posted
As far as I know, the superintendant REALLY doesn't have a leg to stand on. My guess is the girl and dog are back in school within a week.
Posts: 4112 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote: Why won't her parents allow an IEP? Isn't the point of an IEP to figure out what accomodations need to be made?
Here's the IEP: "Make the sure the dog with her and the teachers know what to do when a seizure happens."
I think the answer is (from the article)
quote: She said the plan would involve not only testing Chey-enne's intellectual capability, but also her mental and emotional health, something that is not required for most children.
Gilliam said her daughter is a good student and she does not want her treated differently.
I get the impression the plan isn't as simple as "Make the sure the dog with her and the teachers know what to do when a seizure happens." It sounds like they're going to pu thtis poor girl through a bunch of tests that are completely unrelated to her disability...
If I broke my leg (therby making myself temporarily disabled), would the school require that I had an IEP before allowing me to use crutches or a wheelchair? Of course not, because it's obvious what needs to be done and it has nothing to do with my mental abilities...
Same thing here. Obviously this Cheyenne has a physical disability; there's no reason to do more tests...
Posts: 409 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Exactly. She doesn't NEED an IEP for mental and academic reasons--she needs to be accomodated for her seizure disorder.
Posts: 14745 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I know what the article said, but I think this fight is coming too late. It sounds like
"My daughter will need some special things - namely, a dog." "In order to have special accommodations, we need to do this paperwork thingy so the expectations are defined and all her needs are met." "My daughter isn't different, and I just told you what she needs." "But we need this paperwork thingy." "I don't think so."
Then the first day of school comes, there's no paperwork laying out what's going on and what needs to happen, and there's a ruckus. Of course there's a ruckus! Human nature and bureaucracy being what it is, the ruckus was inevitable. She's welcome to fight the system and limit the tests, but I think this was the wrong time. It should have happened before.
posted
Had the parent talked to the teacher? Did they know what was coming? It sounds like there was one conversation and then the matter ignored when they hit a stalemate. Of course I think the dog should attend and the kid not tested for the other stuff unless there is cause, but I don't think the school district is Darth Vadar here.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't think we know the whole story. There was obviously a communication breakdown somewhere.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Of course the school district is darth vader... assuming whats in the article is true.
"When the family first bought their house in Rockcastle County two months ago, she said she began working with the school system to ensure that it was prepared for the dog, which came home with the family Sunday after five months of training."
"Gilliam said she had responded to the district's questions, sent in the paperwork officials required and worked with them to draw up plans for how the dog would be handled at school."
Posts: 4112 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Then why was the arrival of the dog a surprise?
You know what would be helpful? Some sort of document laying out what the child needed, what the dog was for, and what accomodations needed to be made, and that document placed in the kid's file so all the teachers and principals would know what was going on.
posted
poor kid, I feel bad that she has to deal with all of this crap. Maybe things are different on an elementary level, but at the University level they just need a doctors documentation. They take the doctors note to the students with disabilities office and the disabilities office tells the instructors what accommodations the student's doctor says they need. Neither I, nor the chair of the department would have the right to complain about their needs…we would not even have the right to know WHY the student needs accommodations (for the privacy rights of the student) we simply know that the student’s doctor and the student disability office say that this is how things are.
Posts: 1901 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Here is the only point in the schools favor.
Although he has not had any complaints from parents, Hammond said the dog could be a liability to the district and might disrupt the classroom. He also noted that some children might fear dogs or be allergic to them.
What do you do if another child is allergic to dogs? Who gets accomodated then?
I assume that the law that allows the girl to take the dog to school would also protect the school district if the dog ever bit someone at school.
posted
Geez, that is terrible. Makes me ashamed to live in Kentucky. I've read some on dogs being helpful to people with epilepsy, so the fact is the dog is waaaay more helpful than any person is going to be. I'd be very interested to know if the parents are planning on contacting the national epilepsy foundation; I'm sure they'd love to get involved in this.
And yes, as far as the superintendent knew, if the dog hurt any other kid, there are crazy liable for all damages. This isn't the result of Darth Vader sitting high in an office twirling his mustache (so to speak); this is what happens in a sue-happy society.
posted
I think the school is wrong. However, “I don’t want her to be treated any differently than the other kids” is a silly argument when you’re asking for a special accommodation.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've heard that demand many many times. The demand usually appears when an IEP is mentioned, as IEPs are generally associated with mentally or emotionally challenged kids. There are so many procedures for getting an IEP and testing is one of those to go with them--to prove that a kid NEEDS an IEP and therefore will be "coded."
