Proposed Statement ...... total bollocks

[Flocci]

I cannot believe that after 3 months our proposed statement arrived yesterday and it is total bollocks. It has taken 24 hours for me to calm down to even type a rant. They had 9 reports from everyone involved with dd and every single frigging one said that she will need full time 121 care at school. They have sat on it for all this time and come back and offered 8 hours a week.

I called up just to clairfy the figure and got through to the bitch who actually wrote it and she at least had the grace to admit that they did expect me to reject it but that that was just a starting point ....... but actually that makes it worse. What is the point? Why did I and everyone else bust a gut getting that info together when clearly the LEA haven't read it or they read it and just plucked a figure from the sky to see if I could be arsed to challenge it.

I just don't understand what this process is all about - clearly it is some sort of haggling process where only the parents who have the strength to push and fight keep goping and so they hope they can fob others off along the way. Even ignoring what all our reports said, just waht they listed in the statement as being required would take more than 8 hours a week.

I am just so pissed off by the process - why couldn't it be a face to face assessment and idscussion where we actually discuss ir propery and all come to a decision rather than paper flying about and random figures that make no sense, and of course endless bloody delays.

There we go. I know I am not the first and I won't be the last but it pisses me off so much. I knew this sould be hard, but I am so tired of fighting for every little crumb. And this is so important FFS.

You have my utmost sympathy. We have just done all this and it has been so stressful.

I think they try and get away with offering as little as possible and hope that parents will just accept it.

You said "clearly it is some sort of haggling process where only the parents who have the strength to push and fight keep goping and so they hope they can fob others off along the way."

And you are 100% right.

Sadly, we have to play the game. Don't beg. Don't plead. Send them a letter stating that you absolutely won't accept anything less than what the reports have recommended and you would like them to finalise the Statement as soon as possible so that you can appeal to the Tribunal ASAP (put in a point there about how you will clearly win as the reports state that x,y and z are needed - in fact, keep repeating that point as much as you can.

Soon, they will withdraw their bollox Statement. I can almost guarantee that they wouldn't dare go to Tribunal with that.

I've been there, Flocci, and the begging and pleading and meetings don't mean anything to them. A Tribunal application does. It's shite, isn't it. But you WILL get there. As you say, it's just a haggling process.

Oh, getting the MP involved will help too (it did with me) and , if you're brave enough, the local paper. They might hurry up even more with the inevitable right decision then.

Good luck.

Has anyone ever said 'Well I'll only send ds/dd to school for 8 hours a week then?' I just wonder what the reaction would be sometimes.
It's just absolutely ridiculous. We're only talking about paying someone slightly more than minimum wage to care for our children at school.

Bloody hell, 8 hours!. They've clearly ignored all the reports (they don't read anything with too many words in it) and have just gone by what their remaining budget allows.

As you rightly point out this is all about negotiation and haggling. Hardball negociation is what is required here.

The hours and lack of are only part of the problem; my guess as well that all the sentences in Parts 2 and 3 are only worthy of shredding. You certainly cannot have any woolly words in it or vague provision.
Would also suggest you contact IPSEA (or SOS;SEN) and run this issue past them, you need to get your response letter to the LEA dead right. Run Parts 2 and 3 by them as they're written it and they'll tell you what it should say.

Meeting face to face with the LEA doesn't always work either - we've been down that particular route before the Statement got issued and it still didn't help much. We do though fall under the remit of a particularly dogmatic and shite LEA (also IPSEA get a ton of complaints about our county every year) so that is why.

I would also like to point out as well that SENDIST don't work in August(!). This LEA though may well drag you to Tribunal just for spite; they don't always back down prior to Tribunal.

Getting your MP on side as well in this matter is also a good idea.

SENDIST's website:-

www.sendist.gov.uk

I have just been through this procedure with my LEA, and it is one of the most stressful things I have been through, so I really do sympathise. Especially with school starting soon. You still have time to finalise the statement before September, so don't panic. They have already shown you that they mean to play dirty with you. The head of the panel actually told me that the proposed statement was only a negotiation starting point before I had even received it. I warned him that I had taken advice from IPSEA and after that the Lea were a little more cautious with me.
Every contact I had with them I did it in writing, and sent emails to head of panel, named officer, and mp at same time. I mentioned case law, and that I had been advised by IPSEA, NAS, and anyone else you can get to help you. SOSSEN are also very good.
Best of luck!

