Deaf student's dog turned away from school - Page 2

**RedheadGrrl** · 02-27-2007, 08:03 PM

UPDATE

Judge: Dog Simba must stay out of school
BY CARL MACGOWAN AND JOHN VALENTI

A federal judge ruled Tuesday afternoon that as long as John Cave Jr. is a student at an East Meadow high school, his service dog, Simba, will have to remain home for now.

Saying that the 14-year-old boy and his family had "failed to exhaust" all their appeals with the East Meadow School District, U.S. District Court Judge Arthur D. Spatt said Simba is not allowed to accompany his owner to classes at W. Tresper Clarke High School because the dog could be "disruptive and counterproductive" to the educational process.

The ruling was announced by Spatt shortly after 1 p.m. in U.S. District Court, Eastern District in Central Islip.

Spatt ruled against the Caves, he said, in part because the family did not follow the appeals process in place in the school district -- instead opting to sue the district for $150 million.

John Cave Jr. is deaf and said he needs Simba to attend classes with him at Clarke, where he is a ninth-grader, because not having the dog present is destroying his training regime with Simba.

His attorney, Paul Margiotta, had argued the dog should be allowed in school and that the right to do so is guaranteed by the Americans with Disabilities Act.

The canine controversy has attracted national attention since Jan. 3, when Clarke principal Timothy Voels called police after Cave attempted to bring Simba to school.

District officials argued Cave did not need the dog and expressed concern for the health and safety of other students and staff. Parents of schoolmates said they feared their children would suffer allergic reactions with the dog in class and Voels even testified in court earlier this month that allowing Simba in school was akin to playing "Russian Roulette" with the health and welfare of students and faculty.

But in his decision Tuesday, Spatt said that though two school district committees that govern the education of disabled students in the district had ruled against Cave bringing Simba to school, Cave's parent, John and Nancy, never appealed either of those decisions to the district. Instead, they opted to file the multimillion suit and sought a preliminary injunction that would force the district to allow Simba to attend school. Cave's parents argued that Simba was losing his effectiveness as a service dog because he is away from their son for at least six hours a day.

"I've had it," Nancy Cave, seated in the gallery, said quietly, as Spatt announced his decision. Her son, who uses cochlear implants in his ears to hear, had no reaction to the ruling.

Simba, who also was in court, sat quietly and was well-behaved the entire time.

The family, their lawyer and Simba immediately went into a conference room following the ruling and did not formally address reporters.

The lawyers representing the school district praised the verdict and noted that the district provides Cave with a sign-language interpreter, a note-taker and other assistance while the ninth-grader is in class.

"I think the judge did the right thing and recognized that the district is doing the right thing," said school district attorney Steve Schlesinger. Another school district attorney, Stanley Camhi, said the decision demonstrates the contention that "the district is going above and beyond their legal requirements to serve to Cave."

It is unclear if Cave and his parents can still appeal the district's previous committee rulings through the district-approved appeals process.

It also is unclear if they will appeal the court's Tuesday decision.

Defmusicman · 02-27-2007, 08:55 PM

It looks like common sense has prevailed in this case. I can understand a blind, visually impaired or deaf/blind student requiring a seeing-eye dog . But in this case, the parents have not offered any convincing proof that the boy cannot function without the dog. The rights of one does not supersede the rights of all so I'll score this one for the judge.

pek1 · 06-25-2007, 12:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RedheadGrrl

UPDATE

Judge: Dog Simba must stay out of school
BY CARL MACGOWAN AND JOHN VALENTI

A federal judge ruled Tuesday afternoon that as long as John Cave Jr. is a student at an East Meadow high school, his service dog, Simba, will have to remain home for now.

Saying that the 14-year-old boy and his family had "failed to exhaust" all their appeals with the East Meadow School District, U.S. District Court Judge Arthur D. Spatt said Simba is not allowed to accompany his owner to classes at W. Tresper Clarke High School because the dog could be "disruptive and counterproductive" to the educational process.

The ruling was announced by Spatt shortly after 1 p.m. in U.S. District Court, Eastern District in Central Islip.

Spatt ruled against the Caves, he said, in part because the family did not follow the appeals process in place in the school district -- instead opting to sue the district for $150 million.

