Learning disability ruling holds schools liable
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
The decision by the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco in a case from Compton (Los Angeles County) is one of the first in the nation on a parent's ability to enforce a federal law that requires schools to identify all children with disabilities and provide them with an appropriate education.
The law allows parents to seek a state administrative hearing to challenge a school's denial of their request to classify a child as learning disabled. In Monday's 2-1 ruling, the court said parents can also demand a hearing, or file suit on the child's behalf in some circumstances, when a school ignores the disabilities.
The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act requires schools to identify and evaluate all children with disabilities who need special education services, and allows parents to file complaints about any shortcomings in the school's procedures, Judge Harry Pregerson said in the majority opinion.
The Compton Unified School District "chose to ignore (the student's) disabilities" and is just as responsible under the law as if it had wrongly rejected her parents' request to classify her as disabled, Pregerson said.
Dissenting Judge N. Randy Smith said the law authorizes parental complaints only to protest a school's wrongful actions, not its inactions or negligence.
He said the law was intended to promote cooperation between parents and schools, but the ruling "weakens parents' role" by making schools solely responsible for monitoring children's development.
Lawyers for the district and the plaintiff, one of its former students, were unavailable for comment. The district could ask the full appeals court for a rehearing or appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The student failed every class as a 10th-grader in 2003-04, the court said. Teachers described her work as "gibberish" and said she sometimes refused to enter the classroom or spent time at her desk coloring with crayons or playing with dolls.
Her mother was reluctant to have her tested for disabilities. A mental health counselor recommended an assessment, but the district instead promoted her to the 11th grade.
Her mother requested an assessment the next fall, and the school placed her in special education. The mother then sued on her daughter's behalf, claiming school officials should have made the placement in the ninth grade - when the girl was performing at a fourth-grade level - and seeking remedial tutoring at the district's expense.
The appeals court upheld a federal judge's ruling that required the tutoring. Even if the law required a parent to prove wrongful action by the district, the court said, the Compton district's "willful inaction in the face of numerous 'red flags' is more than sufficient" to show a violation.
The ruling can be viewed at sfgate.com/ZJKF. E-mail Bob Egelko at begelko@sfchronicle.com.
This article appeared on page C - 4 of the San Francisco Chronicle
Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/03/22/BA541CJMSH.DTL#ixzz0jD9X1tdJ
