Parents want hearing school to get state funding - Page 6

jillio · 06-28-2010, 03:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KristinaB

According to this, There is a tuition to pay for The Moog School. I checked into it, when I lived just outside of St. Louis.
Admission
Admission
The primary criterion for admission into our program is that our program can benefit the child. Typically that means that the child has a significant enough hearing loss and language delay to need the kind of special education program we offer and demonstrates a potential for learning to talk.

The first step for admission to our program is to contact Betsy Moog Brooks, Director of the Family School and the Moog School. She will talk with parents about their child and will explain what our program has to offer. As part of the admission process, parents will be asked to send information regarding their child's program and spoken language skills. If the child is over age three, an evaluation will be scheduled along with a tour of the school. The more information we have about the child, the better we will be able to advise parents regarding what our program has to offer. Parents may contact Betsy by calling (314) 692-7172 or by email bbrooks@moogcenter.org.

Tuition

Parents with children under age three are eligible for Early Intervention through Missouri First Steps or Illinois Child and Family Connections, state programs that provide financial support for children from birth to age three. The tuition for the School program for the 2008-2009 school year is $24,950. Financial aid is available.

Financial Aid

Financial aid is based on need and families who need support are encouraged to complete a financial aid application. We also work with families to identify additional sources to help provide financial support.

Isn't the Moog School a charter school?

**KristinaB** · 06-28-2010, 03:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillio

Yes. Under age 3. The parents in the OP have already received services for early intervention under this.

Isn't the Moog School a charter school?

I believe it is. As far as I know there were no state or federally funded private schools in the St. Louis area for all grades. I lived around there for 2 years and was researching quite a bit.

The First Steps program is a fantastic program and really helped with my daughter. Services and help stopped after she was put into an ECSE Preschool at a public school. Daughter wasn't having hearing problems then, it was speech. She could not talk until she was 5 or 6. Oral and Facial muscle control issues related to birth. We had to exercise and train the muscles to work before she could speak.

jillio · 06-28-2010, 03:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KristinaB

I believe it is. As far as I know there were no state or federally funded private schools in the St. Louis area for all grades. I lived around there for 2 years and was researching quite a bit.

The First Steps program is a fantastic program and really helped with my daughter. Services and help stopped after she was put into an ECSE Preschool at a public school. Daughter wasn't having hearing problems then, it was speech. She could not talk until she was 5 or 6. Oral and Facial muscle control issues related to birth. We had to exercise and train the muscles to work before she could speak.

Ahh, got it. Yeah, since Early Intervention is funded differently different stiplations apply.

**Reba** · 06-28-2010, 03:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by faire_jour

Nope, that is my job. If there an an appropriate program available and the district can't provide it, it IS my job to make the district pay for it.

Just to clarify, when you state that the district will pay for it, you mean the taxpayers will pay for it. School districts use taxpayer money for their programs.

When government entities pay for services you have to expect strings to be attached.

jillio · 06-28-2010, 04:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

Just to clarify, when you state that the district will pay for it, you mean the taxpayers will pay for it. School districts use taxpayer money for their programs.

When government entities pay for services you have to expect strings to be attached.

True. And even when a child is sent out of district, the home district school is still overseeing everything. They still attend all IEPs and if it is determined that the child is not making significantly greater progress under the out of district program, they can take the funding away and refuse to pay for that child to continue in the program.

faire_jour · 06-28-2010, 05:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillio

I didn't say if they had an oral program, either. I said if accommodations were being made for the oral student in the home school. I'd still like to see that case law you said exists that shows that everyday, school systems are paying for private placement when accommodations are already being made.