John Cave Jr. is deaf and said he needs Simba to attend classes with him at Clarke, where he is a ninth-grader, because not having the dog present is destroying his training regime with Simba.

His attorney, Paul Margiotta, had argued the dog should be allowed in school and that the right to do so is guaranteed by the Americans with Disabilities Act.

The canine controversy has attracted national attention since Jan. 3, when Clarke principal Timothy Voels called police after Cave attempted to bring Simba to school.

District officials argued Cave did not need the dog and expressed concern for the health and safety of other students and staff. Parents of schoolmates said they feared their children would suffer allergic reactions with the dog in class and Voels even testified in court earlier this month that allowing Simba in school was akin to playing "Russian Roulette" with the health and welfare of students and faculty.

But in his decision Tuesday, Spatt said that though two school district committees that govern the education of disabled students in the district had ruled against Cave bringing Simba to school, Cave's parent, John and Nancy, never appealed either of those decisions to the district. Instead, they opted to file the multimillion suit and sought a preliminary injunction that would force the district to allow Simba to attend school. Cave's parents argued that Simba was losing his effectiveness as a service dog because he is away from their son for at least six hours a day.

"I've had it," Nancy Cave, seated in the gallery, said quietly, as Spatt announced his decision. Her son, who uses cochlear implants in his ears to hear, had no reaction to the ruling.

Simba, who also was in court, sat quietly and was well-behaved the entire time.

The family, their lawyer and Simba immediately went into a conference room following the ruling and did not formally address reporters.

The lawyers representing the school district praised the verdict and noted that the district provides Cave with a sign-language interpreter, a note-taker and other assistance while the ninth-grader is in class.

"I think the judge did the right thing and recognized that the district is doing the right thing," said school district attorney Steve Schlesinger. Another school district attorney, Stanley Camhi, said the decision demonstrates the contention that "the district is going above and beyond their legal requirements to serve to Cave."

It is unclear if Cave and his parents can still appeal the district's previous committee rulings through the district-approved appeals process.

It also is unclear if they will appeal the court's Tuesday decision.

I haven't been watching this for a few months and have now come up to date.

It is unfortunate that the hearing dog wasn't allowed. I still stand by the parents, as well as the ACLU and the filing of the $150 million lawsuit. Keep appealing, keep appealing and hounding the judicial system. There are many high-profile attorneys that would jump at this chance. I know I would!

I would also file a lawsuit against the judge.

For the boy, I'm afraid that the school is now considered a hostile environment, which is probably going to be covered in the new lawsuit. If not, it should be. The safety of the child is now in jeapardy due to this ruling and the parents should home school him.

As for other students having allergies? Whatever.

pek1 · 06-25-2007, 12:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Defmusicman

. . . But in this case, the parents have not offered any convincing proof that the boy cannot function without the dog . . .

The dog was trained for a purpose and that purpose is to aid the boy. Regardless.

SorEncarnacion · 06-25-2007, 04:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eve

I think allergies of other students should be a major concern. You can't cater to one child in a school full of children, especially when there are other alternatives available for that one child.

Please know that I am not trying to be rude about this at all. If allergies to the dog are to be a concern for the school, then it must also remove every other type of common allergen from its campus, including every type of pollenating plant, the grass on the athletic fields, and all of the common allergens in the kitchen (almost every grain, dairy, eggs/poultry, nuts, beans of all kinds, and every seafood product, ... ) because the school just might have students allergic to one or more of these things.
I can understand why the school would not want a dog, no matter how well trained, to be roaming in crowded hallways. Though the danger is miniscule, it is not nonexistent. However, were I to argue this point in court, I would ask if a school should remove a blind person's cane because it can be used as a weapon. For this reason, the student can take paths less traveled, or move a few minutes before/after everyone else does.
I can see the interpreter point as valid, but only if the interpreter(s) would be with the student every minute from the time he showed up for school in the morning to the time he left that afternoon. If the school will not allow the dog on campus, it should replace that service in like manner. This would require that the interpreter(s) be male, so that trips to the bathroom, gym class, and so on are, at the very least, less awkward. This would mean possibly no down time at all for the interpreter(s), and the school would have to be willing to pay even more for male interpreters than a female, if that is the case where they are, not to mention housing the interpreter if he lives too far to commute. Economically, the service dog definitely costs the school a whole lot less than any other alternative.

