Oppose IDEA Discipline Amendments

The current IDEA does not provide for the safety of students, staff, nor individual children. Upon cursory reading it may appear things may be done swiftly when a student’s violence demands his/her removal from peers - yet, the “Stay Put” rule will go into effect, the IEP must remain in force - when it contains “socialization” goals that means the dangerous child should be taught with others. The reauthorization of IDEA virtually excluded professionals in the field of behavior disorders. In crisis all a school will encounter is legal doubletalk and incredible ineptness (on all fronts.)

The field of behavior disorders in in shambles. The field of LD is next. Training for special education professionals is being minimized while needs continue to grow. Everyone dances in this country to the tune of a very selfish piper - help and safety to our classrooms is becoming more and more distant, bringing mental health to our violent students and their families is further away than ever.

There are very few certified personnel in behavior disorders. Politicians, parents, and an unconcerned public will finish us off. Hate to be so gloomy, but that is how I see it. Pity the child with mental health needs in this culture.

Ken Campbell, President, Florida Council for Children with Behavior Disorders

Ken, thank you for stepping out and making those statements. Indeed, something is very wrong when teachers must keep emotionally disturbed children (some who have diagnoses, yet do not take meds because mom and dad oppose, their right, I guess) in their classrooms. Next, they tell us to SIMPLY create a positive behavioral plan……this is mandated, as though we teachers could fix everything if indeed we would only do our jobs as IDEA stipulates.

We are not mental health professionals. I do NOT have good tools to deal with some of the serious issues we are finding in our schools today. The special ed. advocates seem to suggest that if we are just trained (trained in a plethora of widely varying disabilities, as if we could become experts in all of these and still manage to teach, too). Or, the parent who (due to her savviness) got an IEP for her child that demanded the teacher to track 8 different behaviors on a behavior management system, every half hour all day long; oh, and she taught other children, too. The parent, of course, caught the school, they had not been able to handle this………..

Yes, we do need to take care of our teachers, when we burn them out, cause them unnecessary stress, who will want our jobs? INdeed, I have almost never (once) sat in an IEP meeting where anyone at the table expressed the least bit of concern about whether or not the task being set forth was actually possible.

If we must have conduct disorders and emotionally disturbed children in our classrooms, we must have mental health professionals on campus to assist us.

Elementary and Secondary Counseling Improvement Act of 2001, H.R. 1508

Sponsored by Rep. Roukema (R-NJ), this newly-introduced bill authorizes $100 million in grants to start or expand school-based counseling and mental health programs. The bill lists child and adolescent psychiatrists, along with school counselors, school psychologists and school social workers, as qualified providers of mental health services. The movement of more child and adolescent psychiatrists into schools will encourage earlier identification of children and adolescents with mental illnesses and improve outreach to children who would not otherwise seek treatment.

Please let your elected officials know you support this bill. You can go to http://www.congress.org and send your elected officials and email.

What could possibly be worth sacrificing safety? If it weren’t in a classroom, would we even be having this conversation?

Yes we would. The point is that a lot of these kids have problems controlling their anger. Some tend to express their anger with threats they do not mean. By making it possible for them to be expelled just for saying they may hurt someone is a travesty. I see the problems that the teachers face with these kids, but it should not be an expelling offense to think or say something. I think that a lot of these new rules about school wiolence are just paranoia over the shootings that have taken place recently. Every child that says they will do something is not going to act on it. And historically when they start changing laws, they do not stop. What part will be changed next. IDEA ‘97 is necessary the way it is. I think it should be left in tact.

I am not looking to clog this board with arguments. My feelings being expressed, I will not post to this thread again.

Crystal

My 2 cents, I know that an ed child is not getting the most education possible if it is only up to the teachers to try to teach a full class and keep up with the behavior of an ed child. I have a friend who teaches k-garten and told me one of many horrific stories of a 5 yr old with problems just today.The family chooses not to believe anything is wrong, and actually rewards expelling behavior with trips to the ice cream store. My own son was harassed, among other kids, by a child with obvious behavior problems(choking, threatening kids with sharpened objects, etc.) Today my son told me that he did it one last time and is going to a mental hospital. My son was afraid of this kid, and the kid wasn’t even very big.

Yes, mental health for kids is not given much priority, insurance doesn’t help as much as with physical health. It is a shame. I can understand why the 0 tolerance for threats, the school shootings are scary for all parents and school staff. It is a shame however to not take each case individually and see what the likely hood of such an incident occurring might be. Maybe instead of expulsion or suspension, an intensive meeting with the kid and parents and mental health professionals to investigate.

I notice for the most part that elementary school is very nurturing, middle school less so and high school even less. Maybe schools shouldn’t be made to be larger just because the kids are older. It would certainly be easier to get to know the kids especially at a time when they need adults to pay attention to them and mentor them.Even I can’t say I had that all knowing wonderful teacher who made a difference in my life, my school was large and impersonal and that was in the 80’s.

I would support a measure that would introduce more child mental health professionals in the school. Maybe kids who need it can get the help they need when that help is larger than what the reg. or sped. teacher can provide.

