LA Barriers to SEN Families: Setting Us Up to Fail
Jan 24, 2017 — Dear Supporters,
since last updating you, there has been a child protection conference. We spent a lot of time prior to the conference sending evidence and information to children's services as to the misrepresentations and lies being recorded, as well as the process itself being unlawful. The conference was of course also unlawful by default because the whole Section 47 investigation has been. However, the outcome of the conference was for child in need plans rather than child protection plans and we can only imagine that the information on the unlawfulness along with the evidence and information about the falsehoods, was greatly responsible for this outcome. It has been exhausting and traumatic to go through this though. Seeing your children distressed by people who apparently don't care they are causing this distress, is awful.
Of course, it should never have even got as far as it did. In previous updates I have talked about local failings by services. When parents are battling to get their children's needs met and encounter opposition, resistance and ignorance from services, what are they supposed to do? Abandon their vulnerable children's needs? I've already talked about the Cerebra definition of an 'empowered parent' and how for being one, I have been maliciously targeted by the LA.
Yet again, we face more barriers from the LA, related to their supposed concerns about a school situation, which was largely contributed to by the LA itself, resulting in the child being unable to attend said school. We worked hard to find a replacement school for the child due to this happening with the original placement. The child was already eligible for SEN transport, only to find that the LA had not completed the paperwork with the child's new school; failed to request parents reapply for SEN transport and when the family applied, have now refused SEN transport. This is yet another breach of law by the LA. The Government statutory guidance on SEN transport is clear. The LA admits the child has medical eligibility, but wants to save money.
Potentially this causes a big problem for the family and has high potential to impact on the child's attendance. The LA knows this. The very attendance the LA alleged to be concerned about in the first place.
At the child protection conference, a professional stated that whilst they agreed to a child in need plan, if the child's attendance at school changed they would then want a child protection plan. Do you see what they are doing here? Any reasonable person would be forgiven for thinking that a family was being set up to fail. It's not only barriers being placed in the way, it comes across as deliberate sabotage.
Not to mention that any action out of an unlawful S47 process is void anyway. Or the fact that all children with a disability are automatically considered a child in need in law, but they don't all have child in need plans with the LA.
Ultimately, what concerns us is that our children's voices are still not being listened to (they have very clearly stated they don't want or need to see social services), ours as their parents are not either, an entire lack of autism awareness drives the actions and intentions of the LA and LAs cannot get away with riding roughshod over families' rights and breaching the law. The ethics of an LA who would behave this way are seriously skewed.
Please help this petition regain momentum by sharing with friends and acquaintances, on social media and anywhere else you can think of. This is not the only LA behaving badly and it must be highlighted. Thank you.
Keep fighting for people power!
Politicians and rich CEOs shouldn't make all the decisions. Today we ask you to help keep Change.org free and independent. Our job as a public benefit company is to help petitions like this one fight back and get heard. If everyone who saw this chipped in monthly we'd secure Change.org's future today. Help us hold the powerful to account. Can you spare a minute to become a member today?I'll power Change with $5 monthly