GIRFEC (Getting It Right For Every Child) is the Scottish Government's version of Every Child Matters. The name is funny because it doesn't mean doing the right thing for your child.
In this system the individual is not the centre, but rather the collective, the average, the aggregate. Your children are the error in this system, and the authorities have an eye on the greater good. And of course that greater good needs them. They, not your children, become the centre of the system, the ones who bring essential relief to the ignorant masses. So, dear listener, if you are going to complain, rebuke, challenge, disagree or question those who claim to serve your interests, take heed. Welcome to the brave new world of the Highland Council.
GIRFEC began in the Highlands in 2006 through the Highland Pathfinder Trial, which was set up with the aim of “encompassing all children's services but also other agencies whose work has a significant impact on the lives of children and their families, with a mission to address all aspects of children's needs from birth to 18 years old.”
But for one Highland family, 2006 marked the beginning of a different kind of experience – years of anguish and frustration at the hands of the Highland Education Authority. GIRFEC and the Designated Persons scheme had not improved their lives or their autistic son's outcomes. They certainly had not made “Scotland the best place to grow up”.
Their young son, who has autism, changed primary schools in Inverness in 2005 and, to maintain continuity, his carer from his previous school accompanied him when he changed schools. Without notice, consultation or preparation, the carer was removed from a school in the GIRFEC trial area at the start of the 2006/07 school year. The parents only became aware of this when they saw a “thank you” note to the carer in the school newsletter. When the parents enquired, the headteacher told them that the school budget did not include any funding for support staff for their son and that, as headteacher, he was not aware that their son needed support staff. This was despite the fact that support staff had been with him throughout the previous two terms when he changed schools.
Without support, the child quickly began to have issues with dressing, concentration, social language, bullying in the playground, lack of self-confidence, etc. Additionally, with nowhere for him to be considered a “time out” space, he reported feelings of isolation and stress to his parents.
Furthermore, none of the recommendations made by the occupational therapist regarding the needs of their autistic son were implemented and the records of needs were not followed. In addition to autism, the son was diagnosed with developmental coordination disorder and had additional physiological problems, but despite the records of needs, he was not given a coordination support plan and the individual education program was discontinued without consultation with the parents.
The principal, who was also the boy's nominator, did not appear to understand the vulnerability of the boy's autism and other physiological issues, and teachers appeared to lack the knowledge and understanding to adequately support and understand children with autism.
This was further evidenced when, on one occasion, a vulnerable child was allowed to leave the school unsupervised after class, despite the mother having clearly instructed her to leave the child there until she arrived as she would be late.Relations between the school and the parents continued to deteriorate and when the family approached Highland Council's Senior Education Officer, Mr John Bruce, for help, matters worsened.
The parents felt increasingly harassed and saddened every time they sought help from authorities to get the services and support their autistic child needed but was not receiving. This was not right for their child, let alone all children. The parents became known as “problematic parents” and were told by the Highland Education Department that they were “the worst parents I've ever dealt with.” However, the child still did not receive the support he needed, which according to the occupational therapist and other medical professionals involved in the case should have been provided. The situation worsened, and the mother even approached the Education Department directly to ask if they could guarantee her son's safety at school, to which the Education Department replied, “We cannot guarantee your child's safety.”
At this point, the parents decided to remove their son from school for their son's safety and on legal advice. The parents were subsequently reported to the Children's Commissioner on a number of occasions for not sending their son to school, despite the fact that state schooling is not compulsory in Scotland. Furthermore, although their child was not attending school, the parents had provided a suitable and appropriate education for their autistic son, and a week earlier the son had received a UK National Education Award. The following week the absenteeism was again reported to the Children's Reporter by Highland Council's Director of Education and Wellbeing, Bill Alexander.
Bill Alexander, Director of Care and Learning at Highland Council
In 2009, Highland councils and the Scottish Government were celebrating the successful rollout of GIRFEC across the local authority. But for one family living in the GIRFEC pilot area of Inverness and its hinterland, 2009 marked the beginning of the worst period of their lives. A failure to receive a diagnosis for their son's autism meant they were denied vital services and the support they needed, and their family nearly fell apart.