Posts: 14745 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
Y'all seem to be having a nice conversation without me, so I don't feel guilty for taking awhile to come in.
Think I'll email this to a particular editor I know - she publishes a disability rights magazine. And she's in Kentucky - unlike me.
Not too worried about this one really.
*NO complaints from other kids or their parents. *CUTE DOG whose job is to protect girl from hurting herself during seizures. *Her disability isn't in the cognitive or behavioral area, making her more acceptable to people in general.
Forget the law - the superintendent is up against a kid and her dog. He's toast. The public will be outraged. (thinking of those villagers in the Frankenstein movies right now)
It's not rational, but that is how it seems to work. I could be wrong, of course.
Posts: 4344 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
(edit: Stephen posted while I was writing. Yay, SuperDrake!
The school administrator just doesn't have any common sense. It sounds like they had it all arranged, but he was in the dark about it. When he found out, he freaked because there was no written procedure in place. (I've had bosses like that, too.)
When I attended college I had to register as a disabled student and go through tons of paperwork and interviews in order to be given a small table and chair instead of the standard one-piece student desk/chair combination. I had to supply a note from my physician detailing the reasons I needed a special desk.
The main reason for this was not my disabilities, but that the desks are designed for "students" and I am a fat old lady. I tried their little desk thingy, and it hurt. What is the need to document something so obvious? Who knows...?
The dog should be in school with the girl. What if she was blind and it was a seeing-eye dog? Would there be an objection then?
posted
WARNING: Anyone who has a need for instant gratification should not read this. It's a "teaser" with a promise of a story tomorrow when I am (hopefully) not so tired. . . . . . . . . (just to show how ridiculous things can get, there's this story a guy with cerebral palsy told me about how he got suspended from high school for exiting the building during a fire. Good story - but I'm too fried to type it out right now.)
Posts: 4344 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
kat, having gone through the IEP process with my son this past year, I can tell you that it involves a LOT more than paperwork (and it involves an awful lot of that)! It means hours and hours of testing -- and that is time that the child is not in the classroom, learning. The other kids do notice, and sometimes tease, the kid being pulled out of class all the time.
Also, the tests evaluate such things as intellectual abilities (doesn't seem anyone is claiming that's an issue here), emotional stability/issues (ditto), and things along those lines. While it does include tests that are strictly physical abilities (vision test, hearing test), they hardly seem necessary in this case.
I have no idea about Kentucky, but many schools around here simply do not have the resources to do this testing during the summer. And it takes about two months. It seems to me that requesting one is a stalling tactic on the part of school, and it's very uncool.
An IEP is to determine exactly what the problem is -- how on earth is that necessary here? Both the problem and the provided solution are pretty clear.
(I am assuming that IEP procedures are as similar from state to state as I was told they have become in the past few years.)
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm also dealing with IEPs here for my younger daughter, who was originally labeled as "developmentally disabled" for severe learning delays (was still not toilet training at age 6, almost no speech, etc.) and recently diagnosed as ADHD. My understanding of the whole thing is that there are two major components of the IEP procedure: 1. To determine the type and extent of the child's disabilities and how they are expected to affect the child's school experience 2. To develop and institute a plan for a school program that will address the child's needs and if at all feasible, work towards joining/returning to mainstream classes.
After 3 years of "multi-need" classes and at age 7, Missy is almost at a kindergarten level. Our next IEP review meeting is in October. As of our last meeting in April (no review over summer break) our hope was to return her part-time to mainstream kindergarten in the spring semester of this coming school year.
Now, I know that doesn't exactly relate to the young girl with the seizure issues, but hopefully it helps shed some light on the overall topic.
There are federal laws in the US that require public schools to make all reasonably available accomodations to allow a child to have a positive and beneficial school experience. At the immediate moment I can't think of the terminology that was used in the books I read about ADHD over the summer, maybe someone else will recognize my comment and be able to identify it. Whatever the name, it is a FEDERAL law and therefore all public schools in the United States MUST follow. I don't recall reading that an IEP is required in order to identify and provide those accomodations - and I think that in this specific case, assuming of course that the parents have medical documentation from the family physician, the child's needs are pretty blatantly obvious. She needs to have tools appropriate to coping with her seizures without harming herself or another child.
