What is a polite way to put this

[sweetteamum]

DS has a private diagnosis of PDA. I realise the local authority have to accept, and it can be overturned by a tribunal if they refuse to.

However, I'd like to avoid the hassle and need a polite was of suggesting they accept it. Without being rude and obnoxious.

I am actually applying for one at the minute.

I realise the local authority have to accept, and it can be overturned by a tribunal if they refuse to.

Really?

I didn't think a Tribunal had teh authority to negate a diagnosis that was issued by a suitably qualified medical professional.

I very much doubt they do.

I would think that any medical professional who had their diagnosis over-turned in this way would have serious grounds for complaint as it's a challenge to their professional competency.

No need to 'encourage' the LA to accept it. Just tell them that that is the dx. A private dx is no less valid than an NHS dx. I dread to think the amount of damages that the LA could be liable for if they refused to recognise a private dx and, as a result, damage was done.

The LA can't say a doctor is wrong without very good evidence. They can, however, say that it's a medical issue so not of any educational relevance, as ours did about DS's long string of NHS-confirmed diagnoses

I agree - don't encourage them to accept it - tell them what the diagnosis is and then that is that.

However, having said that.... LAs do try to overturn medical diagnosis. At my tribunal last summer the LA EP tried to overturn a medical diagnosis which has a direct impact on my Ds' education. The Judge refused to allow it, and it involved over an hour of heated debate between all sides - specifically because a non-medical person was trying to overturn a medical diagnosis given by two medical doctors (both consultants). Eventually the LA gave up and their lawyer privately conceded to my barrister so the dx stayed.

Afterwards I formerly complained to the LA. They weren't interested and said it was a difference of professional opinion. They also, totally missing the point, said if I still wasn't happy, I should take my complaint to the Tribunal Services about the way the hearing was conducted. I have decided that although I don't accept their response, there's no where further I can take it.

This wasn't the first time they tried this. They tried it during my appeal for refusal to assess a year ago. The LA conceded the appeal before the hearing, but when they tried to go after my solicitor for costs, in their costs application they said that they didn't believe the diagnoses a consultant psychiatrist had given my DS. The Judge told them to behave themselves, and if they wanted to challenge a medical diagnosis then they should have taken us to Tribunal instead of conceding.

So yes, if they can get away with it, LAs will try to overturn diagnoses.

The LA challenged DS1's diagnosis of ASD. The NHS pathway recommends statementing for all ASD. ASD is much more likely to be statemented than MLD.

The LA TRAINEE EP additional assessment directly challenged it (made by DK, Margo Sharp and confirmed by NHS comm paed and their own salt). He just added the proviso that he wasn't qualified but the LA had requested he did so.

Margo was one of our witnesses at tribunal but the LA conceded before she got a chance to rip him to shreds.

99% certainty of expected failure will not stop them trying it on.

Sorry, maybe I got the wrong end of the stick.

I'm a 'friend' of an educational equality sen advocate (only on Facebook) and thought she'd posted saying that private diagnosis have to be accepted by the authority and if it ever got to appeal then the appeal would accept and overturn it.

I'm not too hot on explaining things so do apologise.

The NHS pathway recommends statementing for all ASD

keep - That's really interesting. If you have a reference to any document that specifically advises that, it could be very useful additional ammo for any parent experiencing a refusal to assess.

On a differet note..

There are some truly appalling accounts on thsi thread of abuse of power by the LAs. I really feel that SEND should have the power to disbar some individuals who abuse their position and professional status in this way. Of course they won't though.

But it seems that it's now going beyond just a cost saving exercise by LAs and starting to get very personal and vindictibe and all reasonableness seems to be totally absent.

It's win at any cost - truth bing one of them

I posted this last month - I'll try and find a link.

I think it is worth noting that the NHS Map of Medicine care path recommends statementing for ASD but not for other conditions such as ADHD. With regard to ASD:

"•needs should be documented in a statement of special educational needs (SEN):
•the local education authority should provide for the needs identified in this statement
•the child’s progress can be reviewed through an individual education plan
•approaches that focus on social functioning should be introduced as an on-going intervention strategy from early years to adulthood

•inclusion of children with ASD in mainstream schools:
?some children cope with good support
?some studies have found that social isolation, loneliness, and bullying are commonplace for pupils with ASD who attend mainstream schools"

Also look at the DfE stats of how many children with different diagnoses have statements or are on SA+. www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/225699/SFR30-2013_Text.pdf

Thanks Keep

Some very interesting statistics in your .pdf file.

app.mapofmedicine.com/mom/104/page.html?department-id=6&specialty-id=1030&pathway-id=3393&page-id=8682&pathway-prov-cert=/attachments/15523_provcert.pdf

Additional information on providing for special needs in primary.

I don't know if you need Athens to access this but I will post it anyway.

Thanks for this - how often do the lea go after parents for tribunal costs? Is that something else to look forward to?

The winner (LA or parent) is not entitled to recover costs from the loser. Tribunals not a real court because they are allegedly 'free' and legal representation is not required.

In reality this means that LAs take parents to tribunal when they know they do not have a hope in hell of winning.

My LA caved before my experts had chance to give evidence. I was refused right to appeal for costs on the basis that just because I won it meant diddly squat in terms of recouping tribunal costs. So it cost nearly 5k for a couple of hours.

2boys - my LA is particularly nasty. They threatened me for months with a costs application, but then at the last minute switched the application to my lawyers - who then put in a counter-claim because of having to defend themselves.

The reason the LA gave was because they said I should be declaring all my experts' evidence as each assessment took place - which I couldn't do because my experts hadn't finalised their reports because they all had to talk to each other and finalise at the same time, and were working towards evidence deadlines. In the end, after being heavily threatened and bullied by the LA, I got in all my reports 3 weeks before evidence deadline. Which the LA then didn't read and so tried to extend the evidence deadline. Lawyers went for strikeout, which made the LA read the reports in double quick time. LA put in their costs application (amongst other amounts) a sum of money for reading the reports because they said the reports were all late (hmm no, they were 3 weeks early!)

That was for my appeal against SA. Then for my appeal against parts 2, 3 & 4 - guess when the LA put in their evidence? Yup - that would be exactly on evidence deadline! Mine had been in 4 weeks previously to deadline and they sat on it and refused to communicate with me! So they did exactly the same as to what they complained about.

You really can't make up the behaviour of my LA during my two appeals.

(LA bods, if you are reading this, I hope you have sleepless nights because of the way you treat disabled children and their parents who come under your care)

Yes how do these people sleep at night? They care nothing for children or education - which should be the two things they ARE employed to care about