be unfounded. SW concluding ds self harm gnat bites raise it

SW phones GP and then give inaccurate info to CAMHS, says medical certificate is withdrawn and plan is made.

I express concerns, tell her as far as im aware GP cert isnt withdrawn (GP receptionist said its not withdrawn, but wait for GP to return from holiday) and ask for time for CAMHS plan.

I have covered myself all the way, by putting everything into writing.

I realised i cannot just make this SW go away, but i also cant just leave everything she has done go unchallenged. I think i have every right to have it explained to me on what grounds the case has progressed.

Last time i ask her to explain her actions to me in writing, she progressed it too core assessment, handed me the draft, then told me now CIN in 5 seconds flat!. Then changed the meeting which took place a month previous had now become a CIN meeting and the agreement between me and social worker i was asked to sign a month ago, now became a CIN plan.

Previously it was multi agency meeting and a proposal.

CIN plan and CIN meeting, might well be CIN, although it doesnt state it anywhere.

CIN plan might not be a CIN plan and meeting wasnt CIN.

Either way i deserve an explanation. If it was CIN she should have told me at the time, not a month later. If its not CIN then she shouldnt be telling me it is.

Thanks Agnes, I was getting deja vu feelings, but sometimes I get my wires crossed. The previous short-lived 20hours a week makes sense now, it was probably done on temporary funding from either the LA or diverted from the old school.

And if they've been in BESD / managed moves / individual behaviour plan mode re miniclaw's ASD, that'll explain the persistence of the truant / school refusal / separation anxiety / family dysfunction model.

Claw, is there any way of accessing a school less directly influenced by the LA? Although non-maintained schools acting as a law unto themselves is sometimes problematic, knowing that there is an academy, voluntary aided faith school, private school or something just into the next county might be comforting.

Lougle sorry missed your post setting out the criteria

"SW gets referral from school, possible CP issue".

The school had the photos i took of ds for about 3 weeks. 2 days after i apply for SA, note on school file between LA and SENCO, discussing my applying for SA and deciding to report me to child protection. Why wait for 3 weeks, if you were that concerned about the photos?

They then report me 2 more times for different things. All of which i did the opposite to. Refusing meeting, i consented to meeting in writing to both school and SS etc, etc. Mum is removing from school. I made no attempt to remove him from school.

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)

This SW told me, ds injuries were GNAT BITES. Ds was signed off sick due to his school anxiety and self harm, i showed her copies of GP cert and CAMHS reports.

Its written in the core assessment she concludes "mum doesnt focus on positive changes ds has made in school and relys on past reports" exactly what school have reported to them. Raise to core.

2 months later case is handed to another SW.

SW decides DS is a CIN because of his disability.

That is not the case at all. SW's only role is to enforce a return to school. SW has told me all along its not a CP issue, then everytime i raise concerns the CP threat is wheeled out. 5 days after i make a complaint about her visit, its now CIN. She is sending me a very clear message, do as i say.

-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.

Yep

Maria, im not sure if another school would want ds! As SENCO is also saying to professionals 'on paper' ds has a very high level of need.

When ds started at this school, they were supporting my request for a statement and put it in writing to me too!

Pretty much the same situation as now, SA was agreed, i had to remove him school. At this school he ended up in hospital and they still refused to accept that he self harmed due to anxiety of school, again despite CAMHS writing reports that his anxiety and self harming was school related. At this school he recieved no support whatsoever, didnt even have an IEP. He was coming home with bite marks, strangulation marks on his neck, pushed down the stairs, hit with sticks etc, etc. He was nicknamed pooey pants, had his lunch stolen etc, etc. This is when the self harm started and the 'anxious mum' title started. So he started school well, it went down hill rapidly. The more i asked for IEP, support etc, the more hostile school become. They actually told me during a meeting with CAMHS not to contact the school anymore, when ds had just been discharged from hospital and started to refuse school. No fuss was made about me removing him from this school.