If it turns out another child in the class is allergic to the dog, then they should deal with THAT issue if and when it comes up. Maybe they transfer that specific child to another classroom. Obviously the parents of that child should be then seeking their own separate medical advice for the allergies. I have a feeling the school super is just grasping at straws looking for any reason he/she can to raise a stink about this.... and probably out of a simple lack of education about the situation.
posted
I think there is something more behind the parents objections to an IEP. People with Epilepsy are frequently and invalidly grouped together with people who have mentally or emotionally disability. There are those who still think that people with epilepsy must be stupid or crazy as well. The mothers reaction suggests that they are fighting very hard to protect their daughter from that kind of ignorant stereotyping and the school districts insistance on an IEP suggests that they do view epilepsy as a mental disability rather than a physical disability.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:I assume that the law that allows the girl to take the dog to school would also protect the school district if the dog ever bit someone at school.
I think that the chances of a service dog biting someone are pretty remote. This dogs are bread and then extensively trained to act as service animals. There owners are required to demonstate that they can control the animals under all circumstances. These strict requirements are part of the laws that allow service animals access to areas that are closed to pets. I haven't researched it, but I would be surprised if there has been a case in the past decade where a service animal has bitten someone.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
it's rare, but it has happened. It's been a few years since I was up on the topic, but there's been a strong active group of service dog owners who maintain they have the right to train their own dogs. Mostly, that works out OK. The people who use the dog don't want it to be unreliable - it's not in their best interests.
However,...I knew at least one person who had a dog that couldn't be trusted around children and yet they still maintained it was an acceptable service dog.
I really want to stress that this is rare, though.
And bites/attacks from professionally trained dogs are, as far as I know, unheard of.
Posts: 4344 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm sorry. I just think the superintendent is trying to pull a power-play here. I don't know how it is elsewhere, but here in California as far as I know, service dogs are by law allowed to go everywhere their person needs to go. End of story. I see them in stores and restaurants all the time.
And Dead_Horse. You said:
quote:When I attended college I had to register as a disabled student and go through tons of paperwork and interviews in order to be given a small table and chair instead of the standard one-piece student desk/chair combination. I had to supply a note from my physician detailing the reasons I needed a special desk.
The main reason for this was not my disabilities, but that the desks are designed for "students" and I am a fat old lady. I tried their little desk thingy, and it hurt. What is the need to document something so obvious? Who knows...?
That's terrible. When I was in community college, while all classrooms save science labs had those hideous "student desks", they all had at least two or three tables and chairs (and sometimes a whole row of them) to accomodate those who needed them. No documentation of disability was required to use them. There was just an understanding that those who needed them most in any class got to use them (in other words, able-bodied thin folks had last choice ), no big deal. And, if there was a class that had more people who needed them than tables and chairs available, an extra or two was brought in. It sometimes took a week or two, bureaucracy and maintenance services being what they are, but it did happen without any huge deal being made - no having to register as a "disabled student", no doctor's excuses. Then, at the university I attended for my upper division work, almost all the classrooms had tables and chairs rather than "student desks" as a matter of course.
Posts: 2454 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
LMA, Yes, it was somewhat embarrassing and humiliating. But I'm used to those. What really frosted me is that it took so long (a few days) to get the tables, and I missed some classes. When I first realized I didn't fit, a friend asked a nearby janitor to get a table, She did it quickly and without fuss. Right after the class, I checked out the other rooms, then went to the administrative office to ask for the furniture to be switched. That is what set the red tape rolling. Apparently all the paperwork had to be done before I could attend class (for safety reasons? no, liability.) Then they decided each table must have a large handicap sign (blue with wheelchair logo) on it to prevent other students from using it. (It didn't. The table or chair or both went missing several times.) And they had to be placed in the front row, closest to the door in each room.
The computer labs had comfy ergonomic task chairs, so I changed majors.
Didn't matter, I flunked out anyway, due to disabilities I decided not to reveal to the school after the chair fiasko. eh. Posts: 1379 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah, isn't it nice how they seem to feel the need to point out to everyone (with huge signs, and with the placement of accessible tables sometimes) that "here is a person who is different and must be specially accommodated"? That did get to be an issue in some cases, such as in classrooms where the only accessible tables were separated from the main body of seats and stuck way in front of the room where everybody else could stare (and which they sometimes did).
