Federal law already guarantees children with disabilities an appropriate education. Should they do more to ensure that school districts are more compliant with these regulations?
_____________________________________________________________
As a parent of two children with autism, I have personal experience with the ways that my local school district ignores Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 which provides for a Free Appropriate Public Education. My wife and I have received confirmation from employees within the district that it is the district’s policy to deny parent’s requests at the school level even if those involved in the IEP think the request is reasonable and necessary. At a Town Hall Meeting last weekend I had the opportunity to ask my congressman about how to put more teeth into this law.
The Congressman seemed knowledgeable about the subject and pointed out that the Federal government has not provided the funding that was originally promised, leaving the local school districts to bear the burden. He was also correct in asserting that the law provides the opportunity for parents to hire lawyers who specialize in this field and requires school districts to pay for these services for parents who win their case. If there was a need for additional enforcement measures, his contacts with the Special Education and Disability communities were not applying pressure.
Unfortunately, the format of the proceedings did not allow for follow-up questions. If they had, I would have pointed out that the use of confidentiality clauses was severely limiting the ability for parents to communicate with each other about available services. I would have also asked about providing protections for district employees who speak out about policies that they think hamper the ability to provide the most appropriate education for students.
_____________________________________________________________
As a parent of two children with autism, I have personal experience with the ways that my local school district ignores Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 which provides for a Free Appropriate Public Education. My wife and I have received confirmation from employees within the district that it is the district’s policy to deny parent’s requests at the school level even if those involved in the IEP think the request is reasonable and necessary. At a Town Hall Meeting last weekend I had the opportunity to ask my congressman about how to put more teeth into this law.
The Congressman seemed knowledgeable about the subject and pointed out that the Federal government has not provided the funding that was originally promised, leaving the local school districts to bear the burden. He was also correct in asserting that the law provides the opportunity for parents to hire lawyers who specialize in this field and requires school districts to pay for these services for parents who win their case. If there was a need for additional enforcement measures, his contacts with the Special Education and Disability communities were not applying pressure.
Unfortunately, the format of the proceedings did not allow for follow-up questions. If they had, I would have pointed out that the use of confidentiality clauses was severely limiting the ability for parents to communicate with each other about available services. I would have also asked about providing protections for district employees who speak out about policies that they think hamper the ability to provide the most appropriate education for students.