Holding the Torch

EFFECTIVE AND MEANINGFUL COMMUNICATION IS ESSENTIAL FOR SPECIAL EDUCATION SUCCESS

In most contested special education cases that we undertake, there is a serious and chronic communication breakdown between parents and school personnel.  Parents often feel that they have been marginalized in the IEP process and that educators ignore their concerns about regression, failure to set measurable goals, and vague objectives in their child’s IEP.  Educators complain that some parents have unrealistic expectations for the student and don’t understand or appreciate the burdens and limitations for teachers in the classroom.  With deteriorating trust and communication, both parties fall into patterns of marathon and counterproductive IEP meetings. When things get this bad, it can be more about posturing than getting anything done.

In analyzing the merits of claims for special needs children, we always look at the patterns of communication between parents and the school.  If it’s poor, how did it get that way?  How can it improve?  Even if there is litigation or other legal intervention, what mechanisms for improved communication can be built into the determined remedies or consent orders?   Here are some considerations:

• Educators need to provide meaningful and regular mechanisms to allow parents to communicate with their child’s teachers.  This can include email, notebook exchange between home and school and web based information posting regarding grades and assignments.

• Parents should communicate regularly with teachers.  Before an IEP meeting, parents can send a short concise written outline of questions/concerns to school staff for consideration before the discussion at the meeting.

• The IEP process is supposed to be collaborative.  Well before any substantive meeting, school staff should give parents easy to understand information regarding data, goals, and measurement criteria for their child’s progress.

• IEP meetings need to be scheduled at times that allow for parents to participate easily while managing work and child care needs.  IEP meetings should not be allowed to deteriorate into lengthy marathon sessions.

Communication problems hamper progress for special needs children.  There are a number of ways to address this issue in each unique case.  The fact is that this must be addressed or there will be no sustainable change to improve accommodations or services.

NATIONAL AUTISM CENTER RELEASES STANDARDS REPORT

    In September the National Autism Center released its National Standards Report.  This report is the most recent and comprehensive study about the viability of treatment methodologies for children with autism spectrum disorders (ASD).  There has long been confusion and conflicting information about the best treatment methods to address ASD.  This report is an invaluable resource for parents and advocates for help focusing discussions with school districts for developing effective IEPs.

     The report identifies eleven methodologies as “established” practices.  These are treatments that are based on peer-reviewed research and have produced beneficial results in a number of controlled studies.  The report also names a number of practices that are “emerging treatments” such as music therapy and language training.  Other practices are identified as “unestablished” as they provided little or no benefit in the controlled studies.

     Parents and advocates for children with ASD should demand education practices that are supported by peer-reviewed research.  School staff should be able to clearly support and explain how a proposed program for a child meets the criteria for “established” practices as defined by this new report.  The National Standards Report can be a valuable tool for parents and schools to fashion meaningful and individualized IEPs for children with ASD.

 

THE CONSEQUENCES OF CLOSING STATE PSYCHIATRIC FACILITIES FOR CHILDREN

    As part of the statewide proposed budget cuts in Virginia, the Commonwealth Center for Children and Adolescents was slated for closure earlier this year.  Closing this facility would have eliminated the only state run in-patient psychiatric facility for children.  Many of the children sent to this hospital are court involved and struggle with severe psychiatric disorders and violent behavior problems.  The challenges presented by seriously mentally ill children are some of the most difficult problems faced by parents and Juvenile Court judges.  By the time a child needs inpatient psychiatric care – circumstances are often acute and dangerous.

     The political rational for closing the Commonwealth Center was to save approximately $6.6 million.  The state would then try to purchase the care from private providers by allocating an additional $2.2 million.  What private providers?

     Those of us who practice in the legal arena for children with serious mental health disorders know full well the severe limitations that govern the placement of seriously mentally ill children in private hospitals.  Even if a family has insurance (many don’t), private or local hospitals often refuse admission for medium or long term care.  Showing up in the emergency room is not an option for these cases.  Local mental health agencies do not have the resources in place to pick up the slack.

     Facing the prospect of closing of the Commonwealth Center, a number of advocates around the state reacted.  In a January 2009 article written by psychologist John R. Morgan in the Newport News Daily Press, he correctly observed that: “Untreated acute psychiatric problems will have drastic consequences for these vulnerable children, their struggling families and their concerned communities.  In the absence of realistic alternatives, it is ill-advised or even irresponsible to pursue a course which so clearly risks significant harm to children.”

     Last March the General Assembly voted to retain funding for the Commonwealth Center and a serious crisis was averted for the time being.  Virginia has always been significantly deficient in serving seriously mentally ill children.  With the continuing pressure to cut State budgets, we are heading into new and more risky territory for these children, their families and communities.  Having learned some lessons from the fight to retain the Commonwealth Center, It is important for advocates to continue strong and strategic responses on behalf .
of children at risk.