ATM don't even get me started on the total and utter vagueness of the wording - that is truly not worth the paper it is written on. The whole report was 4 pages long. Page 1 summarised factual info. Page 2 was a resume of dd's problems, copied and pasted from the info provided. Page 3 was the critical stuff and so clearly was just a proforma piece of shite where dd's name had been slotted in. I did that comedy thing of shaking the envelope to see if there was some more pages inside as I couldn't quite believe that was it.

NOWHERE did it actually specify what actual proper assistance she will need ie at mealtimes dd will need an adult to escort her to the hall, help her climb into her chair, collect her meal and carry it to the table, cut up her food...... instead it said "strategies must be in place to ensure mealtimes are adequately supervised..." STRATEGIES????? It was just vague jargon bullshit.

Oh, and page 4 suggested that on an ongoing basis dd be reviewed by x y and z to assess her ongoing needs. Yes, thanks for that.

Luckily dd doesn't start until January so we have a whole extra term which is lucky because these wankers can't be arsed to work at all in August, so now they have 8 weeks to get back to me which will take us to October and I have just got to stew until then.

Have already contacted IPSEA and our chosen primary school who wrote a stunning response absolutely tearing the proposed statement to shreds. So the fight is on most definitely. Again.

It's bloody annoying, isn't it. Our LEA has been much, much quicker, but even after re-iterating all the stuff from all the reports about needing help with staying on task, keeping safe, learning to deal with routines and unavoidable changes in routine and with unstructured non classroom time, plus needing someone to regularly check and change his nappy, DS1 was offered "50-100%" of "dedicated and on-call support" from a variety of budgets. Now, the school are great and even on their limited budget (it's a tiny school) would manage to employ someone to cover 3 days a week, but it stinks that the LEAs do their best to try and wriggle out of providing appropriately. I'm not even asking for them to fund a place in a special or specialist school - he's a bright boy and I have a bunch of reasons for wanting him to be in the supportive local village school and all I'm asking is that they see to it that he doesn't flounder there and become an unfortunate statistic.

Oh Flocci, they are such wankers
It's like the worst days of Communist bureaucracy isn't it, and to think that they have a process for making it difficult for children - first they say 'no' to everything, then they produce a piss poor statement KNOWING that it's piss poor, then they lie, wriggle and obstruct to avoid putting all the right support in.

And guess who is paying for these plonkers who do this for living? You and me, out of our taxes. Imagine all the funding that could go to schools if this process was eliminated and the time-wasting tossers put to do some proper work.

I don't understand how they sleep at night, I really don't.

Hi Flocci

It is certainly communist bureaucracy at its finest. I honestly think the majority of LEA staff think they are untouchable and thus can act as power mad jobsworths. On a wider level the whole town/county council system needs a complete overhaul.

Having read your recent comment it is all too clear that the LEA have no actual plan in place to help your daughter at lunchtimes. This does not really surprise me as LEA's do not like having to pay for lunchtime support due to cost . The statement you've been given is as you rightly surmise completely vague and not worth the paper its written on.

You're wise to get IPSEA on board; they can certainly assist. Another possible way forward is to get your MP also on side. The people in your constituency voted for him/her; put that person to work!.

(In my case I will have to attend the hated Annual review session towards the end of the year; even when the Statement is issued you still have to go through that process).

You are so right that this is a hideously untouchable bureaucracy.

In no private business could an organisation get away with interminable delays leading to a document which is not in any way supportable, but they can and do because although I can fight against the content now there is no way I can complain about the bitch who stalled it for months etc etc. I can't say er hello what is this based on? have you noticed this doesn't make sense? can you see that none of the professionals you asked for info agree with you? etc etc because there is no opportunity to do that.

I think I will contact my MP actually - can't do any harm.

And I agree totally that it is ridiculous to be bickering about relatively small sums of money when the alternative is to use up a much more expensive place at a specialist school. Especially when there are plenty of little ones who need those places as opposed to my dd who would do much better in mainstream as long as she is properly supported of course.

Mind you, when we were fighting to get 121 support at preschool they only agreed to that after I accepted a place at a specialist preschool which is of course vasly oversubscribed, and said that if they didn't fund her 121 worker in mainstream I would bloody well send her to the specialist preschool just to prove what a ridiculous bunch of twats they were. OK so i didn't phrase it quite like that but they got the message.