Here is a case (not deaf) where the school wanted to provide a modified mainstream setting but the parents enrolled the child in a private school and they paid for it.

http://users.rcn.com/peregrin.enteract/add/carter.txt

"In other words,
school systems are to provide the children with an appropriate special
education instead of drawing lines in the sand and adopting a take it or leave
it attitude. As the result of Carter, school systems are revising and taking
another look at the continuum of special education alternatives that they are
required to offer to handicapped children. In the Second Circuit, when parents
placed children into appropriate private special education programs that were
not on the states "approved" list and if the public school had defaulted in
providing an appropriate education, the parents could not be reimbursed. In
the Second Circuit, the private education was appropriate, but it was not
free. In the Fourth Circuit, pursuant to Carter, given similar facts, the
private school education was appropriate and free. The U. S. Supreme Court
has affirmed this Court's ruling that a special education program should be
appropriate and also be free. "

faire_jour · 06-28-2010, 06:01 PM

The school wanted TC but parents won the right to place the child at a private oral school, and have the school pay:

http://www.listen-up.org/dnload/1383.pdf

The school proided a TC placement and the parents moved the child to a private school and were ordered to pay tution.

http://www.listen-up.org/dnload/593.pdf

"In Burlington School Comm. v. Mass. Dept. of Ed. (1983) 471 U.S. 359, the
U.S. Supreme Court held that parents of disabled children may receive
retroactive reimbursement for the tuition and related expenses of unilaterally
placing their child in a private special education program. Such reimbursement
is an appropriate remedy where the school district has failed to provide the
child with a FAPE and the private placement is determined to be proper under
the Act and reasonably calculated to provide educational benefit to the child."

jillio · 06-28-2010, 06:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by faire_jour

Here is a case (not deaf) where the school wanted to provide a modified mainstream setting but the parents enrolled the child in a private school and they paid for it.

http://users.rcn.com/peregrin.enteract/add/carter.txt

"In other words,
school systems are to provide the children with an appropriate special
education instead of drawing lines in the sand and adopting a take it or leave
it attitude. As the result of Carter, school systems are revising and taking
another look at the continuum of special education alternatives that they are
required to offer to handicapped children. In the Second Circuit, when parents
placed children into appropriate private special education programs that were
not on the states "approved" list and if the public school had defaulted in
providing an appropriate education, the parents could not be reimbursed. In
the Second Circuit, the private education was appropriate, but it was not
free. In the Fourth Circuit, pursuant to Carter, given similar facts, the
private school education was appropriate and free. The U. S. Supreme Court
has affirmed this Court's ruling that a special education program should be
appropriate and also be free. "

This case is hardly comparable to the case in the OP. This is a case of misdiagnosis.

In 1983, Florence County School District Four evaluated and misdiagnosed
fifteen year old Shannon Carter as lazy, unmotivated and a slow learner and
told her parents to make her work harder. Her parents pressured her to the
point that she became severely depressed and suicidal. In 1985, the inter-
vention of Linda Summer, a licensed clinical social worker versed in the field
of learning disabilities, changed Shannon's life. Ms. Summer suspected that
Shannon had a learning disability and an attention deficit disorder. An
extensive battery of evaluations were performed which resulted in Florence
County School District Four admitting that Shannon was indeed learning
disabled and had an attention deficit disorder. In 1983, District Four had
used an uncertified evaluator and had failed to follow the proper procedures
for evaluating children suspected of having a learning disability. Shannon
had almost taken her life.

This has absolutely nothing to do with a school system providing accommodation and the parent demanding a private placement.

jillio · 06-28-2010, 06:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by faire_jour

The school wanted TC but parents won the right to place the child at a private oral school, and have the school pay:

http://www.listen-up.org/dnload/1383.pdf

The school proided a TC placement and the parents moved the child to a private school and were ordered to pay tution.

http://www.listen-up.org/dnload/593.pdf

"In Burlington School Comm. v. Mass. Dept. of Ed. (1983) 471 U.S. 359, the
U.S. Supreme Court held that parents of disabled children may receive
retroactive reimbursement for the tuition and related expenses of unilaterally
placing their child in a private special education program. Such reimbursement
is an appropriate remedy where the school district has failed to provide the
child with a FAPE and the private placement is determined to be proper under
the Act and reasonably calculated to provide educational benefit to the child."

