Continuing in our series of parental blame trainings to Worcestershire SEND professionals, WPCF reps today presented to 40+ school attendance leads from across Worcestershire. Attending Worcestershire County Council’s Attendance Network, the session, titled “Children and Young People with SEND: Attendance and Blame,” was led by Anne, a PCF rep, parent to two autistic children, a school governor, a charity leader and safeguarding professional.
The session explored the complex relationship between school attendance, neurodivergence and parental blame and encouraged leaders to reflect on their current practices.
Drawing on her own lived experience, national research, and local parent carers’ insights, Anne urged schools leaders to look beyond attendance figures and understand the reasons children struggle to attend.
“For too long, attendance has been treated as a number, not a symptom,” Anne said. “When neurodivergent children experience distress at school, the focus should be on understanding their needs – not blaming parents.”
National research presented to delegates highlighted that 92.1% of severely absent children are neurodivergent, with 83.4% identified as autistic. Among persistently absent pupils, over 65% have recognised SEND needs, either through an EHCP or SEN support plan. Neurodivergent children are three to six times more likely to be excluded and 46% more likely to experience school-based distress than their peers.
The session explored the growing incidence of parental blame in education – when professionals attribute a child’s difficulties to parenting rather than unmet need.
Citing the Cerebra report “Institutionalising Parent Carer Blame”, Anne noted that systemic bias can lead to parents being unfairly accused of Fabricated or Induced Illness (FII) or poor parenting when their children’s needs are misunderstood.
“Parent carers told researchers they felt ‘humiliated, bullied, and devastated’ by the way professionals treated them,” she explained. “We must recognise that these patterns aren’t isolated incidents – they’re built into the system, and they cause long-term harm.”
Delegates reflected on powerful real-life accounts from Worcestershire parent carers describing the trauma of being accused rather than supported. One parent quoted in the training said, “They used to say I was very cooperative, but when I refused to drag my autistic child into school, they reported me.”
The training also amplified the voices of neurodivergent young people from Worcestershire, who shared what helps and what doesn’t when they are struggling in school.
They asked adults to stop “gaslighting our experiences”, to stop rewarding them for masking distress, and to understand that school refusal is not a choice but a sign of anxiety and overwhelm. One young person described it vividly:
“Normally the dragons in our brains are blue – calm and happy. But sometimes our dragons turn red – angry or stressed. That’s when we’re overwhelmed.”
Participants discussed practical steps to make attendance support more compassionate and effective:
* Building trusting relationships with families
* Listening and believing parents and carers
* Avoiding terms like “difficult parent” or “attention-seeking”
* Focusing on mental well-being before attendance statistics
* Adopting trauma-informed, evidence-based approaches
Anne concluded: “No parent wants their child to miss school. Our role as professionals is not to force attendance but to create conditions where attendance becomes possible.”
The session was described by attendees as “thought-provoking, emotional and necessary” and “excellent and thought provoking.”
Critically, the session had encouraged leaders to be curious and think differently as the before and after training Slido eloquently summarised:
Worcestershire education leaders left with a shared commitment to re-examining attendance policies, their practices and working with families as partners, not subjects of scrutiny.
