What's New/News:                                            Vol. 2, Issue 10

ADVOCACY NEWS

One district, which I will call X district, completed the assessment of a student on June 13, 2000. That assessment came only after the child had been retained in 6th grade for a second year and was facing a third year in the same grade. The district felt like the boy belonged in the Alternate Education Program because of his behavior. The student could not stay on task. Oddly enough, this district was well aware that the young man had Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder and had difficulty paying attention yet their solution was to fail the student and punish him for his behavior. After failing the 6th grade, the student's behavior deteriorated even more the second year. He was placed in the A.E.P. until his parents contacted an attorney in the late spring.

The attorney (me) suggested that the student be assessed for special education services. The assessment was completed June 13 (as I mentioned earlier). The student did not qualify as a student with a learning disability or as a child with a serious emotional disturbance. And, even though the student could qualify for special education services under the category of Other Health Impaired (O.H.I.), the district refused to consider that possibility.

The A.R.D.C. meeting was set for the day before school started. The plan was to not admit the student to special education services. As a consequence, the only plan was to keep the child in the A.E.P. and retain him in the sixth grade. When I objected, the assistant superintendent agreed to promote the child to the 7th grade but keep him in the A.E.P.

Let me explain why this suggestion was not in the child's best interest. First, the district had not tried to modify for the student who had a disability nor had they tried to accommodate him in regular classes. Second, the district had not considered placing the student under O.H.I. to qualify the student for services. They had also not considered placement under Section 504 of the Civil Rights Act of 1978. They preferred to retain and punish rather than modify or accommodate. Their decision resulted in deteriorating behavior and a much bigger problem than they would have had to face had they done anything for that young man. Legally, the district was on very shaky ground.

That first meeting, the day before school started, ended when the district indicated it did not know that an attorney would be present (even though I was the person who suggested the assessment and had been at the prior meetings in the spring). School started the following Monday with no placement for the student. He stayed home. The parents and I met with the special education director and coordinator the following week. The director promised that she would find a solution. The next A.R.D. meeting occurred about a week later. Meanwhile, many conversations took place. The district remained adamant in their decision for placement. We did not budge from our position either. We ended the meeting with a decision to meet again the next day.

The next day, the A.R.D.C. convened again. (I had sent a letter to the superintendent in the meantime.) The district agreed to general education placement in the 7th grade and services under Section 504 at another middle school (not the child's home school). Our demands had been met but an accommodation plan still had to be developed.

Finally, one and a half weeks into the school semester, the district, the parents and I met at the new middle school to discuss reasonable accommodations. The student started school the following day.

Just to sum up—it took five official meetings, dozens of conversations and several letters to convince a district to do what was legally and morally right for a child.

Footnote: Even with this extraordinary effort by many professionals, two parents and a lawyer, I cannot guarantee the success of this child in the regular program. The student spent two years being made to feel like a failure. He was punished and chastised for his disability (rather like making fun of a child in a wheelchair). This young man has a long way to go before he will feel good about himself as a student. He will need counseling and understanding to overcome the damage that has thoughtlessly been inflicted by people who should know better.

In another case, in another district, another young man with Attention Deficit-Hyperactivity Disorder has been facing similar problems. I am not sure why schools have such a difficult time tolerating and accommodating children with this disability. A student with a serious emotional disturbance would be offered immediate placement from understanding professionals. Students in wheelchairs are accepted. Students with learning disabilities, hearing impairments, visual disabilities, etc., all receive prompt and generally proper placement. But, give a district an Attention Deficit child and you suddenly face chaos. I don't understand. I'll let you know if this second boy's situation improves. The district, the district lawyer, the parent and I are still having meetings.

Next month, I'll mention a couple of other cases. For now, let's discuss Social Security. My experience with Social Security Disability is that adults have a very difficult time qualifying. Most individuals have to appeal the first decision because they are not disabled enough or will not be disabled long enough. I would like to suggest that anyone trying to apply for social security benefits contact an attorney early on to make sure that they are not kept waiting for months for any type of assistance. Even with an attorney, expect to wait six months to a year to even qualify. Sometimes the agency is faster but swiftness is the exception not the rule.

Karen

9

Home

Table of Contents

Resource Links