Gonna need a link so I can actually read case law on this one. The listen up link doesn't work. But I need a link that will allow me to view the case and the documents regarding the courts decision. The quote that you have given me doesn't say anything about TC or oral placement. Few public school systems offer TC as first alternative. This is about being retroactively reimbursed for placing their child in a private school while the case was decided.

faire_jour · 06-28-2010, 06:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillio

This case is hardly comparable to the case in the OP. This is a case of misdiagnosis.

In 1983, Florence County School District Four evaluated and misdiagnosed
fifteen year old Shannon Carter as lazy, unmotivated and a slow learner and
told her parents to make her work harder. Her parents pressured her to the
point that she became severely depressed and suicidal. In 1985, the inter-
vention of Linda Summer, a licensed clinical social worker versed in the field
of learning disabilities, changed Shannon's life. Ms. Summer suspected that
Shannon had a learning disability and an attention deficit disorder. An
extensive battery of evaluations were performed which resulted in Florence
County School District Four admitting that Shannon was indeed learning
disabled and had an attention deficit disorder. In 1983, District Four had
used an uncertified evaluator and had failed to follow the proper procedures
for evaluating children suspected of having a learning disability. Shannon
had almost taken her life.

This has absolutely nothing to do with a school system providing accommodation and the parent demanding a private placement.

And once she was properly dx'ed she was offered a placement, a modified mainstream, and her parents moved her to a private school and the school was ordered to pay for it. That is exactly what we are talking about.

faire_jour · 06-28-2010, 06:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillio

Gonna need a link so I can actually read case law on this one. The listen up link doesn't work. But I need a link that will allow me to view the case and the documents regarding the courts decision. The quote that you have given me doesn't say anything about TC or oral placement. Few public school systems offer TC as first alternative. This is about being retroactively reimbursed for placing their child in a private school while the case was decided.

I don't have that, sorry. If you can't accept the final courts decision as proof, I can't help you. I'm not their lawyer, I have access to simple public information.

And I don't know where you live but every parent I have every spoken to was offered TC right off the bat. Most self contained classes are, or were, TC.

jillio · 06-28-2010, 06:11 PM

Okay, found the case you linked to:

STUDENT is four and one-half years old and eligible for special education
services as a result of a severe to profound sensori-neural hearing loss in both
ears. In July 1994, when STUDENT was approximately fourteen months old,
his hearing loss was first diagnosed by an audiologist, Dr. Robin Vaughn. Dr.
Vaughn concluded that STUDENT had a "severe to profound hearing loss in
the left ear and a probable moderate hearing loss in the right ear." (Pet. Exh.
48.) On September 7, 1994, STUDENT's mother contacted the District to
request services for him.
In late September 1994, an initial assessment of STUDENT was performed by
the District's school nurse and a special education teacher. Although
STUDENT was 16 months old, he was able to use only one word, and was
functioning at the 12-month age level in language. STUDENT's development in
all other areas was noted to be within normal limits. The assessors relied on Dr.
Vaughn's report of STUDENT's hearing loss, and stated that STUDENT was
"deaf in one ear" and had "a profound hearing loss in the other." (Pet. Exh. 5.)
STUDENT was found eligible for the District's parent/infant services, known as
the Early Start in-home program, based on his severe language delay and
hearing loss.

