Ambitious about Autism's new 'Ruled Out' campaign on academic exclusion

[RowanMumsnet]

Hello

Ambitious about Autism have launched a new campaign today called Ruled Out. It focuses on children with autism and asks why they miss out on school.

Ambitious about Autism say:

'Children with autism are disproportionately affected by both formal and illegal school exclusion. Some parents find it difficult to find a school that can meet their child’s needs and as a result their children are put on part-time timetables, excluded or not able to access the curriculum they are entitled to. In short, they miss out on education.

4 in 10 children with autism have been excluded informally and therefore illegally during their time at school.
20% of children with autism have been formally excluded in the past 12 months.
Over half of parents of children with autism say they have kept their child out of school for fear that the school is unable to provide appropriate support.'

The campaign has the following aims:

Every family of a child with autism should know their rights, and have the resources to help their child get the support they are entitled to at school.
Every school should have access to an autism specialist teacher, to build capacity among schools staff and to support children with autism to learn and achieve.
Every local authority should set out in its local offer the support available in its area to ensure children with autism have access to quality full-time education.

Ambitious About Autism has asked if Mumsnet would like to sign up as an official supporter of the campaign, and as ever we said we'd need to run it past our posters. So if you have any thoughts on that, do please let us know; and of course if you'd like to take action to support the campaign at an individual level, you can see how to do that at the bottom of this page.

Thanks
MNHQ

Yes our campaign should really be called 'ABA for those who want it' certainly not to be imposed on any parents who do not want it

But at the moment it is not even on the menu, parents have to go to tribunal for even a sniff of ABA . Yet if they want Teacch or SALT or OT, it is a big thumbs up

We want a level playing field really

Rowan - Do you think AaA might answer my question about whether they would support ABA training for LSAs, since their own schools (Treehouse and now also The Rise) espouse behavioural methods?

It would also be in stark contrast to our current "zero training" ethos! Untrained schoolgates mums as LSAs is just a bit poor, and often it is the autistic child who pays the price for that lack of training, by getting excluded.

Thanks!

So this campaign has now become completely about Aba not about children with autism generally

Right royal I agree completely

Agree, rightroyal I do not think mainstream is the right place for all ASD children even if some cope there. My son is far happier in his BESD school than he ever was in mainstream. He is included there far more than he was in mainstream - he can access all of the curriculum rather than sitting in a room by himself with a TA. He can go on school trips rather than being asked to stay at home. He is not so permanently stressed & no longer goes into the meltdowns that led to him being excluded from mainstream etc etc. It is disgraceful though that the only route to meeting his needs was via exclusions. Two headteachers told me that excluding my son was the only way we would get help - there surely should be a kinder way.

Onein it's terrible you've had to go through that

Thank you for your answers but it is important that this campaign generates light as well as heat:

1. There is no explanation at all as to why you do not say loudly: we must stop law-breaking by LAs. I am a lawyer. I had a lawyer and barrister acting for me pro bono and the support of school, the LA Ed Psych, and all other professionals, but it was still extremely hard to get the LA to educate my son out of school. It took months. Why? Because it costs. The LA were also scared of opening the 'floodgates'. Stand up for parents and kids and say it clear: stop breaking the law now. Giving parents pamphlets is not enough.

1. To suggest it is cheaper to follow the law than not to is naiive. LAs are thinking of this year's budget not the overall cost to society. If you want to run a campaign like that, supply clear figures and produce research.

1. Did you run your campaign aims past the parents who contributed to your report? If not, why not? If you did, did they say they feel that these aims, if achieved, would have made any difference? Ask them

1. If you are demanding all schools have 'access' to specialist teachers, I really think some ground work should have been done in considering what is available already and whether it is actually 'access' that is the problem. To launch a campaign while you are not clear about what you want (e.g. you don't even know how you would define 'specialist teacher') is actually pretty worrying.

1. The point about the Local Offer is that it putting this provision in a Local Offer is already an obligation, so what are you trying to achieve. Plus, it being set out as such doesn't mean there is a right of children to access it.

Great to draw attention to these things, but you need clear campaign goals that have meaning and impact and research and evidence to support them

Also I have to say sickof that the idea that if parents want "Teacch or SALT or OT, it is a big thumbs up" doesn't always meet the reality.

The reality is that parents end up fighting for EVERYTHING - including access to services who have no idea how to support children or work with them directly whatever method they are using because so few are able to argue for access to them.

ABA was not for my son but I am sure it really helps others. But I think what we all want is less fight and more adherence to the law which, let us not forget, actually requires that:

a child's SEN MUST be met by appropriate provision.

It's not the DDA - it is the Equality Act. And yes it is non-compliant with that and with the Education Act too.

No one would say they don't support a campaign which raises awareness of kids being out of school, but you need to know how you are going to change that situation and have very clear aims.

We've just waited a term and a half in a new LA to be offered a school place.

A child without a disability would not be waiting so long. It's not OK that this is routine treatment for SN kids.

Similar experience here boc (dc with a statement). The reason given is that the new LA did not know the extent of the difficulties and therefore couldn't determine what a suitable education would be .

Thanks for supporting this campaign MN.
DS has only had a one day exclusion at his MS High School (with an ASD resource base).
He had many unofficial exclusions at primary and even Nursery until something I'd read on MN gave me the balls to ask for the exclusion in writing as my employer needed it (they didn't). That was the last time it happened.

DS had several "up to five day" exclusions before he was 6. A permanent exclusion that was turned into a managed move in year 2 by my threat to take legal action. A term of part time school that was only turned into full time by the threat of legal action. I lost count over the years of the 10.30 am calls to pick him up and take him home from school. We moved house and he was left waiting a term and a half for a MS school place - that's illegal exclusion.

I know for a fact that if he was a NT typical child without a statement his schooling would not have been so disrupted over the years, and I'd have been able to work.

Having a statement only means you have a piece of paper. Getting schools/LA's to implement the contents of a legal document is another battle worth mentioning.

Getting a non-mainstream statement for a child with a non-standard, "tickbox stylee" diagnosis is a separate battle too. DS will never cope in a mainstream environment, yet doesn't meet the diagnostic criteria for the massively oversubscribed unit places that exist. Does this mean he cannot have a state education?

Did you get fined for all the missed education Boc?

We were expected to agree to an illegal exclusion and keep ds home for 2 weeks to avoid an exclusion! You couldn't make it up.

No never been fined. I do consider the loss of my career as financial punishment for giving birth to a disabled kid however. After all education authorities have no obligation to provide any kind of financial compensation to families when they break the law. My lone parent advisor at the job centre wrote on my behalf to the LA & school when DS was only allowed to be part time - lovely lady.

I'm mentioning the financial impact because I think the fact that parents are then left without the financial resources to compensate for the failures in the school system needs to be made. e.g You can't afford to employ a tutor to help your child catch up on the work missed through an illegal exclusion.

Can I ask does this campaign extend to children who can't access school due to their needs not being met [also known as school refusers]

My daughter sometimes gets so anxious about going to school that she can't go and she has at times been sent home due to being sick because her anxiety levels are so high. She is also on a reduced timetable even when she is in school.

The case studies here do show school refusal Ineed

This is where many LAs go into overdrive. Refusing to do anything, blaming the parents, using CAMHS as a delaying tactic to refuse to put provision in place. Suggesting endless 'reintegration' trials - half a day here etc with no educational provision outside school.

This is an area where the LGO has at least issued clear guidance here

Go to the LGO

The LGO may have clear guidance but their investigators don't all seem aware of it . They seem to ignore the guidance when it suits, just like the LA's really.