As a parent, it is not easy hearing that your child needs special education services.
As a parent whose teenage autistic son has been in special ed for his entire life, I am grateful for the federal Individuals With Disabilities Act (IDEA), according to which students with disabilities in the U.S. are entitled to a “free and appropriate education.” Charlie’s school day is not that of a typical teenager — his curriculum is focused on pre-vocational training and instruction in skills of daily living — and prior to the enactment of IDEA in 1975, families were very much on their own to provide an education for a child with disabilities.
That said, the implementation IDEA and the process whereby one obtains special ed services for a child leave much to be desired. After students are referred and tested, parents, teachers, therapists, case managers (who could be a school psychologist or social worker) meet to discuss the student’s Individualized Education Plan (IEP). While this all sounds fairly cordial, the actual experience often ends up being far from that, with parents and educators often clashing over what are “appropriate” services and supports for a child. Lawsuits are not uncommon, with parents suing school districts and, in some cases, school districts suing parents (yes, I know someone who such happened to).
Two Lawyers On the Problems of IDEA and Special Ed
Miriam Freedman, a Boston lawyer who has represented public schools in special education, writes in The Atlantic that IDEA is based on “private enforcement, charging parents with the responsibility to advocate for their children and pitting them against their children’s schools.” Indeed, school districts are mandated to abide very closely to IDEA’s terms and can face legal action if they do not.
Also in The Atlantic, Chris Borreca, another lawyer representing schools (both public and private), says that, along with Section 504 and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), IDEA has become one of “most litigated federal statutes in existence.” In 1986, Congress amended the law to allow parents, should they prevail in hearings and court filings, to obtain attorneys’ fees”; Borreca says that the result has been that special education is now a “litigious mess.”
Freedman also describes how, since 1975, the population of students served by the law has changed:
The law was written for students with severe and profound disabilities, but now some 70 to 80 percent of the students served are identified as having mild to moderate disabilities, such as speech, attention, and learning challenges — diagnoses that have a greater degree of subjectivity.
IDEA has, says Freedman, “has created a vast diagnosis industry that serves as a gatekeeper to the entitlement.” With more than 6 million students covered by IDEA, over 20 percent of school districts’ budgets is often allotted to special ed.
Freedman and Borreca are both writing from the perspective of school districts. IDEA is a “regulatory and bureaucratic nightmare for schools,” as Freedman says — but scrapping together something of an education for a child with serious learning difficulties in the days before IDEA could be described as a “nightmare” too. As one mother of a 50-something autistic man — while fully sympathetic to Charlie’s struggles — once said to me, “You parents now have it handed to you with a silver spoon! I had to fight for every, every single thing for my son.”
Suggestions For Reforming Special Ed: Pros and Caveats
Freedman lists four proposals to reform special education that they do warrant discussion. She calls for an end to “private enforcement” of IDEA, perhaps by having “mediators and ombudsmen or federal and state enforcement mechanisms” instead, and also for a stop to a “compliance-based” approach whereby educators and parents do not constantly have to check on, and in some cases to police, each other. She also calls for an end to the “medical model” of basing eligibility for services on a specialist’s diagnosis; she rather suggests “improving regular education for all students,” as better “regular education” would mean that “fewer students need to be identified for special education services.”
Photo by LizMarie_AK
Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may
not reflect those of
Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.