teachermum1

I think that some people with ASD have real trouble distinguishing between reality and fantasy/ fiction and I think this article (even though it's the Sun!) sums up why that could be very dangerous.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article1668577.ece Given that it inspired this nutter to start raping women, I think I'd give it a miss...

Seen in the summer initially and tentative dx was made on that day. The hold up was waiting for the ADOS test - they won't formally dx here before having an ADOS test and the waiting list here is huge! That happened in the December and then the dx was the following week. So that's about 6 months (but he had been in the system ages, having already been dx'd with ADHD and having already got a Statement)

I do understand all that you're saying. It is a difficult decision and I wish you and J luck.

I will also say that it's not your responsibility to make sure that he stays in school once you've dropped him off. If he becomes challenging and anxious, the school and he need to develop strategies to deal with this. My J tries to run out of school and often has to be restrained to keep him in. It then takes a while for him to 'come down', but then he goes and rejoins the class. His challenging behaviour comes in the form of hurling furniture, biting, spitting, scratching, kicking, hitting etc. and this is in a mainstream school. But there has never been any suggestion that I should go and collect him when he kicks off. The school know that this is something that J does so regularly that they have got to deal with it. Obviously it is sad that both our Js have times of not being able to cope with the classroom environment, but it's up to the school to find a way of reducing that anxiety - small group or 1:1 teaching, perhaps, in a separate room in times of anxiety - they both have full time 1:1 support after all. I also think that if J is so unable to separate from you to even try going to school, the panel will find it hard to believe that he can cope with going away to a residential school. That will surely be an even bigger wrench for him in their eyes. I think that the previous post about trying to set up a transition plan now is good. See what they say about HOW they will cope when J kicks off. It's not up to you to stay there at school on call all day!

I don't know, Js Mum. I think I'm right in thinking that this is an ASD-specific school that you're appealing for, and the problem is that you don't have an ASD dx. Add to that the (probably wrong) suggestions of attachment disorder and I think that the Tribunal is going to be tricky to win if you look like you're not even giving mainstream a chance. If you lose the Tribunal, he'll have to go to state school. Didn't they offer you a state school place at the local special school? I think it would be worth trying to get him and interim place there while you wiat for Tribunal rather than the local mainstream. They will be used to children with SEN at the special school. I know that J has lots of issues. My J is the same. But I think that Flora is right in two ways A) that the Tribunal will be more winnable if you show that you have tried - not just to show that it will fail - it might succeed, but to show that you're not an overprotective mother and that B ) we have to let our kids go beyond their comfort zones. At the moment, J knows that he can always come home or not go to school if he kicks off enough. Sorry if that sounds harsh, but he's learnt that kicking off will make you give in. You, rightly, want to protect him from becoming anxious, but how will he move on if he just gets to stay at home in his nice comfy bubble? He HAS to go back to school at some point. If he doesn't want to go to residential, I see no option but to move or to try the local special school. Either way, he must go back to school in September and he must not know what the Tribunal is about. You can't cloud his view of what might be his permanent school. You might lose (I hope you don't) and you have to proceed on the basis that you might, for J's sake, and so prepare him for the back up plan as well as for the best case scenario. I think it will be very difficult for you to win the Tribunal without a dx and without your co-operation to at least try J in school in September. With no dx, the panel might decide that his symptoms are close enough to ASD to be best met in your chosen school BUT if you won't send him to school, the LEA may muddy the waters by blaming you for his problems (have seen it happen) and that would be awful. Send him. Whichever school he goes to will be difficult, but he HAS to get used to going to school again. Good luck. x

Who privately dx'd him, J's Mum? What is the wording of that report? Won't the LEA accept it?

Since J was at nursery, all staff (teachers and TAs) working with him have always gone the extra mile (or ten!) - being bitten, kicked, scratched, verbally abused, screamed at, having to run after him when he runs out of school, having to differentiate everything, having to write reams and reams of paperwork to get J the right amount of support in his Statement or to support DLA applications, having to put up with masses of contact from and with me - so I have always fel that they deserve presents. Yes, they are doing their jobs, but I am a teacher and know that what they do at J's school goes waaaaayyyy beyond what they have to do. They could have pushed for him to be permanently excluded years ago, but instead have dedicated themselves to making J succeed. I know that they always like the cards I encourage/ make J make for them best, but I also want to give my thanks too. So I always do a card, and always presents too. This year, I gave his teacher (who will also have J again next year!) a pampering day for 2 voucher. Yes, expensive, but totally deserved and worth it. She and J's TA (who also got a nice present) are the most important people in J's life, after me, and have just as much impact on his wellbeing. They have more impact on him than members of my own family! I WANT to reward them - it's not a case of having to. That doesn't mean that people are wrong not to give presents to school staff. It's just very right in my case.

