Thought I would update on this situation. This weekend I send the letter below to the District Manager of the Children's Disability Dept. Of social services.. it took me this long to do the necessary ground work. Please note the part about Ofsted!
I'll keep you posted on what happens next.
For the attention of .... ? District Manager Children?s Disability Team
Dear Sirs
I am writing to you with regard to the recent decision of the respite panel to refuse my son, .....(DOB 18.06.00) overnight respite at ..... on the basis that he attends a mainstream school.
I have since made some enquiries and also taken legal advice from the Disability Law Service regarding the above decision as I feel very strongly that to deny a family a service based the type of education a child receives is not only discriminatory but also goes against the inclusion policy which states that parents of disabled children are entitled to choose whether their child is educated in a special or mainstream environment (dependent on available provision).
Following several unsuccessful attempts to obtain a copy of the most recent OFSTED inspection report for ..... Respite Centre, so that I could view the wording of the admissions criteria, I obtained a copy of the Statement of Purpose and Function for (..... another slightly further away) centre instead which I understand is worded similarly. Page 14, the last sentence in paragraph one states.. ??all children accessing the service attend specialised educational provisions.? I understand that it is this statement, on the ...... document, that resulted in my son to being refused overnight respite on the basis that he did not fit the admissions criteria.
Further enquiries have ascertained that the criteria currently being used by respite centres was set by OFSTED themselves which perhaps explains their unwillingness to provide me with the information I requested and to which I am legally entitled.
The Disability Law Service were able to confirm that centres who adopt this criteria are indeed contravening the purpose of the Inclusion Policy and that I am within my rights to seek for respite centres to change the wording of this section of the Statements of Purpose and Function to ?..most of the children accessing this service..? (or ?the majority?.) instead of all. This is then a statement of what is currently fact, not a statement which allows respite panels to rule children out on the basis of where they are educated.
I feel strongly about this because the Inclusion Policy has given us, as parents, the right to have a say in the type of education provision we feel is most suitable for our children with special needs. We should not then be penalised for exercising this right. It should also be considered that as mainstream schools become more inclusive, there will be more children with various types of disability, some of them complex, being educated in mainstream. The amendment that I propose would prevent further families being denied a service which, frankly, has nothing to do with their children?s education. Many families are suffering chronic sleep deprivation as a result of the sleep difficulties of their children who have special needs. There is no reasonable argument in defence of a ruling that families should not be allowed overnight respite in centres, because their child ?is not disabled enough to attend a special school?; this concept is out of date since the advent of the Inclusion Policy. Being as it appears that OFSTED are responsible for this discrepancy, I will be writing to them also, to point this out to them, and will await a response, taking further action as advised, if necessary.
Secondly, I would like to specifically request that my son?s case goes back to panel as soon as possible, for the above reasons and also because it should be acknowledged that a panel had made a previous decision that we should be receiving overnight respite as a result of my son?s sleep issues and during 2007 that is indeed what we were getting. The fact that overnight respite at the home of my son?s respite day-care worker proved unsuitable (unmanageable for her due to the extent of his sleep issues) surely does not make us any less entitled, rather the contrary. In these circumstances, a respite centre is obviously the answer, as agreed at the Child In Need meeting held on 17th October 2007, when it was arranged for the case to go back to panel. A decision not to award this leaves us without a service which it has been previously agreed we are entitled, and of which we are very much in need.
It should also be noted that my son?s current school, ......Primary, ........., not only contains a PD unit, but is also a flagship school for inclusion, so is in fact incorporating special education into its curriculum, which is thus adapted to the needs of individual children via outreach services and input from visiting therapists.
Furthermore, for the purpose of your records, although not in any way connected with the decision of the panel, arrangements are currently being made for my son?s phased transition into special school, either .......... or .........., in the near future. This is due to my son?s needs being unanimously considered by us, his parents and those who work with him, to be now more appropriately met by special education.
I await your early response.
Yours faithfully
An Extremely Narked ShinyHappy