Parents want hearing school to get state funding

[faire_jour]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.:roll:

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

 

[jillio]

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]

For SCOTUS opinions this link might help:

Opinions

 

[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.

 

[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.

 

[jillio]

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]

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!]

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]

Wirelessly posted

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]

Wirelessly posted

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]

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.

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.