I guess that comes as no great shock to people here. LOL! difficult child's triennial evaluation is due and I had asked for a change in class. from ED to OHI because the principal (who has been leading the iep team) kept saying that goals and services needed to be based on behavior because that's why difficult child was on an iep to begin with and that's the way these people interpret the ED class. So, the ed spec had said that would require a comprehensive re-evaluation. I said "go for it". Then, I was given the list of things they were going to include in this "comprehensive evaluation", which was a social worker interview, 2 educational tests, a memeory test, visual and hearing tests, and a psychiatric interview/observation. So, I signed agreement to have difficult child re-evaluation's with an asterick and comment next to my signature saying to "see attached letter" and attached my letter stating IDEA and state regs that "this is to be a comprehensive evaluation that tests ALL areas related to suspected diability" and listed what those areas would be and referred to difficult child's previous neuropsychologist testing (which they have a copy of) that shows he does have weaknesses in these areas and referred to psychiatrist's recent letter stating diagnosis. So, I get a call from Special Education director for the school district. She asked in 5 different ways what was it I wanted and I answered each time with reference to my letter and state regs. She asked why I wanted this. I said besides it being the law, it was the ed spec who said a comprehensive evaluation needed to be done, so I expect it to be comprehensive and meet regs. She said "all to get a change in class". I said that I realized the class. wasn't supposed to matter, but apparently it does because I keep hearing that this is why difficult child can only get certain services and why his teachers fuss at him and treat him like a behavior problem when he is symptommatic yet has been no behavior problem at school for 18 mos. I said that I'm told by principal and others that his iep goals can only be behavior or academic and I know that isn't true, as well, but since I don't want to be argumentative or uncooperative in iep meetings, maybe this will help them see that difficult child has other needs that require other goals. She said that she thought the intended testing would reveal those things. I said they would not, not based on what I was told. She said that they would include psychological testing- unless it had been done before. I said the school district has done NO testing on my difficult child before, yet didn't want to accept the nueropsych results I had done privately, then ultimately accepted them, but never looked at them. I told her that I had asked for a list of tests they intended to do but had not received one and asked why it seems like pulling teeth to get this school district to do anything. I told her that considering that they had never spent one dime to do one test on my son, I didn't think I was asking too much. Then she said that maybe we should put this on hold, because given where difficult child is now, that would require them traveling and "his emotional and psychiatric state might effect the testing outcome". (Is she kidding here?) I said that this is what needs to be tested and I'm not expecting it to change anytime soon. Also, he might be moving from where he is in a couple of weeks, but I wouldn't expect things to be ideal for a very long time, so they might just have to travel. (Are these the people that are supposed to help my son learn that doing what you should do to begin with might prevent having to do more at a later time?) She said she'd discuss it with ed spec and email me a list of intended testing. And- the principal who had acted like she would advocate for difficult child/me- well, I sent her an email over a week ago telling difficult child's current status and she has not even responded. I was stupid to think I'd get an "I'm sorry to here this", but darn- couldn't she even respond with something? It really makes me wonder what she did say in that school district "MDT" meeting or whatever it was that took place 1 week before I went to that county staffing meeting and felt attacked. She acted like she cared about difficult child and did go to batt for him last spring. Maybe she's still trying to cover their rears for breaking the law where difficult child is concerned 2 years ago.. It still bothers me. difficult child wanted to buy something for her- which I did. He would be finishing up at her school and moving onto high school and she can't even acknowledge an email now? Even in my letter that I attached to that form about this triennial review, I said that the current principal and cm were doing a good job trying to accommodate difficult child with the resources they had available, but that he needed more resources and accommodations made available. What phonies.