Let's just take a look at the concerns part of the report from the ed psych for a moment. It needs a bit of unpicking. Firstly, she's published it out of context. What else was written in the body and analysis of the report? Then, let's read between the lines of the language used...
The ed psych has clearly stated Wilby "displays" a slight sensory sensitivity as he SMELLS his food. Just for R's benefit, you can't smell beige, so he can eat other colours.
Wilby's difficulties are worst during the holidays and new places. So, yep, we all know he loves being at school and the holidays are a
tit show of chaos and new places. All at times when he is with his parents who do nothing to take account of his needs. And then the pair of tossers head to London to spout off about how the system is damaging their kid.
"He has shown some aggression"... this is not a concrete assertion that professionals believe he is aggressive. It is just reflective of the parents' account. The word "some" appears to seek to minimise the concern. For example, if the concern was significant, there might be something added along the lines of "Wilby had shown aggression and this has sometimes led to accidental injury to his carers". It doesn't say that though because it would be harmful to Wilby's future (hint R, stop posting online that he is violent) and could prevent him getting into the right school for him, which imo is a mainstream school where he will thrive.
Josh is concerned, his parents are concerned... this is code for professionals don't share these concerns in any way and so the report is including them, but the ed psych is distancing themselves from the concerns.
Anyway, I won't unpick it all, but we can see that a lot of what is written is just attributed to parental support and not about professional concern. Even with the potty training, the ed psych clearly disagreed with them and has written the advice given within the concern!
The bit about Wilby gets upset in some way on most days. It doesn't say dysregulates, nor does it say he needs to have time in a safe place, nor does it say that he needs significant adult support (above that needed by any other child) to recover. Some children get upset daily in nursery and pre-school settings and there are lots of reasons why.
Also, the bit about struggling with adult-led tasks. Speak to him through an iPad and all will be well.
He has no routine and boundaries at home (despite line 1 of the concerns).
When she says Wilby doesn't understand her asking what he did at school. That's true for many, many children at his age. Why the hell does she not know this? Why does she think all children's settings provide information to parents/carers to tell them what they've been up to and send whacky artwork home. She has no idea about child development.
As for all the talk of young people and suicide. No trigger warning, which is dreadful. She uses weird euphemisms to begin talking about the subject as though she realises it is all kinds of wrong! By the way, did anyone else pick up that she'd be angry if she was "holding a banner and Wilby wasn't here any more"? Firstly, the mere fact that she's considering that about Wilby's future appals me. Secondly, when considering potential future grief in relation to any loved one (not just children), most people go with sad, devastated, heartbroken, etc, etc. Not many people would go straight to angry when asked how would you feel if XYZ died? She is a genuine psychopath or a robot. One or the other. Yuk.
View attachment 2257855
Her behaviour genuinely disgusts me.
And I am sure someone on here said that shes treating a school place as a babysitting service she thinks shes entitled too. Shes not quite clocked that she needs to at least help to prepare him for school. Shes just hoping she'll be able to plonk him in the classroom in September and that's that. How on earth has she kept her other 3 children alive all this time?? Shes literally clueless.(hope the link works!)
In Ratfuckers words 'I cant' Its becoming like a comedy now 
