OT IDEA Changes

[tw1nsmom]

I don't know if this is of interest to anyone, or if it's in fact old news. I've been taking a special education lay advocacy course and we've been discussing some substantial changes to the IDEA. I still have two weeks left in the course, but I thought I'd outline some areas that might be of concern as I see them.

As of July 1, 2005

-They are doing away with most of the goals on IEP's. Most students will only have the main annual goals. Only students with severe disabilities will get the more specific goals

-There will be no more status quo. If the school district wants to put your child in a placement that you disagree with, or eliminate services, your child will NOT stay in his/her current placement during the dispute process. They will be placed where the school district wants until you prevail and get them the services back, or get them back in a placement you feel is appropriate.

-The have added additional layers to the dispute system, so it will be a longer time frame to resolution of disputes. Due to lack of status quo this may lead to longer innapropriate placements for your child.

-If a dispute goes to binding arbitration where lawyers are involved, and the complaint is found to be frivolous, the parent and/or lawyer may be responsible for the legal fees of the school district. The main problem with this is that there are zero guidelines for what constitutes frivolous. It's completely subjective. Some of our area educational lwayers are already planning on not taking anymore cases.

-Parents will only automatically receive a copy of their child's IEP after the annual review. If you have to go back to a CSE committee to amend an IEP, the parent will only receive a copy of the IEP if they request it in writing.


There are many other items that are effected, but I can't get to my notes right now. It really seems as if the new laws favor the districts instead of the child/parents. It seems like we're stepping back instead of forward. If this is of interest to anyone, I'll post things as I learn them.

 

[teacherforhi]

-If a dispute goes to binding arbitration where lawyers are involved, and the complaint is found to be frivolous, the parent and/or lawyer may be responsible for the legal fees of the school district. The main problem with this is that there are zero guidelines for what constitutes frivolous. It's completely subjective. Some of our area educational lwayers are already planning on not taking anymore cases.

I'm actually glad to see this one. We have a parent here whose father owns a law practice. Every time she decides that we've done something to harm her child, she sues us...four times in seven years. We've won every time; however, that doesn't stop her father from bringing the cases. Maybe if she has to start paying us back, then her family will finally rein her in.

 

[tw1nsmom]

I'm actually glad to see this one. We have a parent here whose father owns a law practice. Every time she decides that we've done something to harm her child, she sues us...four times in seven years. We've won every time; however, that doesn't stop her father from bringing the cases. Maybe if she has to start paying us back, then her family will finally rein her in.

While, yes, there are frivolous lawsuits, the main problem with the new law is that there aren't any guidelines as to what constitutes frivolous. I'm as aggravated as the next person about people abusing the system, but the majority of the people aren't. By threatening them with financial subjective financial retribution, the system is keeping parents from protecting their children's constitutional rights to a FAPE. For every truly frivolous lawsuit, there are thousands of instances of school districts lying to parents about their rights under the law, failure to provide children of special needs witht he supports necessary to succeed, and general education teachers who are resentful of and/or refuse to properly implement a child's IEP.

I didn't post on the most recent thread on the community board that universally blamed special ed kids for all the violence in today's schools and basicly wanted all special ed kids to be sent off to seperate schools. It made me cry, but I didn't post. There was so much prejudice and misinformation that I didn't even know where to begin. I posted this information here in hopes that some of the information I'm learning might help another parent of a special needs child, not to open a debate or bashing thread like the one I've mentioned.

 

[Talking Hands]

I didn't post on the most recent thread on the community board that universally blamed special ed kids for all the violence in today's schools and basicly wanted all special ed kids to be sent off to seperate schools. It made me cry, but I didn't post. There was so much prejudice and misinformation that I didn't even know where to begin. I posted this information here in hopes that some of the information I'm learning might help another parent of a special needs child, not to open a debate or bashing thread like the one I've mentioned.

That thread did not blame all violence in schools on special ed kids but pointed out a very real problem existing in the school system where it is virtually impossible to remove a special needs child from a mainstream classroom when his behavior is a danger to other chilrdren or is disruptive to the classrooms purpose of education. It is a very valid concern for parents of children affected by these violent and disruptive children. And it doesn't just happen in mainstream classes but in pull out and self contained classes as well. And very often it is because of improper placement and the refusal of the parents of that child to allow the IEP to be amended and proper placement determined.
Least restrictive enviroment doesn't always mean inclusion. An example: a deaf child with multiple handicaps. Cannot read, write. Cannot sign. Behavior issues in a self contained classroom even with a one on one aide. Still in diapers. Mother wanted this child in an inclusion class. He was funtionally a PMH child in a classroom of deaf children of normal intelligence and it took a good 1/3 of the classroom time dealing with his behaviors even with his aide. His placement was wrong even for the self container classroom and it was hurting all the kids. No way he needed to be placed in an inclusion classroom situation. And mom was constantly suing the school, teachers, aides and anyone else she could think of. And he couldn't be placed in a proper classroom enviroment because the mother refused to allow the IEP to be modified except to allow inclusion which the school system would not accept

 

[teacherforhi]

While, yes, there are frivolous lawsuits, the main problem with the new law is that there aren't any guidelines as to what constitutes frivolous. I'm as aggravated as the next person about people abusing the system, but the majority of the people aren't. By threatening them with financial subjective financial retribution, the system is keeping parents from protecting their children's constitutional rights to a FAPE. For every truly frivolous lawsuit, there are thousands of instances of school districts lying to parents about their rights under the law, failure to provide children of special needs witht he supports necessary to succeed, and general education teachers who are resentful of and/or refuse to properly implement a child's IEP.

Wow...wasn't bashing special ed kids...here or on the other thread. I simply feel that there a great many parents who have gotten out of hand when it comes to special education. For every one parent that truly cares about their child and truly thinks and considers what the most appropriate placement for their child will be and is completely realistic about what their child may accomplish in life, I can show you three that just want to ram their "wants" down the school system's throats.

The majority of parents do not understand what FAPE means. It's free and appropriate, not free and everything-single-thing-under-the-sun. Yes, it might be nice if the school system provided a state-of-the-art FM system for your child to use at school; however, unless you want to pay for it, your child can make do with the entirely appropriate one that the system provides. (Yes, the witch sued us over this.)

As far as there being no definition of what constitutes "frivolous", I think that needs to be decided on a case-by-case basis, same as it would be if my next-door neighbor sued me. It might be justifiable, it might not.

In NC at least, there are plenty of chances for a parent with a frivolous lawsuit to stop before it gets to that stage. They file a dispute with the state board who examines the situation and makes a ruling. If the state finds for the parent, it creates a plan that the system must follow in order to come back into compliance. If the state finds for the system, the parent has the option of going to the next level. The whole process can take months; trust me, I know.

I won't argue that every lawsuit is frivolous; I know that the vast majority aren't. I also think that at the end of a trial any reasonable person will be able to tell what is frivolous and what isn't. I don't think it has to be an all or nothing type thing.

Sorry this is long, but I have a tendancy to jump on my soap box at this sort of thing. Probably just tired of being sued for not producing a perfect child at the end of every school year.