The 9's got one right

 The 9’s got one right

 

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously in favor of a student and his family.  The case involved a boy who is deaf and his case against the Sturgis Public Schools in Michigan for failing to provide him with a sign language interpreter for his 12 years in school.   His family was led to believe he would be receiving a high school diploma, but was told just a couple of months prior to graduation that he would be receiving a certificate of completion instead.

The family was able to reach a settlement under the Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA).  They subsequently filed for monetary damages under the Americans with Disabilities Act  (ADA).  Lower courts had ruled that because the family had accepted the IDEA settlement they could not also sue under ADA.  Instead, they should have exhausted all options under IDEA.  IDEA does not provide for monetary damages; ADA does.

But the Supreme Court justices unanimously disagreed on the family’s options, specifically mentioning that IDEA does not provide for monetary damages but ADA does.   Justice Gorsuch pointed out that exhausting administrative remedies would only apply if the same remedies were available under both federal laws.  But they are not.  Gorsuch noted in the ruling that lower courts have had different opinions on the issue but now the issue is settled.

Lawyers for the student had argued that a ruling for the school district would have prevented families from making IDEA settlements because that would foreclose their ability to proceed under other laws that allowed for monetary damages.

One of the senior advocates for The Arc was among other amicus briefs supporting the family.  She stated “the decision removes unnecessary burdens from families seeking relief and helps ensure that students with disabilities and their parents are able to pursue every avenue of justice available to them when their civil rights are violated.”

The decision clearly separates the two major federal laws supporting children with disabilities.   Now parents can access both major statues protecting children with disabilities.  The Supremes got this one right.

 

Nothing is under the rug

 Nothing is under the rug.

 

Used to be that schools were safe spaces for kids.    I mean how often did you hear about a teacher abusing a child?   Almost never.

Not too long ago a teacher at the Gilman school in Baltimore was charged with sexually abusing boys and was also charged with rape.   Gilman is a prestigious private school.    If you Google “teacher accused of sexual assault” a long list of teachers and schools across the country pop right up.

A few years ago, the Maryland General Assembly passed legislation requiring that all past employers of new staff be surveyed to make sure that there is no history of sexual abuse from previous employers.  Additionally, ALL school employees  need to be finger printed to make sure there are no other instances of inappropriate behavior on the record.   Is that enough- well the answer is no.

Parents are not sitting on the sidelines.   They are speaking up and asking for damages.  A new report has found that a growing number of schools across the country have shelled out damages of one million dollars or more.   Some of the complaints go back decades.

United Educators, an insurance and risk management company, analyzed some of the data.  In 2022 alone there were 69 publicly reported awards of one million or more.    That is up from 38 in 2021.  These data were pulled from publicly available reports and records.  It is entirely likely that there are settlements and jury awards that are not in the public record.

The University of California recently settled a claim against a gynecologist who sexually abused women.  The payout was $615.6 million dollars- over half a BILLION!

The Maryland State Legislature is currently considering a bill that is moving through the process that would remove the current limit of age 38 for victims to sue their abusers.   This legislation has been considered before but this year after an Attorney General report highlighted several hundred instances of sex abuse by priests and church employees, many votes shifted.

Hard to say if behaviors have changed or if families and victims are just unwilling to sweep this stuff under the rug.   Rug should be pretty lumpy by now.

 

 

Excuse me, this might be none of your business

 Excuse me, this might be none of your business

 

Schools regularly ask students to provide health information.   Has a child had the required vaccinations?   Has the child had certain childhood diseases?  But this time it appears that Florida has gone too far, even for a governor who is hot to go as far right as he can.

Physicians often ask girls about their menstrual cycles for a variety of health care reasons.  The Florida High School Athletic Association was requiring that the information be provided directly to schools rather than to health care providers if girls were going to compete in athletics.  The information the Athletic Association wanted schools to have included if the student menstruated, the age of the first cycle, date of the most recent cycle and how many cycles the girl had had in the past year.  Not surprisingly, anger erupted over this intrusion into the girl’s privacy requesting information that should stay with the medical provider.  Florida Democratic lawmakers called it “highly invasive” and the president of the American Federation of Teachers called it “dystopian”.  Hundreds of people went online to sign a Change.org petition called, “Privacy. Period”.   The American Academy of Pediatrics recommended making menstrual histories important but t has insisted it does not intend for these histories to be provided to schools.

The crux of the matter is the political goal of keeping transgender athletes from competing in athletics.   As a core political tenet, the Governor has signed into law bills that prevent such participation.  After nationwide opposition and bad press, The Florida High School Athletic Association has backed off its request.  However, it has changed its medical history form from just asking for “sex”; it is requesting “sex assigned at birth”.

The intrusion into students’ – make that girls- privacy apparently has proved too much even for Florida lawmaker standards.   Amid the backlash, the Association shifted course and voted recently that the more personal information should stay in the physicians office.  Apparently Florida has never heard of HIPPA, a federal law that requires the creation of national standards to protect sensitive patient health information from being disclosed without the patient's consent or knowledge.  Remember the old days when conservative politics meant keeping government out of our lives?  Well just maybe some things are none of the government’s business.

Paid to keep kids out of special ed

 Paid to keep kids out of Special Ed

 

Local school systems in Maryland are being paid to keep students OUT of special ed.  The State Superintendent of Schools is offering three school districts in Maryland one million dollars each if they can figure out a way to keep children from being placed into special education.   He is particularly interested in keeping lower socio-economic kids, Black boys and other children he has deemed as over identified for needing special education services.

School districts that are interested need to submit a proposal that will reduce the number of children being referred for special education services from the identified so-called vulnerable groups.  The State Department of Education is getting the three million dollars from COVID funds it hasn’t used up yet.  The program is designed to Reduce Overidentification in Special Education (ROSE) in Maryland schools.

“This new grant opportunity will allow awarded LEAs to analyze and interrogate their data, develop and implement pre-referral processes, and train school-district staff on evidence-based strategies that identify and prevent disparities in special education identification.” (per the MSDE website)  Winners of the grant need to show strong baseline data and explain how they are going to address the over identification of children in these vulnerable groups.  All measurable data must be disaggregated by each vulnerable group.

What is wrong with this picture?   For openers, where are the data that show receiving special education services is a bad thing.  It seems to me that we would need these data before making a plan to keep students from receiving the services.  Secondly, why is there the assumption that just because there are more kids from these sub-groups receiving special ed, they are over-identified.   Even the State Superintendent calls these children vulnerable.   Most discouraging of all is the purpose of the grant is to keep kids from being identified but NOT to meet their educational needs!  Grant recipients will partner with a “national leader” selected by MSDE to oversee the implementation of the grant program.

These monies are coming from the American Education Rescue Plan.  Seems to me just the opposite is happening.  These kids aren’t being rescued, they are being pushed further underwater just so MSDE can claim fewer students from the identified “vulnerable” groups are receiving special education.  Guess that’s ok as long as they don’t drown trying to reach standards of general education.