Mediation between Children's services and Education
and a parent of an autistic child
Denise was at her wits end, her son is severely autistic and
the day centre where he was receiving an after school service
had, three months ago, refused to take him any longer pending
a re-assessment. Her husband, a solicitor, had initiated two
Judicial Reviews one about the care of his son in the Special
School, which he felt was inadequate and improperly resourced.
The second about Children's Services decision to stop providing
after school care and curtail his son's respite provision.
The first Judicial Review to be listed was about the After
School and Respite provision and the judge advised that mediation
be attempted first. Both Denise and Children's Services agreed
to that and the mediation went ahead within one week. The Assistant
Director explained that the decision to exclude their son had
been made on Health and Safety grounds, after an incident where
a staff member was hurt. The intention had been to re-assess
the case but when Denise's husband left the review meeting
after an half an hour and then did not respond to further contact
the assessment had been postponed.
The first mediation session established much of the history
of the case and Denise was able to demonstrate the enormous
strain on herself and her family. Many decisions were made,
but at the end of the session Denise felt she needed to speak
with her husband as he did not want any partial agreements
made. It was agreed there would be a second meeting, and that
for the second half of the meeting the Special Educational
Needs Coordinator (SENCO) for the school would be present.
At the second meeting, one week later, the after school provision
was re-visited.
Children's Services outcome: The after school provision for
her son was re-established and agreed monitoring and feedback
procedures were put in place. Children's services committed
to a fixed amount of respite care and set a review date. Agreements
were made on how Denise could raise her concerns quickly and
communication was restored between Denise and her case manager,
who was present throughout. The Judicial Review application
was withdrawn.
In the afternoon Denise's case manager stayed and her husband
arrived. This mediation was with the SENCO so that Denise's
husband could deal with his concerns about his sons educational
provision. He felt that his son's statement was not being consistently
applied and that the decisions made at the last review meeting
had not been enacted. As a result he felt his son's behaviour
had deteriorated culminating in the incident at the Day Centre.
The SENCO was able to reassure the parents about the provision
that had been put in place, but it became clear that the maternity
leave of a key staff member had unsettled their son very greatly
and on the afternoon of the day care incident she had visited
the school, with her new baby.
Education outcome: This realisation provided an insight into
the possible reasons for his outburst at the day centre that
evening. The school agreed that any subsequent visits would
be carefully planned and managed, as would her part time return
to work. Denise agreed to visit the school to reassure herself
about the level of provision and to attend a planning and review
meeting three weeks later to share her observations. The Judicial
Review application was withdrawn after this visit.