He started at this school with 20 hours of support etc, etc. school supporting statement. IEPS with statement objectives written at the top. Just before Tribunal school changed their minds and removed all his help. Their reasons for removing his 20 hours of anxiety management 'his needs are only on paper'.

Again same pattern started well, went rapidly downhill, after tribunal in 2011, i asked school for copies of the programmes and support they claimed he had at Tribunal. They ignored me and have ignored me ever since.

So ds is due back to school tomorrow, there is no way im going to get him there, unless i take him dragging and screaming, forcible dress him, forcible put him the car and forcible take him out of the car.

school report happy in school, no problem. This is exactly what they were saying when SW visited him in school and told me to pick him immediately for emergency mental health assessment.

Why is it that social worker recognised he needs emergency mental health assessment, but school dont notice this and report he is happy, no problem.

Even if i could ds there, how can i trust them?

I hope you find a way through this quickly, Claw. I can't see how you can when you are at war with half the professionals involved and the other half won't put in writing what you have been told verbally.

I can't see how the LA are going to accurately assess your DS, either, to be honest, because it sounds like there isn't a single agency which doesn't have some sort of agenda in this. CAMHS aren't suddenly going to stick their heads above the parapet. A paed (do you have a paed? They are strangely silent in all of this) is only going to comment on physical health and medical history and is unlikely to make judgement on educational requirements (for example, DD1's paed simply said 'healthy child, MLD, GDD - will need access to changing facilities and step markers and will need support from her statement for learning). SALT and OT seem worse than useless, and your DS isn't at school so the EP can't assess your DS's needs in a school environment, meaning that you'll get a report of 'Mum says, Mum reports, DS says...' and assessments that are based on the ideal learning environment of 1:1 at home in the quiet, which will be a far cry from performance in a busy classroom.

As CAMHS report says that the assessed risk of your DS towards himself is 'low', would it be worth seeing the reintegration plan as a 'necessary evil' and going with it, even for a day or 3? Even if you know your DS will react badly, can you think 'it's only an hour'? Then you might get the evidence you need that your DS really can't do it.

CAMHS reported 'the risk of ds killing himself was 'low', as i am doing a good job of keeping him safe'. We are all agreed that the risk of him actually killing himself are low, but what i was asking for was a risk assessment of ds self harming as a result of a plan to return him to school.

Im guessing as i returned him to school free from all injury in September, and a month later it resulted in him being smothered in injuries again (extensive scratching) and needing an emergency mental health assessment by October, the risk is pretty high.

It also escalated to him hurting himself in other ways, that he has never done before, cutting himself with scissors, headbutting doors, walls, tables, baths, punching himself, hitting himself with objects hairbrushes etc, trying to strangle himself, throwing himself of the bed. Wandering around the house of a night, looking for things to hurt himself with.

Drawing pictures of himself hanging from branches and writing i want to die now. Writing notes on his ipod about wanting to die etc, etc.

He also threw the dog down the stairs, strangled the cat, attacked me

This type of self harming he is doing everytime school was mentioned.

For the last 2 and half years he has been silently self harming by scratching and being very inward with it, very quietly, very privately and has never expressed wanting to die.

All sharp objects have to be removed from his reach, he has to sleep in bed with me, with a lock on the door.

Since being off school his scratching injuries have cleared totally, he doesnt self harm in other ways unless returning to school is mentioned.

Last time i tried to get him to school, he got hysterical, throwing himself of the bed, punching himself in the face, trying to strangle himself, screaming about stabbing himself and physically attacking me when i was stopping him.

He then cant sleep, cant eat, with shut himself in his room and refused to come out, wont leave the house to do other things, wont interact,refuse to get dressed etc, etc.

I can see what are saying, no evidence at all, as again its just my word. But thats the way its always been, i cant see it changing. If i could get ds to school, he might well be fine once there, then he would just hurt himself when he gets home.

