'Insane' rule leaves mum with 240km school run

Emmaroos

Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2010
Messages
20
I've already emailed her to suggest it.
The office had barely been established when I left Ireland, so I never thought of it until I saw the post.
Thanks for the suggestion.
 


Emmaroos

Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2010
Messages
20
If the case is indeed how you ave outlined it, I would suggest that the child's mother, or you, call the Children's Ombudsman and hopefully they can take the case. It doesn't cost anything and doesn't involve legal action. There appears to be a precedent in the case as I have outlined earlier. I would imagine the school would support her in her case.
Aife's mum contacted the Department of Education to find out if she could benefit from the previous ruling in what seems to be almost identical case. The recommendations of the Ombudsman in that case for concessionary transport have not been implemented yet, and they could not say when or if they are likely to be implemented, despite having told the Ombudsman's office that they would be in place for next year. The SENO was not aware of the ruling. An application to the Ombudsman is in progress, but for now the madness of having to drive the same route as the bus continues. I'll post the outcome when I hear.

One final point. Apparently the child ON the bus from the same area was granted transport before the current regulations were implemented.
 

Asparagus

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 7, 2010
Messages
4,823
Aife's mum contacted the Department of Education to find out if she could benefit from the previous ruling in what seems to be almost identical case. The recommendations of the Ombudsman in that case for concessionary transport have not been implemented yet, and they could not say when or if they are likely to be implemented, despite having told the Ombudsman's office that they would be in place for next year. The SENO was not aware of the ruling. An application to the Ombudsman is in progress, but for now the madness of having to drive the same route as the bus continues. I'll post the outcome when I hear.

One final point. Apparently the child ON the bus from the same area was granted transport before the current regulations were implemented.
Thanks Emmaroos - It looks more and more like the Independent piece was fair.

Whudda thunk that...?
 

jimwin

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 7, 2010
Messages
373
Aife's mum contacted the Department of Education to find out if she could benefit from the previous ruling in what seems to be almost identical case. The recommendations of the Ombudsman in that case for concessionary transport have not been implemented yet, and they could not say when or if they are likely to be implemented, despite having told the Ombudsman's office that they would be in place for next year. The SENO was not aware of the ruling. An application to the Ombudsman is in progress, but for now the madness of having to drive the same route as the bus continues. I'll post the outcome when I hear.

One final point. Apparently the child ON the bus from the same area was granted transport before the current regulations were implemented.
Hopefully going through the appropriate system of redress will lead to a positive outcome for the child.
I stand by my view that this is the right thing to do as it looks at cases based on objective analysis of the facts rather subjective or emotional perspectives. I do not believe that the newspaper article would have changed the situation. I would be shocked if the Ombudsman's finding would not be implemented, if it is found to discriminate in this case. That is what the system if for and it is extremely effective.
I would also like to take this opportunity to apologise for some ill judged comments on my part, that may may have caused offence.
 

Emmaroos

Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2010
Messages
20
Hopefully going through the appropriate system of redress will lead to a positive outcome for the child.
I stand by my view that this is the right thing to do as it looks at cases based on objective analysis of the facts rather subjective or emotional perspectives. I do not believe that the newspaper article would have changed the situation. I would be shocked if the Ombudsman's finding would not be implemented, if it is found to discriminate in this case. That is what the system if for and it is extremely effective.
I would also like to take this opportunity to apologise for some ill judged comments on my part, that may may have caused offence.
Even though the Ombudsman's office found in favour of concessionary transport in a case very similar to Aife's and found that that the "child’s individual circumstances should be adequately considered rather than a general prohibition applied" the Department of Education response was that they would do so for the start of the 2011/12 school year. Given that there can be at best a handful of SEN children each year in this position it seems obtuse that the appeals board can't take this ruling into account when they review an appeal. The ruling doesn't say if they made an immediate exception for the child who took the case, but obviously Aife's mother is hoping that they did, because a year is a very long time to have your daily life under the huge financial pressure of limited employability combined with the expense of driving 240km every day.

It is also frustrating that not one of the officials Aife's mother dealt with throughout the initial application or the later appeal seemed to be aware of the Ombudsman's ruling given how directly it impacts on their decision making. If, however, they were aware of the case then their indication to her that she had made and lost the only appeal possible does not reflect well on the people appointed and paid to assist the families of children with special needs.
I appreciate your apology, because I am sure it is hurtful when people question her commitment to her daughter's welfare and I also very much appreciate your suggestion of an appeal to the Ombudsman because, for the moment, it really is her only hope.
It is worth pointing out that without the story in the Independent, this thread would never have formed and she may never have had the benefit of your suggestion! ;)
 

jimwin

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 7, 2010
Messages
373
Even though the Ombudsman's office found in favour of concessionary transport in a case very similar to Aife's and found that that the "child’s individual circumstances should be adequately considered rather than a general prohibition applied" the Department of Education response was that they would do so for the start of the 2011/12 school year. Given that there can be at best a handful of SEN children each year in this position it seems obtuse that the appeals board can't take this ruling into account when they review an appeal. The ruling doesn't say if they made an immediate exception for the child who took the case, but obviously Aife's mother is hoping that they did, because a year is a very long time to have your daily life under the huge financial pressure of limited employability combined with the expense of driving 240km every day.

It is also frustrating that not one of the officials Aife's mother dealt with throughout the initial application or the later appeal seemed to be aware of the Ombudsman's ruling given how directly it impacts on their decision making. If, however, they were aware of the case then their indication to her that she had made and lost the only appeal possible does not reflect well on the people appointed and paid to assist the families of children with special needs.
I appreciate your apology, because I am sure it is hurtful when people question her commitment to her daughter's welfare and I also very much appreciate your suggestion of an appeal to the Ombudsman because, for the moment, it really is her only hope.

It is worth pointing out that without the story in the Independent, this thread would never have formed and she may never have had the benefit of your suggestion! ;)
Honestly, the frustration on my part was my view about the Mum's use of media and portrayal of the child. I think that's more of a charity/pity approach rather than a rights one. The article was, in my view poorly written, sensationalist and ill judged.

HOWEVER, back on topic, I am glad that she has decided to do go down the formal route. Not only will it provide an objective assessment of her claim, it may well help other parents in similar positions. It is about the vindication of rights and of holding agencies to account. Shame on the professionals on not informing mum of her rights under the law.
 

champsbuddy

New member
Joined
Nov 9, 2010
Messages
2
Sure it's all gone to pot. This poor mother has to homeschool her child. So what if his disability isn't exactly internationally recognised. ;)

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VlPnVLLVGk"]YouTube - Special Ed[/ame]

<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/6VlPnVLLVGk?fs=1&hl=en_US&rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/6VlPnVLLVGk?fs=1&hl=en_US&rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top Bottom