Parents prosecuted over SEN child missing school

The parents of a teenager with Special Educational Needs (SEN) have said they spent £30,000 on legal costs after they were prosecuted over their son's non-attendance at school.

The Education Authority (EA) took the case against James and Leigh Bryson after their son Archie, who is autistic, missed almost a year of school.

"Our son has a disability and he wasn't in school for reasons that were not his fault and weren't our fault," Ms Bryson said.

The EA said the welfare and right to education for children was always its primary concern and that it had engaged extensively, but the parents were "not cooperative".

The couple were convicted but the judge issued an absolute discharge meaning there was no punishment.

The couple said they spent tens of thousands defending the case.

Archie's reluctance to attend school began in 2022, but initially Ms Bryson thought it was just teenage moodiness.

But then came regular vomiting—triggered by the sight of his school uniform.

On one occasion he tried to get out of a moving car when school was brought up in conversation.

"Luckily one of his brothers managed to hold on to him while I slammed on the brakes and pulled over," Mr Bryson told The State of Us podcast.

Archie, who also has dyspraxia, began pacing at night, unable to sleep.

The Brysons said there was confusion at his school, Ballyclare Secondary, over Archie's placement on the school's SEN register and the implementation of his Individual Education Plan (IEP).

The family said aids that helped Archie function in class were removed for a time which added to his anxiety and distress in school.

Ballyclare Secondary School denies this was the case and in a statement released through the EA said it had "worked extensively with the parents to support the pupil's individual needs".

The school also refuted the claim that the aids to help Archie were removed, adding it was "committed to ensuring every pupil receives the support they need to thrive".

"In this case, extensive efforts were made to engage with the parents and put in place appropriate measures in line with school procedures and professional recommendations," the statement added.

"He [Archie] was in detention constantly," Ms Bryson said.

"He'd put his head down on the desk because he was exhausted, his IEP allowed that, but it was treated as defiance."

Archie's attendance remained above average, but then he stopped attending school.

The Brysons said this was following advice from an educational psychologist to keep him at home until a safety and support plan was put in place. The couple said that did not happen.

"We were told to wait," Ms Bryson explained.

"We contacted the psychologist, political representatives, even the Northern Ireland children's commissioner. We tried everything. But it was overruled by someone at the Education Authority—and we still don't know why."

From September 2022 to June 2023, Archie remained out of school.

The Brysons said they were then shocked and horrified to receive a court summons.

The family's legal battle lasted for a year and ended in a courtroom at the end of September.

The judge, Mr Justice Conners, issued an absolute discharge, acknowledging the complexity of the case.

He said he was also unhappy with some of the evidence provided by Mr Bryson, who he said had not been fully cooperative with the EA.

However, he also said he was "unhappy" about some of the evidence provided regarding what happened at the school.

In his summing up remarks the judge said having received a letter from the board of governors it was clear that "things happened that shouldn't have".

The EA has prosecuted 410 other parents over the past five years for school non-attendance.

The Brysons said their case raises questions about how families of SEN children are treated.

"We weren't trying to keep Archie out of school," Mr Bryson said.

"If we'd home-schooled him, the case would've gone away—but that would've been a lie. His needs are greater than what we could provide.

"I don't know what they wanted us to do, carry him into school? Wrestle him through the door? We were protecting our son."

When asked how many of the other 410 parents they have prosecuted ended up in court, the EA said that information "wasn't readily available".

They gave a similar response when asked how many parents of SEN children were among the 410.

In a statement the EA said: "The wellbeing, welfare and right to education for all children and young people have always been the Education Authority's primary concern."

It added that it had engaged extensively with the family, offering a wide range of support.

"However, the parents were not cooperative with the EA and ultimately a court determined that the parents had failed to ensure the child's regular attendance at school," it continued.

"Parents have a legal duty to ensure their child has access to education. Our preferred approach is to provide support and guidance so that children return to the school where they are registered."