Once again....these people have NO CLUE

[Shari]

Here is an excerpt from their own handbook...Special Services Policies...

Suspension
Disruptive, aggressive and anti-social behaviors may be sufficient cause for suspending handicapped students from
school.
Any handicapped student who has evidenced a history of such behaviors will have written into his/her IEP specific
behavior management contingencies to be initiated at the onset of inappropriate behaviors. Behavior management
contingencies may include, but are not limited to: time-out room, in-school-suspension, homebound instruction
(following an IEP meeting), short-term suspension (not more than 3 days), counseling (by school counselors), crisis
intervention, withdrawal of privileges.
The parents/guardian/surrogate and student will be informed of, and agree to, the behavior management
contingencies stipulated in the IEP.
When the handicapped student exhibits disruptive or anti-social behavior, the management contingencies set forth in
the IEP will be activated by the principal and/or other individuals in the school who are responsible for implementing
the student.s IEP.
The behavior management contingencies used and the individuals implementing them will be a function of the IEP
and the types and severity of the behavior demonstrated by the student.
Management contingencies which consist of suspension or otherwise exclusion from the school must be​

implemented by the principal upon delegation from the superintendent.

As of 6pm this evening, the superintendent declined getting involved...she "doesn't get involved in suspensions until its hit the 10 day mark". What the &&&&& ever. If you will recall, it was the super and Pretty Boy that had a 5am rendevous to put Wee on half days to begin with...

And here is the definition of "assault", which my difficult child committed today on a teacher, by slapping her hand, when she requested he write....

2)​

​

​

​

[FONT=Arial,Bold][FONT=Arial,Bold]Assault[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial,Bold][FONT=Arial,Bold][/FONT][/FONT]a)
Hitting, striking and/or attempting to
cause injury to another person;
placing a person in reasonable
apprehension of imminent physical
injury; physically injuring another
person.
b) Attempting to kill or cause serious
physical injury to another; killing or
causing serious physical injury to​

another.

And this is the list of "possible consequences"....
[FONT=Arial,Bold][FONT=Arial,Bold]

Consequences will be assigned based on severity of conduct and previous conduct violations.​

A. Principal/Student conference
B. Loss of privileges
C. Detention
D. In school suspension
E. Out of school suspension​

F. Expulsion.

[/FONT][/FONT]So, for a sped student with known behavioral issues, with a first offense, we go straight to the second most severe punishment they have???? When the "crime" barely fits the definition????

 

[Marguerite]

Shari, after hanging around with you lot on this site for the last few years, I'm beginning to see a pattern.

When a Special Needs kid has a program written up, the school uses this to try to help the kid's problem behaviours BY HOLDING THE KID TO A HIGHER STANDARD OF BEHAVIOUR.

In other words, for the school, the main purpose of the IEp is to first identify the student with problems, and put procedures in place ASAP to protect staff and other students from the fallout of the problem kid's behaviour.

Absolutely no intention to help the child at all. The main focus clearly 9to me) seems to be - don't give this problem kid the slightest wiggle room whatsoever. Hit it hard. Fast. get 'em out of here as soon as we can. Then we can get back to doing what we are supposed to be doing - teaching 'normal' kids, and ensuring the problem kid is Someone Else's Problem.

Does this seem right, in view of your past experiences with Wee?

Totally, utterly wrong, of course. But seriously, if this is how some schools are choosing to interpret the legislation, you need to do more than just advocate at the school level. From their point of view, of course you ill fight for your child. From their point of view, they are fighting for their staff, and to get the problem gone so they can 'get back to normal'.

With attitudes like this, you need advocacy at the district level, or higher. Attitudes need to change, the law as it should be interpreted needs to be presented to the staff in the whole district, as an inservice.

Shari, we battle with our kids. That should be all we have to deal with. But it never is. We end up battling with schools when they should be helping us. Being a Warrior Mum involves a helluvalot more. It's not fair.

You do an amazing job, I just thought I'd better give you the perspective form a few thousand miles away, that I see something nastily familiar here.

