Supreme Court Takes Up Special Ed Case

(AP)  A lawyer for an Oregon high school student told the Supreme Court on Tuesday that the public education system failed to address his learning problems and then improperly denied his parents reimbursement after they enrolled him in a private school.

A lawyer for the school system argued that the student's parents should have given public special education programs a chance before seeking reimbursement for private school tuition.

"All parents have to do is give (public education programs) a try," said Gary Feinerman, an attorney representing the Forest Grove, Ore., School District.

The Supreme Court is again trying to decide when taxpayers must foot the bill for private schooling for special education students.

In the Oregon case, the family of a teenage boy diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) sued the school district, saying the school did not properly address the student's learning problems. The family is seeking reimbursement for the student's tuition, which cost $5,200-a-month.

Federal law calls for school districts to reimburse students or their families for education costs when public schools do not have services that address or fulfill the students' needs. Under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, the nation's special education students are entitled to a "free and appropriate public education."

In its appeal to the Supreme Court, the school district said students should at least give public special education programs a try before seeking reimbursement for private tuition.

Chief Justice John Roberts seemed sympathetic to that point, noting that in many cases a tryout period can be as short as 10 days.

"What's wrong with 10 days?" Roberts asked.

David Salmons, a lawyer for the student - who was identified only as T.A. - said that specialized learning plans for students typically are developed at the end of a school year and are to be used at the beginning of the next year. Such a practice makes a 10-day tryout impractical.

Justice David Souter said he was concerned that legal appeals in similar cases could drag out for years while a student's education languishes.

"You get into court and it can go on a long time," Souter said. "You can't wait years" when a student's education is at stake.

Justice John Paul Stevens told Feinerman, the school district's lawyer, that his interpretation of the law could give public schools an incentive to deny special education services for students it deems don't need them.

Justice Anthony Kennedy appeared to agree, telling Feinerman that his position in the case seemed "formalistic" and "promotes intransigence."

Kennedy's position on the case is considered crucial, since the high court split 4-4 on a similar case two years ago. Kennedy recused himself in that case, but was among those considering the Oregon case on Tuesday.

The case is Forest Grove School District v. T.A., 08-305.


For more info:

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Decision: Forest Grove School District v. T.A., April 28, 2008 (pdf)

Brief By Petitioner Forest Grove School District (pdf)

Brief By Respondent T.A. (pdf)

[ADHDmama]

Children and adults with disabilities can and do work and have productive lives. More so now than ever before. People are now recognizing that with generally inexpensive accomodations these children can complete their education but also excel. Children and adults with adhd have a severe and chronic neurological disability that has no relation to parenting. At least no more than for any child. Just because you repeat something often enough doesn't make it true or valid.

The school was making a case that if it denied a child services then it could reasonably deny the child alternative services which are more costly. That's quite an incentive. Thankfully the supreme court wouldn't deny a child the right to a free and public education as it would for any other child. Anyone who feels that these children aren't deserving of an education obviously never made use of the one they received.

In this case the parents asked for help from the school and were denied. The supreme court in its wisdom saw the loophole for schools to simply deny the disability and then wash it's hands of any responsibility. For anyone who says these parents didn't give the public school a try what was the school doing when the boy was in kindergarten through his junior year of high school? The school wanted the problem to go away, unfortunately that 'problem' is someone life and eventual livlihood.

As a parent of a child with adhd, I am used to the trivializing of the condition and the insinuation that I'm to blame. Despite that, I'm not going to sit back and let the ignorance of others who could care less to learn about or understand disability, beyond not parking in the handicapped stall, interfere with the needs of my child. If you would, what does that say about your parenting?

[godfirstcountrysecond]

You can not send a child away just becasue YOU think they are unteachable. These children go to school to learn not only from books but to be an important part of society. You must have been the one in classes who made fun of these children or been made fun of yourself otherwise you would have a little compassion.

[endurorob]

First of all it appears that these parents did not give the public school system any chance at all. Secondly why is the private tuition over $5,000 a month. Thirdly theri are many kids these days diagnosed with ADHD that go to public schools and do just fine as long as they take their meds. This just sounds like the parents want their kid in private school and want everyone else to cover the cost for them.

[ToolMangler1]

The determination of how & where they are educated should be up to professionals not parents especially if they are not paying for it. There are far too many people that do not take responsibility for the children they choose to bring in this world.
Posted by diamruby at 2:34 PM : Apr 28, 2009



The problem here is that the "Professionals" are under budget constraints just like the parents of a ADHD child. The difference is that the "Pros" can declare a child useless and discard it, the parents can't (and wouldn't if they could in most cases) "I double dare you to get involved with a handicapped child for 6 months and try to help that same child before you run your 'yap' again." (ToolMangler said that)

[diamruby]

Special education aka free day care for children who will never be able to work or live in the real world. Why are these students in a regular school? If your child is mentally handicapped & cannot attend a regular school then that is a medical problem & your health insurance should pay for their care or better yet you teach them at home. Most of the children & teens with all these attention & disorderly problems are mainly unruly brats that parents have not taken care of at home. It is unreasonable to expect other people to support & pay for your childrens private education. Will this child be able to get a college degree & hold down a job? We need to make sure all people get an education if possible. The determination of how & where they are educated should be up to professionals not parents especially if they are not paying for it. There are far too many people that do not take responsibility for the children they choose to bring in this world.