School for the Deaf denies deaf child with Down Syndrome placement

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bottesini said:
CSDF has reams of information where this same thing has happened before.

It isn't really unusual, although I am happy your friends got the result they wanted.
Click to expand...

What do you mean by the first comment, that they have "reams of information"? I did see that school had a case that had similarities, a deaf student with a secondary diagnosis of autism was advised they "didn't benefit" from placement there. It ultimately worked it's way to federal court and the family essentially prevailed, although it was through a settlement.

If a child is profoundly deaf and uses ASL, they have every right to attend a school for the deaf. A secondary "disability" does not outweigh another. They both need to be appropriately addressed.

Beyond that, a child who is deaf requires effective access to language and communication in order to make progress in the curriculum and their life.

Thanks Bott- I'm happy for them too.
 
jillio said:
No it wouldn't. And what is all this crap about confidentiality, anyway. Nothing about this case, as it has been described, is covered by confidentiality.
Click to expand...

Yes, it is covered by confidentiality. A compliance complaint and it's findings are confidential.
 
jillio said:
Not unusual at all. And I doubt that any decision will affect more than this case alone, IF there is even a case that a decision has been made regarding.
Click to expand...

This is why I brought this situation to the forum. Your comment that it's, "not unusual at all" really hits the nail on the head. This is something that needs to be addressed. If it isn't, countless deaf children will end up without appropriate language and communication skills. I don't need to get into the other ramifications of situations like this. I think we all know what happens when you're cut off from language and communication.
 
CSign said:
What do you mean by the first comment, that they have "reams of information"? I did see that school had a case that had similarities, a deaf student with a secondary diagnosis of autism was advised they "didn't benefit" from placement there. It ultimately worked it's way to federal court and the family essentially prevailed, although it was through a settlement.

If a child is profoundly deaf and uses ASL, they have every right to attend a school for the deaf. A secondary "disability" does not outweigh another. They both need to be appropriately addressed.

Beyond that, a child who is deaf requires effective access to language and communication in order to make progress in the curriculum and their life.

Thanks Bott- I'm happy for them too.
Click to expand...

I mean that there is lots of information in the public record that is easy to obtain relating to this subject.

Not that it is directly about the case you reference. I don't know if yours is in the public record yet.
 
jillio said:
No one is asking you to provide details of the investigation. All we want is the name of the school. The fact that you refuse to provide it, despite the fact that non-compliance findings are a matter of public record, casts suspicions on anything you claim in this matter. It appears to many that you refuse to provide the name of the school, because you know that what you have stated can be checked on as a matter of public record, and my releasing the school's name we will find you to be a fraud.
Click to expand...

If you choose to believe I'm a "fraud" then so be it. I have better things to do with my time than to fabricate stories to bring to this forum. I would love nothing more than to scan and post the report. The fact is, it is confidential and I would be remiss to do so. I also don't feel the need to "prove myself" to someone whose only real interest in me is to make libelous Comments about me and put me down.
 
I did see that school had a case that had similarities, a deaf student with a secondary diagnosis of autism was advised they "didn't benefit" from placement there. It ultimately worked it's way to federal court and the family essentially prevailed, although it was through a settlement.

If a child is profoundly deaf and uses ASL, they have every right to attend a school for the deaf. A secondary "disability" does not outweigh another. They both need to be appropriately addressed.
Click to expand...
CSign, on the other hand........it's not as cut and dried as you're making it seem. I totally and completely agree with you when it comes to mild and even moderate secondary disablties. Those kids can be served very easily at their local/state School for the Deaf. But when you get into more complex disabilty, the kid may need more specialized programming. That is why for example, there are a lot of Deaf Schools that have behavorial disabilty programs (like Walden School) and why Austine School opened a Deaf Autism program. You have to understand, that just like the way a hearing school cannot really offer well trained TODs/blind/autistic/fill in the blank with whatever low incidence disabilty, a staff at an average school for the deaf wouldn't be experianced in teaching kids with more severe secondary disabilties. Those kids need more specialized programs. There are some available, and it sucks they have to go out of state.....but on the other hand......
 
CSign said:
Yes, it is covered by confidentiality. A compliance complaint and it's findings are confidential.
Click to expand...

No, they aren't. Non-compliance is a matter of public record.
 
