EdLaw10L7SpecialEdLaw - InternationalSchoolLeadership

Report
Special Education Law

IEP

IEE

FAPE

OSEP

LRE

OCR

MDT

FBA

504

SLP

DD

COTA

LD

CIC
Special Ed Acronyms
“… No State shall make or enforce any law
which shall abridge the privileges or
immunities of citizens of the US, nor shall
any State deprive any person of life,
liberty, or property, without due process
of law, nor deny to any person within its
jurisdiction the equal protection of the
laws.”
14th Amendment
“No otherwise qualified individual with
disabilities in the United States…shall
solely by reason of his/her disability be
excluded from the participation in, be
denied the benefits of, or be subjected to
discrimination under any program or
activity receiving federal financial
assistance…” 29 USC 794
Vocational Rehabilitation Act 1973
You are the principal of Hokie High School.
Your science department chair told you about
a conversation that occurred this morning
between her and one of her colleagues, Tom.
When notified that Tom was expected to
attend an IEP meeting as a representative of
the regular ed staff. He said he doesn’t
believe in “accommodations” and thinks the
child in question is “just lazy” and is “working
the system.”
Case Study
It is the duty of all schools to provide a
free and appropriate public education in
the least restrictive environment for every
child between the ages of 3 & 21 who has
identifiable disabilities
Education for All Handicapped
Children’s Act 1975

Free Appropriate Public Education

Individual Education Plan

Special Ed Services

Related Services

Due Process

Least Restrictive Environment
Education for All Handicapped
Children’s Act - Provisions
1986




Attorney fees
0-3 program, optional
3-6 program essential
Services for deafblind/
multi-handicapped
Amendments
1990




TBI, Autism
Transition services
Prevent schools from
using the 11th
amendment
ESY






Extensive parent rights
Discipline
Access to regular curriculum/assessment
Access to regular program
Non-categorical eligibility
Limits services to private school students
1997 IDEA






NCLB coordination
Special Ed services for children in private
schools
Changes eligibility definitions for LD
Flexibility for intervention prior to
eligibility determination (15%)
Modified dispute resolution
More refined disciplinary rules for
students with disabilities
IDEA 2004

Removal for 45 alternative placement for
causing serious bodily injury at school

Manifestation team, must include parents,
district, and relevant members of IEP
team

Child can be in alternative placement until
decision is made in hearing, or period of
discipline ends
Discipline Changes
FAPE
 ESY
 Regression-Recoup
 Procedural
safeguards
 IEPs
 ADHD
 LRE
 Private School
Placement

Court Cases






Related services
Discipline
Stay-put provision
Compensatory
education
Attorney’s and Expert
fees
Liability for
reimbursement of
parents








EACHA 1975
Rowley 1982 SC
Tatro
1984 SC
Burlington 1985 SC
Robinson
1986
Honig
1988 SC
Timothy W 1989 1st C
Zobrest 1993 SC
Cases
ACCESS
FAPE
Related Services
Reimbursement
Attorney fees
Discipline
Ability to benefit
Parochial school








Florence 1993 SC
Reimbursement
Oberti
1993 3rd Circuit
LRE
Holland 1994 9th Circuit
LRE
Garrett 1999 SC
Related Services
Van Clay 2002 7ircuit
LRE
Shaeffer 2005 SC
Burden of Proof
Arlington 2006 SC
Non-Attorney fees
Alvin
2007 SC
ADHD
Cases (continued)
Henry Hudson v Rowley
1982 SC

Defined FAPE

EAHCA does not require maximum ed
services, but a floor of opportunity

Questions of methodology for provision of
services are to be determined by state
and local ed systems
FAPE

Irving v Tatro 1984 SC
◦ CIC is a related service

Cedar Rapids v Garrett 1999 SC
◦ Continuous nursing service is a related service
Related Services

Parents of a medically fragile child are insistent
that their child be totally integrated into the
school mainstream. Due to a cardiac condition,
it is possible that the child will have to be
resuscitated at some point during the school day.
Additionally, trach suctioning and naso-gastric
tube feeding are required. The parents demand
that a full time nurse be provided to ensure that
their child receives the necessary medical
attention.
How would you handle this?
Honig v Doe 1988 SC
 Discipline rights
 May suspend a child for up to 10 days
with out violating the stay-put provision

Why are suspension and expulsion
procedures for students with disabilities
different from those for non-disabled?
Discipline
During most of his years in the Shrenk School
District, Tommy demonstrated no need for special
education services. He had average grades and
progressed from grade to grade. Although diagnosed
ADHD, he was not on any medication. In high school
he left school one day with friends, all of whom
admitted to smoking marijuana at his home. Later
the group returned to school, where Tommy used a
pellet gun to shoot at another student on the school
track. The student was not seriously injured. When
Tommy was expelled his parents filed a due process
complaint saying he should have been served as a
special education student.
What should the school do?





Timothy W v Rochester 1989
Oberti v Bd of Ed
1993
Sacramento v Holland 1994
Beth v VanClay
2002
1st Circuit
3rd Circuit
9th Circuit
7th Circuit
What are the factors in the 4 part Holland
test?
http://www.kidstogether.org/right-ed_files/rachel.htm
LRE

Florence v Carter 1993 SC
◦ Parent entitled to reimbursement for private
placement (not parochial)

Zobrest v Catalina
1993 SC
◦ Provision of services at parochial schools

Foley v Special School District 1998 8th
Circuit
◦ Voluntary parochial placement, no entitlement

KDM v Reedsport 1999 9th Circuit
◦ Not entitled to services in parochial school
Special Ed and Private Placements

Martinez v School Bd
1988 11th Circuit
◦ Aids, risk v accommodation

Timothy v Cedar Rapids 1999 8th Circuit
◦ 504 and transportation for choice

Schaeffer v Weast
2005 SC
Arlington v Murphy
2006 SC
◦ Burden of proof is on the party seeking relief

◦ Non-attorney fees are not reimbursable costs
Additional Cases
Issues
Special Education
Section 504
Identification
Evaluation
Due Process
Discipline
Enforcement
If 504 and Special Education serve students
with disabilities – what are the differences?
IDEIA
Section 504
Identification/
eligibility
Specific categories; adversely affect
ed performance
Must affect major life activity; no
need for sped
Evaluation
Comprehensive eval by MDT;
Independent eval; re-eval every 3
years; no significant re-eval for
placement change
Evaluation from variety of sources
documented; periodic eval; decisions
do not require consent;
Responsibility for
FAPE
IEP; educational benefit to student;
placement in spec ed/gen ed; related
services
Plan; comparable ed; placement in
gen ed; related services
Due Process
Impartial hearing and appointee for
hearing; specific procedures; stayput; 10 day notice for change;
requires parent consent
Impartial hearing; hearing officer can
be school staff; no stay-put: no prior
notice for change; requires parent
participation
Enforcement
OSEP
OCR
504 vs Special Ed
Be familiar with district policies and
procedures regarding sped
Ensure proper placement of qualified
transfer students
Make sure disciplinary actions conform with
the law
Complete assessments within time limits
Checklists

www.nichcy.org

www.angelfire.com

www.school.familyeducation.com

http://www.k12.wa.us/SpecialEd/program
review/TechnicalAssistance.aspx
Resources

similar documents