Reassesments of children with ASD

[dana]

Hi,

 

we had Annual Review Statement this morning. I believe everything went well, they all decided that my son still needs support but until I get it written on paper I won't relax. He gets 21 hours at the moment but he has almost all the time TA with him (he is year 7).

 

However, my son's pediatrician, who was present at the meeting, told me that the previous specialist poediatrician for ASD left and her new boss is now examining all his dxs of ASD, considering majority of them wrong! My son' poediatrician gave a clear dx of ASD to my son (she had EP, SALT, school reports)and she is known to my NAS parents' group for NOT giving easily dx of ASD. I've just asked her for additional support from one member of Autism team but her new boss will give the answer to that only after he goes through all my son's papers. I just hope my son will not have to go again for assesments because he finds difficult to cope with them (interuption of his routine). Just to say that I was one of the parents who didn't want my son to be 'labeled', and believed (naively) that 'he will grow out of his difficulties' until he went to year 5 and I voluntared at his class and actually saw how different from all the other children he was. And only then when everybody, his teacher, SENCO etc. raised the flag my husband and I decided to go for dx.

 

I just wonder wheather this move of her new boss is the beginning of something much wider in the current economic crises and that it will be done many more reassesments in order to save money.

 

Danaxxx

Edited December 14, 2010 by dana

[cmuir]

Hi

 

I was in a situation whereby there was a lot of education politics going on with my son. Completely out of the blue I got a phonecall from a Paed asking to see my son. Given that the Paed was the very same who emphatically said my son didn't have an ASD (he was dx'd by an ASD specialist a few months after having seen this Paed), I said absolutely not and explained why. I must confess to having been very suspicious as to the reasons why this was happening and said so. Thankfully things were left at that. Thinking about it, the older R has become, the more obvious his difficulties are leaving no room for any doubt. I guess that may be the same for your son - funding for LA's, for example, isn't handed out easily and so his issues must be obvious to the school, and that's what the hang onto.

 

Best wishes.

 

Caroline.

[Sally44]

My experience was that my son had a Statement. At the Annual Review all the provision in the Statement was not being provided. I asked for amendments to the Statement so that he did get that provision and I also complained to the EP service that they had not confirmed whether my son had dyslexia or not.

On these grounds the LEA decided to re-assess from the beginning. I was very worried about this, but everyone (apart from my solicitor), thought it could only be a good idea as it would give up to date reports.

 

What actually happened is that the LEA EP and NHS OT produced weak and vague reports which the LEA said 'superceded' all my independent reports. So when they re-wrote the new Statement, all the provision that was basically a cut and paste job from the independent reports has been removed.

 

I am now left with a much weaker Statement. There is no way that this re-assessment was anything other than a clever way to weaken the Statement.

 

That has meant I have had to place another appeal to SEND.

 

So, I would say unless there is a very good reason, to refuse any kind of total re-assessment of the Statement if that is proposed. If the LEA do decide to re-assess apparently there is nothing you can do about that as you cannot refuse. But if individual professionals want to assess you can refuse. However I have also found that professionals do not always even ask you before they assess. They just turn up at school and do it. Obviously that is different if a hospital based professional asks you to bring your child in and you refuse. But it might be worth making it absolutely clear to school that your son is not to be assessed without your permission.

Edited December 14, 2010 by Sally44

[coolblue]

 

 

However, my son's pediatrician, who was present at the meeting, told me that the previous specialist poediatrician for ASD left and her new boss is now examining all his dxs of ASD, considering majority of them wrong! My son' poediatrician gave a clear dx of ASD to my son (she had EP, SALT, school reports)and she is known to my NAS parents' group for NOT giving easily dx of ASD. I've just asked her for additional support from one member of Autism team but her new boss will give the answer to that only after he goes through all my son's papers.

 

 

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

I just wonder wheather this move of her new boss is the beginning of something much wider in the current economic crises and that it will be done many more reassesments in order to save money.

 

Danaxxx

 

I know some LAs use a formal diagnosis as a criterion for whether children get extra support or not, or how much they get, but what they should be doing is providing support on the basis of need, regardless of the cause of that need. If there's a difference of opinion over whether or not a child meets the diagnosis of ASD, then clearly the child has significant developmental issues whatever the cause, and will still need support for the needs that arise from those issues. If they try to change support based on diagnosis, ask how the child's needs have changed.

 

cb

[dana]

Thank you all for your replies. I sincerely hope that my son's statement will not be affected.

 

However, I have a feeling that in following years we'll see many more cuts in funding of SEN children and it will be used any excuse to do it, ncluding the change of dx. Councils got much less money than they hoped for but what is bad is that they have freedom to decide wheather or not they will take it from SEN children in order to fund other services.

 

Danaxxx

[Sally44]

My similar situation was about a diagnosis of dyslexia.

At the annual review the LEA representative said that a 'formal diagnosis' of dyslexia was needed before it could be incorporated into section 2 of the Statement.

And the EP said that no further support would be given unless that support was detailed in reports (obviously she is not going to do that - ha, ha, ha).

 

Anyway, I spoke to IPSEA about this, and as already said, the CoP (which is guidance not law - but is the strongest position we have apart from case law), says the EVERY NEED should be identified. It does not say every DIAGNOIS, and it does not say that only diagnosis via the LEA are accepted. These are all criteria that different LEAs have. That is a blanket policy which is illegal. You can also look on IPSEA website for the DfES letter to schools that basically says that LEAs should not use blanket policies to refuse to assess certain groups or children or certain types of difficulties. Each case has to be taken on its merits. And each and every need has to be identified in section 2 with provision quantified and specified in section 3.

[coolblue]

Well said, Sally!

 

Educating children with special educational needs isn't rocket science but it does involve training. If mainstream class teachers are not trained to support children with reading difficulties when reading is, and always has been a key part of their job, then you really have to wonder quite what is going on.

 

 

cb