myliberalpath

[myliberalpath]

How we were left with no choice.

I put autism in the scope of this blog; firstly because I believe that a liberal society is one that looks after its most vulnerable members; and secondly because it was concern for Noah’s future in society with autism that pushed me to join a political party. The last 18 months have been a challenging time for Noah as the transition into school life has headlined his anxieties and their impact on his behaviour. Things came to a crisis point around the time of his brother’s birth, during the chaotic Christmas period, when he was excluded from school for five days.  A Guardian article in October 2016 highlighted that SEN pupils account for over 50% of all permanent and fixed-period exclusions. Exclusion is supposed to be the last resort for these children; but it would seem to be increasingly the first action. the incident that led to Noah’s exclusion is one he needs to learn is not socially acceptable. It frustrates us, however, that there was little allowance for the impact of his disability on his behaviour; he was not being naughty, it was about unmanaged needs. What happened next has led us to the hardest decision we’ve had to make as parents - to move Noah from his mainstream primary school to a specialist centre - and one in which we’ve actually felt we’ve had no choice. It may be the best option for him, but at every turn our legal right to have ways in which he can be educated in a mainstream setting have been disdainfully dismissed.  On Noah’s last day we wrote this letter to the school governors. I post this not to highlight Noah’s situation - there are many families who have to struggle longer and harder to get any level of adequate provision - but to illustrate the low grade way in which schools, councils, and us responsible adults fail, and how progress on inclusion for children with disabilities is nowhere near what we may expect it to be in 2017.

Dear Governors of Rosendale Primary School,

Today our son, Noah, had his final day at Rosendale Primary School after two years. He has autism and you will probably be aware of at least some of his circumstances this year. Unfortunately, we feel compelled to write to you to put on record our extreme dissatisfaction with Noah’s treatment by the school in the last eight months.

We do not dispute that individuals have made highly commendable efforts to find solutions, to include Noah and progress his learning – and we thank them for that, in particular [the SENDCo], [his lead LSA] and [Miss C] (who has accommodated him in the KS1 Choir) - or that extra resources have been found. That said, between official school policy and Lambeth Council he has been let down by an approach that seemed designed only to ‘manage out’ Noah, a lack of adherence to legal guidance on disability, and a refusal to listen to our representations on his needs.

Of deepest concern is that Noah has been on an informal exclusion – finishing at 1.00pm daily - since returning to school in January following a 5 day fixed-term exclusion. We initially agreed to a part-time day in January while Noah reintegrated for a few weeks and whilst Doug was on parental leave; this then extended without any consultation, though with promises of review, all disregarded despite our continual insistence that the situation must change, and reached the point where even when we gave an ultimatum the school and Council still failed to take any action whatsoever. This has shown a complete lack of good faith and led to a complete break down in our trust of the school. We have consulted with IPSEA and, you should not need telling, they confirmed that this action is illegal under the Children and Families Act 2014. Even with the advice of professionals, parental agreement, or resource implications it cannot be justified. To be clear, the school has been acting illegally in its exclusion of Noah for eight months.

With Council funds the school did engage several consultants to advise on Noah’s requirements. All indicated that with appropriate support Noah could function in the school. Our understanding, and indeed this was communicated to Noah too, was that the intention of the strategies implemented in response to these reports was to help Noah manage his behaviour and stay within a mainstream setting at Rosendale. The plans put in place by [a behavioural consultancy] to allow him to rejoin his peers in 1SR in fact appeared to be progressing successfully; yet within a few weeks of starting a 21 week programme it became clear that the school had no intention of following through and we were told to find an alternative setting for Noah (in breach, incidentally, of the Equality Act).  

As the informal exclusion deviated from his EHCP it should have prompted an official review and action from the LEA, whose responsibility it is to ensure the EHCP is followed. We were excluded from a review meeting in January; a further review was held in April, which ended without agreement – we felt that our request for Noah to be educated in a mainstream school was ignored, whilst the school insisted there was no place for him at Rosendale and we were again told to find an alternative setting. By the time of a further meeting in June we effectively felt beaten into submitting to the school’s wishes and that there was no option but to agree to the best available specialist school option. We still have no signed off EHCP.

Noah has missed a large number of learning opportunities due to a failure to understand the way in which he learns. Whilst he struggles to grasp some of the fundamental skills as a result of his autism, eg writing and reading, he has an incredible capacity for learning in other fields and methods. He has missed opportunities to learn about Florence Nightingale, the human body and science. Whilst he has benefited from being taught individually in a distraction free environment, we see absolutely no reason why he could not join 1SR or 1LD for short periods, or failing that why work on these topics could not have been adapted for him. When we raised this we were simply told off for following the 1LD class blog. By insisting that Noah is constantly supervised by two adults, a situation has been created whereby the school has claimed it cannot afford to provide assistance for Noah for a full day (again, according to IPSEA this is not reasonable grounds for an informal exclusion). Without this loss of hours he may have been able to participate in such lessons, and indeed it may have further enabled him to develop the skills to function in a classroom. We have found this quite inexplicable even allowing for some of the incidents that occurred previously and given the progress he has demonstrated following [the behavioural consultancy’s] plan.

Throughout this time Noah has been excluded from school trips. There has been no attempt to include him in either whole year trips, 1SR [a specialist unit set-up to teach pupils with autism at the school] trips or to consider alternatives that he could have participated in. Once again, this is in breach of the Equality Act.  

Part of your pitch to parents for converting Rosendale to an academy was that you wished it to become a centre of excellence for SEND. This has to mean that the school is committed to helping not just those with disabilities who can be helped by the simplest adjustments, but also those who present more considerable challenges. It requires you to have the imagination to allow them to achieve their aspirations. It needs to mean that you are prepared to drag yourselves the extra distance that these remarkable growing individuals are willing to just to make the world work for them.