True, if the school really insists on sticking to its own policy, it can. However, I think that the school would end up investing more energy in trying to replace the service than it would in just making a small change in its own rules.

ASLGAL · 06-25-2007, 04:54 AM

I do not see a doubt here.

The ADA is very clear, the child qualifies for and received the dog as a tool for his independence in life, the dog should be with him and in school, the movies, a store, or city street, anywhere the child goes the dog should go.

I can see the dependency issue that some one brought up. That is food for thought as it did not occur to me. That is something his Deaf mentors should work on with him.

Bottom line for me is the School Districts abuse of their power and discriminatory treatment of this young man.

Unfortunate but this type of arrogance toward Deaf/Deaf-Blind and their tools for life goes on all the time.

You would think an enlightened society could do better.

Defmusicman · 06-25-2007, 08:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pek1

The dog was trained for a purpose and that purpose is to aid the boy. Regardless.

Aid the boy in what? He's not blind nor does he have vision problems. He has interpreters and notetakers. He is not helpless without the dog and can function like any other deaf/hh kid in a mainstream school. So I do not see why the school should be forced to accomodate him. I hate to play devil's advocate here but this case does not fall into the "reasonable accomodations" category.

Of course, everyone is entitled to their opinions and I respect all opinions whether you agree with me or not.

jillio · 06-25-2007, 08:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dark-Half

I actually agree with them. Instead of a dog he should have an interpreter. They present good points to the argument as well. There's no reason why he would need a dog at school. Maybe I'm not familar with how service dogs function to help deaf people, but I fail to see how bringing a dog to school will help him.

Would someone mind telling me how taking a dog to school -will- help someone in place where an interpreter can't?

Perhaps if he has gone to the bathroom alone and the female terp can't go in with him. Should a fire alarm sound at that point the dog would be able to alert him.

jillio · 06-25-2007, 08:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SorEncarnacion

Please know that I am not trying to be rude about this at all. If allergies to the dog are to be a concern for the school, then it must also remove every other type of common allergen from its campus, including every type of pollenating plant, the grass on the athletic fields, and all of the common allergens in the kitchen (almost every grain, dairy, eggs/poultry, nuts, beans of all kinds, and every seafood product, ... ) because the school just might have students allergic to one or more of these things.
I can understand why the school would not want a dog, no matter how well trained, to be roaming in crowded hallways. Though the danger is miniscule, it is not nonexistent. However, were I to argue this point in court, I would ask if a school should remove a blind person's cane because it can be used as a weapon. For this reason, the student can take paths less traveled, or move a few minutes before/after everyone else does.
I can see the interpreter point as valid, but only if the interpreter(s) would be with the student every minute from the time he showed up for school in the morning to the time he left that afternoon. If the school will not allow the dog on campus, it should replace that service in like manner. This would require that the interpreter(s) be male, so that trips to the bathroom, gym class, and so on are, at the very least, less awkward. This would mean possibly no down time at all for the interpreter(s), and the school would have to be willing to pay even more for male interpreters than a female, if that is the case where they are, not to mention housing the interpreter if he lives too far to commute. Economically, the service dog definitely costs the school a whole lot less than any other alternative.

True, if the school really insists on sticking to its own policy, it can. However, I think that the school would end up investing more energy in trying to replace the service than it would in just making a small change in its own rules.

What if the student were blind? Theoretically, he could use a human guide to be mobile while at school. Should they refuse to let service dogs for blind students as well? Just asking.

msjoi · 06-25-2007, 09:02 PM

Hello, I am a special educator in training, and we're currently doing research on the fact that some feel that those with deafness or that are HoH should not be "grouped" in with students with disabilities, although special services and assistance may be necessary in the education process. What do you all feel is necessary for schools and educators to do to help?

