Anda di halaman 1dari 5

1

Portfolio #5

Yolanda Nega
Portfolio #5
College of Southern Nevada

2
Portfolio #5
Some public school can excessive burden money with children with disabilities and parents might
have the rights to demand services for their special child. Services may be denied depending on the
circumstances and the childs care demand while applying inclusion in the public schools. This is the case
that one high school is currently facing. Debbie Young is a seasoned high school principal. She served as
a special education teacher and an assistant principal in a progressive, affluent school district in the South.
She is approached by the parents of a severely disabled tenth-grade students to have their son, Jonathan,
attend one of the schools in this district. Jonathan has multiple disabilities requiring constant care by a
special trained nurse. He is profoundly mentally disabled, has spastic quadriplegia, and has a seizure
disorder, Young refuses the parents request due to extraordinary expenses and a view that the school is
not the most appropriate placement for Jonathan seizure disorder. The No Child Left Behind Act, makes it
clear that all children should receive education equally. Children with disabilities should not be the
exception, and should receive the same opportunity of education.
The schools can be protected under the law to spend money or not in
special education services as Michael, La Morte argues, When facing parental
request for excessively expensive services, schools may find some potential relief in
the United States Supreme Courts decision Board of Education V. Rowley
(HENDRICK HUDSON DIST. BD. OF ED. v. ROWLEY, 458 U.S. 176 (1982 458
U.S. 176). In Rowley the court held that schools are not required to maximize a
childs educational potential by providing superior special education and related
services regardless of expenses. La Monte adds that parents may express their
wishes, but if the schools choice is also appropriate, the school may choose
between appropriate options and need not choose the most expensive option,
regardless of parental wishes (La Morte). This law is not clear as what special
services schools can deny, but opens the window to look to review this law and

3
Portfolio #5
incorporate either all children or not to deny services to all and not make the special
children and their families feeling discriminate.

If some schools have the right to deny services based on monetary excessive
expenses who is protecting special children education? La Monte explains Section
504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 protects both handicapped children and adults
form discrimination in institutions receiving federal fund, unlike the IDEA that
applies only to eligible children with disabilities. As a recipient of federal funds,
public schools must comply with the mandate of Section 504 (La Monte). Some
schools might be unintentionally violating the law by denying services and do not
follow the Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, that allow special children to be
educated, prepared, and be independent individuals that will help them in their
future lives. That is why law that can protect some schools to deny and shows that
services to this population should be revised.
In the same case Young has the right to refuses service to Jonathan because
the American with Disabilities Act (ADA) states that students with disabilities must
be reasonably accommodated, but only to the extent that it does not impose an
undue hardship on the school. (Center for Education and Employment Law). A
review to the law by the Supreme Court with children with disabilities needs to
happen for children to be educated and also the other law states No Child Left
behind Act. All this contradictions of the law requires further evaluation to allow all
children regardless of mentally or health condition to be educate equally as the law
requires.

4
Portfolio #5
In addition, the changes to the IDEA Reauthorization Act of 2004 states that
comparable relate services must be provided to a disabled child who transfers to a
new school district in his or her state within the same school year. Services are
expanded to include nursing and interpreting services (Essex). The law has many
contradictions that is needed to clarify as to what extend it will cover certain
children with disabilities and which children do not qualify.
The court system and schools should seek these special children that if many
services are deny such as attend school and deny them to provided special
accommodation. These children are losing valuable education and the opportunity
to be dependable and educate individuals who can probably in the future they can
be productive people for any employer. That is why, in this case, hire an extra nurse
will solve this issue and most importantly will help children with disabilities to
become educated individuals.

5
Portfolio #5

References:
Center for Education and Employment Law. Desk book Encyclopedia of American
School Law.
2012. U.S.A. Print.
Nathan, Essex. School Law and The Public Schools. Pearson. 2012. U.S.A. Print.
La Monte, Michael. School Law Cases and Concepts. Pearson. 2005. U.S.A. Print.

Anda mungkin juga menyukai