The only able bodied child in the class....

[Lettie99]

My DS's proposed placement by the LEA is in the only SLD in the borough. The alternative special school is for mild MLD only - so only one option for us according to the LEA. Our issue is that we know our son, being non verbal with development delay, requires specialist care,and the special SLD school proposed has a strong focus on medical and disability needs. He would be the only able bodied child in the class, and in his current nursery environment, he seems to be interacting and starting to model the kids around him. I am very concerned he would not get this exposure or interaction in the proposed special school. I don't mean to suggest anything negative regarding children with more physical needs, but my son's opportunities to model will definitely be affected. Do you think this an argument for me to propose another school?

The school I was talking about wasn't open-plan and the pupil was in Reception where it can often be easier to make provision for additional needs. I'd worked in a school for children with ASD years before I became a teacher so the high door handles were a commonsense request based on experience.

Children will thrive in the school that is right for them; whether that be mainstream or special - the key is finding that school and having it named in your child's statement!

Haven't got DS' statement yet but they are doing it as if he will be attending mainstream. However they have said we can still then ask for a split placement or SN school place afterwards. Also if they don't give what we think is enough hours then we can appeal. DS only has mild ASD but his specialist teacher is pretty certain he will get the full 25 hours support so I would imagine someone with higher needs would definitely get it.

25 hours isn't full support though is it? Our was just described as 1.0 but must have been 33+ (6 and a half hour day?).

25 hours won't cover breaks and lunch time. Because in MS schools these times are not classed as teaching time, 25 hours is classed as a 'full statement'. i.e. 1:1 for all teaching time.

DD1 needs 1:1 all the time, so we couldn't risk even a 25 hour statement coming through.

ds1 had ta support in lunch and break times when he was in mainstream. He would have been dead in the road outside without it.

Oh the original statement said 0.8. I rang them and told them they were having a laugh and I would refuse to send my son to school without 1:1 at break time as he would escape and be killed. They said they never provided it - I named them a child who had it in his statement (ho ho that annoyed them - weirdly the child already getting 1.0 was a million times more able than ds1 - said child is now in secondary with no support ds1 is in sld/pmld) and they sent a revised statement.

I know someone who has been in this position for two years,her son had to go as he couldn't dealwith MS but I know aprents feel it very much the wrong palce (sadly LEAdont seem to care)

I would be v wary

I know someLEA'stry not to offer lunchtime support,ours is one.Apaprently SOS!SEN are good on that,they have offered to hel pme with that one. I have a feeling IPSEA cover it on their site also.

J's Statement provides 100% despite numerous people claiming that this area doesn't do 100%. If it's needed, it's needed and they need to know that you know that a Tribunal panel would know that!

My DD only got 45 mins of help a week in MS primary. She's now in Y7 in MS secondary, who are giving her 11+ hrs a week. On SA+. Including lunchtimes. The school are saying MS isn't the right environment for her, and they are (fucking finally) helping me to get a statement for her as they need it as they think she needs a minimum of 18+ hrs a week help and they can't afford to provide that level of support on SA+.

I was told 100% support on the statement only included teaching hours and it was up to the school to fund any extra for assemblies, break time, lunch time, after school club etc. Is it possible to get more than 25 hours on a statement? If so that's what I will be fighting for!

We had full time support (including breaktimes and lunchtimes) on the statement. The school may have had to pay for it, I don't know - but the requirement for full time support was set out in the statement.

Also if you need salt - make sure it goes in parts 2&3 (anything shoved in at the end in part 5 is worthless).

What about things like physio and OT. Where should they go?

part 2&3 but much much harder to argue they're an educational need. So very difficult to get that.

nappyaddict, if you get a 25 hour statement, but your DS needs break & lunchtime cover, he would lose it from class time. Our trouble was that DD's reports all stated that she particularly needed cover at breaks/lunchtime. So if she only got a 25 hr statement I was told by the school that I would have to take her home at lunch, or whatever.

If you get a 25 hr statement, that is what your DS will be entitled to - there will be nothing legally to make the school bump it up.