Hmmm...can't help thinking that, in some cases, NOT being able to keep a child in a room would leave EVERYONE at more risk from a fire, especially those children with obsessions with matches and fire. I think these would only ever be used in the most extreme cases, and, in those cases, not locking a child in would be more risky to everyone than locking them in. Perhaps those who are so negative about them are those whose children are not extreme enough to need one, so naturally it's a horrible idea. But in a sleep-deprived, scarred by near-misses family of a child who genuinely meets the high care rate DLA criteria of never being able to be left unsupervised at day or night due to risk of danger to the child or others, I can completely see why these are a great idea. I don't like the implication that someone's a bad parent if they used one of these. I personally wouldn't, for various reasons, but for some, it would be a welcome last resort to keep everyone safe.

Some schools use these as an alternative to restraint.

Hiya, I'm a full time teacher (as my name probably gives away...) and I have a 6 year old with autism who is a real handful BUT we have our routine now. We both go to school, we both come home (I get home a bit later than him and his (adult) babysitter (don't know what else to call her - but she brings him back to our house because he needs alone time after school, not having to try to fit in with other kids at a childminder or after school club!)), then we play games, read, do homework (big battle time) and then we have tea and it's his bedtime. Then, when he's settled, I do my marking. If you're able to be organised at peak times, it's doable. Not easy, but doable. I wish I had stayed normal mainscale teacher now instead of taking on extra paid responsibilities, but that was pre-dx, and now we rely on the money. What nobody ever tells you is that your training year and NQT year are the hardest re: paperwork. Nobody except OFSTED will ever want to see so much paperwork again. In most places, some lessons are planned for you if you have a big department/ school and you all share the scheme writing, and nobody wants to see your lesson plans on a reguar basis, so you get into writing minimal notes FOR YOU, not for someone else to read and judge. That takes the pressure off loads. I don't write lesson plans any more unless I'm being observed, 4 years down the line. Parenting my son helps my teaching, and teaching helps my parenting. Yes, it's hard, but the job is good and the holidays take the pressure off a bit (though still need to work some in the holidays) I like the job. I have to prioritise at times, with my son always coming first, but school stuff gets prioritised into: never gonna touch it (usually something paperworky and pointless like a survey about my ICT training needs); will do this term; will do this half-term; will do by the end of the month; will do by the end of the week; will do tomorrow and do it now!

Ja was statemented at 3, just before school. He got 18 hours of class support time and 5 hours of lunchtime support. He had no dx at the time. Now, a dx of ADHD and a dx of autism later, he gets 33 hours. There is no limit on hours; the hours just have to be enough to meet the child's needs, whatever they have been identified to be.

My son is dx'd ADHD and autism. He was dx'd ADHD first, and when they also dx'd the ASD, the psych said that some psychs believe that ADHD symptoms are just part of the autism, but that others see it as separate. It was good for us to have the dual dx as the CAMHS here only sees children with both dx's after initial dx. If it had been one or the other, we'd have had no support bar medication post-dx!

The way I would go about it is to ask the LEA how many hours of support THEY think SA+ should equate to in schools. They will know this, whatever they try to fob you off with. If they say 10 hours, you go to that meeting and ask for 10 hours. The statement stuff is ######. Parent Partnership are often less than impartial or are stupid enough to believe that what the LEA says is true and lawful. You do NOT need a dx for a Statement. It even says that in the SEN Code of Practice. You get a Statement for a child's needs. J was statemented at 3, with no official dx. Later the ADHD and autism dx's were useful in pushing for MORE support, but the initial statement was for social, emotional and behavioural difficulties, nothing else. I would personally find out what SA+ equates to, and push for that. If SA+ doesn't offer enough support i.e. if it really is 2x 10 minutes, then you DO qualify for a statement as a statement is qualified for ONLY if the needs are beyond the support that the school can offer. That's actually the only criteria for a statement, whatever the LEA will try to tell you. Good luck. By the way, I'm not 'rating SA+ so highly', just pointing out that IN SOME AREAS AND SOME SCHOOLS, it can be sufficient to meet a child's needs - clearly not in your son's case. But in SOME places, SA+ is very generous in terms of time, and so, in SOME places, it is enough and Statements aren't needed. The problem comes when parents, (like LEAs aren't supposed to do) almost have blanket policies - oh, child has SEN so must need statementing, oh, child has ASD so must need statementing. The whole principle of SEN is that it is about the individual case, so it's really unhelpful to generalise and this subject has really got me annoyed because I'm repeating myself and have apparently angered someone when I'm stating facts, not emotive stuff. The point is not that every child needs a statement - every child needs what is necessary for their needs. Parents need to remember that as well as LEAs, I think.