The best situation was in classrooms where some of the "student desks" actually had fold-down desk arms. I'd just fold the desk down, prop my feet up on the underseat bookrack of the desk in front of me, and pull out my clipboard with paper to take notes. Hey, what could be better than putting my feet up, getting comfy, and enjoying the lecture? All that was missing was something to drink or a bit of a snack. And, actually, at university, that wasn't even a problem because at that school we were allowed to eat and drink in the classrooms as we chose. Although it got a little silly sometimes when the dorm students came to early-morning classes in their jammies and with their bowl of cereal and morning juice or coffee. Nothing wrong with being comfortable. And now I've gone totally off-topic. Oh, well.
Posts: 2454 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
When I was in college I knew a student who was almost completely deaf. She read lips and her speech was impaired, but usually understandable. In class she usually needed the professors to wear a little unit clipped to their shirts that transmitted their words to her so she could hear a little of the lecture. She had several teachers at our college refuse to wear the little unit. I never understood why teachers had the right to arbitrarily choose not to help her--it seemed like fairly reasonable accomodation to me.
Posts: 1990 | Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Theca, did she sign? At the community college I attended, the disabled students program furnished sign language interpreters to sit in on classes and translate lectures for deaf and hard-of-hearing students.
And as for those teachers...it has been my experience that a certain segment of the teaching community in colleges are actually just self-absorbed jerks who think that it is their job to throw as many obstacles in the way of students as they can, rather than to facilitate their learning like they are presumably supposed to do. This takes all sorts of forms. Some, as in the case you cite, will not facilitate disabled students. Others do stupid stuff like make up bizarre requirements for assignments. I had one instructor, for example, who would not accept stapled papers - multipage assignments had to be paper-clipped together. And if someone forgot and handed in a stapled assignment, he would go off into a ten-minute, obscenity-laden tirade. I could cite other examples.
Posts: 2454 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Vomiting during a seizure? Exactly what do you know about seizures? It ain't the flu. It ain't a stomach virus.. As far as teachers not knowing what to do ... thyey can take a cue from the friggin DOG. If the dog alerts, then, if they are PAYING ATTENTION, they can take steps to get the kid away from furniture 'to keep her from bumping her head'. The dog is a TOOL in proactive seizure interdiction. Not a REACTION after the fact. You p[ointed out 'what if she hit her head...' well if the dog ain't there to predict the seizure and she has one THEN what? At least WITH the dog there, a teacher has a heads up that the girl is about to go nova (so to speak). Without the dog there.... well what can I say that I ain't already said...
Posts: 986 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
The talk about chairs and seating hit home for me. You see, I'm left handed. Most college classrooms have one or two lefthanded desks. I'm speaking of the desks that have a chair and only an itty bitty writing platform coming off the arm, which seemed to be the rule at my university.
I started out before class, making a huge production of finding the lefthanded desk, in a couple of classes. That way all the people would begin to recognize me and leave me the lefthanded desk. They had no use for it anyway. Fortunately I was in engineering where left-handed people are more rare than the normal population.
There were a few times I ended up in a right handed desk. I could make do but my note writing and learning did suffer. Most of the time what I would do is steal a left handed desk from a room next door. But, I could see easily I could have ending up having to file reasonable accomodation paperwork, just for being lefthanded!
posted
I don't understand the parents reluctance to have an IEP personally, but I know that in my nieces' case, my sister in law didn't want an IEP because she was afraid that she would then be labeled as learning disabled.
Well...the child IS learning disabled. She has a form of dyslexia and struggles very hard in school. She was held back one year already and barely squeaked by the next year with the help of a private tutor. Certainly it's my sister in law's choice, and if she wants to continue doing things this way she can, but I suspect it will get more difficult as the child gets into the upper grades.
I think we may have a similar case here - a mother who wants to stand up and say "my daughter is not different!" and thinks the IEP's are "only for retarded or really messed up kids" and doesn't want her daughter thought of that way. In fact, IEP's are just what they state - Individual Education Plans, put in place to ensure the child is getting the care and learning attention they need.
I agree with CT - the dog is probably not the main issue, the lack of an IEP is and I think the school is acting in the best interests of everyone by requiring one.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I see this case as a consequence of institutionalization.
1. The taxpayers and lawmakers and people of the state have set up an educational plan and program for the kids, to which the kids have a right to.
2. In order to protect the minors given over to the program's care, the leaders of the program are given responsibility in loco parentis for all the children.
3. To participate in the program and recieve the education, certain things are expected of the kids. They must come dressed, and they can't bring their pets.
4. In some situations, greater care is needed for some kids, and in others, certain rules should not applay. In this case, the dog isn't a random pet, he is needed for the kid's health.
