Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Internet Search
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Parent Support Forums
Special Ed 101
Re: Private school placements
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Martie" data-source="post: 84663" data-attributes="member: 284"><p>Sheila took the words right out of my word processor :smile:</p><p></p><p>The ONLY parents who can get a case to the Supreme Court are very rich, or extremely poor and represented by a legal aid clinic usually associated with a law school. Therefore, I am not surprised that this family could afford tuition. they are not depriving another child in my opinion; they are fighting for other children. However, I still think they will lose.</p><p></p><p>Amy Rowley's parents paid for her private education while the case went through the courts. They lost and were not reimbursed, giving us the "Rowley test" that stands today. Amy Rowley is on the faculty of the U of WI--not a real typical outcome for a profoundly deaf child. This is a direct result of the education her parents provided. Would she be at WI if she had stayed in public school? I doubt it.</p><p></p><p>Another example is Winkleman that came down in June: they had all sorts of offers of free representation, but the principle that parents may represent their child is district court was the issue. They won, not that many parents are capable of going into district coutrt pro se, but the principle is very important.</p><p></p><p>in my opinion the people who are hurt cannot self-fund a legal fight, and do not interest/qualify for legal aid. To be a legal aid case, it is important to be "interesting" as well as poor.</p><p></p><p>I also agree with Sheila NY has a large number of outplacements in comparison to other SDs around the nation. I am not sure why this is so, but there was a boy in the PG ahead of my ex-difficult child's at EGBS who was funded by NY city schools. Every other kid there was private pay. A strong case can be made that a large public high school is a very dangerous place for an adolescent with severe depression. It is these students for whom "try our school for a semester (or a year)" could be fatal. I am very glad that I had the resources to go with the private placement without regard to the SD not giving a rat's --- about my son's life. In the end, they did not have to pay. In the end, if his next suicide gesture had been more than, he would be dead and they would still not give a rat's ---. That is my firm belief and I can back it up: every year my son WOULD have been in public h.s., there was a successful suicide in the high school he would have attended. The SD made no policy changes so I guess they just do not care enough to change. Suicide is contagious among depressed youth. A single suicide increases the risk of another by over 300%. I think those odds justified removing ex-difficult child immediately but the H.O. was very offended that we did not "give the SD a chance"--to what, let him die? by the way the same hearing officer said it was "inconvenient" for a Special Education student to need AP math, advanced science and German. Perhaps we should have argued that the SD could not provide gifted Special Education.</p><p></p><p>As you can see, I feel strongly about what happens to depressed internalizers in public secondary school. What if removing ex-difficult child to a private placement had not been an option? I am not rich, but neither am I poor. Lots of people are in the middle and it is those kids I worry most about.</p><p></p><p>Thank you for your comments.</p><p></p><p>Martie</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Martie, post: 84663, member: 284"] Sheila took the words right out of my word processor [img]:smile:[/img] The ONLY parents who can get a case to the Supreme Court are very rich, or extremely poor and represented by a legal aid clinic usually associated with a law school. Therefore, I am not surprised that this family could afford tuition. they are not depriving another child in my opinion; they are fighting for other children. However, I still think they will lose. Amy Rowley's parents paid for her private education while the case went through the courts. They lost and were not reimbursed, giving us the "Rowley test" that stands today. Amy Rowley is on the faculty of the U of WI--not a real typical outcome for a profoundly deaf child. This is a direct result of the education her parents provided. Would she be at WI if she had stayed in public school? I doubt it. Another example is Winkleman that came down in June: they had all sorts of offers of free representation, but the principle that parents may represent their child is district court was the issue. They won, not that many parents are capable of going into district coutrt pro se, but the principle is very important. in my opinion the people who are hurt cannot self-fund a legal fight, and do not interest/qualify for legal aid. To be a legal aid case, it is important to be "interesting" as well as poor. I also agree with Sheila NY has a large number of outplacements in comparison to other SDs around the nation. I am not sure why this is so, but there was a boy in the PG ahead of my ex-difficult child's at EGBS who was funded by NY city schools. Every other kid there was private pay. A strong case can be made that a large public high school is a very dangerous place for an adolescent with severe depression. It is these students for whom "try our school for a semester (or a year)" could be fatal. I am very glad that I had the resources to go with the private placement without regard to the SD not giving a rat's --- about my son's life. In the end, they did not have to pay. In the end, if his next suicide gesture had been more than, he would be dead and they would still not give a rat's ---. That is my firm belief and I can back it up: every year my son WOULD have been in public h.s., there was a successful suicide in the high school he would have attended. The SD made no policy changes so I guess they just do not care enough to change. Suicide is contagious among depressed youth. A single suicide increases the risk of another by over 300%. I think those odds justified removing ex-difficult child immediately but the H.O. was very offended that we did not "give the SD a chance"--to what, let him die? by the way the same hearing officer said it was "inconvenient" for a Special Education student to need AP math, advanced science and German. Perhaps we should have argued that the SD could not provide gifted Special Education. As you can see, I feel strongly about what happens to depressed internalizers in public secondary school. What if removing ex-difficult child to a private placement had not been an option? I am not rich, but neither am I poor. Lots of people are in the middle and it is those kids I worry most about. Thank you for your comments. Martie [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Parent Support Forums
Special Ed 101
Re: Private school placements
Top