-
A school complaints panel has ruled that the Head teacher can deviate from providing what is well stated in section F of the EHCP, is this lawful?
I made a complaint to the LA and the mainstream primary school that my daughter was not receiving her education in line with section F of the EHCP which was very clearly and precisely stated following Tribunal.
The LA refused to address my complaint telling me that the school must consider it. The complaint went to Stage 2 at the school and the panel ruled it was reasonable and defensible for the Head not to provide SaLT, now and next trays, noise cancelling headphones etc to my child and dismissed my complaint. I am within 12 weeks of their decision, can I challenge this decision at Judicial Review or by other means? Much of the provision is now being made ironically, although some elements are outstanding.
I have written evidence directly from the Head refusing my child the provision because it was his opinion that she did not need it. -
Is it true that ADHD is not considered a disability as far as The Equality Act 2010 is concerned?
This question relates to a case we were told about recently: my 8 year old son was recently given a fixed term exclusion for ‘non-complaint behaviour’, the worst of which seems to have been using the calming fiddle toy we had given him during lessons. He does not have an EHCp but we are looking at that. He has been diagnosed with ADHD but we believe he also has a number of difficulties outside the ADHD diagnostic criteria. We believe this exclusion amounts to disability discrimination. Our first response was to complain to the Academy and eventually a meeting was held which was chaired by the Chair of Governors who claims to have decades of SEND experience. At the start of the meeting, she questioned the legitimacy of our concerns as, as far as she was aware, ADHD was now not considered a disability as far as The Equality Act 2010 is concerned as this is what she had read in a local newspaper.
