How do you become a SEN specialist lawyer/advocate

[bjkmummy]

After my recent tribunal journey where we win an independent placement without a lawyer representing us, I have decided in sept to do a law degree via the OU and then go on and specialise in sen law. Just wondering if anyone knew how the likes of FS became specialists in SEN law? Is it even covered in a law degree? I'm going to a free conference in may where one of the heads of a top. Itch SEN law firm will be so may ask them to give me any pointers.

Has anyone else had this mad idea to do this? I was just shocked how much legal help costs and want to be able hopefully in the future if I qualify to offer it to parents at a sensible price. I also just want to show my LA how they have inspired me!!!

Gosh, no idea, bjk but this is very impressive and admirable. How long will it take to complete a law degree with OU? Guess you can ask for a placement (do they call it pupillage still?) with an SEN law firm? Great idea to pick the brains of a SEN lawyer. Guess you could ring around, too. Good luck!

I think she volunteered for IPSEA and was so good they offered her a job. I assume she is not legally qualified as a solicitor or she would be advertising herself as one. I think most advocates start as volunteers and then set up on their own. You need to pick a charity that offers representation at hearings as you need to be able to offer that.

An alternative is to work as a paralegal / legal exec in a firm that does sen law. You may want to look at the legal exec option - after 5 years as a legal exec and having passed all the exams you qualify as a solicitor. If I was starting out in law now I would not pay degree and law school fees I would tell people to go the legal exec route you get to the same place and its much cheaper. Some firms eg Irwin Mitchell even have their own in house courses and don't charge you (as long as you work for them for a certain period after). You can work parttime and train at the same time. May also be worth looking at mediation courses so you can work as sen mediator - as while mediation is not going to be compulsory under new SEN Act the govt is pushing it. Our LA uses a firm that has no sen experience but mainly deals with neighbour disputes so there is going to be a market for sen mediators.

Most law degrees with not cover education law as standard - it might be an option. It may be easier to get into it via IPSEA etc or you will end up having to do lots of areas of law you have no interest in.

I've got 6 years I reckon to get qualified whilst the kids still in school and I can use that time. I am also considering doing the IPSea volunteer course as well and have registered for it. I used to work in the court side of thing ore children and started my ilex qualification but never finished it. They do run it now at a local college but I'm guessing in the evenings which would be difficult for me to do due to hubby shift pattern. Also I don't know if I would get funding to do ilex - wold need to find out - I know the rules for funding change in sept and its meant to make further education more accessible to people over 25 albeit you are taking out a loan for the fees. One of the college has an open day in 2 weeks so will go and look into that as well. I just need to now get my complaint against the LA done, get my son into his new school post tribunal and then start and think about myself for once and my future career prospects. I'm not in a position to have a job at the moment as I have to do the transport run for my older son for at least the next 5 years so that limits me an awful lot but then don't want to waste this valuable time at home.

I'm studying with the OU and love it! I'm doing an open degree so I can choose the modules. I'm doing social policy, psychology and inclusion. I also started volunteering for local branch of NAS and recently completed their family rights training to enable me to point parents to the right resources and give them info but I would love to set up an advocacy service.

I can't add much to what has been said. Volunteer experience is a good place to start. I would also add that getting a broader understanding of the law would be useful.

Law courses don't do education law but will teach public law, human rights and other important legal principles which are relevant to the SEN process but underused!

I don't know all the details but know fs is not a solicitor but an advocate - an advocate has full court appearance rights

As far as I'm aware FS became a parent partnership person at her local LEA after her dd was diagnosed and then (not impressed with the advice she was being told to give in this 'independent' role) she moved to the Elfrida Rathbone Charity in Camden. Which is where I came across her, in an unbelievably fortunate stroke of luck! Paid nothing for her services either. Then in time she set up her own business with another advocate.

She was always brilliant though, and was renowned for her excellence pretty much from day one of her SEN work. She left a top job in the city to get into that field, so was always very, very sharp and used to a huge workload and immense pressure.

I got my legal practice certificate many moons ago and considered trying to get into advocacy but FS is so good I knew I would never compare! She has much more work than she can handle so there's definitely an opportunity for someone determined!

FS is not a lawyer but you don't need to be to appear with parents at Tribunal. You do not have the right to appear in any court though.

FS has wonderful practical knowledge. A lawyer is needed for more legal issues like JR though.

TBH, I don't think you need to be as 'good' as FS. She is something to aspire to be for sure, but I imagine it is pretty easy to be 'better' than a good number of other people proporting to be 'advocates'. Aim to be better than them and be determined to get better as you learn and build up experience and you'll make the difference you want to.

bjk - All the best.. I know nothing about law

I thought that fs had full court appearance rights, or maybe I misheard her? She has certainly been in front of the high court of appeal for a pal of mine

manish, are you on twitter?

