Q:
09.37 Is the fact that a particular placement will cause stress to the pupil/young person relevant to choice of placement?
Nodi No-nonsense Guide Wales
Authors: Civitas Law education team
01 Nov 2024
A: SenseCheck
- 0 Yes
- 0 No
- 1 Other
- 01 Nov 2024
-
Other
Complex
Can't answer yes or no.:
Para 23.59 ALN Code 2021 states that theremay be other considerations that are relevant depending on the circumstances: para 23.59 ALN Code 2021. Where the stress is related to a CYP’s ALN or would impact on the ability to make reasonable ALP this is likely to be a relevant factor to consider.
Cases under old Welsh law/English law that are potentially relevant include:
In B v Vale of Glamorgan [2001] ELR 529, a 16-year-old suffering from mental ill-health refused to attend the school specified her statement of SEN. Her parents’ appeal was allowed because there had been a failure to address how, given her refusal, the FTT had concluded that the school could provide for her needs.
The reasoning in MW v Halton BC [2010] UKUT 34 (AAC) para 37, implies a need to consider the impact, if any, of attendance at that school on the child and how, if at all, ALN can be managed and monitored in such an environment. In that case it was established that a CYP whilst attending or being expected to attend a school, experienced symptoms (from whatever cause) consistent with stress sufficient to be of evident concern to his medical advisers. The UT considered that under such circumstances it would need to be able to form a conclusion that the school proposed was nonetheless “appropriate”.
In St Helens BC v TE and another [2018] UKUT 278 (AAC) para 14, 23, the UT held that it was lawful for the FTT to conclude that a school was not suitable solely by reference to its conclusion that the child “has formed an entrenched and currently intractable opposition to attending [R] school or any mainstream provision” given that it recognised that “his attitude to the proposed placement is part of the significant and complex needs that must be met by the provider” and given EP advice which linked his attitude to his SEN. On the facts (so the UT held) this was not unlawfully giving the child or young person a veto.
Nodi No-nonsense Guide Wales
Authors: Civitas Law education team
|
Comment