Silentwolfdog · 06-26-2007, 01:20 AM

With violence nowaday, having a dog to warn deaf student is a good thing. Interpreter is not going to be with him all the time and how else is he supposed to know if emergency has arise? At my public school, there is no visual fire drill that alarm deaf students. For all I know, I can be in restroom for five minutes clueless that those 5 very minutes could be thing that save my life if I'd knew.

Dog can alarm him the sound of guns, alarms, people shouting at him, cars/buses in school parking lots, etc. So I believe that he needs his dog with him since dog is trained to help him alert him of his surrounding. Period.

I know for fact interpreter is NOT going be with deaf student all the time. It is not interpreter's responsibility to babysit, so dog is a good way for student to be independent.

**shel90** · 06-26-2007, 09:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silentwolfdog

With violence nowaday, having a dog to warn deaf student is a good thing. Interpreter is not going to be with him all the time and how else is he supposed to know if emergency has arise? At my public school, there is no visual fire drill that alarm deaf students. For all I know, I can be in restroom for five minutes clueless that those 5 very minutes could be thing that save my life if I'd knew.

Dog can alarm him the sound of guns, alarms, people shouting at him, cars/buses in school parking lots, etc. So I believe that he needs his dog with him since dog is trained to help him alert him of his surrounding. Period.

I know for fact interpreter is NOT going be with deaf student all the time. It is not interpreter's responsibility to babysit, so dog is a good way for student to be independent.

True..u and Jillo have good points...especially with all these school shootings . I never had a terp nor a dog growing up in mainstreamed school until high school but then again, I was lucky that no serious emergencies occurred while I was in school.
HMMM...there are so many deaf/hoh mainstreamed now so a plan for them needs to be addressed if such a serious emergency like a shooting should happen.

pek1 · 06-27-2007, 12:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by msjoi

Hello, I am a special educator in training, and we're currently doing research on the fact that some feel that those with deafness or that are HoH should not be "grouped" in with students with disabilities, although special services and assistance may be necessary in the education process. What do you all feel is necessary for schools and educators to do to help?

An IEP (Individual Educational Plan). Where are you attending college so I'd know (roughly) where you're coming from. I think this would make a great report in a technical writing course!

pek1 · 06-27-2007, 12:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shel90

HMMM...there are so many deaf/hoh mainstreamed now so a plan for them needs to be addressed if such a serious emergency like a shooting should happen.

Let them pack one.

pek1 · 06-27-2007, 12:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Defmusicman

Of course, everyone is entitled to their opinions and I respect all opinions whether you agree with me or not.

I respectfully concur.

Aleser · 06-27-2007, 08:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Defmusicman

Aid the boy in what? He's not blind nor does he have vision problems. He has interpreters and notetakers. He is not helpless without the dog and can function like any other deaf/hh kid in a mainstream school. So I do not see why the school should be forced to accomodate him. I hate to play devil's advocate here but this case does not fall into the "reasonable accomodations" category.

Of course, everyone is entitled to their opinions and I respect all opinions whether you agree with me or not.

I am blind and I wouldn't be "helpless" without a dog. I use a cane and a special handheld device which emits sound and tracks how they bounce back to warn me of objects I'm getting closer to. I get around fine. Does that mean I don't deserve the -right- to take a dog to school?

Service dogs are service dogs. If the dog serves SOME purpose to mitigate disability, it's a service dog. Which under the ADA, we have a right to take anywhere and everywhere- I know someone with asperger's syndrome who takes their Ssig dog to school. That's as far away from "needed" as humanly possible. Hearing dogs serve ALOT of important functions for their owner. An interpreter cannot be with a student during the entire time they're at school, much less during the walk to/from school, alerting them to dangers.

The argument is basically "hey, other deaf kids make do without it, why should he get better treatment?" Answer? Because the law SAYS he should. He went through the mile long process of getting a service dog, and he'll have to work hard to keep it trained. He deserves to benefit from it anywhere and everywhere.

oh, and allergies? I had CRAP reactions to flowers planted all over our (outdoor) campus in the 7th grade. I took diphenhydramine and was still miserable and tired all the time. Did the school remove the flowers because of how I felt, how I'm sure plenty other students with allergies felt? Nope.

dreama · 06-27-2007, 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aleser

I am blind and I wouldn't be "helpless" without a dog. I use a cane and a special handheld device which emits sound and tracks how they bounce back to warn me of objects I'm getting closer to. I get around fine. Does that mean I don't deserve the -right- to take a dog to school?