Marg

 

[klmno]

I hate to say it, but in my jurisdiction that sort of stuff is typical. The same list of possible consequences is listed for almost every violation of the code of conduct, from one extreme to the other. You know the law and school policies that went into effect after a high school teen took a black squirt gun that looked like a 9mm to school in Fl and pointed it at people like he was going to shoot people some years back? they were getting ready to arrest my son and expel him for "taking a look-a-like weapon" to school in 3rd grade after a kid told on him for having a squirt gun at school, which was see-thru plastic with the big white "trigger" and you could see the water tube running inside of it, and my son had gotten it from a cub scout meeting as a reward the night before and hadn't pointed it at anyone- it fell out of his pocket.

And I think it was in this state that a 6yo, 1st grader, kissed another 1st grader on the cheek and the kid and the parents were sued for sexual harassment.

Once the sd targets your kid, it is impossible it seems to ever overcome it.

I have read completely different stories on this board though- kids taking weapons to school, hitting teachers, etc, and they get a revised IEP and a slap on the hand. I have no idea if it's parental technique, the sd jurisdiction, whether or not the staff likes the family or what.

 

[klmno]

I just read Marg's post and I think she is right. I said a few years back to people in our courts here that I think the problem is discrimination. Just like once federal law was passed forbidding discrimination based on race, it really took years before all local jurisdictions really abided by that and now the same thing is happening with MH issues and sd's policies for these kids. Until that happens, the ignorance in that jurisdiction's general population will persist. 20 years from now maybe things will be different, but the people in our local agencies pretty much reflect the attitudes of the general public in that jurisdiction and this just goes to show how much ignorance and discrimination is still left in our country regarding MH issues and kids that need help and support. These will be your local reps who walk around and complain about federal laws and having to comply with them and now having to deal with the state government coming in to check things. Just remember, the federal law was passed because the majority of Americans didn't want things to continue like this and they voted in people who would pass laws to change it. Unfortunately, it takes years and years before it really gets changed on a local level that directly helps our kids.

 

[Shari]

Yes, Marg, you are spot-on. I think.

But am I missing something in there? If they exclude him from school, shouldn't it be, ultimately, at the super's hand, per their own policy???

I am going to their own attorney tomorrow. Even if he can't talk to me, I can advise him that he might ought to give the school a call...

I have absolutely, positively had it with these people. I'm really fighting the urge to just call the newspaper....

I hear ya, KLMNO. And I don't know if its right or its wrong, but they are dang sure changing the rules as they fly. And they better dang well be crossing their t's and dotting their i's, 'cause I do believe the stuff is gonna hit the fan.

And its kinda sad, cause I think this sped teacher has something going for her.

 

[klmno]

Have you had and read a sd's psychiatric report on a kid? If you read between the lines it reads more like a legal document meant solely to CYA the sd and accomplish just what Marg said. There's a whole lot more in there like that than what can actually help the child and educate him/her. The sd's know what they are doing- they are CYA'ing. But they are doing it because they are too ignorant to see that the kid really does need help and can be helped and it would probably cost them less in the long run to just do what they shoud, in my humble opinion. The same thing with juvenile justice issues. More money is wasted CYA'ing and doing completely useless things than is spent on actually making appropriate efforts to accommodate and rehabilitate.

There are a lot of people who don't seem to have common sense anymore.

 

[susiestar]

Marg has nailed exactly what they are doing. I don't understand why they are so unwilling to transfer wee to the alternative school in the next district. It cannot be much more expensive than continually having to consult with the attorney - esp when attorney tells them they are violating the laws! It dang sure has to be cheaper than the settlement you could get if it went to court.

in my opinion this is an act in bad faith after the IEP was negotiated. They were told how to behave and they agreed and then did what they wanted. All because Wee is being held to a standard that I don't think I could live up to.

I think it really is time to find a reporter and an attorney. There is NO WAY these people are going to treat Wee decently, much less with the kind of treatment and support he needs to be able to learn.

Few superintendents are going to get involved in day to day discipline matters, esp if a principal has already handled them. It would mean overriding the principal which might make it seem like the principal did something wrong. Which he did, but they will CYA for him, of course.