CSign said:
If you choose to believe I'm a "fraud" then so be it. I have better things to do with my time than to fabricate stories to bring to this forum. I would love nothing more than to scan and post the report. The fact is, it is confidential and I would be remiss to do so. I also don't feel the need to "prove myself" to someone whose only real interest in me is to make libelous Comments about me and put me down.
Click to expand...

You don't need to scan and post the report. All you have to do is provide the name of the school. Anyone who chooses can access the rest.
 
I just re-read through parts of this thread and found myself amused.

How many times have I heard the case that a Deaf school IS usually the least restrictive environment for d/hh? So when you take girl with d/s and who is deaf (common) and you start to cry, "Well, it's about the academics!" and such, do you realize what you're saying? People on here -most, if not many- have been saying that in regards to academics, hearing schools (generally) can't meet needs because of linguistic differences...and that's not even getting into the social aspect. So what makes anyone think that a hearing school is better equipped than a deaf school? And aren't we all about diversity here?

Look, we don't have enough info to make clear judgments about her case, but we certainly don't have enough info to determine that the school was fair.

Jillio, in regards to algebra, I assumed that if the Deaf school can't meet her needs, she may not be high functioning enough for algebra. I have no idea. But 'mainstreaming' usually means placements like that. There was a student in my school who was MR and he had lots of classes in 'mainstream'. He was given alternate assignments. No one expected him to be able to explain cell division as well as the rest of us in Biology, but the arrangement was good for us all.

meh. I feel sorry for the parents. They must be frustrated.
 
TheOracle said:
I just re-read through parts of this thread and found myself amused.

How many times have I heard the case that a Deaf school IS usually the least restrictive environment for d/hh? So when you take girl with d/s and who is deaf (common) and you start to cry, "Well, it's about the academics!" and such, do you realize what you're saying? People on here -most, if not many- have been saying that in regards to academics, hearing schools (generally) can't meet needs because of linguistic differences...and that's not even getting into the social aspect. So what makes anyone think that a hearing school is better equipped than a deaf school? And aren't we all about diversity here?

Look, we don't have enough info to make clear judgments about her case, but we certainly don't have enough info to determine that the school was fair.

Jillio, in regards to algebra, I assumed that if the Deaf school can't meet her needs, she may not be high functioning enough for algebra. I have no idea. But 'mainstreaming' usually means placements like that. There was a student in my school who was MR and he had lots of classes in 'mainstream'. He was given alternate assignments. No one expected him to be able to explain cell division as well as the rest of us in Biology, but the arrangement was good for us all.

meh. I feel sorry for the parents. They must be frustrated.
Click to expand...

That is the problem with this whole thread.
 
TheOracle said:
I just re-read through parts of this thread and found myself amused.

How many times have I heard the case that a Deaf school IS usually the least restrictive environment for d/hh? So when you take girl with d/s and who is deaf (common) and you start to cry, "Well, it's about the academics!" and such, do you realize what you're saying? People on here -most, if not many- have been saying that in regards to academics, hearing schools (generally) can't meet needs because of linguistic differences...and that's not even getting into the social aspect. So what makes anyone think that a hearing school is better equipped than a deaf school? And aren't we all about diversity here?

Look, we don't have enough info to make clear judgments about her case, but we certainly don't have enough info to determine that the school was fair.

Jillio, in regards to algebra, I assumed that if the Deaf school can't meet her needs, she may not be high functioning enough for algebra. I have no idea. But 'mainstreaming' usually means placements like that. There was a student in my school who was MR and he had lots of classes in 'mainstream'. He was given alternate assignments. No one expected him to be able to explain cell division as well as the rest of us in Biology, but the arrangement was good for us all.

meh. I feel sorry for the parents. They must be frustrated.
Click to expand...

You may be right regarding the functional limitations.

The mainstream is infinately more prepared to address issues of developmental delays than is a small specialized deaf school. Not to mention the fact that they receive funding to develop programs to meet the needs of students with developmental delays.

But, as shel said, we don't have enough information to make a call here. Especially when the name of the school is being withheld.
 
jillio said:
You may be right regarding the functional limitations.

The mainstream is infinately more prepared to address issues of developmental delays than is a small specialized deaf school. Not to mention the fact that they receive funding to develop programs to meet the needs of students with developmental delays.