5. In order to accomodate a child's individual needs and still honor the agreement with the other parents and the taxpayers to efficiently provide a safe and effective education for all kid's, a system was set up to handle the exceptions to the standard agreement.
6. That system includes IEPs - Individual Education Plans so every homo in loco parentis would know what to do and what to expect in order to keep the individual kid and the other kids safe.
7. The kid's mom didn't want her treated any differently from every other kid.
Fine! She's treated exactly the same! No pets! If there ARE accomodations to be made, then make sure everyone knows what they are what to do about it. There's even a system in place to take of that.
If the system isn't effective and needs to be changed, then that's a worthy and noble goal and should be brought to the attention of those that can make the change, and if those refuse, then the power-holders need to be replaced with people who WILL make the change.
But if you simply bypass the system altogether and then get upset because the benefits of it (knowledge for everybody, accomodations, protection) don't occur anyway, it isn't going to work. That's like going to college, never filling out a financial aid form, and then getting upset because you didn't get any grants. Yeah, the forms are a pain in the neck, but there's a reason they exist - it's the same reason institutionalization of any kind occurs. Instituationalization happens when the number of people involved gets larger than can be held in the head of one person. There are thousands of students in the school district, and a decent number will need accomodations.
It's the tradeoff between cheap education for everyone and personalized education for only a few.
posted
I wonder if the child was a parapalegic and confined to a wheel chair if the school would require and IEP to allow the wheelchair in school?
I understand the mother's reluctance to have and IEP. I have 2 children on an IEP. My son, who is going into the 9th grade this year, has been on an IEP since the 3rd grade for ADHD. At first I bulked at the idea- I did not like the idea a placing a label on my son and I did not like the idea of the battery of tests, developmental and psychological, that were required for the IEP. Eventually I realized that it was in the best interest of my child to have the "label"- after all he does have ADHD and the IEP has been invaluable in helping us deal with the behavoral and educational problems that stem from the disorder. As a "special education" student he actually has more rights than the other "regular ed" students and he receives the help that he needs.
My daughter, on the other hand, is on an IEP because she has a slight speech impediment. The only testing she needed was speech related and her IEP addresses only the speech impediment.
My point to all of this- I don't think the mother should be afraid of an IEP, it is simply a tool parents and school officials use to determine how to best meet the needs of the child. Parent's have a lot of input into an IEP. Once an IEP is in place it MUST be followed. (even if another child is allergic to the dog- the school still MUST follow the IEP)
But I question the schools insistence on the battery of psychological testing, it doesn't seem necesasry as it wasn't in my daughter's case.
Posts: 295 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Regardless, I hope you and others would share their experiences here. It would certainly help demystify seizures, and it would help enormously to give an accurate account of what its like to deal with "the system" (as rivka and Goody Scrivener did so eloquently above).
Exactly! They want to make sure that all bases are covered and that the kid's teachers know exactly what to expect when an epileptic fit happens. The article said a grand mal seizure two or three times a week.
Why condemn the school leaders for insisting that they be fully prepped for this? It's in everyone's interest: the other students (definitely a safe dog), the kid (her teachers and principal are prepared for the occasion), and society at large (the state doesn't pay out millions from lawsuits). The objection to the IEP seems to be that the mother doesn't want her daughter to be thought of differently. It's not the IEP that'll do that - it's the epilepsy! The IEP makes sure her needs are met.
posted
The school had two months to train everyone and figure out whether or not they were prepared. Are you seriously saying that in that amount of time, they couldn't figure it out?
CT, a service dog is also "assistive technology." There are two types if assistive technology, service and device. http://wata.org/what-is-at.htm
I think the school should get it's act together. I don't necessarily have an opinion about whether or not the dog should be allowed, but I do have an opinion about the school being given two months to prepare and screwing it all up royally.
Posts: 9871 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
No, I'm saying that when they tried to figure it out, the mother said "Don't do it." Were they supposed to do it without her permission or cooperation?
posted
Yeah, CT, that part IS vague. I'd like to know what happened with that--WERE the parents told that without the IEP, they couldnt allow the dog? Or is the principal questioning whether the dog should be allowed at all? Were the parents balking at the SPED aspect of an IEP?
Posts: 14745 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
guys -- the problem the parent had with the IEP (according to the article) was not just that she was opposed to the IEP entirely -- but that this particular school was demanding more testing above and beyond what is required to establish an IEP for her daughter. I don't think she opposes the idea of an IEP at all -- just that the requirements they were dictating going down that route -- because what they were demanding of her daughter was MORE than what they use to determine IEP's for other students.
