Proud Member of The Moms Clean Air Force
Print This Post
Oct
3
The Parma School District fulfilled its legal obligations when it created an education plan for an autistic child despite the objections of the boy’s parents, a federal appeals court ruled Friday.
The ruling by the 6th U.S. Circuit Court is an apparent setback for Jeff and Sandee Winkelman, who have argued since 2003 that the district’s plan for their son Jacob did not address behavioral problems caused by autism.
Sandee Winkelman vowed Friday to continue her mission to protect her son’s right to an education. The method by which schools deal with autistic students is flawed and fails to consider their individual needs, she said.
Here’s the pdf for the court decision, but the Cleveland.com post, just minutes ago, didn’t list it.
What’s a little confusing is that, according to this late August article, the Winkelmans just were awarded 2007-2008 tuition for their child’s attendance at the Monarch School, a part of Bellefaire JCB that specifically educates, treats and works with children who’ve been diagnosed along the autism spectrum.
In yet another defeat to the Parma City School District, the State Level Review Officer Robert Mues has upheld the decision of Impartial Hearing Officer Ronald Alexander. Jeff and Sandee Winkelman, who have been battling the PCSD for the last five school years over the programming for their child Jacob, who has autism, won reimbursement for Jacob’s attendance at the Monarch School for the 2007/08 school year. The Monarch School is specially designed to meet the needs of children with autism and is located in Cleveland Heights.
The award of tuition for Monarch to Jacob largely centered on the PCSD failure to address Jacob’s transition needs. Although the PCSD staff tried to maintain that transition services would be offered, neither the IHO nor the SLRO credit ed the district witnesses testimony. “It was obvious to everyone at the table that the District had no intention of serving Jacob, and that talk of transition services for Jacob were a sham,” stated Andrew Cuddy, the New York attorney that handled the case for the Winkelmans.
Cuddy explained, “The reasoning of both the IHO and SLRO focused on the unique need of Jacob if he were to transition from Monarch back into a public school setting. The District’s plan, or better put, lack of a plan, surely would have caused injury to Jacob. The District maintained these services were not legally required under the law. They should have gotten better legal advice.”
…
The August 21, 2008 ruling of State Level Review Officer Robert Mues ordered the Parma City School District to reimburse Jeff and Sandee Winkelman $68,500 for the 2007/08 school year attendance at the Monarch School.
But today’s appellate decision affirms a trial court’s decision against them both for remuneration for the services they (the parents) have paid for and for finding that the district must make such payments in the future.
From today’s opinion:
The parents of an autistic child sued their local school district, alleging that the school district had failed to provide a “free appropriate public education” (FAPE) in accordance with the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), 20 U.S.C. § 1400, et seq., and seeking remuneration for doing so themselves, as well as a court order directing the school district to do so in the future. Both parties moved for judgment on the administrative record and the district court ruled for the school district. The parents appealed.
…
The Winkelmans first argue that the district court erred by placing the burden of proof on them, rather than on the school district. Next, they argue that the district court erred by finding that the school district had provided the FAPE with regard to music therapy, occupational therapy, and speech therapy. Finally, they contend that the district court erred by approving the hearing officer’s decision to disregard the Winkelmans’ expert-witness’s testimony as not credible.
After carefully reviewing the record, the law, and the arguments presented in the appellate briefs, we conclude that each of the Winkelmans’ assignments of error is without merit, and that the district court’s opinion, Winkelman v. Parma Cty. Sch. Dist., 411 F. Supp. 2d 722 (N.D. Ohio 2005), correctly sets out the applicable law and correctly applies that law to the facts in the record. The issuance of a full written opinion by this court would serve no useful purpose. Accordingly, for the reasons stated in the district court’s opinion, we AFFIRM.
Although I’m not familiar with the actions of the Parma district and what they’ve offered in place of what the Monarch School provides and how well the two programs match the child’s needs, I would have been more suprised if the appellate court had decided in favor of the parents. Not because I don’t think their case is strong, but only because education law gives a great deal of discretion to district professionals. Again, this doesn’t mean I can being to assume who was right or wrong in this case, but I would have guessed that this would be the result.
Nonethelss, it’s possible that on appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, if the case were taken, who knows.
I wrote about Winkelman before here, here, here here here here and here.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 11:41 pm October 3rd, 2008 in Courts, Education, Law, Ohio, Social Issues, Youth
Comments
5 Responses to “Appeals court rules against Winkleman parents, Parma Schools’ plan for autistic child adequate”
Voted into Top 25 Political Mom Blogs
Now on sale-WLST essay included!
Posts About Pepper Pike City Council2010 WE Magazine 101 Women Bloggers to Watch
Category Specific RSS
Pepper Pike Cleveland+ Politics Women Ohio Elections Law Jewish
Shalom Jill,
Like you I’ve been following this case for some time. I do so because it will directly affect a portion of the students I work with.
I think there is a broader educational/societal question here in that we’re not addressing a child’s right to an education versus a child’s right to therapy.
We agree that all children have a societally created right to an education through grade 12. And we have taken the extra steps of making that education mandatory with very specific exceptions.
What we are wrestling with now is where does an education — preparing a student to be a productive member of society as an adult — end and therapy/caregiving begin?
