Why Behaviour Leads Must Recognise the Interplay of SEND Needs

Challenging Behaviour in SEND: Impulse Control, Demand Avoidance and Shame

Over the past decade, awareness of Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) in schools has improved. Yet, despite progress in identification and support planning, there remains a significant blind spot: how certain SEND needs interact with—and often intensify—each other. When impulse control difficulties, demand avoidance, and shame co-exist, the outcome is frequently misinterpreted behaviour, breakdowns in support, and ultimately, school exclusions.

This article examines these three complex needs, how they overlap, and why traditional behaviour policies often fail the very pupils they aim to support.

1. Understanding the Individual Needs

Impulse Control Difficulties

Impulse control is typically regulated by the brain’s frontal cortex, which may be underdeveloped or impacted in pupils with ADHD or trauma histories. These pupils often:

• Struggle with emotional regulation
• React before thinking
• Show unpredictability in high-stress situations
• Experience an overactive fear response

According to the ADHD Foundation (2024), around 5% of school-aged children in the UK are diagnosed with ADHD (Link to our free screening tool) a figure expected to rise due to improved diagnostic pathways. For these pupils, impulse control is not a choice, but a neurological challenge.

Demand Avoidance

Demand avoidance refers to an extreme resistance to everyday demands. It may be linked to Pathological Demand Avoidance (PDA), recognised as a profile within the autism spectrum. Alternatively, it may be a trauma-informed response rooted in past experiences of chaos and loss of control.

The PDA Society (2025) notes that demand avoidance is not defiance but a fear-driven need to preserve autonomy. Behaviour often leads to misreading this as stubbornness or oppositional conduct.

Shame and Low Self-Esteem

Perhaps the most overlooked factor is shame. This is not simply embarrassment—it’s a persistent internal narrative of unworthiness, often fuelled by years of rejection, misunderstanding, and punishment.

As psychologist Dr. Brené Brown famously puts it: “Shame corrodes the very part of us that believes we are capable of change.”

Pupils affected by shame may:

• Predict failure as a coping mechanism
• Pre-emptively reject peers or staff
• Adopt behaviours that confirm their negative self-beliefs

2. When These Needs Interact

Impulse Meets Demand Avoidance

Separately, both needs are manageable with the right strategies. Together, they form a volatile pairing. Imagine a pupil who is:

• Impulsively reacting to stress
• Deeply fearful of losing control
• Triggered by any perceived demand, even a calm instruction

This pupil may lash out, flee, or shut down without warning. Traditional sanctions or escalation frameworks often compound the behaviour rather than de-escalate it.

Demand Avoidance and Shame

For demand-avoidant pupils, unpredictability feels dangerous. They may attempt to control their environment in ways that appear manipulative, these are often called adaptive behaviours (or maladaptive behaviours): dominating peers, rejecting group work, or challenging adults.

But behind this is a desperate need for consistency. Shame builds when these attempts are punished or misunderstood. Over time, these pupils internalise beliefs such as:

• “I’m bad.”
• “I always get it wrong.”
• “No one likes me.”

This becomes their emotional baseline. And ironically, the predictability of failure feels safer than the risk of success.

The Full Trio

When all three factors are present, challenging behaviour is almost guaranteed. These pupils often:

• Reject support before it’s offered
• Sabotage relationships
• Appear to choose failure
• Display ‘rude’ or ‘defiant’ conduct

But these are survival strategies not character flaws. “The behaviour is not the problem. The behaviour is the communication of the problem.”. The Royal College of Speech and Language Therapists has produced this sheet that outlines the connection.

3. Misinterpretation Leads to Exclusion

The UK continues to see a disproportionate number of SEND pupils being excluded. According to the Department for Education (DfE) statistics (2024), pupils with identified SEND were five times more likely to be permanently excluded than their non-SEND peers.

Most exclusions cite ‘persistent disruptive behaviour’ a category that includes:

• Refusal to follow instructions
• Verbal defiance
• Disruptive classroom presence
• Inappropriate comments or jokes
• Physical aggression towards peers or staff
• Frequent interruptions during lessons
• Using electronic devices inappropriately
• Leaving the classroom without permission
• Engaging in off-task conversations
• Creating noise or distractions (e.g., tapping, shouting)
• Intimidating or bullying behaviour towards classmates
• Throwing objects or causing property damage
• Excessive tardiness or absenteeism
• Failure to complete assignments or engage with learning materials

Yet when behaviour leads misinterpret complex need profiles as non-compliance, pupils are funnelled into disciplinary processes rather than supported. This represents a systemic failure, not an individual one.

4. What Schools Can Do Differently

a) Reframe the Behaviour: Begin with the assumption: “What is this behaviour trying to tell me?” Every behaviour serves a function—safety, escape, control, or connection. If you are unsure as to the function use a simple functional analysis tool to start those discussions.

b) Language and Communication: Demand-avoidant pupils need to feel in control. Behaviour leads can:

• Offer choices rather than direct instructions
• Use non-directive phrasing (e.g., “When you’re ready…”)
• Avoid power struggles at all costs

These shifts reduce the fear response and increase engagement.

c) Build Emotional Safety: Impulse control and shame improve in environments that:

• Are consistent and predictable
• Contain emotionally attuned adults
• Allow time for co-regulation rather than immediate correction

d) Whole-School Training: Behaviour policy is a whole-school issue. All staff need access to CPD focused on:

• Understanding PDA and trauma-informed practice
• Differentiating between defiance and distress
• Repairing relationships after incidents, not just managing them

Organisations like Beacon House and YoungMinds offer excellent resources for school-wide SEND awareness.

5. A Call for Systemic Change

The current behaviour frameworks used in many schools are not fit for purpose when supporting the most complex SEND profiles. Zero-tolerance policies, behaviour point systems, and rigid consequence ladders all reinforce shame and fear for these pupils.

We need:

• Greater flexibility in behaviour responses
• A review of national exclusion practices
• A move away from compliance-focused cultures

As highlighted by the Centre for Mental Health (2024), exclusion often marks the start of a downward spiral—social isolation, mental health decline, and involvement with youth justice.

There is an urgent need for policy that acknowledges complexity, not just control.

FAQ: Supporting Complex SEND Behaviour

What is the link between impulse control and ADHD?

Pupils with ADHD often have underdeveloped executive function, making it harder to regulate impulses. This is neurological, not behavioural.

How can schools support demand-avoidant pupils?

Use indirect language, reduce pressure, offer choice, and build trusting relationships. Avoid power-based conflict.

Why does shame play such a large role in behaviour?

Shame creates a belief that failure is inevitable. Pupils act out to control when and how that failure happens.

What should behaviour leads do differently?

Avoid interpreting behaviour as defiance. Look beneath the surface, implement trauma-informed practice, and adjust language.

Are there alternatives to exclusion?

Yes. Restorative approaches, nurture provision, and relational practice all provide safer, more effective alternatives.

Final Thought

Impulse control difficulties, demand avoidance, and shame present a profound challenge to the education system. But it is not insurmountable. With training, compassion, and a shift in mindset, behaviour leads can drive systemic change, moving from reactive management to proactive understanding.

Let’s stop asking, “What’s wrong with this child?” and start asking, “What happened to this child—and how can we help?”