Schools witholding things?

[ScienceGeek]

I was wondering if it was quite common practice for schools to withold information from parents? Me and my mum were talking about school recently when she was visiting and it is amazing just how much she didn't know about what went on in school. Like she didn't know until a few years after I left that I was in counselling for nearly the whole time I was in secondary school, had anger management, social skills training and the list goes on. It seems to me she actually knew relatively little about what went on, reports gave no indiction on how much I was struggling just that I needed to concentrate more and stop daydreaming but that was about it. I'm just curious thats all.

[Kathryn]

I doubt whether my daughter's schools withheld information deliberately, but there were things I certainly didn't know. For example her year 6 teacher wrote on the secondary transfer form that she had "very poor social skills", an observation she never shared with me. In her first year at secondary, she spent a great deal of time hiding under the desk during chemistry lessons - soomething I never knew until much later. They also put her into a year 7 class where there was a statemented child so that she could benefit from the LSA support. I wasn't told this at the time. All these observations migh have helped us to an earlier diagnosis and better support, had they been discussed with us as they arose. Her reports were very positive and gave little iindication of trouble.

 

K x

[Mumble]

It's an interesting one - quite tricky because of different 'best interests' and a huge swing towards school reports highlighting the positive (almost to the detriment of the truth in some cases).

 

My school reports featured strongly in my late-dx. This was not just because of difficulty getting reliable information from my mother about my early development but because what was contained within them was so stark and pointed towards a dx. I hadn't seen my primary school reports until then and I was shocked at what they said - teachers certainly wouldn't 'get away' with writing the same things today without evidence of having followed such concerns up. When I was at primary school however, and I think particularly as a girl, follow-up was expected from my parents which they didn't do and instead they moved me when too many questions were raised so I have sets of reports from different primary schools raising the same concerns. It is quite frustrating reading them with the knowledge I have now and I find it quite upsetting to think what might have been and what might have been avoided if those concerns had been investigated and I had been diagnosed but actually I have to tell myself that that involves applying today's understanding to yesterday - had I been diagnosed I would probably have not had the opportunities I did have and may well have been institutionalised like my brother.

 

My secondary school reports are generally very different from my primary ones as they came following the 'be positive' era. They were still useful in dx but it required some careful reading between the lines for instance in my English Lit report which talked about me finding it impossible to understand the characters' perspectives or to get any grasp on metaphor. Also, secondary school reports are much more subject based (well actually I think primary ones are now too) so you miss the reporting of the social aspects.

 

Like she didn't know until a few years after I left that I was in counselling for nearly the whole time I was in secondary school, had anger management, social skills training and the list goes on.

It probably depends on how these services were accessed, who provided them, how you were referred etc. Particularly with the counselling, there would have been issues of confidentiality involved. The counsellors would not have been able to speak to your Mum or anyone else without your consent. The same would apply whether you were referred through the school or your GP. Anger management, social skills etc. may have been covered by agencies seen as 'medical' and hence the same issues of confidentiality would have been involved.

 

All these observations might have helped us to an earlier diagnosis and better support, had they been discussed with us as they arose. Her reports were very positive and gave little indication of trouble.

The way I have to think about it (I suppose for my own peace of mind as much as anything else) is that it's easy to see in hindsight and then put the pieces together. Had you been told those small pieces individually would they have been enough to warrant going down the diagnostic route (or certainly, would they have been enough for diagnosticians to take your concerns seriously)? We hope that today, early diagnosis leads to better support but would it have been the case in a climate of less understanding of higher functioning ASDs? We still get today the "oh, but you speak so well" or "but you're making eye-contact" - what would it have been like 10 - 20 years ago?

 

There, I managed to write my whole reply without jumping up on my soap-box and going on about the pointlessness and potential problems of the 'let's be positive' report and the limited reporting on issues that actually matter...

 

... almost.

 

[KarenT]

I don't know about it being common practice but it's certainly not unusual, in this area anyway. J's first school had a reputation (not only with SN children) that once your kids were across the threshhold they were none of the parents' business. I found out so little about what was going on there, and much of what I did find out came from other children and parents by the back door. Even when asked for clarification teachers would lie to keep my knowledge to a minimum. I'm not exaggerating - the extent of deceit and lying was atrocious.