This is about early intervention services. Early intervention services are funded differently than K-12. We already went through this. The parents in the OP have already had EI services. Now they are attempting to get taxpayers to pay for their child's placement in elementary school. Do, this case, as well, is not comparable to the situation in the OP.

faire_jour · 06-28-2010, 06:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillio

Okay, found the case you linked to:

STUDENT is four and one-half years old and eligible for special education
services as a result of a severe to profound sensori-neural hearing loss in both
ears. In July 1994, when STUDENT was approximately fourteen months old,
his hearing loss was first diagnosed by an audiologist, Dr. Robin Vaughn. Dr.
Vaughn concluded that STUDENT had a "severe to profound hearing loss in
the left ear and a probable moderate hearing loss in the right ear." (Pet. Exh.
48.) On September 7, 1994, STUDENT's mother contacted the District to
request services for him.
In late September 1994, an initial assessment of STUDENT was performed by
the District's school nurse and a special education teacher. Although
STUDENT was 16 months old, he was able to use only one word, and was
functioning at the 12-month age level in language. STUDENT's development in
all other areas was noted to be within normal limits. The assessors relied on Dr.
Vaughn's report of STUDENT's hearing loss, and stated that STUDENT was
"deaf in one ear" and had "a profound hearing loss in the other." (Pet. Exh. 5.)
STUDENT was found eligible for the District's parent/infant services, known as
the Early Start in-home program, based on his severe language delay and
hearing loss.

This is about early intervention services. Early intervention services are funded differently than K-12. We already went through this. The parents in the OP have already had EI services. Now they are attempting to get taxpayers to pay for their child's placement in elementary school. Do, this case, as well, is not comparable to the situation in the OP.

In the beginning he is 16 months, but at the end he is 4 1/2.

jillio · 06-28-2010, 06:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by faire_jour

And once she was properly dx'ed she was offered a placement, a modified mainstream, and her parents moved her to a private school and the school was ordered to pay for it. That is exactly what we are talking about.

Nope. Retroactive pay was awarded. And, was the school on the list of acceptable contract schools. The school on the OP is not. They have other facilities they will pay for, just not the school the parents are demanding they pay for. And we are talking about misdiagnosis in this case. Can't be compared to the situation in the OP.

jillio · 06-28-2010, 06:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by faire_jour

In the beginning he is 16 months, but at the end he is 4 1/2.

Yes, the child ages. And as the child ages, he fails to develop spoken language even though the mother is insistent that he learn to speak. The school system in this case, was attempting to provide the child with communication skills. This is just one more case of a parent putting the child at severe risk all for the sake of a spoken word.

Cases like this don't do much to support your position. And it has virtually nothing to do with the OP.

jillio · 06-28-2010, 06:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by faire_jour

In the beginning he is 16 months, but at the end he is 4 1/2.

Yep, and still is not developing spoken language skills and is severely language delayed. What is your point? And it is still about EI services; At 16 months and 4 1/2. EI is funded differently than elementary school. Still not applicable to the OP.

**Reba** · 06-28-2010, 06:29 PM

For SCOTUS opinions this link might help:

Opinions

whatdidyousay! · 06-28-2010, 06:37 PM

I did not know a state would pay for private school . I thought if the public school is not able to teach a child that need extra help the state would find a public schoo lthat could work with the child. Tax payers should not have to pay for a kid to go to private school. I think that is wrong.

**Reba** · 06-28-2010, 06:39 PM

I'm getting lost in this debate.

Questions:

1. If a parent decides that none of the local public schools can provide appropriate accommodations, and therefore sends the child to a private school, who pays for the tuition? (It was my understanding that the parents pay.)

2. If a parent decides that none of the local public or private schools can provide appropriate accommodations, what can the parent do?

Comment:

I know that in my area if a child with special needs attends a private school, the parents pay for the tuition but the public schools provide supplemental therapy at no cost to the family. The therapy/classes are held in public schools, so it's up to the parents to make their own arrangements for attendance. That usually means early dismissal at the private school, then driving the student to the public school for the appointed sessions.

jillio · 06-28-2010, 06:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

I'm getting lost in this debate.

Questions:

1. If a parent decides that none of the local public schools can provide appropriate accommodations, and therefore sends the child to a private school, who pays for the tuition? (It was my understanding that the parents pay.)

In a case such as this, the parents will pay.
2. If a parent decides that none of the local public or private schools can provide appropriate accommodations, what can the parent do?