So plan is get him to school, if he self harms when he gets home, thats your problem, because you are responsible for his safety.

and yes im still up, ds is still awake and its 3.30am due to doing school work. Mealtonin works perfectly well without school work.

I just dont know what to do for the best Lougle.

If he starts at another MS, things will no doubt start of fine, so SA there, everything is fine, that has been pattern so far.

Even if its not, they will then blame the new environment, change etc on everything not being fine.

If i take him off role, it will seen as me further disengaging and im not sure CP is a risk im willing to take.

There is also a pattern emerging, which could be blamed on me, get to SA take him out of school, so school cant have any input and i am already being accused of making up his difficulties. Again unfounded, but adds fuel.

Sw will see it as me being totally unreasonable, you wanted school to assess his needs, they have now agreed and you are still not happy. Even though they were forced to agree, they didnt do it through choice.

I know what this school will do, give him 1:1 now all through the SA, so his anxiety reduces and they and experts can report doing fine, great progress. Remove just before Tribunal, so they can say coping well without and isnt needed. Like they did last time. If i can manage to get there, how do i deal with this?

I will sleep on it, but i need to give it some serious thought.

Claw - I do not doubt that anxiety is real and I am sure that there are many manifestations of school phobia but I don't recognise the pattern of behaviour that you describe as in any way similar to that of DS1. DS1 (12) lives in the present - he doesn't worry about things that might happen in the future. ime 8 year old boys are not given to extistential angst. On the one had you say that DS does not self-harm when not attending school but on the other hand you say he has been self-harming for 2 and a half years and over the last few months you have described an escalation in DS's self-harming at the same time as increasing school absence.

The stress of impending tribunal etc passes over DS's head. His behaviour and meltdowns are specific - new tutor, attempts to get him to attend the learning centre. But inbetween the meltdowns he is absolutely fine and happy. He does not need to be in a pit of despair at all times to demonstrate school phobia. In fact if he were depressed/anxious all the time (ie showing a phobic reaction in the absence of the trigger) his problem would not be school phobia.

Perhaps this is part of the problem for CAMHS rather than them fence sitting because they are the attack dog of the school/lea/SS.

Santa, sorry if you have been through this issue before, but have you looked into low dose Prozac for his anxiety?

This school will lie about everything to everyone and your trust in them disappeared after the 2011 Tribunal.

You can send your child to a school you don't trust. I know you have not had much choice while fighting for a SA but you have this agreed now. Get him out of there.

If you believe in the right school he would not suffer like this, then start working towards the right school.. Identify it. Meet the school. Get your evidence to demonstrate this he what he needs. This can be done whilst home schooling. I know others who have had to HE while they wait for/fight for a place in a specialist school.

If you really believe that even an hour at this school is too much, you need to break free of it altogether. Even if you got 30 hours support, I can't see how you'd ever trust this place so there is nothing to be gained.

Children do get assessed on the basis of their needs whilst out of school and being HEd.

You can't send your child that should be

Just one further thought, I have seen some very anxious kids thrive at ABA schools, if there is one in your area? The child may be too high-functioning for special school, but because ABA schools are 1-to-1 at all times, and give each child an individualised curriculum, they can work well. There are also group sessions, but class sizes are v small, as is school overall. Far cosier environment than a bug, noisy ms. The LA would hate the cost, of course, but in this case where your child is having such an extreme reaction to ms, perhaps a different approach altogether would help. The behavioural approach might also help your DS learn anxiety-management techniques. Just a thought.

Also, sick of, there are specialist schools out there which cater for able children with high anxiety. You just have to find them.

In this placement, there is every possibility the LA will eventually turn on the school and say, ok, we agree there are problems with THIS school but there is every chance he can function perfectly well at another m/s school.

And the fact is he may, in the right placement, where people actually give a toss. You will always be part of his education but with a school you can work with and that is prepared to be flexible about anxiety and working in and out of the class with a 1:1, he may flourish.