DD1 has SALT & OT in part 2&3, but it is all in-house at special school anyway.

Oh interesting lou. Is it quantified? When ds1 moved to special school because there's an onsite salt and thd staff knew what they were doing I didn't bother fighting about it going in part 3, let it slip to 5. Did you have to battle to get it in the correct part?

No, for SALT Part 3 says:

"2. DD will need adult support to help her develop her social communication skiils and social interaction skills, including initiating and responding to peer interactions and turn taking.

1. DD will need structured programmes that will develop her speech and language skills throughout the the whole of the school curriculum during the the whole of the school day. Regular assessment, advice and monitoring will be provided by a speech and language therapist, either directly or indirectly, at a level determined by the therapist.

An environment which promotes a multi-modal approach to communication and learning incorporating the use by staff of speech, objects of reference, auditory cues, gestures and Makaton signs/symbols and PECS as appropriate.

1. Targeted support to improve attention and listening skills, and opportunities to work on discrete learning tasks in an environment where distractions are reduced.

1. ...Targeted support to develop her play skills, including her imaginative, symbolic and social play skills. Provision of different types of play opportunities with adult modelling.

DD will need opportunities to work in a variety of settings including one-to-one, paired and small group, to teach steps more explicitly and generalise to larger groups."

For OT Part 3 says:

"1. An individual programme to develop gross and fine motor skills.

Assessment, advice and monitoring will be provided by an occupational therapist, either directly or indirectly, at a level determined by the therapy service.

1. Support for her sensory needs taking account of the advice from an Occupational Therapist, and monitored at a level determined by the therapist.

1. Targeted support to help her develop her self help skills, develop her organisational skills and age appropriate independent working skills. Independence skills should be supported through the use of visual prompts and provision of clear routines. She will need adult support with toileting, dressing/undressing and eating.

Adult support will be needed to ensure DD's safety when moving around the classroom, school and in the playground, and in Games and PE; all staff should be aware of DD's lack of danger and tendency to put non food objects in her mouth."

WRT getting it in there, as part of my Appendix A, I wrote:

"We are aware that the SEN Code of Practice states that SALT is an educational need, and we will expect to see this provision in Part 3 of DD1?s Statement of SEN.

Likewise, we would like to have more Occupational Therapy contact, and would expect this provision to be in Part 3 of DD1?s Statement of SEN."

It is all a bit woolly, but like you, I felt that as it was for SS, it is what they do. Had it been for mainstream I would have torn it to shreds!

Many of the SN kids I know in MS schools (especially those with physical disabilities), are getting far more direct contact OT, SALT and physio than my son ever has in SLD school. They also get to use the facilities at SN schools!! It kind of pisses me off actually. I don't begrudge them, of course, it's just that I would like that level of support for my son.

It seems to have helped that these parents have joined up to create a louder voice and give each other advice.

Ds3 gets SLT in his SNU and things like rotary days out, ds1 gets zero in MS- no Paed any more,no therapy of any kind, nothing. Its crap. He's just there and that is it. Or not, with an emergency review now requested.

I would have thought OT was an educational need because of learning to write?

Exactamundo nappyaddict. But my DS2, who cannot produce any written work at all due to his lack of pencil control (Y1, 6.1yo, in MS) sees the OT for 2 sessions a YEAR for 20 mins a time. The help and support is just not there.

yes I agree it should be an educational need -but it's harder to prove and unless you child has profound and multiple disabilities and needs it to e.g. drink from a cup there isn't the case law to support your claim.

DS can't really feed himself with a fork and spoon. He can do yoghurt just about and anything else if you load it for him. Do you think that would be enough?

no. Unfortunately. Or at least I know many children like that, who don't have quantified hours of OT. You could get an OT visit and assessment and help (special cutlery) pretty easily (may be a bit of a wait) but I think you would struggle to get quantified hours in a statement.

Bumping this back up because I have a question about a split placement. Is it true that they can only be on the roll at one of the schools they go to?

Yes, I seem to remember it is.

But IPSEA would be able to confirm. There are some people on here who have successfully co-ordinated split placements, so they can work, and they can work well.