I would feel the same way, for example, if the IEP I had for my son years ago (for the gifted program) had required emotional or psychiatric testing ABOVE the normal intelligence test required to establish giftedness for the program. I would have seriously questioned it.
posted
Right...crap, I've sat in on IEP meetings as a case manager. I mean, the kid does need an IEP, but additional special education resources aren't needed, unless they've documented a case why.
Posts: 14745 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
I'm going to stick with my original assertion that the school should have gotten it's shit together sooner. From this article, it appears that the superintendent wanted a letter confirming her disability from her doctor. Now, with two months notice, it seems a bit silly to me to be demanding proof the first day of school.
quote: Though administrators at the school had given their approval for Cheyenne to bring the dog to school, Hammond said he had concerns about safety issues, such as other students being allergic to the dog or being afraid.
After talking with the school board's attorney and insurer, Hammond said he would allow Cheyenne to attend school with her dog if her doctor certified it was medically necessary.
To me, it seems like the school was doing fine with things and then on the first day of school, the superintendent found out about what was going on at that school and freaked. Being a bureaucrat, he naturally did what comes naturally to bureaucrats. He tried to cover his ass.
That one seems to make is sound like that is exactly what happened.
quote: Jennifer Gilliam said school officials below Hammond had worked with the family to develop a detailed plan for Cheyenne to have her dog in school, covering everything from cleaning up after Mikki to having the dog wear boots so her nails wouldn't scratch the gym floor.
Gilliam said the staff at Mount Vernon Elementary had been great to work with. But after Cheyenne and Mikki had been at school about two hours Wednesday, Hammond said they would have to leave.
Hammond said he had questions about issues, such as other children being allergic to the dog, or being scared of the dog, and the liability of having even a well-trained dog in school. The school system hasn't faced the issue of allowing a student to use a service dog before, he said.
He said he has to make sure all students are safe.
Hammond asked board attorney Jerry Cox to research allowing Chey-enne to bring her dog to school, but had not received an answer before school started yesterday.
The situation might be unique in Kentucky. Brad Hughes, spokesman for the state School Boards Association, said blind students have used service dogs, but no one at the organization could recall an issue involving letting in service dogs that help with conditions not related to impaired sight.
posted
Oh, by the way, she is now allowed to be at school with her dog, just in case you didn't click on the links. (Not any of you involved in the thread, just the lurkers.)
Posts: 9871 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
CT - you are correct that article is really lacking on some of the better details to clarify the mom's position.
quote: Her mother may have had her so thoroughly evaluated that she's just understandably totally ticked off that they'd bring it up again.
And this is very possible -- or one possibility. I know with one of my kids, I had some extensive testing done outside the school setting because what the school was telling me did not jive with my gut feelings about the problem. So after getting better, more detailed and in-depth testing (testing over several days) from a reputable outside source -- then the school complains that they don't "have" to recognize any testing other than that performed by their request.
So it is possible they were wanting to repeat things which the family had already documented and they didn't want to put her through it again.
(That's just one possibility -- not necessarily what happened -- because we don't know).
posted
The short answer to your question CT, is that the IEP became important (paperwork wise) in 1998, when the Federal Government required it in order for the schools to get Federal Funding.
It looks like IEP's have been around for quite a while, but there were laws passed in 1997 (IDEA, which seems to have gone into affect in 1998) that made the IEP's more important, at least bureaucratically.
From what I can tell, it would seem that IEP's have been around for a long time. But in 1997, when IDEA97 was passed, new requirements in paper work were included so the IEP's seem to have a new emphasis. I wonder if everyone was just ignoring them before this legislation. I mean, the inclusion of disabled kids started with the law in 1975. It just looks like these IEP's were forced into prominence with passage of IDEA97.
And from the articles I read about it, it would seem it was necessary to pass these laws. It's kind of amazing what it looks like the schools were trying to get away with.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Hail]](graemlins/hail.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
), no big deal. And, if there was a class that had more people who needed them than tables and chairs available, an extra or two was brought in. It sometimes took a week or two, bureaucracy and maintenance services being what they are, but it did happen without any huge deal being made - no having to register as a "disabled student", no doctor's excuses. Then, at the university I attended for my upper division work, almost all the classrooms had tables and chairs rather than "student desks" as a matter of course.
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
(Not any of you involved in the thread, just the lurkers.)