Go to due process, provide plenty of witnesses, and have a good attorney to argue the case against the services the school is providing.Comment:

I know that in my area if a child with special needs attends a private school, the parents pay for the tuition but the public schools provide supplemental therapy at no cost to the family. The therapy/classes are held in public schools, so it's up to the parents to make their own arrangements for attendance. That usually means early dismissal at the private school, then driving the student to the public school for the appointed sessions.

The same in this area. This is not a case of the school system not being able to provide proper accommodations. It is about a parent choosing to send their child to a private school and wanting the district to pay for it.

jillio · 06-28-2010, 06:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by whatdidyousay!

I did not know a state would pay for private school . I thought if the public school is not able to teach a child that need extra help the state would find a public schoo lthat could work with the child. Tax payers should not have to pay for a kid to go to private school. I think that is wrong.

They will find an out of district public school or contract with a private school as a last resort.

whatdidyousay! · 06-28-2010, 07:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

I'm getting lost in this debate.

Questions:

1. If a parent decides that none of the local public schools can provide appropriate accommodations, and therefore sends the child to a private school, who pays for the tuition? (It was my understanding that the parents pay.)

2. If a parent decides that none of the local public or private schools can provide appropriate accommodations, what can the parent do?

Comment:

I know that in my area if a child with special needs attends a private school, the parents pay for the tuition but the public schools provide supplemental therapy at no cost to the family. The therapy/classes are held in public schools, so it's up to the parents to make their own arrangements for attendance. That usually means early dismissal at the private school, then driving the student to the public school for the appointed sessions.

That was my understanding too, if parents send their child to private
school , the parents pay. That is what my parents did with me. With all the budgets cuts being made by the states , towns and cites , it not the time for parents to what the state to pay for their child to go to private school. The parents will have to hire someone to work with her child or see if their church
or temple will help pay . I have a nephew that going to public school ,he has
special needs and his parents got him sign up for the extra help. I agree the parents need to more active to see that their child get the help he/she need
and not expect taxpayers to pay for private school when people are having hard time taking care of their own families.

faire_jour · 06-28-2010, 07:42 PM

Wirelessly posted

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillio

Quote:

Originally Posted by faire_jour

In the beginning he is 16 months, but at the end he is 4 1/2.

Yep, and still is not developing spoken language skills and is severely language delayed. What is your point? And it is still about EI services; At 16 months and 4 1/2. EI is funded differently than elementary school. Still not applicable to the OP.

Wrong again! EI ends at age 3 and then the child is served by the school district.

faire_jour · 06-28-2010, 07:48 PM

Wirelessly posted

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillio

Quote:

Originally Posted by whatdidyousay!

I did not know a state would pay for private school . I thought if the public school is not able to teach a child that need extra help the state would find a public schoo lthat could work with the child. Tax payers should not have to pay for a kid to go to private school. I think that is wrong.

They will find an out of district public school or contract with a private school as a last resort.

Ta da! you finally admit that they will contract with a private school!!! finally, some progress!

deafdyke · 06-28-2010, 08:15 PM

Quote:

his is not about oral education... this is about 'cater to me, my kid is special'.

They HAVE a school available to them at no cost. Use it. Move near the school and enroll your kid. That's what I have to do. THEY made the choice for their child to be oral. THEY decided private school was best. THEY decided not to choose to relocate near a more affordable option. The cost is theirs to pay.

If these parents get their private school paid for, I want the schools to pay for my move so my kid can go to the state school... or they need to open a school near us. I want to be catered to, too.

WeeBeastie, will you marry me?

SO DEAD ON!!!!! It does seem like a lot of oral only parents buy into the assumption that oral abilty will equalize their dhh kids. And then they spend their time complaining that it's expensive or that there's nothing specificly for oral kids.

