Commentary: ‘Tragedy and triumph’ in court ruling
July 1st, 2009Commentators are still posting reactiions to last week’s Supreme Court decision in Forest Grove School District v. T.A., which found that school districts can be obligated to pay for private special education services even when a student has not first sampled special ed in a public school. Some excerpts:
From the Toledo Blade:
The decision undoubtedly will add to public schools’ financial woes, but it is well within the spirit of federal law, which long ago — 1975– established a right to a “free and appropriate education” for disabled kids.
Unfortunately, the federal government has failed to keep a commitment to fund such programs at a certain level. Perhaps with the court ruling, pressure will grow for more money to be appropriated.
From the Dallas Morning News:
We side with the majority for a simple reason: Think what it would be like for a child with a learning problem to live in a school district that wouldn’t qualify him as disabled or provide needed services. That child’s either stuck or his parents must pay for private schooling.
… That said, this decision poses daunting fiscal challenges to Texas school districts. At a minimum, they must be more open to including special-ed students and creating better individual learning plans.
We hope the ruling doesn’t stall existing cooperation between some parents of special-education students and fair-minded districts. Still, this game-changer was warranted.
Op-ed: The tragedy and triumph of T.A., by Charles Conroy in the Boston Globe:
Whether the Supreme Court decision will have positive effects for private schools for children with disabilities — and a negative impact on public schools that struggle to fund special-needs services — will start to become clear in the days to come. But what is evident now is the obvious benefit for kids like T.A. This boy went to school from kindergarten into high school apparently struggling. The school district responded to his disability with inaction, inertia, and, ultimately, defensiveness and opposition to his receiving services when and where he needed them. He never got what he needed until he was a junior in high school.
… T.A.’s school career might have been largely lost. That’s the tragedy. Since last Monday, there will be fewer T.A.s. That’s the triumph.
From the Salt Lake Deseret News:
Utah can ill-afford siphoning off resources from its already lean public school resources. We hope special educators in public schools will view this ruling as added impetus to provide the best possible programming for students with special needs, thus encouraging other parents to make a deliberate choice to place their children in public school programs, which not only benefit students with disabilities when they attend regular education classes but teach important lessons to other students in mainstream classes.
This entry was posted
on Wednesday, July 1st, 2009 at 9:21 pm and is filed under IDEA, education, law, special education.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Email This Post
Our RSS Feed