Service dogs are service dogs. If the dog serves SOME purpose to mitigate disability, it's a service dog. Which under the ADA, we have a right to take anywhere and everywhere- I know someone with asperger's syndrome who takes their Ssig dog to school. That's as far away from "needed" as humanly possible. Hearing dogs serve ALOT of important functions for their owner. An interpreter cannot be with a student during the entire time they're at school, much less during the walk to/from school, alerting them to dangers.

The argument is basically "hey, other deaf kids make do without it, why should he get better treatment?" Answer? Because the law SAYS he should. He went through the mile long process of getting a service dog, and he'll have to work hard to keep it trained. He deserves to benefit from it anywhere and everywhere.

oh, and allergies? I had CRAP reactions to flowers planted all over our (outdoor) campus in the 7th grade. I took diphenhydramine and was still miserable and tired all the time. Did the school remove the flowers because of how I felt, how I'm sure plenty other students with allergies felt? Nope.

I totally agree with this post. I don't use taxi's unless I have to as I've had some really bad experiences with some cab drivers refusing to take my dog.

Hear Again · 06-27-2007, 05:50 PM

How well a blind, deaf or disabled person can function without a service dog isn't the point. A service dog is allowed in all public establishments under the ADA -- period -- regardless of how well a dog's handler can fuction without it.

I've been a guide dog user for the past 15 years and am thankful I've only had a handful of occaisions where access has been a problem.

Cane Corso · 06-27-2007, 08:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dark-Half

I actually agree with them. Instead of a dog he should have an interpreter. They present good points to the argument as well. There's no reason why he would need a dog at school. Maybe I'm not familar with how service dogs function to help deaf people, but I fail to see how bringing a dog to school will help him.

Would someone mind telling me how taking a dog to school -will- help someone in place where an interpreter can't?

No I disagree totally! If this school is a public school, the school has NO say whatsoever. ADA is a LAW; therefore, people with disability that have service dogs should be allowed in anywhere. This is simple pure discrimination!

Let me ask, do you want to be the person to guide a blind person everywhere like it is your job? Don't you think it would be easy if he had a guide dog? Let the dog guide him around as long as he likes? Why can't a deaf person do the same thing? Why can't a person in wheelchair do it too? I know a case about a woman who had history of sezures, she was not allowed to bring in her service dog to a resturant. She sued and won because she is depending on the dog for her life.

You know what? Interpreters only exists in the classrooms, they don't follow deaf students everywhere they go. I would love if I have an interpreter who follows me everywhere I go except for going to the bathroom and bedroom. This is just stupid, I'm sorry.

Hear Again · 06-27-2007, 09:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cane Corso

Let me ask, do you want to be the person to guide a blind person everywhere like it is your job? Don't you think it would be easy if he had a guide dog? Let the dog guide him around as long as he likes?

First, a blind person with good orientation and mobility skills does not *need* a sighted person to guide them everywhere. With proper O&M instruction, blind people can learn how to use their hearing, environmental sounds and landmarks to get from point A to point B. Even people like myself who are fully deafblind (without my CIs) can travel independently.

Second, a guide dog does not simply "guide a blind person around." Blind people who have guide dogs have gone through extensive training in order to learn how to work with their dogs.

It is the blind person's job to direct their dog with commands of "forward," "left," "right," "find the...," etc. and to know how to get from one place to another. In other words, the blind person is the one who is in control -- not the guide dog. If a blind person doesn't know where they are going, their guide dog will be of very little help to them.

pek1 · 06-27-2007, 10:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hear Again

How well a blind, deaf or disabled person can function without a service dog isn't the point. A service dog is allowed in all public establishments under the ADA -- period -- regardless of how well a dog's handler can fuction without it.

I've been a guide dog user for the past 15 years and am thankful I've only had a handful of occaisions where access has been a problem.

There is only one environment that the service animal can't be in and that is a sterile environment (an operating room). Ohterwise, everything is fair game.

