Tucson school district sued over fight
As a special education teacher, I can see both sides of this. Students with disabilities are protected by federal law from the consequences of their actions (at least sometimes) when their actions are caused by their disabilities. When the student has a severe cognitive disability or other developmental delay, this protection is absolutely necessary - students who are cognitively or developmental delays are often unaware of the consequences of their actions, and/or incapable of controlling their responses to stressful situations. Such legal protection is necessary for them to attend school, as well as other public venues.
Students with behavioral problems are a less clear-cut problem; some have biochemical mood disorders that can limit, sometimes severely, their ability to control their actions. Others were born with genetic and/or environmental disorders that have similar effects. And then... there are a few who are labeled emotionally disabled, but who, in many ways, appear to be juvenile delinquents. Those diagnosed with oppositional-defiant disorder, and other conduct disorders, are difficult to differentiate from children who, a few decades ago, would have been labeled incorrigible and sent to juvenile detention. For some, this may be appropriate; for others, it may not... but that does not change the fact that these children are more likely to be a risk to others.
At what point is a child's legal right to a free, appropriate, public education, in the least restrictive environment, outweighed by the disruption that child causes other students in the school - especially a student who is demonstrably dangerous to other students? This is the other side of the issue.
Current educational law requires that all students who possibly can be be educated with their peers - the least restrictive environment, the one most like that in which non-disabled students are educated. If the student is disruptive for reasons caused by the disability, the child is protected by law - sometimes to the detriment of those around him/her, both staff and students.
For example, there are currently a pair of twins at my school who are diagnosed with autism; they are non-verbal (in terms of speech - they can both scream rather loudly), and one of them is occasionally violent in her frustration - but her violence is predictable, part of her disability; they are both quite loud when they want to be, and can cause disruption both by sound and, occasionally, by attacking other people (usually staff, as they are never in an inclusion setting without an adult).
On the other hand, there are also several students at my school who have been diagnosed with conduct disorders of various types. One is a bully, who enjoys victimizing vulnerable students, both emotionally and physically; he has been caught again and again, but because of his psychiatric diagnosis, it is virtually impossible to expel him - only after nearly 2 school years of careful observation could we finally convince the district to place him in day treatment, which is not the least restrictive environment, but is the least restrictive environment in which he is not a danger to others - and we had to fight tooth and nail, with the full support of his parents, to get him there. Yet, other students who behave in the same fashion and don't have a psychiatric diagnosis are expelled within months, at the outside.
The legal and ethical obligations and obstructions in such cases are hard to navigate - but the outcome is, all too often, that students who are not disabled, at best, have their education disrupted by such students; at worst, they become victims of bullies or worse. Cutbacks in educational funding have only exacerbated this problem - there are fewer alternatives for such students (diagnosed or not), and it is harder than ever to get students access to such services.
As a society, what do we do with these students? This is a difficult and complex question, which I have spent much of my career to date (14+ years) attempting to answer... but I have no answers, only more questions.
TUCSON- A playground fight has led to a lawsuit by an elementary-school student and his mother against the Tucson Unified School District.
The student, Cody Barber, was playing tag during a physical-education class at John B. Wright Elementary School, when he was attacked by another student, according to the lawsuit filed in Pima County Superior Court.
The alleged attacker was not identified in the suit. He knocked Cody to the ground, kicked him once and severely lacerated his spleen, said plaintiff's attorney Richard Gonzales.
...The victim's mother, Leonor Barber, accused the school district of negligence because the boy who allegedly attacked Cody had a history of behavioral issues, had been placed "on restriction" and wasn't supposed to be participating in the class.
As a special education teacher, I can see both sides of this. Students with disabilities are protected by federal law from the consequences of their actions (at least sometimes) when their actions are caused by their disabilities. When the student has a severe cognitive disability or other developmental delay, this protection is absolutely necessary - students who are cognitively or developmental delays are often unaware of the consequences of their actions, and/or incapable of controlling their responses to stressful situations. Such legal protection is necessary for them to attend school, as well as other public venues.
Students with behavioral problems are a less clear-cut problem; some have biochemical mood disorders that can limit, sometimes severely, their ability to control their actions. Others were born with genetic and/or environmental disorders that have similar effects. And then... there are a few who are labeled emotionally disabled, but who, in many ways, appear to be juvenile delinquents. Those diagnosed with oppositional-defiant disorder, and other conduct disorders, are difficult to differentiate from children who, a few decades ago, would have been labeled incorrigible and sent to juvenile detention. For some, this may be appropriate; for others, it may not... but that does not change the fact that these children are more likely to be a risk to others.
At what point is a child's legal right to a free, appropriate, public education, in the least restrictive environment, outweighed by the disruption that child causes other students in the school - especially a student who is demonstrably dangerous to other students? This is the other side of the issue.
Current educational law requires that all students who possibly can be be educated with their peers - the least restrictive environment, the one most like that in which non-disabled students are educated. If the student is disruptive for reasons caused by the disability, the child is protected by law - sometimes to the detriment of those around him/her, both staff and students.
For example, there are currently a pair of twins at my school who are diagnosed with autism; they are non-verbal (in terms of speech - they can both scream rather loudly), and one of them is occasionally violent in her frustration - but her violence is predictable, part of her disability; they are both quite loud when they want to be, and can cause disruption both by sound and, occasionally, by attacking other people (usually staff, as they are never in an inclusion setting without an adult).
On the other hand, there are also several students at my school who have been diagnosed with conduct disorders of various types. One is a bully, who enjoys victimizing vulnerable students, both emotionally and physically; he has been caught again and again, but because of his psychiatric diagnosis, it is virtually impossible to expel him - only after nearly 2 school years of careful observation could we finally convince the district to place him in day treatment, which is not the least restrictive environment, but is the least restrictive environment in which he is not a danger to others - and we had to fight tooth and nail, with the full support of his parents, to get him there. Yet, other students who behave in the same fashion and don't have a psychiatric diagnosis are expelled within months, at the outside.
The legal and ethical obligations and obstructions in such cases are hard to navigate - but the outcome is, all too often, that students who are not disabled, at best, have their education disrupted by such students; at worst, they become victims of bullies or worse. Cutbacks in educational funding have only exacerbated this problem - there are fewer alternatives for such students (diagnosed or not), and it is harder than ever to get students access to such services.
As a society, what do we do with these students? This is a difficult and complex question, which I have spent much of my career to date (14+ years) attempting to answer... but I have no answers, only more questions.