 

Things were no better at the school he moved on to, from where I deregistered him home educate. Although I know I have every right to his school records and work books I've had practically nothing, which is particularly concerning from a Home Ed point of view as I have absolutely no idea what he covered in the year and a bit he was there, nor what his ability level was. I have seen no written work whatsoever and consequently no comments from teachers other than the bland stream of positives they're obliged to give on end of year reports.

 

Don't get me wrong, I know there are good schools and good teachers out there and that we've been particularly unfortunate in our own experience, but in answer to the opening post - yes I do believe it's commonplace for schools to withhold information from parents about their children. I and many others have plenty of evidence to support it.

 

Karen

x

[call me jaded]

There was no obligation to tell families about what additional support was being given until 2002.

[MelowMeldrew]

I was wondering if it was quite common practice for schools to withold information from parents? Me and my mum were talking about school recently when she was visiting and it is amazing just how much she didn't know about what went on in school. Like she didn't know until a few years after I left that I was in counselling for nearly the whole time I was in secondary school, had anger management, social skills training and the list goes on. It seems to me she actually knew relatively little about what went on, reports gave no indiction on how much I was struggling just that I needed to concentrate more and stop daydreaming but that was about it. I'm just curious thats all.

 

 

I feel sure they do withhold a fair amount of information ! (Mostly to protect themselves if support is poor). I was quite annoyed with mine for a while because my son had been expressing likes and dislikes and interests we didn't know about, and I told them this was preventing us building on them at home. We wanted in the loop ALL the time. I don't send my child there to be forgot about till he comes home. I get a weekly and daily if necessary update on what goes on now, including academic progress which they told us nothing until end of term. I said this was not good enough ! They said autistics like your son want a clear division between the two, and get unsettled if we combine home and school, I said ridiculous ! There is the social approach too if they might feel we are not doing things the right way as they see it. Some see us as part of the problem it has to be said. School is some 'Island' where fairies fly about or something....! I said school provided a resource of value or he wouldn't be there, but, WE have to deal OUTSIDE this secular approach where autistic children are not subject to the hostilities of the world outside and then we have to deal with them unaided in the main. They promised to widen links between parents and teachers, about time I would have thought.

[Kathryn]

The way I have to think about it (I suppose for my own peace of mind as much as anything else) is that it's easy to see in hindsight and then put the pieces together. Had you been told those small pieces individually would they have been enough to warrant going down the diagnostic route (or certainly, would they have been enough for diagnosticians to take your concerns seriously)? We hope that today, early diagnosis leads to better support but would it have been the case in a climate of less understanding of higher functioning ASDs? We still get today the "oh, but you speak so well" or "but you're making eye-contact" - what would it have been like 10 - 20 years ago?

 

Hi Mumble,

 

I've been thinking about this, and yes in our particular case, I think these individual bits of information would have helped us pursue our concerns far sooner. It would have indicated that the teachers had noticed something and that it wasn't just us being poor parents. I'm talking about a difference of a couple of years extra insight here, it's not much, but it might have meant that got a dx year 8 instead of year 10, and thereby salvaged her secondary school education. Who knows? As you say, hindsight is easy!

 

K x

[daniels-mum]

I would definately agree that schools withold things, D's year 6 teacher has been really brilliant but prior to that they were not very proactive at all. If I asked they would tell me but I was never included in meetings, IEP's or anything like that. When I asked to see records from school for D's Stat Asses I came across an Ed Pysc report from 2004 that I had never seen. It stated that D got up in the middle of lessons, walked around the classroom, would lick and sniff things etc.. I never knew any of this until I saw this report earlier this year, I dare say this may have helped with diagnosis ( for which I am still fighting for now) earlier. Prior to this year they were always very cagey how they spent his extra funding aswell.

 

I have certainly upped my game this last year, whereas before I just left them to it as I didnt really know any better, but this forum has been fantastic and has given me the confidence to challenge things with school. You definately need to ask or you wont find anything out, I dont think it is always done on purpose, although in some cases it could be malicous but I think there is a big gap in what parents are told and what they should be told.

 

I intend to be very proactive when D starts high school in Sept, I think the SENCO is sick of me already and he hasnt even started there yet!!!

Edited July 29, 2009 by daniels-mum

[Athena]

DD's school report was so positive, that I did not recognise the happy, carefree child described in the report! Though digging deeper it does say, "with support" can do X, "with prompting" can do Y.

 

But I am totally in the dark regarding what happens during the school day, due to DD's communication problems, she can't tell me and the school are too busy to let me know much at all.....