Quote:

if parents send their child to private
school , the parents pay. That is what my parents did with me. With all the budgets cuts being made by the states , towns and cites , it not the time for parents to what the state to pay for their child to go to private school. The parents will have to hire someone to work with her child or see if their church
or temple will help pay . I have a nephew that going to public school ,he has
special needs and his parents got him sign up for the extra help. I agree the parents need to more active to see that their child get the help he/she need
and not expect taxpayers to pay for private school when people are having hard time taking care of their own families.

AMEN!!!!! It was all well and good when the economy was good. BUT now everyone's struggling!! EVERYONE!

A · 06-28-2010, 09:38 PM

It does create a problem when private school for the oral deaf is right there near you, while another is about 50 or more miles is covered by state/district. You don't want to drop everything and move when you can just take her to THAT school. If there was no oral school around then it does make sense to move.
what doesn't make sense is if the district already covering a local oral school and the parent say "NO" to that school because she want her child go to a private school.

Miss-Delectable · 06-29-2010, 02:56 AM

I think those sort of parents who think the world owes them are the worst kind of brats. It's all about the best and best, nothing but the best for their child at taxpayer's expenses.

An unnecessary expense, in my opinion, when there are plenty of services available to these kids.

If they want the superior private schooling for their child, then be prepared to make all sort of sacrifices such as moving into the district where the school is, or work your ass off to pay the school fees even if it means taking out more mortgage or using the equity in the house. Or wait until their kid become eligible for a scholarship.

Or best idea....suck it up and accept what the home district provides for the time being!

**shel90** · 06-29-2010, 06:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Miss-Delectable

I think those sort of parents who think the world owes them are the worst kind of brats. It's all about the best and best, nothing but the best for their child at taxpayer's expenses.

An unnecessary expense, in my opinion, when there are plenty of services available to these kids.

If they want the superior private schooling for their child, then be prepared to make all sort of sacrifices such as moving into the district where the school is, or work your ass off to pay the school fees even if it means taking out more mortgage or using the equity in the house. Or wait until their kid become eligible for a scholarship.

Or best idea....suck it up and accept what the home district provides for the time being!

faire_jour · 06-29-2010, 09:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Miss-Delectable

I think those sort of parents who think the world owes them are the worst kind of brats. It's all about the best and best, nothing but the best for their child at taxpayer's expenses.

An unnecessary expense, in my opinion, when there are plenty of services available to these kids.

If they want the superior private schooling for their child, then be prepared to make all sort of sacrifices such as moving into the district where the school is, or work your ass off to pay the school fees even if it means taking out more mortgage or using the equity in the house. Or wait until their kid become eligible for a scholarship.

Or best idea....suck it up and accept what the home district provides for the time being!

The whole point is that the home district is NOT providing appropriate services! If they were people wouldn't be winning their court cases and schools wouldn't be paying for private tution.

Would thi fight even be taking place if it was 20 families fighting to have the school set up a bi-bi program? Or a parent fighting for an expensive residental placement at a state school for the Deaf?

jillio · 06-29-2010, 09:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by faire_jour

Wirelessly posted

Wrong again! EI ends at age 3 and then the child is served by the school district.

Nope. Read the case you submitted. EI can extend up until a child reaches age to attend kindergarten if it is determined that their delays are so severe that they need continued services under EI.

06-29-2010, 02:56 AM	#177 (permalink)
Miss-Delectable V.I.P. Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 17,174 Blog Entries: 3	I think those sort of parents who think the world owes them are the worst kind of brats. It's all about the best and best, nothing but the best for their child at taxpayer's expenses. An unnecessary expense, in my opinion, when there are plenty of services available to these kids. If they want the superior private schooling for their child, then be prepared to make all sort of sacrifices such as moving into the district where the school is, or work your ass off to pay the school fees even if it means taking out more mortgage or using the equity in the house. Or wait until their kid become eligible for a scholarship. Or best idea....suck it up and accept what the home district provides for the time being! __________________ "Walking with a friend in the dark is better than walking alone in the light." - Helen Keller