Aleser · 06-27-2007, 11:24 PM

Quote:

Let me ask, do you want to be the person to guide a blind person everywhere like it is your job? Don't you think it would be easy if he had a guide dog? Let the dog guide him around as long as he likes?

I'm basically repeating what has been said, but a dog can't/wont guide around the owner- it's up to you to interpret feedback the dog provides you and give orders based on that. As also mentioned, -no- blind person should need guiding around. If they do, it's because they haven't received proper training, not because of the nature of their disability.

That said, science: catch up with me, here. I'd sure like a self-guiding cane one of these days. Like, an all in one pack that can give me the benefits of carrying a cane, gps, and miniguide in one small package. Preferably with an "upgrade" option that will analyze traffic for me. I'd like to be lazy -some- days!

Hear Again · 06-28-2007, 12:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pek1

There is only one environment that the service animal can't be in and that is a sterile environment (an operating room). Ohterwise, everything is fair game.

Pete,

You're correct. Thank you for pointing that out.

Hear Again · 06-28-2007, 12:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aleser

I'd sure like a self-guiding cane one of these days. Like, an all in one pack that can give me the benefits of carrying a cane, gps, and miniguide in one small package. Preferably with an "upgrade" option that will analyze traffic for me. I'd like to be lazy -some- days!

Me too!

dreama · 06-28-2007, 12:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hear Again

If a blind person doesn't know where they are going, their guide dog will be of very little help to them.

Yes that is mostly true. However a few months back a bus driver put me off at the wrong stop. I had no idea where I was but Jilli found the way home.

However I must stress that this is an exception rather then a rule. She could have just as easily gone round in circles but you can usually tell if the dog doesn't know where they are going as their pace slows down. In this case Jilli was walking at a good pace with a sense of purpose so I just let her get on with it.

jillio · 06-28-2007, 01:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hear Again

First, a blind person with good orientation and mobility skills does not *need* a sighted person to guide them everywhere. With proper O&M instruction, blind people can learn how to use their hearing, environmental sounds and landmarks to get from point A to point B. Even people like myself who are fully deafblind (without my CIs) can travel independently.

Second, a guide dog does not simply "guide a blind person around." Blind people who have guide dogs have gone through extensive training in order to learn how to work with their dogs.

It is the blind person's job to direct their dog with commands of "forward," "left," "right," "find the...," etc. and to know how to get from one place to another. In other words, the blind person is the one who is in control -- not the guide dog. If a blind person doesn't know where they are going, their guide dog will be of very little help to them.

I have a blind student here at school that I arrange services for, and he is really the first person I ever worked with who used a service dog. The relationship between the two, and the way they work together is absolutely amazing to watch! I truly gained in respect for those who use service dogs, as well as for the dogs themselves.

Hear Again · 06-28-2007, 06:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillio

I have a blind student here at school that I arrange services for, and he is really the first person I ever worked with who used a service dog. The relationship between the two, and the way they work together is absolutely amazing to watch! I truly gained in respect for those who use service dogs, as well as for the dogs themselves.

jillio,

I agree!

I'm currently working with my second guide dog (she's 11 years old) and I'm continually amazed at how intelligent, loving and devoted these dogs really are!

Defmusicman · 06-28-2007, 09:01 PM

Thanks to all who have responded and I feel like I have learned a few things from this thread. If the law says that service dogs must be allowed anywhere to assist disabled persons, then so be it. It should be interesting to see how this case plays out in the courts and the eventual impact it will have on future of service dogs. Stay tuned.

pek1 · 07-02-2007, 11:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hear Again

jillio,

I agree!

I'm currently working with my second guide dog (she's 11 years old) and I'm continually amazed at how intelligent, loving and devoted these dogs really are!

Hear Again,

As soon as Maria gets settled into her new home, she is going to enlarge my avatar (to the left). Here I am pictured with Snickers, my Hearing Dog.

Calphool · 08-30-2007, 08:01 AM

I was just reading about this court case on another web site. Does anyone know of any recent updates?

I guess the issue in question is the gray area between the ADA and the IDEA. It seems that the ADA requires a broader spectrum of accommodations in the public sphere than the IDEA does.

