'Sunderland education system a disgrace' |
||
|
November 2006 |
The school exclusion of a 5 year old girl with autism has been condemned as disability discrimination and a "sham" by the Special Educational Needs and Disability Tribunal. IPSEA welcomes the ground-breaking decision of SENDIST in the case of Sunderland child Katelyn Mitchinson. Katelyn, aged 5 at the time of the exclusion, has severe autism. After being placed in Grange Park Primary school without the necessary support, she was unlawfully and permanently excluded within a few weeks in circumstances which the Tribunal condemned in the strongest terms as disability discrimination and a "sham". Most significantly the Tribunal held Sunderland Local Authority responsible for this discrimination as well as the school. The Tribunal therefore ordered Sunderland to review and reform its whole policy and practice regarding the exclusion of children and the avoidance of disability discrimination. The Tribunal Decision describes how Katelyn started at Grange Park in September this year and how "She was excluded … following a meeting on October 14th. Although this was described as 'a period of respite' and it is recorded that Miss Mitchinson (the mother) was keeping Katelyn away from school on a voluntary basis, we are satisfied both on the written and oral evidence that such an arrangement was a sham. The clear intention of the school at that time and subsequently was not to allow Katelyn to return … Whilst the decision to exclude was taken by the Headteacher and endorsed by the School Governors, we were satisfied on the evidence available to us that the LEA were privy to this decision and did nothing to ensure that Katelyn's placement at the school was kept available to her as her Statement required. It is our view that both the school and the LEA share a responsibility for the act of discrimination that Katelyn experienced … the LEA then never bothered to ensure that the high level of specialist provision that Katelyn would require in a mainstream placement was made. The school did not other to ask for full-time support or for other additional help as there was no confidence that the LEA would provide further help … the school's difficulties in coping with Katelyn arose in large measure from the lack of support and leadership of the LEA … the LEA's failure to provide the necessary planning, support, and advice and training to the school in those early weeks means that the LEA also unlawfully discriminated against her with regard to the circumstances and the manner of her exclusion from school." IPSEA welcomes the order which the Tribunal has made with regard to corrective action by both the school and the LEA, including the following requirements:
Louise Mitchinson commented: "I accept their apology and hope that the rest of the order is fully complied with so that this doesn't happen to another child or family." "They didn't just exclude her from her school, but from her own community. The children in her class knew she had problems, but accepted her. She had overcome that hurdle, only to get it from the adults." Louise, of Pilgrim Close, Monkwearmouth, said Katelyn, struggling to communicate in a class of 30, would become physical. "Although she was excluded on health and safety grounds, there were reasonable steps the school should have taken to stop it happening in the first place," she said. "The whole experience was awful, like we had done something really wrong to be shunned like that.
Speaking for IPSEA, Chief Executive Roger Inman said: "IPSEA is proud to have supported Katelyn's mother with bringing this claim of disability discrimination against the school and Sunderland LEA. We hear on a daily basis of children with special educational needs and disabilities who are excluded from school because their teachers have not been given sufficient resources or training to meet their needs. Our casework shows this to be a particular problem for children with autism in mainstream schools. This decision states clearly that disability discrimination duties do not just rest with schools. It sends out a warning to Local Authorities that they have a duty under the Disability Discrimination Act to support schools in the inclusion of disabled pupils and, in particular, to work actively with schools to prevent any subsequent exclusion of such children. It specifically warns that failure by a Local Authority to ensure the delivery of provision in a Statement can result in a finding of disability discrimination against that Authority. This is a welcome reminder that local authorities cannot wash their hands of responsibility for disabled pupils by relying entirely on schools to get inclusion right." |
|