IPSEA volunteering would be the way to go.

I looked into doing a law degree locally but there was too much EU stuff for me in it.

I think being an advocate that knows SEN law inside out would be preferable to sitting through a lot of irrelevant stuff during a law degree.

After all it's only interpreting a set of rules i.e. the laws made by the Govt and developing and arguing your case for interpreting them in your preferred way. (Bit simplistic but just trying to say it's not rocket science really).

Get familiar with education law, precedents, tribunal rulings, relevant JR and Ombudsman decisions etc and you could probably argue effectively at Tribunal. A lot of us have been forced through our own experiences to do this to a lesser lay degree anyway. As an advocate you'd just be doing it more depth (and professionally).

Not trying to demean the experience of any professional lawyers on here - no, I'm really not.

sorry - made by Parliament (not the Govt).

LOL.

The law isn't rocket science. The complex intricacies of the way the law is broken and justified is however, a bit more complicated, though I don't think lawyers are especially willing or necessarily able to get into that kind of detail anyway.

It's not rocket science Star.

You even have a hierarchy of rules of interpretation. If you are creative with English, can provide evidence and can present a compelling argument you'll probably win your case.

Complex intricacies of the way law is broken and justified are just counter-arguments to your assertion that your interpretation is the correct one.

Dunno Wet, You should have seen the state of DS' statement after our lost tribunal.

Still completely unspecified and contradicted itself all the way through it, with spelling mistakes etc.

I suppose though that a judges decision that a professional is presenting the truth verbally and subsequent dismissal of all documentary evidence is 'interpretation', though a bloody creative one.

I suppose technically it is legal for the judge to rule that because no LA staff have made the recommendation the parents are seeking, then their case should be dismissed, even if the recommendation or otherwise was not requested or even within their professional capacity to comment on i.e. ds was seen by the HV/SW/GP/TA. In their report, nowhere does it state that the child needs ABA.

Grrrrrrr.

Honestly I could have possibly lived with an evidence-based argument against us. But the drivel that we received as justification for dismissing our appeal was, I fear, vindictive in the wording and the blatant abuse of power.

Well that's extremely poor interpretation of the law by feeble-minded practitioners.

What a good advocate does is present the facts in a very palatable format and ensure the audience focuses on the relevant information.

From what I remember the bunch of tossers on your Tribunal let the LA ramble on until they had used up all the available time (philibustering) so your legal advisor didn't have time to present your case fully?

Did your legal team actually say to the Tribunal - hang on here, we are running out of time.

No criticism intended - just interested to know how they handled that LA tactic. Don't answer if it's all too painful to remember - sorry I asked.

That's not a fair fight.

That's an abuse of power.

The parent did not get a fair hearing.

The Judge ruled that since we'd got documentary evidence, and the LA had none, that they should be allowed to talk for the majority of the hearing.

No. It was a joke.

As was making us wait just over 6 weeks for their decision.

It FELT personal. If FELT like the Judge was incompetent (new salaried and admitted he knew nothing about Education) was ruled by one of the panel members, another LA's EP, who has a reputation for being anti-parent and was basically directing the operation given the Judges weak stance.

You couldn't make it up could you

The best lawyer in the world would have lost in that situation.

I know we say this but I really don't know how some of those people can live with themselves when they behave like that.

I suppose it's because they simply are mindless morons.

I almost suspect that the 6 week wait was further deliberate abuse.

The decision was full of the utmost utter bull, much of which never even was presented at the tribunal, that the judge or someone made up to justify their decision.

The reason I didn't appeal, was because firstly we were out of money, and I had lost faith in the system, preferring to spend anything we did have directly on ds, and because he was under school age meaning his ARs were 6 monthly and appealing against a new statement would be faster and guarantee I didn't have to deal with that panel again.

I didn't have a lawyer. I had FS. I can't fault her for our hearing. I believe it was her first one against a certain LA Lawyer too. I think she was a bit stunned, but it wouldn't have made any difference if we'd had a top barrister, except the barrister might have encouraged us to appeal and spend more money on them, whereas FS advised not to, and I agreed with her.

But I'm still bitter I didn't get justice and win an appeal that I'm sure we'd have been granted. But we'd never have got costs, and ds' provision would have been even more delayed.

Ooops! Sorry I didn't realise you had had FS.

I can understand your bitterness. I still feel bitter after all these years.

Appealing would have tied you up with no certainty of outcome.

I walked away before Tribunal when the L&SC offered funding for a specialist FE placement. My solicitor's advice was to refuse that funding and go to Tribunal to get a LA funded school (not FE). Far too risky so I took the LS&C FE money.

Sometimes you just have to be pragmatic. We both know that the system is corrupt. No one can win against corrupt systems.

We did the best we could.