I don't quite understand why the school has dug in so deeply on this case. Let the kid have his service dog. What's the big deal? Dander? Stupid excuse... what would they do if they had a blind teacher? Oh wait, they probably wouldn't HIRE a blind teacher.... (in violation of the ADA).

I think the bottom line here is that the school doesn't want a dog, because they fear that it will be disruptive.... and in truth, a poorly trained service dog probably would be disruptive. However, in my experience these dogs are incredibly well behaved. The school knows that the "disruptive" argument won't hold water, so they attack the character of the individuals putting the case forward (the parents). Unfortunately the judge bought into the stupid arguments. He even suggested that terps and note takers, are extraordinary accommodations. Clearly he's clueless about typical accommodations made for the deaf. Those aren't extraordinary at all.

06-25-2007, 09:02 PM	#40 (permalink)
msjoi Registered User Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 1	Should deaf/Hard of Hearing (HoH) students be special ed.? Hello, I am a special educator in training, and we're currently doing research on the fact that some feel that those with deafness or that are HoH should not be "grouped" in with students with disabilities, although special services and assistance may be necessary in the education process. What do you all feel is necessary for schools and educators to do to help?

06-26-2007, 01:20 AM	#41 (permalink)
Silentwolfdog Registered User Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Earth Posts: 931	With violence nowaday, having a dog to warn deaf student is a good thing. Interpreter is not going to be with him all the time and how else is he supposed to know if emergency has arise? At my public school, there is no visual fire drill that alarm deaf students. For all I know, I can be in restroom for five minutes clueless that those 5 very minutes could be thing that save my life if I'd knew. Dog can alarm him the sound of guns, alarms, people shouting at him, cars/buses in school parking lots, etc. So I believe that he needs his dog with him since dog is trained to help him alert him of his surrounding. Period. I know for fact interpreter is NOT going be with deaf student all the time. It is not interpreter's responsibility to babysit, so dog is a good way for student to be independent. __________________ If you are using red or blue font, there's a good chance that I am not reading your posts due to it being blended into background! I have loved the stars too fondly to be fearful of the night. ~Sarah William Check my art at http://silentwolfdog.deviantart.com

06-27-2007, 05:50 PM	#48 (permalink)
Hear Again Registered User Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Wisconsin Posts: 20,122 Blog Entries: 6	How well a blind, deaf or disabled person can function without a service dog isn't the point. A service dog is allowed in all public establishments under the ADA -- period -- regardless of how well a dog's handler can fuction without it. I've been a guide dog user for the past 15 years and am thankful I've only had a handful of occaisions where access has been a problem. Last edited by Hear Again; 06-27-2007 at 06:06 PM.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

02-27-2007, 08:03 PM	#31 (permalink)
RedheadGrrl Premium Member Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 4,827	UPDATE Judge: Dog Simba must stay out of school BY CARL MACGOWAN AND JOHN VALENTI A federal judge ruled Tuesday afternoon that as long as John Cave Jr. is a student at an East Meadow high school, his service dog, Simba, will have to remain home for now. Saying that the 14-year-old boy and his family had "failed to exhaust" all their appeals with the East Meadow School District, U.S. District Court Judge Arthur D. Spatt said Simba is not allowed to accompany his owner to classes at W. Tresper Clarke High School because the dog could be "disruptive and counterproductive" to the educational process. The ruling was announced by Spatt shortly after 1 p.m. in U.S. District Court, Eastern District in Central Islip. Spatt ruled against the Caves, he said, in part because the family did not follow the appeals process in place in the school district -- instead opting to sue the district for $150 million. John Cave Jr. is deaf and said he needs Simba to attend classes with him at Clarke, where he is a ninth-grader, because not having the dog present is destroying his training regime with Simba. His attorney, Paul Margiotta, had argued the dog should be allowed in school and that the right to do so is guaranteed by the Americans with Disabilities Act. The canine controversy has attracted national attention since Jan. 3, when Clarke principal Timothy Voels called police after Cave attempted to bring Simba to school. District officials argued Cave did not need the dog and expressed concern for the health and safety of other students and staff. Parents of schoolmates said they feared their children would suffer allergic reactions with the dog in class and Voels even testified in court earlier this month that allowing Simba in school was akin to playing "Russian Roulette" with the health and welfare of students and faculty. But in his decision Tuesday, Spatt said that though two school district committees that govern the education of disabled students in the district had ruled against Cave bringing Simba to school, Cave's parent, John and Nancy, never appealed either of those decisions to the district. Instead, they opted to file the multimillion suit and sought a preliminary injunction that would force the district to allow Simba to attend school. Cave's parents argued that Simba was losing his effectiveness as a service dog because he is away from their son for at least six hours a day. "I've had it," Nancy Cave, seated in the gallery, said quietly, as Spatt announced his decision. Her son, who uses cochlear implants in his ears to hear, had no reaction to the ruling. Simba, who also was in court, sat quietly and was well-behaved the entire time. The family, their lawyer and Simba immediately went into a conference room following the ruling and did not formally address reporters. The lawyers representing the school district praised the verdict and noted that the district provides Cave with a sign-language interpreter, a note-taker and other assistance while the ninth-grader is in class. "I think the judge did the right thing and recognized that the district is doing the right thing," said school district attorney Steve Schlesinger. Another school district attorney, Stanley Camhi, said the decision demonstrates the contention that "the district is going above and beyond their legal requirements to serve to Cave." It is unclear if Cave and his parents can still appeal the district's previous committee rulings through the district-approved appeals process. It also is unclear if they will appeal the court's Tuesday decision.

