The parents of an autistic boy who has been excluded from school seven times in four terms say youngsters like him need more support in the classroom.Or alternately, perhaps they shouldn't be there at all?
Lee and Natalie Berry, of Nelson Gardens, Rayleigh, are unhappy with the way Downhall Primary School handled six-year-old Owen’s most recent exclusion.Why did they not consider it in the first place?
They say staff are struggling to meet his needs, leaving them to consider a specialist school.
Owen has a teaching assistant with him at all times at school, but still managed to get in a fight with two other pupils on Thursday. As a result, he was excluded on Friday, which meant he missed a Christmas bazaar.This child appears to have been an ongoing problem for the school. And the other pupils, of course.
His dad is especially angry at the reason the school gave for his most recent exclusion.
We need to bear them in mind too; Mr & Mrs Berry won’t. As you might expect, only their own child and their own wishes concerns them.
Which is only natural, of course. But what isn't natural is the resources thrown at keeping this child in a manifestly unsuitable environment, to the detriment of both him and everyone else:
Mr Berry, 30, said: “We have had problems over the past year.The problem is, the teachers are not ‘paid to do the job’.
“Owen has been excluded several times, but I snapped when they told me the teachers needed a break from him. The teachers are being paid to do the job. It seems unfair.”
Teachers in mainstream schools are not trained and not equipped and not paid to deal with the problems children with severe disabilities pose in class.
Including them is purely a point of dogma with some educationalists and lobby groups. Presumably, the ones Mr and Mrs Berry have been listening to:
Mrs Berry, 30, said: “There should be more help for special needs children in mainstream schools. There isn’t enough support for parents who want them to be there.So despite knowing that the government was failing to provide the necessary funding or training, you went ahead anyway?
“At school, he has a teaching assistant with him full-time, but when there’s a problem, they call on me to sort it out.
“I don’t feel he gets fair treatment and the school should take on board his disability more, as part of his behaviour. This makes me feel pushed out, but it was my choice to put him in a mainstream school.”
I’m struggling to see why the school is getting the lion’s share of the blame here…
“I’ve looked at a special school and I think maybe it’s the way to go with him because of his behaviour problems.”Well, hallelujah!
A statement from the school said any pupil would be excluded for violence against other pupils.Of course, it will.
It added: “We take our duty of care for all pupils and staff very seriously. In this case, because of the child’s aggressive behaviour, we contacted the parent and asked for the child to be collected.
“They refused and unfortunately there was a second incident involving a pupil. The school was left with no other choice but to exclude the child.
“The school looks forward to welcoming him back on Monday and hopes this situation will not occur again.”
Until this child’s parents admit what they must surely know in their hearts, and he is removed from a mainstream school and educated in a place that can cope with his special needs. For his sake.
And for the sake of all the other children.
6 comments:
It doesn't change does it. 25 years ago (under a Conservative government) - in the fair London Borough of Haringey - my younger son attended the local primary. In the class (where there was a teacher + an assistant) there was a constantly disruptive and extremely disturbed pupil. Unfortunately he was the son of immigrants from India. The then headmistress (a Labour crone and drone) refused to do anything.
When the parents petitioned Haringey education "services" - on behalf of the boy as much as anything else to get him special treatment (since he was clearly disturbed) - we were abused as "racists" and "middle class racists" at that although more than half of the parents were white working class. It took 3 years to remove the child to a special school. By that time, I'd given up. I - or rather my son - was lucky. I could afford to transfer my son to private sector education. What the other children who were trapped in the system did I do not know. However, I do know that, on the fatuous bases that the parents of the other children in the class were "racist" and that Haringey's policy of education provision demanded that those who wished to learn (and were capable of learning) should be penalised, their education was severely disrupted and probably severely damaged.
"Expelled", "Excluded"????
Give the bastard a taste of the old bamboo stick and MAKE it conform.
There was a handful of these cases even in the days when special schools were common.
More often the parent wants a place at a special school but the local authority resists it. Due to the cost and modern educational philosophy, local authorities often seem to set a higher threshold for special education than the average on-looker would.
The legal problem is the same in both cases: the local authority and the parents disagree about what is in the best interests of the child. This can end up in court, in rare cases, for the bench to decide.
It is very difficult indeed for parents to face this because it is the death of dreams. It means admitting that the child is more than a little different and that the life they had imagined is not going to unfold as they hoped. It may even mean admitting that the parent cannot meet the child's complex needs, and that's a hard thing to accept.
Given that Mrs Berry's other son has cystic fibrosis the question has to be faced: is the younger son safe if Owen goes in to a temper?
Last week I happened to be looking at the prospectus of a residential special school (there was a different employment law case going on) down in Devon. The school looks very much as if it could produce better outcomes for the child because the staff know what they are doing. This is the sort of education - whether residential or day-school - which will help Owen achieve his full potential.
I hope Mrs Berry will consider taking the help which is available and which works instead of arguing for something which, in the end, is not as much use to Owen.
Moons ago in my wife's first years as an NQT she regalled me with a story about one lad in her care who had well below the curve IQ which, as he was significantly slower than the other childrens, was causing him to become disruptive.
It took 2 whole years to convince his mother to send him to a special school capable of meeting his needs and maximising his potential; his presence at the school was a sentimental gesture she would not abandon- his father and grandfather had both attended the school and it was only whenue was consistently failing in every field and the headmaster intervened that she finally accepted it.
It is hard to accept it for some people; luckily it appears there were none of the issues with ideology that others have had *shivers*.
WoaR is right. Getting a child 'statemented' (as in statement of special needs) takes either oddles of luck or Rumpole of the Bailey in the family. Got to save all that cash for Gay History Month or something.
"By that time, I'd given up. I - or rather my son - was lucky. I could afford to transfer my son to private sector education. What the other children who were trapped in the system did I do not know."
That's the rub, isn't it? The false 'equality' the idealogues demand actually increases social gaps...
"More often the parent wants a place at a special school but the local authority resists it."
And that's if they even have space in a unit to start with. I've heard tales of parents having to send children to another county (albeit just across the border).
"It is very difficult indeed for parents to face this because it is the death of dreams. It means admitting that the child is more than a little different and that the life they had imagined is not going to unfold as they hoped."
Like 'care in the community' before it, the 'they'd be better off included' movement looks good and humane on paper, but is applied with far too broad a brush, with no real investment to make it work for those who might be helped, and with no consequences for those people who duck the responsibility to make a judgement call.
"It took 2 whole years to convince his mother to send him to a special school capable of meeting his needs and maximising his potential; his presence at the school was a sentimental gesture she would not abandon- his father and grandfather had both attended the school..."
It's hard not to have some sympathy for any parent in this situation. But the needs of all the children must be considered, and if not by them, then by the people paid to do it.
"Getting a child 'statemented' (as in statement of special needs) takes either oddles of luck or Rumpole of the Bailey in the family."
I suspect if they set councils a target for the number, there'd be a lot more of them.
Problem being, they'd then include anyone who looked a little odd!
Post a Comment