But, as shel said, we don't have enough information to make a call here. Especially when the name of the school is being withheld.
Click to expand...

How is the mainstream "infinitely more prepared" to deal with a profoundly deaf child with developmental delays? If the mainstream cannot address a deaf childs communication needs, how would that be effective? Access to language and communication is first and foremost. A child with developmental delays who is also deaf will not benefit from a placement that does not provide for complete communication across the board.

The Department of Education had enough information to make a decision, which is why they were found out of compliance. Providing the name of the school isn't going to change much.
 
How many times have I heard the case that a Deaf school IS usually the least restrictive environment for d/hh? So when you take girl with d/s and who is deaf (common) and you start to cry, "Well, it's about the academics!" and such, do you realize what you're saying? People on here -most, if not many- have been saying that in regards to academics, hearing schools (generally) can't meet needs because of linguistic differences...and that's not even getting into the social aspect. So what makes anyone think that a hearing school is better equipped than a deaf school? And aren't we all about diversity here?
Click to expand...
The Oracle, but you're missing that we're talking about degree of developmental delay. A Deaf School can handle virtually all mild and even a lot of moderate. But when you're missing is that when you get to lower levels of functioning, you have to be really specialized. Granted, most profound and severe kids (who are dhh) are in mentally handicapped programs.....where of course they have communication therapy, like with PECS, and switches and things like that. In that case, the hearing loss is a secondary disabilty, not a primary disabilty.
How is the mainstream "infinitely more prepared" to deal with a profoundly deaf child with developmental delays? If the mainstream cannot address a deaf childs communication needs, how would that be effective? Access to language and communication is first and foremost. A child with developmental delays who is also deaf will not benefit from a placement that does not provide for complete communication across the board
Click to expand...
.

Agsin you're missing that it's the DEGREE of developmental delay. Kids with mild or mild/moderate MR and hearing loss can be served well at a deaf school. They have the abilty to aquire ASL language fluently. But when you're talking about more severe mental handicap, it's not as clear. Were you aware that in severe mental handicap programs their education involves learning to communicate through things like PECS, Sign, words and switches?
 
deafdyke said:
Agsin you're missing that it's the DEGREE of developmental delay. Kids with mild or mild/moderate MR and hearing loss can be served well at a deaf school. They have the abilty to aquire ASL language fluently. But when you're talking about more severe mental handicap, it's not as clear. Were you aware that in severe mental handicap programs their education involves learning to communicate through things like PECS, Sign, words and switches?
Click to expand...

RE: my bolded part: yes, I worked in SPED. :)

DD, if the girl had DS, it isn't to assume that she wasn't verbal. Sign is no easier or harder than any other primary language. As a secondary language, it may be even more beneficial.

What I don't understand is how people can say that mainstream schools aren't good enough for Deaf but they're good enough for a D/S child because the deafness is 'secondary'. Shit. I don't know a single Deaf person on AD who says their Deafness is secondary. If that were the case, we wouldn't be capitalizing that shit. :P
 
CSign said:
How is the mainstream "infinitely more prepared" to deal with a profoundly deaf child with developmental delays? If the mainstream cannot address a deaf childs communication needs, how would that be effective? Access to language and communication is first and foremost. A child with developmental delays who is also deaf will not benefit from a placement that does not provide for complete communication across the board.

The Department of Education had enough information to make a decision, which is why they were found out of compliance. Providing the name of the school isn't going to change much.
Click to expand...

CSign, if I could add:

Diversity.

It makes us better.
 
deafdyke said:
.

Agsin you're missing that it's the DEGREE of developmental delay. Kids with mild or mild/moderate MR and hearing loss can be served well at a deaf school. They have the abilty to aquire ASL language fluently. But when you're talking about more severe mental handicap, it's not as clear. Were you aware that in severe mental handicap programs their education involves learning to communicate through things like PECS, Sign, words and switches?
Click to expand...

I'm not missing anything actually. A person who is deaf has the right to access language and communication regardless of a cognitive disability. Frankly, it's appalling that people would suggest otherwise.
 
CSign said:
I'm not missing anything actually. A person who is deaf has the right to access language and communication regardless of a cognitive disability. Frankly, it's appalling that people would suggest otherwise.
Click to expand...

A freaking men.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top