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
Martie, about the IEP meeting
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: 15596" data-attributes="member: 284"><p>MM,</p><p></p><p>I am happy for you if you are fairly satisfied-- go :warrior: !!!! --but if I were you, I'd be really unhappy about the SD attorney reneging on a prior VERBAL agree.</p><p></p><p>I do not mean to lecture but your account shows why it is important to send a "memo of understanding" following any such verbal agreement. I always put at the end something like, "Unless corrected by you, this memo is a factual account of ____." Your attorney might suggest different wording, but unless they take the trouble to correct you, in later proceedings, your memo is a lot stronger than their personnel saying, "that's not how I remember it." If I had been more effective at doing this (in the midst of getting ex-difficult child into EGBS), I might have done better at Due Process.</p><p></p><p>RE: the "attendance sheet." You could have declined to sign it and take it to review with your not-present attorney. It is ridiculous in my opinion for the SD attorney to suggest you sign something that you haven't read and then have your only recourse be to contact someone else after the fact to "correct." (A DP hearing officer would say, "you signed, didn't you read it?") </p><p></p><p>Speaking of things that will never be attached to the IEP, you subsequent "correction" would be one. When I eventually got around to signing an IEP, I was signed on the last page,--not the signature AKA "attendance" sheet, with the following: I am signing page twelve of this document. Additions require an IEP team meeting." Then I would number the pages (which, conveniently, were NEVER numbered by th h.s.) You do NOT have to sign at the meeting--which by the way, ceased to exist when they left abruptly--so even though you signed at the school, it was not at the meeting. This counters the argument that you have to sign with all members present.</p><p></p><p>It sounds as though you handled things well, but you are correct in my opinion, the IEP needs to reflect that the DISABILITIES of auditory processing and motor skill frustration, lead to your daughter's difficulty in being redirected or following other rules. Their omission of this helps them win any future manifestation determination hearing, so in my opinion, it is really important to get this causal connection into the IEP itself. </p><p></p><p>I always found it interesting that my SD could go on for pages about their speculation regarding ex-difficult child's adoption (which is NOT a disability--it's how he entered our family--would they have gone on and on if it had been by C-section?) but when I asked for things, they would say it would make it "too long". I would suggest the deletion of their editorializing--especially stuff that I would strike through because it was speculative-- such as easy child's level of achievement-- (which is in HIS IEP--hello?) This gave me the idea that it was very necessary to number the pages--the degree to which numbering the pages of a document made them unhappy shows to me, what they intended to do. by the way, the pages in ex-difficult child's elementary SD WERE already numbered. The h.s. was very, very sneaky.</p><p></p><p>CAVEAT EMPTOR!</p><p></p><p>Martie </p><p> :warrior:</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Martie, post: 15596, member: 284"] MM, I am happy for you if you are fairly satisfied-- go [img]:warrior:[/img] !!!! --but if I were you, I'd be really unhappy about the SD attorney reneging on a prior VERBAL agree. I do not mean to lecture but your account shows why it is important to send a "memo of understanding" following any such verbal agreement. I always put at the end something like, "Unless corrected by you, this memo is a factual account of ____." Your attorney might suggest different wording, but unless they take the trouble to correct you, in later proceedings, your memo is a lot stronger than their personnel saying, "that's not how I remember it." If I had been more effective at doing this (in the midst of getting ex-difficult child into EGBS), I might have done better at Due Process. RE: the "attendance sheet." You could have declined to sign it and take it to review with your not-present attorney. It is ridiculous in my opinion for the SD attorney to suggest you sign something that you haven't read and then have your only recourse be to contact someone else after the fact to "correct." (A DP hearing officer would say, "you signed, didn't you read it?") Speaking of things that will never be attached to the IEP, you subsequent "correction" would be one. When I eventually got around to signing an IEP, I was signed on the last page,--not the signature AKA "attendance" sheet, with the following: I am signing page twelve of this document. Additions require an IEP team meeting." Then I would number the pages (which, conveniently, were NEVER numbered by th h.s.) You do NOT have to sign at the meeting--which by the way, ceased to exist when they left abruptly--so even though you signed at the school, it was not at the meeting. This counters the argument that you have to sign with all members present. It sounds as though you handled things well, but you are correct in my opinion, the IEP needs to reflect that the DISABILITIES of auditory processing and motor skill frustration, lead to your daughter's difficulty in being redirected or following other rules. Their omission of this helps them win any future manifestation determination hearing, so in my opinion, it is really important to get this causal connection into the IEP itself. I always found it interesting that my SD could go on for pages about their speculation regarding ex-difficult child's adoption (which is NOT a disability--it's how he entered our family--would they have gone on and on if it had been by C-section?) but when I asked for things, they would say it would make it "too long". I would suggest the deletion of their editorializing--especially stuff that I would strike through because it was speculative-- such as easy child's level of achievement-- (which is in HIS IEP--hello?) This gave me the idea that it was very necessary to number the pages--the degree to which numbering the pages of a document made them unhappy shows to me, what they intended to do. by the way, the pages in ex-difficult child's elementary SD WERE already numbered. The h.s. was very, very sneaky. CAVEAT EMPTOR! Martie [img]:warrior:[/img] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Parent Support Forums
Special Ed 101
Martie, about the IEP meeting
Top