This question would be easier if it were not for the extreme differential between the costs of a community providing the former and the latter.
I don’t have current figures, but the last time I checked, the cost of programs designed for children with Autism Spectrum Disorder are in excess of $50,000 per year per child. That can easily be five times or more the cost of a child in the general population of a school system.
That money pays for far more than what we think of as education in the traditional sense.
I work with these students and I’ve met their parents. I understand the exhaustion, anxiety and frustration of providing for a child afflicted with ASD. It can be a very hard life with no relief in sight.
I’m not convinced that school systems — at least not school systems as they are currently funded — are the right mechanism for dealing with what some refer to as an epidemic (1 child in 165 is born with ASD).
These families need society’s help. We need a better way of providing that help.
B’shalom,
Jeff
[...] Appeals court rules against Winkleman parents, Parma Schools’ plan for autistic child adequate Posted in Autism, [...]
In order to clear up some of the confusion, this ruling by the 6th Circuit Court concerns a case that has been ongoing about the 2003/04 school year. There have been subsequent cases each year, costing the Parma City School District millions of dollars in attorney fees.
The parents did “turn the tide” of these decisions when they won the case for the 2007/08 school year both at the hearing level and then at the State Level Review level. That can has not been appealed. All of the prior school years continue to be litigated.
It is impossible to separate what is ‘education’ and ‘relate services’ especially in programs for children with autism. In fact, the IDEA includes for provision of related services as part of the the educational program and as a component of the IEP (Individualized Education Program). These services can also be reimbursed to the state through medicaid, although Ohio chooses to opt out of these reimbursements currently. (I understand that there are legislative efforts to get this in place, however.)
The parents need to continue this fight, as the issues are too significant to abandon.
Yes, programs for children with autism have a price tag. This is largely the result of the public schools failures in providing appropriate programs in-house. The Pleasant Valley program that Parma has been offering Jacob is a warehouse. The children in there make little or now progress from year to year, and in multiple cases of children in those programs that I am aware of they have actually regressed to the point of then needing residential placement. Clearly that is not the intentions of the IDEA — and obviously that is a LOT more expensive than meeting these kids needs to begin with.
Parma is one of the worst special education districts I have ever come across, and it is largely due to poor administration and poor legal guidance. Parma is also in the middle of a public corruption scandal, with a lot of rumors about kickback schemes — that may even include kickbacks from the lawyers. Now wouldn’t that be dandy, if lawyers were kicking back money to school officials who were allowing legal fees to be run up at the expense of the children?
When do we see 50K a year as one on one?
Each level of the disorder different, each child has a special set of needs.
It is obvious that some parents could not provide for the child what the child needs, but if they can define the needs then could they then also serve those needs themselves?
The Cuyahoga Board of Mental Retardation…is it affordable? It is a separate system to address that which the educational system could not. It would be better to teach the parents then to attempt to teach the child, Stay with the child and get instructions and assistance to do that. Do we still think it the system or have we figured out it is the household yet.
Some people would or may say I could not do that, it would be too difficult for them, the same people that demand others do it for them and critical of the results.
They drop the child off and then pick the child up, nice if your child is adaptable but if not you as the individual have ultimate responsibility and government should assist you in doing it yourself. Then we can spend our time catching the parents that lie about the child having the disability to get the money, because some will.
If you have a child with special needs then you need the training, it is your burden for your life. You need to care for that child and learn how to.
If I am wrong then look at the price…if it’s 50K that enough to support a parent and a child more than enough.
Is it the child with the disability or the parents with an inability?
The system that cost 65K is the best, yeah for the people that run it, so admirable? It a high end service for people with excess and it getting into my wallet and I am not so happy about that. It not that I have no empathy, but bare the burden and get off my back.
You sit at home with your child and offer them music therapy…I’m not interested it footing a 65K a year program for that, what the heck. I also say that if you have a 200K a year household income the system should address it differently to that of a single mother with less that 20K a year.
I am tried of social malcontempt, they needs to address these children outside of public education and the system used has to include the parent and their roles. The audacity to assume that society should bare the entire burden with such a sense of entitlement with no regard to the costs to society. Hand the child to others and then demand resolutions and performance, with little humility, some have only self-righteous indignation. It’s highly offensive, my child is broke and you need to fix them…assholes.
Those that cannot do it for them selves by themselves have no right to be critics of others. Are we blind, that we cannot see the roles we play. Help or total responsibility? I would offer help until you get demanding, then I am not so empathetic.
I see these high end systems and how they see empathy as a market to make some decent salaries, enough of that.
To Oengus, #4 above: The Amish have a perspective which seems to apply to you and that is, that those intolerant or openly condemning of those with challenges are the truly disabled ones. Obviously, you do not have a child with a disability. If you are an educator or administrator, you are a perfect example of everything that is wrong in the educational system and society at-large. Certainly, you have a right to your opinion. As the parent of a child with a disability, I have a right to mine too. I have watched my son suffer emotional abuse and academic harm at the hands of a public school system run by cretins which employed teachers more disabled than my child. What I wish for school administrators is less ego and more higher education. What I wish for parents of special needs children is more guts to do what Sandee Winkelman did for her child. What I wish for society in general is enlightement. What I wish for people like you; the very core of the problem; is due karma.