It began when the boy's mother became concerned about her son's behaviour and met with the school and the charity. Children First to discuss these concerns.
The mother was told that her son's behavior was the result of her poor parenting. She was told she wasn't strict enough, then she was told she was too strict. She became scared of parenting.
From here, the family was referred to a child psychiatrist (commonly known as a Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service). The son was diagnosed with Anxious Personality Disorder and Attachment Disorder, but the autistic boy's parents urged the mother to consider autism as a cause, which the child psychiatrist dismissed. A teacher friend of the mother who worked with autistic children also suggested that there was something wrong with the son's behaviour and that he should be tested for autism.
CAMHS, Phoenix Centre, Raigmore Hospital, Inverness
The mother passed this information on to a child psychiatrist, who wanted the name and contact details of the teacher who had told her, but did not ask for thanks. Social work also advised not to consider the possibility of autism. However, the mother decided to do something and contacted the Edinburgh Autism Group, who gave her an Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule (ADOS) assessment at her own expense. The results were suggestive of autism, but the mother was told that her son should be tested on the NHS to warrant services. She passed this assessment on to the school.
The mother was never informed about the “designated person” or that this person was the “first point of contact” for the family. The mother spoke to a very helpful learning support teacher at school who said that she would help ensure that both mother and son received all the support they needed once an autism diagnosis was made. However, the mother was then unable to get past the lead teacher (the boy's designated person) and the deputy principal, and her access to the helpful learning support teacher was blocked.
All the while the son was being bullied by an older boy from another school who lived in the same area. The bullying continued for a long period of time but the services involved stubbornly blamed the boy's behavioural problems on problems at home, problems elsewhere were not questioned and the focus was entirely on the home and especially the mother. The bullying got so bad that the boy could not cope and stopped going out and refusing to go to school. Because of this the family was referred to a child reporter and had to attend three committee hearings. At one hearing the lead teacher and nominee did not attend but sent a fax stating that the ADOS assessment was “not even worth the paper it was on”. The lead teacher liaised with social work but not with the parents. The mother had to get her information second-hand from a social worker.
When I showed the ADOS assessment to social workers, they commented, “When you pay for something, you get what you pay for.”
A previous Children's Board hearing had resulted in our son being moved to another institution for school refusals, but crucially, without any consideration or regard for his autism. Fortunately, our GP got involved and accepted an ADOS assessment, which led to a last minute NHS assessment which confirmed the autism diagnosis, and staff from The Pines Autism Support Centre in Inverness attended the Children's Board hearing and gave a description of our son's autism related behaviours. This description was ultimately accepted by the Board.
CAMHS, Phoenix Centre, Raigmore Hospital, Inverness
Her son has suicidal tendencies and his mother feels that if the Child Protection Commission had actually placed him in a home for out-of-school children in another local authority, her son “might not be here now”.
Even after her son was diagnosed by the NHS, he received limited support until he could access adult services.
The mother said Children 1st was not helpful at all. She did not trust Children 1st and felt they were collecting and sharing information about home and family life. They did nothing to support the family but rather a child psychologist and social worker.
It felt like all the professionals were united against parents and that parents were seen as “the enemy.”
The experiences families have shared with us show that the implementation of GIRFEC and the Designated Person Scheme has not helped families to access services and support, but rather hindered attempts to get children the services they so desperately need. In these cases, families who are acting proactively to address their children's needs at an early stage, before things get worse, are facing resistance, suspicion and blame from the Highland Council and its associated agencies.
If your child has autism and there are other additional needs and requirements, particularly those that have financial implications for the council, have you ever felt that avenues for assistance have been closed off by officials or your own special “designated person”?
When you continued to try to get your child the help and support they needed, have you been faced with a group of officials who tried to shift the blame onto you and your family?
Are you aware that your personal information is being collected and shared without your knowledge or consent?