Lots of big hugs to Wee. He does NOT deserve this. It has to be so hard on his self esteem and his heart.

 

[Marguerite]

You need to get your own attorney on board, at least for a consultation.

Why do they do this?

1) because they really don't know any better, than to be adversarial and resistant to change; and

2) they don't want to set a precedent. Sure, it would be easier and cheaper for them to just transfer this one kid, but then others coming afterward would say to them, "Hey, you transferred wee, why won't you give my kid the same treatment? We have the same paperwork."

We went through similar issues when trying to get easy child 2/difficult child 2 accelerated into school. We had been trying for months, to apply for special consideration. The answers we got were, "yes, she's bright. But those rough tests you had done were just an approximation that show she's at least in the top 10& of the population for IQ. That just isn't enough to justify changing these solid rules for Dept of Ed school entry that have never been broken. We would need to know she is REALLY bright, plus could actually cope. So - no school for her until she's old enough."

She was nearly old enough, but the cut-off was two weeks too early for her.

So we had her tested further. It took a lot longer, school had gone back before we could get the paperwork sorted. But furthertesting showed easy child 2/difficult child 2 was in the top 1% plus was also socially ready. Then the objections were, "But what if this opens the floodgates?"
I then pointed out, "If you had a class full of easy child 2/GFG2s who also came with a guarantee of social readiness, I'm sure teachers would be delighted, not horrified. But it is not likely - this is 1% of the likely intake we're talking about. Less, when you consider the age of this kid and how close to te cut-off she is. I doubt there will be more than one or two across the state each year."

And so it has proven to be. But every time I have heard a similar change suggested (and about that time, I was talking to the media about it, interviewed about it and kept hearing the same question) people keep asking, "But what if this opens the floodgates? Let one in, and there will be hordes to follow."

And you know what? There never are.

Marg

 

[SRL]

Shari, I'd strongly suggest that you not call the school's attorney. Have your attorney do it. Legal has a much better chance of making something happen here in less time than a parent, plus it will add to the paper trail. You can bet that's what they were doing in calling the police.

They don't want to transfer Wee to the next district because then they would have to pay for it. Best for them to make it impossible for him to succeed there and have the parent pull the child out voluntarily. The school has a student on their hands that they can't control, and it's easier and cheaper to push them out than to learn to deal with him.

on the other hand, Wee did get physical with two staff members in two days and they can't ignore that. Did they violate written procedures on how to handle him in both instances?

 

[Shari]

They for sure violated the IEP/BIP in Tuesday's incident.

Wednesday's incident it gets a little hazy. They were making him write (which is a really huge issue and he had already had a refusal earlier in the day) an apology to the para for kicking him the previous day.

Now, I get the gist of what they were doing, but 26+ hours later to dredge up what largely was not Wee's fault to begin with is stretching things a bit, in my humble opinion, especially when their lawyer said they need to come up with a consequence that is immediate... and there would be no need to apologize if the adults had done their jobs. But the combination of events is what the suspension is for...not one of the other, but the two. And if this is how they are going to handle it...no, Wee does not need to be there.

I don't have a private attorney retained yet. No one local does sped law. If we go to due process, etc, the advocates either are, or will bring in, their attorneys.

I doubt the school attorney will talk to me much, and that's fine. He can call the school and simply ask "what's up" and that's good enough for me, because I think he will get where they have dropped the ball....again. I am trying to force them into action. Either force them to get people on board to handle Wee, or put him somewhere else that can. I'm hoping the lawyer will tell them, again, to step up. I dont' care which, but this business of making a plan and not following is over.

 

[SRL]

Have your advocate call the school attorney, then, and if needed have the attorney that represented Wee make this phone call. This is a legal matter and you seriously need to keep some distrance between yourself and the school district attorney.

If I had a way to deal with it, I'd be pulling him out until all players, including attorneys and sped director, were back at the table. If they aren't going to follow his IEP/BIP then they are breaking the law.

 

[smallworld]

I agree with SRL. Have your representatives make the calls. You don't want to say anything that would jeopardize a legal proceeding down the road. You also shouldn't be involving the press at all at this point because that could jeopardize a legal proceeding as well.