Developmental Disabilities : A Diverse Group Of Chronic Conditions

The two important court rulings were the Pennsylvania Association for Retarded Children v. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in 1971 and Mills vs. The Board of Education of the District of Columbia in 1972 (ERIC Clearinghouse, 1998). These court decisions showed that “the responsibility of States and local school districts to educate individuals with disabilities is derived from the equal protection law of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution.”(ERIC Clearinghouse, 1998, n.p.)

During the early years of implementation of IDEA, schools and agencies made mistakes when determining who to serve through special education. “Sometimes schools placed students in special education based on a single test, administered and placed students using tests that were not reliable or valid, or used tests that were discriminatory” (Yell, 2016, p. 58). A procedure for a clear, accurate, and nondiscriminatory helps to ensure that schools do not repeat these early mistakes.

Enacted in 1975, The Education for All Handicapped Children Act (EHA) and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) changed this. The EHA established the right to public education for all children regardless of disability. The IDEA requires schools provide individualized or special education for children with qualifying disabilities. Under the IDEA, states who accept public funds for education must provide special education to qualifying children with disabilities. Evelyn Deno’s concept of cascading of services favoring individualized student-centered education became the blueprint for placement options. James Gallagher’s ideas formed the foundation for the IEP and the due process hearing in exceptional

In the early 1970’s parents of students with disabilities went to federal court when their local school districts did not provide services to meet their children’s educational needs. In Pennsylvania Association for Retarded Citizens (PARC) v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (1971), a Pennsylvania court ruled that all children, regardless of disability, have a basic right to an education under the Fourteenth Amendment. In Mills v. Board of Education of the District of Columbia (1972), a federal court ruled that the District of Columbia schools could not exclude children with disabilities from the public schools. Cases like this focused public attention on the issue of educating children with disabilities. The social and political pressure then resulted in landmark federal legislation to address the educational rights of these children.

This case was a very significant ruling for special education evident with numerous studies positing that the ruling of this 1982 case was perhaps the most important special education decision by the Supreme Court and to this day, continues to have a profound effect on the education of students with disabilities. Additionally, this was the first time that the Supreme Court had to interpret portions of the Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA 1990), which was then the Education for All Handicapped Children Act (EAHCA) as it relates to what constituted a free and appropriate education (FAPE) in the least restrictive environment (LRE).

Not to mention, that this has given many disabled individuals chance to a quality education. This case has made congress take a closer look at the individualize needs that is acquired for students by mandating the school to find a program that will help students individual needs in educational system. “Power imbalances between parents and school districts cannot be eliminated, but the mandatory provision of information will go a long way” (Kotler, p.553, 2014). This help secure a people with disabilities a chance for a better future in educational system.

Rules, regulations, and federal laws for special education have improved as the years have gone by. This essay will indicate how educators teaching special education must comprehend the mandates of the Individual with Disability Act (IDEA), student and parental rights. This essay will also explain how court cases (past and present) and IDEA has given special education students the ability to receive a Free Appropriate Education (FAPE). My interview with Ms. Patricia Pritchett, Coordinator of Special Education in DeKalb County School District, was able to give me information and guidelines in reference to their county procedures and policies for the special education department. The interview with Ms. Pritchett gave me insight as to special education legal framework and how the constant changes that affects students with disabilities and regular education students.

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 (IDEIA) mandates that “to the maximum extent appropriate, children with disabilities, including children in public or private institutions or other care facilities, are educated with children who are not disabled”, and stipulates that “special classes, separate schools, or other removal of children with disabilities from the regular educational environment occurs only when the nature or severity of the disability of a child is such that education in regular classes with the use of supplementary aids and services cannot be achieved satisfactorily” (IDEIA, P.L. 108-446 [Sec. 612 (a)(5)(A)], 2004). Likewise, the No Child Left

“I would just like to call to the Court’s attention what the realities of that situation are, and I think I can speak with some authority because for the last nine years, my fifteen-year-old- daughter has been denied access to public education…” were the words of Leonard Kalish, a father from the Pennsylvania Association for Retarded Children (PARC) v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (1972), speaking about his daughter not being able to attain a public education (Kemerer and Sansom, 2005). He continues by stating, “…and as a result of which we have had her in private schools…we have spent approximately forty thousand dollars…” (p. 293). Like Mr. Kalish, many parents have gone in front of the courts to fight for their child’s right to a Free and Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) and receive financial compensation, like the parents of Jeremy Wartenberg, from Wartenberg v. Capistrano Unified School District (1995) (West Law, 1995). However, before discussing the Wartenberg’s case, it is key to look back on special education and how it has evolved over time.

After reading through this chapter I am more relieved to find all the education rules and legislation we have in place just to assure that children and people with disabilities are treated fairly. With their IEP’s students with disabilities are no different than students without, they just learn the material in a personalized way

Living with disabilities on a daily basis can be more difficult then some realize. Many people who are born with developmental disabilities start their education and therapy at a very young age and there are also those people who have been diagnosed with a disability sometime during their lifetime. But what is there for them to do once they have graduated from high school or are told they are too old to continue in a regular school or they are simply told they aren’t accepted in the “normal” community? In all reality there really

In the recent Supreme Court case , Endrew F. v. Douglas City School District, it was decided on Mar 22, 2017 by Roberts courts that, to meet its substantive obligation under the IDEA, a school must offer an IEP reasonably calculated to enable a child to make

Public Law 94-142: The Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975, now called Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), requires states to provide free, appropriate public education (FAPE) for every child regardless of disability. This federal law was the first to clearly define the rights of disabled children to receive special education services if their disability affects their educational performance. A parent of a special education student also has basic rights under IDEA including the right to have their child evaluated by the school district and to be included when the school district meets about the child or makes decisions about his or her education. If a child is identified as in need of special education

For most of our nation's history, children with special needs or disabilities were shunted aside. In spite of mandated education laws that had been in place since 1918, many students were denied education and

Every person deserves an education. It is what shapes us, allows us to grow. As future and current educators or parents, understanding the perspective of persons with disabilities in the classroom is important. Being confident in your own abilities and not being afraid to use the resources available to you.