Schools are not communities in and of themselves. They are part of a bigger community. Schools provide for those that live in their neighbourhood. We have often been told that things are not possible because it would not fit with the school ethos or it would mean Noah is not included. But where, I ask you all, is the inclusion in forcing a child of six to travel three miles across London every day; to go to a school in a place where he will not be able to go after school to his friends’ houses because his parents don’t know his friends’ parents; to pass the school he has lived opposite for four years and to gradually lose the connection with his peers who he will see in the street?

Ultimately Noah and his family have been left with no choices. Being forced to finish at 1.00pm every day has left Noah feeling painfully aware of his exclusion from his friends and classmates, and sad. He has never been given the opportunity to demonstrate whether he is able to rejoin a classroom. His eight month old brother has only been able to go to baby clinic once since birth; our parental leave has been spent dealing with the fallout from this situation rather than bonding together our expanded family; Jacqui has not been able to fully return to work on finishing her maternity leave. Our mental health has suffered and relationships between all four of us have been placed under substantial stress. We are far from convinced that Noah’s move to a specialist school is the best way to meet his needs in the coming years.

We hope that you can read this and respond constructively, so that the school can better provide for families living with autism in the future. We are happy to meet with you at a future date to discuss the issues we have raised.

[myliberalpath]

From giving us the control over our lives to realise our potential, to supporting those in need and celebrating diversity, here are five reasons why I am a Liberal Democrat. 

Like many of my generation I’ve had a tendency to switch my vote. Since my first general election, when hordes of us voted in a giddy haze in the hope of sweeping Paddy Ashdown into government, the Liberal Democrats have been a political reference point for me.

That was 20 years ago. The Lib Dem surge never happened how we imagined. There was the promise, brilliance and defiance of the Charles Kennedy era; then the horrendous high speed crash with which it ended; the coalition I thought was a reasonably good government borne out of necessity (and actually one I’d seen coming during the campaign). The walls never quite fell. Then we came full circle to Paddy Ashdown’s hat.

On the morning of 8 May 2015, through the demolition dust, I was moved by Nick Clegg’s call to arms to save British Liberalism. I realised that unless people like me - who’d begun to define themselves distinctly as liberals - joined the party it could just disappear. I’ve since researched its philosophical roots - it’s well worth listening to Anne McElvoy’s BBC Radio 4 series British Liberalism: The Grand Tour to get a panoramic view of liberalism’s impact and enduring importance - and it hit home that it wasn’t just a protest vote or accommodating policies that mixed right and left; these were values by which I wanted to live my life. It is the blueprint for the world I want my children to grow up in.

1. It’s about creating the space for us to live our lives. People are at their best when they are empowered. they generally make good decisions about how to direct their lives. Most people will believe in the ‘harm principle’. Liberal Democrats believe in devolving power as close to the people as possible; the state should be there to create the resources for the aspirations of individuals and societies not to control them.   In our daily lives this is reflected in policies to build 300,000 new homes each year, and to battle climate change by doubling green electricity by 2030 (and in fact the Liberals first articulated their commitment to protecting the environment in 1928).

2. Work to live, not live to work.

The economy should give power to people as individuals. It shouldn’t just benefit the wealthy or increase state control. Liberal Democrats look to modern, innovative solutions; emerging industries, co-operatives, mutuals, social enterprise instead of pitting workers against bosses. Free markets can, and should, allow those who are successful to generate personal wealth, but it is important to distinguish a fair economy from the so-called neo-liberal economic policies of the current government (I prefer the term Libertarian, unrestrained economic activity which disregards social consequences).

A Liberal society should also look to support the infrastructure that makes it possible for people to thrive in their work. Liberal Democrats have been particularly pro-active in tackling childcare provision, a key factor in allowing people to get back into work and bringing about a more equal society. Similarly, it should fight for a transport network that allows people to get to and from their work with as little stress as possible.

3. Everyone should have the chance to realise their potential.

It strikes me as astonishing that the first item to get put into in any governmental budget is not education. We should commit all the resource necessary to enable our children and young people to learn and gain skills. The Liberal Democrats propose to put an extra £7bn into the education system; and in the battle for equality some will need additional support to get there, something backed up by the pupil premium. Opportunity needs to extend right the way through to youth training and apprenticeships.

4. We should be there to support those in need.

An important one for me this. As a parent of a child with a disability I know first hand how stressful it can be to faced with a condition that makes life that little bit harder. When someone falls on hard times, a liberal society should gather round them to protect them from harm; to suggest that this is somehow a lifestyle choice, or there are some who are more entitled to support than others, has become a stain on our national morality.  

The welfare state was an idea nurtured by Liberalism in the early part of the 20th century; the blueprint for the NHS was actually devised by a Liberal, William Beveridge. 

5. Our diversity is what makes us great.

I have no doubt that the future is going to be about collaboration. The only way to counter corporate globalisation is to turn away from protectionism - the approach of the three pro-Brexit parties - and to embrace internationalism. The EU provided us with rights, a framework and a shared direction with our 27 closest neighbours. There is, as Nick Clegg has pointed out, no better deal than that which we have. Hand-in-hand is an unswerving commitment to human rights. That should include an immediate granting of the right to stay to EU citizens living in the UK; they are our friends, colleagues, partners and children and deserve our unquestioning support as members of our British family.

Both these stances speak to the type of country, the society, the world we wish to create for the future and our children. I have always believed that our differences are what make us so rich as communities, that enable us to learn from the experiences of others. 

A Liberal society celebrates diversity. When we stand shoulder-to-shoulder with our fellow humans we can see and touch the electricity that links us all. Where we are now it may seem almost out of reach, but we need to hold to these values and have the courage to reach for our hopes.