Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Sally44

Absolutely gutted

Recommended Posts

I've just returned from a trip with my son to see a specialist optician. The reports were waiting for me.

Apart from them arriving 3 days before the AR, they are both saying that my son does not need the level of input he has formerly received. His speech is 'normal'. How they manage to come to that conclusion is beyond me when he is still echolalic, has semantic pragmatic speech disorder and CAPD and auditory delays.

OT also observed him in class and saw 'no concerns'. Eventhough he has SID and she has done nothing so far. Eventhough he has dysgraphia she said she saw 'no problems'.

I could go on and on.

I just feel sick.

I've already had a good cry about it and now I'm getting drunk.

Tomorrow I'll be angry.

I'm most upset with the SALT because I liked and trusted her. She has assessed him and in some areas he is worse than last time. However apparently that is because he is older. Well excluse me, isn't that what the assessments are all about, deciding if there has been a closing or a widening of the gap. She is happy to talk about any improvements and then dispels her other results as maybe he did not know what was expected of him. Doesn't that in itself prove something when he doesn't understand simply verbal instructions. She has even excluded an assessment she carried out infront of me and which he could not complete eg. "before you touch the blue cube touch the black one." He could not do it right.

It is honestly like they have assessed a different child. They are saying he no longer needs help in areas where he has lifelong disorders.

This will be my first annual review.

To think that this has to happen every year makes me want to vomit.

This isn't about meeting the needs of my son at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im so sorry to hear that . I could say 'what a suprise' but I wont . You know the truth Sally. Write to your MP, involve him/her, they will investigate . You've nothing to lose , x

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Darling Sally, I really don't know what to say. You have given me such great advise to my problems and I haven't got any for you so I am sorry. All I can do is offer a few of these >:D<<'> >:D<<'> >:D<<'> >:D<<'>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very sorry to hear this Sally but it doesn't surprise me in the least.

 

I've lost count of the number of times professionals have given me verbal accounts of J's difficulties then written something very different in formal reports. It is so frustrating to think that you've found a professional can trust someone then they do this to you, and your child is at the centre of it without the support they need.

 

Perhaps you might want to say at the annual review what you've said here, refer to the blue cube/black cube test and other conversations you've had in which you've had it reported that your child has X needs and ask for an explanation of why that's not included in official reports. They won't like it but you have every reason to be angry and disappointed at their supposed findings and they surely must answer for these discrepancies.

 

Hope you're not suffering from a hangover this morning :whistle:

 

Karen

x

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Sally.

>:D<<'> >:D< >:D<<'>

I am really sorry this happened. Maybe involving private reports would help? I wish I could give you some more advice. Take care.

Danaxxx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've just spoken with the private SALT I used at tribunal and she has given me some ideas.

Firstly she has said that he has improved in some areas to age appropriate levels. This indicates that with significant specialist input he does make improvements. That is an argument I can use that he needs more input as the potential is there.

The LEA SALT has also identified areas where his performance remains severe. So input is still needed.

She also said that if the argument is that to remove him from the classroom for these therapies means he is losing out on learning - then you have to consider the relevance of being in a class and not being able to demonstrate learning due to the difficulties not being met.

It does sound like we are going to have to go back to tribunal for an ASD specific secondary placement simply to get the input he needs and to address the issue of the academic gap widening.

 

Annual Review is tomorrow. Just found out the OT has not been to see my son since July 2009. So OT have not fulfilled the Statement either. Twice I phoned OT and she told me she was due to go in. But apparently she never went.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

I'm going to sound paranoid, etc, but I do think there are occasions when some level of collusion goes on to play down or gloss over the extent of a child's difficulties. That's certainly happened in my case. The very week that I had a meeting with the top dog at our LEA, I became aware that the mediator was contacted every Tom, Dick and Harry except me – very surprising given it was me that contacted her and at that point she was completely unaware what I'd contacted her about! In addition, I got an unexpected phonecall from a Paed who was emphatic that kiddo didn't have AS and was subsequently proved wrong asking to see R again. In both instances, I found it therapeutic to convey my true feelings in a non-confrontational manner, etc. It's not always constructive to do that, in the sense that it doesn't always change a situation, but to at least convey how you feel can help. If you haven't already done so, it may be worth having a chat with the SALT.

 

I really sympathise. It can seem like a never-ending battle.

 

Caroline.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

EP report finally arrived.

Now it turns out the SALT report might actually be useful because the EP is suggesting that he will never reach 'age appropriate anything due to his various dx'. So now having 'age appropriate speech in some areas proves this wrong!

 

She says that academic improvement should be assessed on his previous levels, and not measured against expected peer group levels - isn't that completely wrong?? She has also said that with or without a dx of dyslexia my son is not expected to reach age appropriate levels and therefore a dx is of no use.

 

I'll have to have a good long look at it tonight.

 

She has basically said nothing needs to change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
She says that academic improvement should be assessed on his previous levels, and not measured against expected peer group levels - isn't that completely wrong?? She has also said that with or without a dx of dyslexia my son is not expected to reach age appropriate levels and therefore a dx is of no use.

 

Yes, his progress should be measured against his previous levels - however, he should be able to achieve the same levels as peers of the same ability with the right support. Expectations should be based on his ability - they can't just choose to give up on him.

 

During the diagnostic process (of dyslexia), they find out which particular areas are weak, which helps staff to know how best to help him. If a child with learning difficulties also had impaired hearing, would they not bother to get his hearing assessed and provide appropriate aids? Even if your son never does achieve age appropriate levels, surely knowing how to help him will ensure that he achieves as much as he IS able?

 

All children should be enabled to achieve their potential.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is my point exactly.

They have not assessed him. They are just assuming low expectations. The SALT progress from 'severe' to 'age appropriate' shows the amount of potential to improve with the right professional input.

He has not had any SPLD input at all. It took them 15 months since he moved to this ER school for them to move him onto the Learn to Read Programme from just phonics alone.

If there was no potential to improve, and no different approaches available, then there would not be specific schools for dyslexia and teachers for children with SPLD, because it would all be pointless and hopeless.

 

I'm also extremely annoyed that the EP has put that as my son is not wearing his ear defenders and Irlen glasses he is more approachable by other children and more able to interact with them. Sensory issues do not go away. He may become more able to tolerate things as he grows up, but they will always be a big issue for him. She's also said his mispronounciation of words is lessening. No it isn't. He has CAPD and that is for life, and he may 'learn' the correct way to say words and stop saying them wrong, but he then says new words wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...