IEP Yesterday - will be reconvened at a later date

Discussion in 'Special Ed 101' started by Mickey2255, May 19, 2007.

  1. Mickey2255

    Mickey2255 New Member

    <span style='font-family: Arial'>Well I have to vent to someone who you all are it.

    For a brief re-cap, my 9 year old ADHD-ODD son has been suspended for 12 days since the beginning of calendar year 2007. Two days for aggression with a student and two 5-day suspensions for aggression with teachers (there's a lot of background to these but I won't bore you). We asked for his IEP to be changed to OHI since it had been just for speech/language even though they have known since kindergarten that he was ADHD. I've been studying like a madwoman to figure out all these laws and rules and went in there pretty prepared. They were prepared
    too - but only to say NO.

    Our first battle came when they argued that they cannot add ODD to the IEP. They say it's a medical diagnosis that would indicate my son is Socially Impaired. HUH???? They also said they are a school and can't treat a medical diagnosis. HUH????? We ended up pending that one just to move on. I knew we weren't going to finish anyway and I sure as heck didn't plan on signing anything yesterday!

    We did pretty good on the accommodations for the ADHD and of course the S/L stuff was nothing new though I did ask for them to specify how many contacts would be in the classroom and how many would be with the S/L therapist in small groups. I actually adore his S/L guy - semi-retired but knows how to have "fun" with learning.

    So then we got down to where they wanted to mark the little box that said he is subject to the school's code of conduct and we came to a grinding halt. I don't have a problem with him being subject to the school's code of conduct per se, but they have specific disciplines attached to them that I don't agree with at all - like those stupid 5 day suspensions. Basically they told me I was going to have to file a manifestation determination after every single infraction to see if what happened was related to his disability. I told them that we already knew
    that as an ADHD/ODD student that 99% of what he would do would be
    determined to be related!! Why waste time on the back end when we can fix this on the front end? I also pointed out that our federal government does not have "one size fits all" penalties for breaking laws. They actually look at the situation before determining the penalty/jail time!

    End result was that nobody in the room was an "administrator" even though the principal had been on the "invitation list" to the IEP and I had expected her to be there. She wasn't there on purpose I'm quite sure. I saw both her and the assistant principal before the meeting and they walked past several times. So nobody in the room could make an "exception" or address the discipline issue even though I had made it quite clear prior to the meeting that this was a priority for me. They also did not address the fact that they owe my son 2 days of school since they exceeded the 10 cummulative days. (If someone is listed as "invited" in the Notice of Meeting to attend the IEP, don't they have to notify me if they are NOT going to be there just the same as they do if they add someone to the attendance list?)

    We are supposed to reconvene next week which isn't going to be easy with my work schedule but I guess I'll find a way. If anyone has any advice or suggestions for "next steps" I'm very open to listening! By nature I'm not very confrontational so the only way I can do this is being super prepared with facts and research to support my position! Otherwise I'd talk in circles and probably just give in.

    I'm also getting ready to fill our a "parent record of proposals" to bring to the next meeting and a "parent attachment" depending on the outcome. I basically had three pages of stuff for the meeting and had written a 6 page history of difficult child. I think both should be included as attachments!

    Thanks for reading! And suggestions are very welcome!

  2. Sheila

    Sheila Moderator

    It sounds as if you know this is misinformation.

    More misinformation. Parents don't file for manifestation hearings. Unless otherwise addressed in the IEP, a student with-an IEP can be suspended for 10 days throughout the school year. At that point, the law dictates that a manifestation hearing be held.

    You might want to do some reading at . The Feds specifically state that IDEA " emphasizes a proactive
    approach to behaviors that interfere
    with learning by requiring that, for
    children with disabilities whose
    behavior impedes their learning or that
    of others, the IEP Team consider, as
    appropriate, and address in the child’s
    IEP, ‘‘the use of positive behavioral
    interventions, and other strategies to
    address the behavior.’’ (See section
    614(d)(3)(B)(i) of the Act). This
    provision should ensure that children
    who need behavior intervention plans to
    succeed in school receive them."
    This is a non-compliance issue by the sd. Perhaps a 5-day suspension is in order.,root,statute,I,B,614,

    (B) Individualized education program team.--The term `individualized education program team' or `IEP Team' means a group of individuals composed of--

    (i) the parents of a child with a disability;

    (ii) not less than 1 regular education teacher of such child (if the child is, or may be, participating in the regular education environment);

    (iii) not less than 1 special education teacher, or where appropriate, not less than 1 special education provider of such child;

    (iv) a representative of the local educational agency who--

    (I) is qualified to provide, or supervise the provision of, specially designed instruction to meet the unique needs of children with disabilities;

    (II) is knowledgeable about the general education curriculum; and

    (III) is knowledgeable about the availability of resources of the local educational agency;

    (v) an individual who can interpret the instructional implications of evaluation results, who may be a member of the team described in clauses (ii) through (vi);

    (vi) at the discretion of the parent or the agency, other individuals who have knowledge or special expertise regarding the child, including related services personnel as appropriate; and

    (vii) whenever appropriate, the child with a disability.

    (C) IEP team attendance.--

    (i) Attendance not necessary.--A member of the IEP Team shall not be required to attend an IEP meeting, in whole or in part, if the parent of a child with a disability and the local educational agency agree that the attendance of such member is not necessary because the member's area of the curriculum or related services is not being modified or discussed in the meeting.

    (ii) Excusal.--A member of the IEP Team may be excused from attending an IEP meeting, in whole or in part, when the meeting involves a modification to or discussion of the member's area of the curriculum or related services, if--

    (I) the parent and the local educational agency consent to the excusal; and

    (II) the member submits, in writing to the parent and the IEP Team, input into the development of the IEP prior to the meeting.

    (iii) Written agreement and consent required.--A parent's agreement under clause (i) and consent under clause (ii) shall be in writing.

    Request it and have it written into the minutes. Be sure and keep a copy for your files.

    Let us know how it goes.
  3. Martie

    Martie Moderator


    Sheila said it all but I want to reinforce three things:

    The SD is required to bring someone who can "commit the financial resources of the SD" and who also has administrative authority. Otherwise, everyone's time is being wasted. Your whole IEP team was not legally constituted. If you feel this was done on purpose, then the SD might later bring this up (which is bizzare, I know--in effect they would be saying, "This IEP is invalid because we did not have the correct personnel there.") I've seen more bizzare, believe me.

    Also, I think the "socially impaired" bit refers to the language in IDEA that categorically DENIES services to students who are "socially maladjusted." Some SDs equate ODD with social mal. Do NOT let them refer to your child as socially maladjusted--if they do, correct them immediately in writing by certified mail. by the way, "socially maladjusted" is not in the DSM or any other recognized nosological diagnostic system--but ADHD sure is.

    As far as the "we aren't medical" then what is OHI???--it's "Other Health Impaired." I refer you to the Supreme Court decsion Garrett v. Cedar Rapids to see what lengths the SC said a SD must go medically to comply with IDEA.

    Keep going on this--you're getting there!!!