True, appropriat. When my boy was at ms, he had a corridor desk which worked very well for periods when he couldn't cope in class. My advocate explains that mainstream education does NOT mean being 90% in the classroom, but being on the ms premises and included where practicable or suitable for the child's needs.

From what I remember of previous threads, Claw has identified a particular school that she feels can meet DS's needs. The problem is that this school is an independent mainstream school but also offers a different 'package' for DC with SEN. I don't know if they have specialist teachers for these children but they do have on site therapists (SALT, OT).

Essentially if DS attends another state m/s school and is deemed to cope OK and not need SALT or OT then this school will be named on the statement rather than Claw's preference. On the other hand if he is deemed not cope (and that no amount of SALT or OT would enable him to do so) it may be decided that he needs specialist placement. There are specialist independent schools that cater for high functioning DC with extreme anxiety. I worry that the level of anxiety is beyond that that could make this indi m/s the best option for DS. I just find it hard to imagine a situation where it will be decided that DS needs private mainstream.

Keep - "On the one had you say that DS does not self-harm when not attending school but on the other hand you say he has been self-harming for 2 and a half years"

Thats right he has been attending school for last 2 and half years and self harming by aggressive scratching. If i take him out school, the scratching stops, return him and he starts scratching again.

"and over the last few months you have described an escalation in DS's self-harming at the same time as increasing school absence"

I took him out of school in June due to extent and seriousness of his scratching. His injuries totally cleared, LA insist he is returned to school in September, by October his body is covered in scratches again. SW visits him in school in October, tells me go and get and take him straight to A&E for emergency mental health assessment.

Not only had his scratching come back, he now needed emergency mental health assessment.

For the next month, he had what i can only describe as a mental breakdown, which is why i took him to GP and she signed him off.

Now he has been out from school since October, no scratching, no thoughts of wanting to die, no self harm. He is happy, his 'normal' self again. The only time now he self harms etc is if returning to school is mention or attempted.

So out of school, he is fine, return to school and he self harms, not only does it return when he is returned to school, but it is now escalating when he is returned to school.

I think that is a pretty clearn pattern.

Inappropriate, i know i have no trust in this school and that is exactly right, all trust went out the window. The minute they 'switched sides' at the last minute and turned up at Tribunal and lied. I expected at least everyone would tell the truth.

It is obvious from 2011 what school/LA agenda was from a copy of LA/School file.

In 2011 the LA were in the process of drafting a statement, they had a 'panel' meeting and decided to report me to SS instead of issuing a statement.

In 2011 school told me they had heard from SS and asked for my consent, i gave my consent in writing. There is a note on school file, that school told ss i declined.

They then wait for me to apply for SA again in 2012, to launch their already collected ammo.

Mum declined previous referral in 2011. We have photos mum gave 3 weeks ago (why wait 3 weeks and for me to apply for SA before expressing concerns about photos which they implied were of a 'sexual' nature)

Then same thing again, mum wont agree to referral, when i consented in writing. Mum is removing ds from school. When i did no such thing.

So report, report, report until SS take notice.

claw you need to make any pattern clear to others ie 'on and off for two and a half years'. atm it looks as though he remains anxious and depressed when not in school. You need to present a picture where he moves very quickly from calm to meltdown in specific circumstances rather than one where he is severely anxious or depressed for days or weeks on end.

Your posts since October do not tell of a happy, normal boy but from his pov there have only been a couple of incidents when pressure has been put on him to return to school. You are relating the experiences of a lot of parents whose DC are still attending school which does not seem to add up to his scarce attendance. Yes DC release stress at home and the school often miss it (been there) but it is the stress of the day to day, in your face, no escape attendance for 5 days a week that has to be released. DS1 does not give a toss whether the absence is authorised or not or all the other adult stuff like statements and tribunals as long as what it 'means' on a daily basis to him is OK. I don't disbelieve you, I suppose I find it difficult to understand why DS would brood on the issue - for DS1 out of sight is out of mind.