We got our Southpaw weighted blanket through J's OT, to borrow, and it worked so well that we got Social Services to buy him one. A few hundred quid, but they did it. Worth looking into for those with social workers - ours agreed pretty much instantly.

JsMum, as someone who helped you to get your original statement for J (recognise me now???!!!) you will know that I am NOT having a go at you, but continuing my campaign as someone who's within the system and parent of Statemented child to make sure that accurate information is held by all. Just wanted you to realise who I was so that you know it's not a personal attack!

JsMum, I agree that SA and SA+ are completely inadquate for some children, yours and mine being two of them. Some children's needs are so extreme and obvious that they require Statementing almost immediately. But in some areas, SA+ can provide up to 25 hours of funding, admittedly not legally guaranteed, but technically a child can have 25 hours per week without a Statement. It simply is not true that SA and SA+ are meant to be temporary or screening tools to work towards a statement. It's the opposite. The idea is that SA and SA+ try to head off the need for a Statement by intervening early. You and I know that this can be inadquate provision for SOME children in SOME schools in SOME LEAs, but certainly not all. 20% of children are on the SEN register in the UK - if they were all heading towards Statements then the whole system would go into meltdown. You're right in saying that IF a child's needs are not being met on SA/ SA+ then the school or LEA should progress towards a statement, but it worries me that some people might read your posts and see SA/SA+ as steps towards an inevitable Statement when, in reality, some children can make very good progress without a Statement. I know a dyslexic child who gets 2 hours of specialist teaching a week and 3 hours of TA support in English lessons (on SA+) and has made amazing progress. They wouldn't want someone with them all the time because then they'd never feel independent. It does make me sad when children get a dx or have any small lag in achievement at school and then parents automatically say 'we want a Statement'. A Statement is ONLY necessary and will ONLY be given when the support needed is beyond that that a mainstream school can provide from its own resources. Most children's needs can be met by a school (if the school is doing what it should) without the need for a Statement. The deal is that SA and SA+ show that a school has been making an effort. So you can't usually get to a Statement without having tried SA and SA+ first in most LEAs, but being on SA and SA+ doesn't mean that you HAVE TO be statemented. Sorry to harp on about it, but I think it's important that misunderstandings like this are corrected so that people don't go into schools armed with the wrong info.

Bard is right - some children's needs can be met at Action/ Action Plus; they are not intended to be temporary UNLESS the child's needs cannot be met, in which case a child would progress to a Statement. Only a small number of children need statements, which provide the greatest level of help. Other children can manage on School Action Plus and a smaller amount of help. In my authority, the LEA won't consider Statementing unless 6 months has been spent on School Action Plus, but that's because the schools have to be seen to have tried other options before Statementing. It's not a rule that a child can ONLY spend 6 months on School Action Plus. The key to remember is that the ONLY legal criteria for a Statement is that a school cannot meet a child's needs from its own resources. My son spent 6 months on Early Years Action Plus and was then Statemented just in time for primary school. He will never be on School Action Plus, partly because I would never let go of the legal protection that the Statement gives and partly because I can't see how he will ever function safely without full time support. But if he was milder, then I wouldn't care what the support was called as long as it met his needs.

