|
|
Feeling Guilty About Asking For Special Ed Services?
Remember the Domino Effect
by Pat Howey, Advocate
Many parents feel guilty about asking the school to provide a specific service or
device for their child. If your child needs a particular service or device, it is
unlikely that he or she is the only child who has this need.
When you achieve a new benefit, program, or related service for your child, the
"system" will often find other children who will also benefit from what it is required
to provide for your child to justify its actions.
I call this the “domino effect.” Schools call it “opening the floodgates.”
Lessons from Our Due Process Hearing
In 1987, we requested a due process hearing for our child. During and after the
hearing, welearned several important lessons including how it benefitted other children.
Laptop Computer
when we requested a due process hearing for our child, one issue was whether she
needed a laptop computer. (This was before the term “assistive technology” was in
the law). In settlement negotiations during the hearing, the school agreed to provide
the computer. However, the school did not purchase one computer - it purchased three
computers. Two other children benefited from what were able to obtain for our child.
After the school crossed that bridge, many other children have received laptop computers
to assist them in their education.
Adaptive Physical Education
A second issue in our hearing was whether my child required Adaptive Physical Education
(APE). At the time of our hearing in 1987, APE was not provided to any child in
the entire county. The hearing officer ruled that my child did require adaptive
physical education. When the next school year began, the school had hired a physical
education teacher with a masters degree in adaptive physical education. Since 1988,
APE has been provided to hundreds of children in our county.
Direct Physical Therapy (PT) & Occupational Therapy (OT)
A third issue in our due process hearing was whether my child needed direct Physical
Therapy (PT) and Occupational Therapy (OT). At the time of our due process hearing,
the school contracted with one physical and occupational therapist for six hours
a week. Children who needed PT or OT received these services through a "consultation"
model. A “gross motor aide” who was paid minimum wage and who was required to have
a General Equivalency (GED) or High School diploma (but who had no training in PT
or OT) provided children with “exercises.” The hearing officer ruled that my child
required direct PT and OT services. As a result, since 1988, hundreds of children
in our county have received direct services from Occupational Therapists, Physical
Therapists, Physical Therapy Assistants (PTA), and Certified Occupational Therapy
Assistants (COTA). The school has at least two full time physical and occupational
therapists on staff during the year. Many, many children now receive direct PT and
OT services. Some continue to receive "exercises" from a gross motor aide, probably
because their parents do not know what their children are receiving.
Strong Parent Advocacy Leads to Changes in the System
Our due process hearing was well publicized. It was open to the public, with
television cameras and radio reporters in attendance. We invited parents to attend,
so they could see what an actual hearing was all about. After our hearing, six more
parents requested hearings. Some cases were settled. Others went to hearing. Many
other parents filed successful state and OCR complaints. The voters in our county
elected several new new school board members. Two superintendents eventually retired
or resigned. The special ed director chose early retirement
Lessons Learned
I do not recommend that all parents take public stances in their disputes with their
schools. This is an individual decision that each parent must make, based on the
issues and facts of their own case. In 1987, my child was in the second grade. None
of her friends read the paper or watched the news. The publicity had little impact
on her. Had she been older, our decision to go public in our dispute with the school
may have been different to protect her privacy. For those parents who have strong
family support and the courage to publicize their special ed issues, your bravado
can provide a valuable learning experience for other parents of children with special
needs. You will make some enemies. You will make some new friends. You will learn
who your true friends are.
Epilogue
In the fall of 2000, thirteen years after our due process hearing, I met a retired
teacher who recalled our hearing. She thanked me. As a direct result of our hearing,
she was able to obtain services for her children she had never been able to obtain
before. Individual parent advocacy does make a systemic impact. Sometimes the impact
is greater than you know. However, individual advocacy is a slow, slow process.
This process has taught me more about patience than any other experience in my life.
That’s why I continue to go through life “Changing the World – One Child at a Time.”
Created: 01/01/05
|