Today
Deafness	Sponsored Links __________________ This advertising will not be shown in this way to registered members. Register your free account today and become a member on AllDeaf.com

02-27-2007, 08:55 PM	#32 (permalink)
Defmusicman Registered User Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Deep South Posts: 400	It looks like common sense has prevailed in this case. I can understand a blind, visually impaired or deaf/blind student requiring a seeing-eye dog . But in this case, the parents have not offered any convincing proof that the boy cannot function without the dog. The rights of one does not supersede the rights of all so I'll score this one for the judge.

06-25-2007, 04:54 AM	#36 (permalink)
ASLGAL Registered User Join Date: May 2007 Location: Ohio Posts: 763	I do not see a doubt here. The ADA is very clear, the child qualifies for and received the dog as a tool for his independence in life, the dog should be with him and in school, the movies, a store, or city street, anywhere the child goes the dog should go. I can see the dependency issue that some one brought up. That is food for thought as it did not occur to me. That is something his Deaf mentors should work on with him. Bottom line for me is the School Districts abuse of their power and discriminatory treatment of this young man. Unfortunate but this type of arrogance toward Deaf/Deaf-Blind and their tools for life goes on all the time. You would think an enlightened society could do better.

06-28-2007, 09:01 PM	#58 (permalink)
Defmusicman Registered User Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Deep South Posts: 400	Thanks to all who have responded and I feel like I have learned a few things from this thread. If the law says that service dogs must be allowed anywhere to assist disabled persons, then so be it. It should be interesting to see how this case plays out in the courts and the eventual impact it will have on future of service dogs. Stay tuned.

08-30-2007, 08:01 AM	#60 (permalink)
Calphool Registered User Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Des Moines, IA Posts: 198	I was just reading about this court case on another web site. Does anyone know of any recent updates? I guess the issue in question is the gray area between the ADA and the IDEA. It seems that the ADA requires a broader spectrum of accommodations in the public sphere than the IDEA does. I don't quite understand why the school has dug in so deeply on this case. Let the kid have his service dog. What's the big deal? Dander? Stupid excuse... what would they do if they had a blind teacher? Oh wait, they probably wouldn't HIRE a blind teacher.... (in violation of the ADA). I think the bottom line here is that the school doesn't want a dog, because they fear that it will be disruptive.... and in truth, a poorly trained service dog probably would be disruptive. However, in my experience these dogs are incredibly well behaved. The school knows that the "disruptive" argument won't hold water, so they attack the character of the individuals putting the case forward (the parents). Unfortunately the judge bought into the stupid arguments. He even suggested that terps and note takers, are extraordinary accommodations. Clearly he's clueless about typical accommodations made for the deaf. Those aren't extraordinary at all.