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

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

06-28-2010, 06:01 PM	#157 (permalink)
faire_jour Banned Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 7,202	The school wanted TC but parents won the right to place the child at a private oral school, and have the school pay: http://www.listen-up.org/dnload/1383.pdf The school proided a TC placement and the parents moved the child to a private school and were ordered to pay tution. http://www.listen-up.org/dnload/593.pdf "In Burlington School Comm. v. Mass. Dept. of Ed. (1983) 471 U.S. 359, the U.S. Supreme Court held that parents of disabled children may receive retroactive reimbursement for the tuition and related expenses of unilaterally placing their child in a private special education program. Such reimbursement is an appropriate remedy where the school district has failed to provide the child with a FAPE and the private placement is determined to be proper under the Act and reasonably calculated to provide educational benefit to the child."

06-28-2010, 06:11 PM	#162 (permalink)
jillio Banned Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 60,296	Okay, found the case you linked to: STUDENT is four and one-half years old and eligible for special education services as a result of a severe to profound sensori-neural hearing loss in both ears. In July 1994, when STUDENT was approximately fourteen months old, his hearing loss was first diagnosed by an audiologist, Dr. Robin Vaughn. Dr. Vaughn concluded that STUDENT had a "severe to profound hearing loss in the left ear and a probable moderate hearing loss in the right ear." (Pet. Exh. 48.) On September 7, 1994, STUDENT's mother contacted the District to request services for him. In late September 1994, an initial assessment of STUDENT was performed by the District's school nurse and a special education teacher. Although STUDENT was 16 months old, he was able to use only one word, and was functioning at the 12-month age level in language. STUDENT's development in all other areas was noted to be within normal limits. The assessors relied on Dr. Vaughn's report of STUDENT's hearing loss, and stated that STUDENT was "deaf in one ear" and had "a profound hearing loss in the other." (Pet. Exh. 5.) STUDENT was found eligible for the District's parent/infant services, known as the Early Start in-home program, based on his severe language delay and hearing loss. This is about early intervention services. Early intervention services are funded differently than K-12. We already went through this. The parents in the OP have already had EI services. Now they are attempting to get taxpayers to pay for their child's placement in elementary school. Do, this case, as well, is not comparable to the situation in the OP.

06-28-2010, 06:29 PM	#167 (permalink)
Reba Granny Terp Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: South Carolina Posts: 39,112	For SCOTUS opinions this link might help: Opinions

06-28-2010, 06:37 PM	#168 (permalink)
whatdidyousay! Registered User Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 8,597	I did not know a state would pay for private school . I thought if the public school is not able to teach a child that need extra help the state would find a public schoo lthat could work with the child. Tax payers should not have to pay for a kid to go to private school. I think that is wrong.

06-28-2010, 06:39 PM	#169 (permalink)
Reba Granny Terp Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: South Carolina Posts: 39,112	I'm getting lost in this debate. Questions: 1. If a parent decides that none of the local public schools can provide appropriate accommodations, and therefore sends the child to a private school, who pays for the tuition? (It was my understanding that the parents pay.) 2. If a parent decides that none of the local public or private schools can provide appropriate accommodations, what can the parent do? Comment: I know that in my area if a child with special needs attends a private school, the parents pay for the tuition but the public schools provide supplemental therapy at no cost to the family. The therapy/classes are held in public schools, so it's up to the parents to make their own arrangements for attendance. That usually means early dismissal at the private school, then driving the student to the public school for the appointed sessions.

06-28-2010, 09:38 PM	#176 (permalink)
A Banned Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 1,180 Blog Entries: 1	It does create a problem when private school for the oral deaf is right there near you, while another is about 50 or more miles is covered by state/district. You don't want to drop everything and move when you can just take her to THAT school. If there was no oral school around then it does make sense to move. what doesn't make sense is if the district already covering a local oral school and the parent say "NO" to that school because she want her child go to a private school.