J was 3 when first statemented, pre-diagnosis of any sort as CAMHS had to dx and wouldn't see him until he was 5. Pead gave tentative dx of ADHD but the needs were so obvious that I didn't push for the label at that stage. His first statement was made just in time for him to go to school and he was awarded 17 classtime hours and 5 lunchtime hours per week. The LEA Ed Psych said we wouldn't get a statement because of his age. I wouldn't trust an EP at all! I was told 'that's the most you'll get' but nursery had had to provide full time one to one for safety reasons (J bites, kicks, throws, hits, scratches, slaps and runs off when in meltdown mode, and also was in a lovely obsession phase with toilets and locks at the time) and so I was v unhappy. But bear in mind this was after a year long battle to actually get the damn statement in the first place, after being told he wasn't eligible blah blah blah and then having to write to my MP and appeal to SENDIST. They gave in before Tribunal and agreed to assess, but yeah, only for 22 hours worth of support. The eventual ADHD dx at 4 didn't alter the amount of hours. Luckily we had a v good school who recognised that only full time support would be safe...but it's taken 3 years and piles and piles of evidence from CAMHS, school, OT and me to convince the LEA to actually write that full-time support into his statement, and I've only fought that fight because he moves up to Juniors next year and they couldn't/ wouldn't fund the extra 10 hours themselves, so it had to be done. I think the autism dx and high ADOS score helped make up the LEA's mind that they had a very bright child here but with very complex problems, so if he was to make it in mainstream rather than me asking for a specialist placement (which they don't have, so they'd have to pay loads for an out-of-county placement), they'd have to fund it properly. More importantly, they knew I had the evidence to win my 2nd proposed SENDIST tribunal, so figured that it was easier to give in. J is v v bright and above average in all subjects but the combination of ADHD and autism makes him very difficult to manage in mainstream and I'm not sure he'll remain in mainstream beyond primary school if I'm being honest. But at least the current statement now gives him the best possible chance for that to happen: it includes 33 hours (which covers the whole school day and is wholly funded by the LEA) of one-to-one support and regular consultancy from the local autism outreach team. Also OT and SALT. It IS possible to get full time, but it IS rare and, in my experience, reserved for those who are like J and are a danger to themselves/ others and cannot be left unsupervised. Also for severe physical disabilities. But the point is that the Statement should reflect the child's needs, by law, and not reflect what the LEA feels like spending. You need to tot up the number of hours in a day that he needs extra support and write down why (and then add 5, to give you room for bargaining). The thing is, no statutory assessment documents ever seem to recommend an actual number of hours, so that leaves LEAs room just to make it up and choose as little as they can get away with. If you can clearly prove how much is needed and why (and hopefully get professionals to back you up), then theoretically ANY amount is realistic. I would certainly say that a very high level of support is needed for the first term while children settle in. I think J's statement allowed for more hours in the first half-term anyway for that very reason. Good luck. Just be firm on what you will and won't accept and why.

As J hadn't been seen by EP when we applied for Stat Assessment when he was at nursery, the LEA sent an EP to assess him. Shouldn't need to be paid for by the school, no way. It's part of the Stat Assessment process and so they have to deal with it - the LEA I mean. I think that the school have misunderstood. If YOU apply for Stat Assessment, the LEA deal with it from there and the school only have to provide paperwork, nothing else.

My LEA say that it costs �2000 to prepare a Statement from beginning to end. Still expensive! I think it would only cost �10,000 if they played silly ###### and delayed it and made parents go to Tribunal.

It doesn't really matter who - paed or CAMHS consultant psych - both should be same level. CAMHS should have more expertise. The important thing in this is to get someone who will listen to you and back you up. J's psychiatrist at CAMHS is fantastic - comes to school reviews etc. and they actually listen to her - if I say something, they will only listen if she says it too! So I rate CAMHS HERE very highly, but even if yours isn't great, I would still say it is worth having a professional on side if poss.

Does sound like the school aren't being brilliant. However, I would say about the tent thing that perhaps the woman was trying to protect the boy who nobody wanted. Sounds a little sad for him to be chucked out of a group, even if he's not their friend.

J has had a CAF filled in, but the other reports still get filled in too, so it's not yet being used for what it was supposed to be used for! The HT at J's school filled it in and then asked for my suggestions/ alterations/ additions in preparation for a Child In Need meeting which was virtually indistinguishable from an Annual Review except centred on all his needs 24/7 as opposed to school needs like a statement review. You should indeed be asked to be involved as it says so on the form.

Hi, Busy Lizzie. Yes, my son is well above average academically in terms of reading and then average-above average in other areas of the curriculum. He has had a statement ever since he started school, which now equates to 32.5 1:1 Behaviour Support Assistant hours in school plus half-termly outreach support. So it is possible to get a statement for clever children. However, the criteria for a Statement is that the child needs more help than a mainstream school could be expected to provide, and in my experience no child will get a statement unless the school have been putting purposeful provision in place for a significant amount of time and it has been proven to make no difference (or not enough difference). So that's where I think the problem might be: they're not putting purposeful provision in place and so the statement panel in my area would certainly say that that should be provided first. Even then, what extra provision does your son need? You don't imply that he needs specialist teaching or significant TA support, so if it's just autism outreach and social skills stuff, that should be provided without the need for a statement. You could kick the school up the butt by asking for a meeting to look at his IEP...if he doesn't have one, he should as he gets support from an outside agency (your psych) and so that might be a way to improve what he is getting at school. See the SENCO to ask for a meeting and air your concerns. HTH. Good luck.