Can OT go into Section 3 of statment?

[shey]

DS is ASD. We are in the process of going through an annual review. We are now with a new LEA. There is a clear benifit for our ds to have occupational therapy (we have assessments by 2 OTs to show this). The new LEA say OT is nothing to do with them and this can not go into the educational element of statment, section 3! Is this right....can it only go into section 6 or whatever where nothing means anything. Does anyone have it in section 3?

I have known one or two situations where education have funded OT. Generally though the provision of OT is down to NHS or SS. Were the OT assessments part of the statement?

If OTs have assessed and said there is a need, they should ethically be providing it, unless the treatment recommended is unavailable due to resources. However the statement is just a recommendation for NHS provision, and the NHS is not bound to provide it, again due to resources.

We tried to get OT into parts 3 and failed- but did get SALT in (we kind of traded SALT for OT because SALT was the bigger need).

It certainly can, but is quite hard- there is some case law concerning OT on the IPSEA site.

Fubsy- if it goes in part 3 the LEA have to fund it whether or not the NHS can provide it. Half way through ds1's reception year in mainstream the NHS stopped providing SALT, so the LEA had to pay for his private one to go in because it was in part 3.

The problem is persuading the LEA that they should fund it - then finding the oT to do the work!

For some reason LEAs are much more likely to fund SALT, they seem to find it more "educational".

If its in part 3 they have no choice though. Either the NHS provides, or the LEA pay a private one. they do fight hard to keep it out of part 3 for that reason- but really it should be in there, so if you decide its important enough you can certainly go for it.

Our LEA standardly puts SALT in part 5. I only know of myself and my friend who had it in part 3 (mine's now back in part 5 because ds1 gets SALT via his special school at a decent level- and doesn't need as much SALT input as he's surrounded by specialist teachers anyway). Her statement (still in part 3) was passed round in awe at her local annual review!

What I struggle with is, if I assess a child and think they need physio, then I am ethically bound to provide that, or at least provide the advice ansd support that would allow parents/carers to do it.

Sometimes schools ask me if a child will get physio if they dont have a statement, and to me thats astrange question as it shouldnt really matter. But obviously in the world of education, you dont get what youre not statmented for, or provided under school action etc.

Jimjams, do you mind me being nosy? Which school does DS1 go to? (Initials will do!)

Oh are you local? Begins with M. Lovely place.

We have both SALT and OT in part 3 of DS2's proposed statement but it wasn't quantified. We have asked for it to be quantified and they're still discussing it. However, as they've agreed that DS2 can go to special school, it's now not so much of an issue, as Jimjams says. Mind you, the Head of the special school begged me to keep pushing for it because he said it gave him more ammunition against the authority!

Jimjams, do you have speech therapy stated even though your little one is in a specialist environment? DS was in a mainstream nursery and so his statement set out how many sessions of s therapy needed etc. Now he is attending a language unit the LEA seem to feel that is enough Language input, even though his one to one sessions are short even if they happen at all.
Thanks for all the advice re OT. We will have a go at arguing for going in section 3!

It's not specified now he's in a specilaist place (I don't think- I pay a lot less attention to the statement these days as we're happpy with the provision he's getting). The school has a permanent SALT and two assistant SALTs so he gets regular blocks, plus all the PECS work etc in class anyway.

Hi Jimjams - based at cdc but do know the SN schools in the area. Thought it looked a good school when Ive been over there!

It's a lovely school. Years since we set foot in the cdc- ds1 started refusing to go in there. I'm betting we know quite a few people in common though.....

Sounds very sensible to me!