From School Refusal to Reconnection
Charlie had not attended school for 10 months, then gradually increased over the course of 5 months to be attending full time.
Student Profile
- Name: Charlie *pseudo name
- Year Level: Year 8
- Age: 13
- Background: Charlie is a bright, funny, socially connected student who enjoys soccer, music, and spending time with friends. He has a strong sense of justice and a vibrant personality.
- However, recent family trauma, emotional dysregulation, and learning disengagement have contributed to significant school avoidance and behavioural incidents.
- Diagnosis: ASD (level 1) / ADHD
Student Comment / observation:
“His sense of humour returned, he began contributing to discussions, and completed two major assignments with pride.” – teacher
Charlie reported feeling “less hated” and even shared, “I still don’t love French, but I don’t feel sick every morning anymore.”
Family Impact:
Charlie’s parent reported “reduced anxiety at home, improved sleep routines, and more positive discussions about school”. There was “a noticeable improvement in Charlie’s mood and confidence”. His mother described it as “a shift from fear to hope. We still have work to do, but we’re in a better place.”.
School Perspective:
“Our staff have begun to recognise that Charlie’s behaviour was a form of communication and affected his attendance. It was helpful from Can’t Face School to see Charlie not as a “problem to manage” but as a student to understand. With improved consistency at home, clearer expectations, and a trauma-informed lens, teachers expressed feeling more equipped and less reactive to help him attend again.”
– Wellbeing leader, Secondary School
The story: Initial Presentation and Concerns
At the start of the year, Charlie had missed five consecutive days of school and was refusing to attend after week 3, particularly after conflictual incidents or on days with less preferred subjects like French. He had missed a total of 2 full school terms, 1 semester before intervention.
His school avoidance was compounded by a growing sense of overwhelm, perceived rejection, and a belief that staff disliked him. Charlie frequently expressed statements like “Why do the work when they don’t like me?”, masking deeper emotional distress.
At home, he refused to get out of bed in the mornings, went to bed late, made statements like “They all hate me there, there is no point in going, I don’t learn anything anyway”.
Behaviourally, Charlie was experiencing difficulty regulating his responses to stress and perceived injustice both at school and at home too.
Incidents from the previous school year and at the start of this one, included absconding from class, refusal to follow instructions, classroom disruption, and in some cases, physical gestures interpreted as threatening, although not intended to harm.
These were clearly signs of nervous system dysregulation, not deliberate aggression. Teachers also expressed feeling anxious around Charlie, complicating relationship repair.
An initial concern was that Charlie wasn’t allowed to return to school until he had attended a ‘Restorative meeting’ which involved sitting in a room with 5 adults questioning him seeking an agreement.
Charlie wasn’t able to access information in situations like this and had previously left the room in the first minute of the meeting. He refused to attend anymore as they caused too much anxiety and stress, for his mother too.
Intervention Strategy
A multi-pronged, phased return plan was collaboratively developed, centred on safety, relationship restoration, and slow reconnection to learning. The successful approach prioritised dignity, connection, and co-regulation over compliance.
This included a series of 1 hour action planning meetings with the mother, then separately with Charlie, and liaison work with the school to negotiate a return to school plan, as well as with Charlie’s previous psychologist.
Phase 1: Stabilisation and Safety Planning (Weeks 1–3)
- Fully understand the situation, be curious, and work with the family and the school through 1 hour consultations with the mother, occasional communications with Charlie, and chair formal meetings with the school.
- A key adult (trusted teacher) was identified and released to meet Charlie at the gate and go and kick the football with him on arrival & at anytime during the school day he needed to deregulate.
- Safety plan adjustments included avoiding physical containment strategies that could trigger Charlie’s trauma history and ensuring staff understood neurodivergent regulation needs.
- Staff were briefed on trauma-informed approaches, inc. using neutral tone, and emotional validation instead of exclusionary discipline.
Phase 2: Staggered Re-entry and Relational Repair (Weeks 4–10)
- Charlie returned to school for 2–3 hours a day, 2-3 days a week, focusing on high-interest subjects and supportive teacher environments (e.g., Maths with Mr. Matt).
- Movement breaks were planned in advance with Charlie, supported by a blue-card system he helped co-create.
- He was encouraged to use music as a regulation tool during breaks.
- Short, relationship-building meetings were held between Charlie and key staff to rebuild trust without pressure.
- Weekly check-ins with the Behaviour Specialist (who shared her own neurodivergence) supported identity-affirming conversations and emotional literacy.
Phase 3: Rebuilding Engagement and Independence (Weeks 11–18)
- Charlie gradually increased attendance to 4-5 full days per week and by part way through Term 4.
- A visual timetable and peer support strategy were introduced to support executive functioning (e.g., organising books, knowing where to go).
- Regular communication between home and school ensured Charlie’s needs were monitored and adjustments tweaked as needed.
- Incidents decreased significantly as Charlie began to feel safer, more connected, and had predictable responses from staff.
- Charlie was celebrated for small wins (e.g., completing a lesson, resolving conflict using words, arriving on time).