Crystal,
These feelings expressed were not argumentative toward you, but toward a system that routinely neglects the input of trained educators. Parents views were considered, administrator views were considered, political views were considered in the new IDEA. For the most part, practicing teachers were not. Perhaps the disrespect is more rampant than I, a teacher and son of a teacher, could ever imagine.
Students should not be removed for threats - especially students with emotional problems. In my career, I have had more than $10,000 worth of surgeries and workmen’s comp claims from injuries inflicted by students with significant behavioral disorders - Knee destroyed, groin muscle torn, eye gouged, etc. and never have I pursued suspension even for those children.
Yet, there are children whose parents refuse medication for their child - with the diagnosis Intermittant Explosive Disorder! There are children who have sexually assaulted classmates whose parents threaten us with everything if we remove their child to another setting. Present IDEA inflicts the stayput rule as they take damned forever to even bring the child to trial - which will end up with conviction, a psycho-sexual evaluation and no treatment! The assaulted child will have to change schools to get away from the perpetrator and the memories of the assault.
M’am, our system is in meltdown. Not only do we need mental health professionals in the schools - we need them in the courts! IDEA needs to be readdressed, but not by the politicians (who obviously do the readdressing and only with their short-sighted political agenda) - but by a regarded panel of advocates and experts - which should by law include expemplary professionals who work with these children.
I never meant to attack nor seem to attack you, Crystal - nor your child (whom I know nothing about) but about a system who infuriated me by ignoring my professional peers.

Ken Campbell

Thank-you for posting this. FYI, the schools cannot FIND certified counselors at this time. Our elem. school has gone w/o all year, despite advertising the position for months. Our state has already taken some action on this to get more counselors into high schools, but the counselors are not to be found. It probably will take a few years. I am thinking of taking the program myself, I might enjoy the change (then we lose one sped teacher!).

Crystal, I don’t think I have to tell you that we DO need to listen to that kind of talk and it is frightening. I once had a student with a great deal of anger who one day threatened to come to school with a gun and kill teachers. We found out when he approached one teacher (not one of his) and told her pointedly, he would not kill her. I think he was crying for help. I also believe his father got the message (he was on inter-district transfer, so that was his last day at our school).

Another fascinating avenue to look into to “treat” youngsters who display anger, sometimes rage, etc. is:

www.amenclinic.com

Dr. Amen believes (and I agree at this point) that these disorders are in the brain, in the brain chemical activity (either over or under active chemical activity in any of 6 areas he has thus far pinpointed). He shows pictures of brains. If there is a way to help a very angry and potentially violent child, I believe it is our (my parent hat) responsibility to do so, regardless of what we think we think of medication. It can give the child the gift of a life and learning and just may protect the other children and adults around him. Clearly youngsters who have problems with anger, etc. often don’t do well in school (with or without comorbid learning disabilities) and the anger increases, the problem escalates and things often get worse.

Yes, we need positive behavioral supports, but the public (frequently those who have never had the responsibility of teaching youngsters) all seem to know what we should do in school to make things all better. Leon Botstein points out in his book “Jefferson’s Children,” that education is about the only place where everyone who has never taught believes they are expert enough to know what we should do to fix everyone’s woes. But, I digress. We perhaps should be providing the positive supports, the mental health supports and parents of severe B.D. or emotionally disturbed children should seriously consider Dr. Amen’s work.

I read on another board, some months back, a parent complaint that the school wanted her to put her bi-polar child on medication. IMagine that, a child with a diagnosed psychiatric disorder that manifests in rage attacks refusing to medicate her child and sending him to school expecting the school to deal with him. But, that is her right. What about the rights of other persons, too? IDEA does not address this, but ethical people everywhere do.

Ditto, nothing personal toward you, Crystal. For a practicing teacher at this point in time who has dealt with parents who are in denial (and many more who are not), this is a most frustrating issue. Ad Ken pointed out, teachers are never consulted, and no one seems to regard our mental health to any extent.

First of all, on the use of medication in children… Before people lump all parents who refuse to use psychotropics in their children into one class of selfish or ill-informed persons more interested in their personal philosophy than in the safety of all…

Let us remember that none of these medications that are being used in young children have been authorized for this use by the FDA. This includes, but is not limited to, Prozac, Paxil and other SSRI’s, Risperdal, Adderall, Fluvox, Luvox, etc. Ritalin has been cleared for use in children over the age of 12, but not younger. So to use these drugs on children is done at the risk of the family (and pediatrician/psychiatrist who prescribes), and this is refered to as “off-label” usage.

The reason being that none of these medications have been tested for safety, effifacy, long-term ramifications or even if it is truly appropriate. Despite this, approximately 2 M children under age 12 are on Ritalin, 1.8 million minors are on Prozac/Paxil, and an unknown number on Risperdal and the rest. All of these children are being medicated against the law (remember that Ritalin, Adderal and Dexidrine are classified under Schedule II, just like other amphetimies).

These medications have not been properly tested in children, and the FDA does not compile statisitics on adverse reactions for off-label usage, so we do not have any adequate safeguard to warn us about common bad reactions.

Couple this with the inexact knowledge most pediatricians have about these types of medications in general. It is as common for instance for a ped to up the dosage when the drug doesn’t deliver as promised, despite the early warnings that may have otherwise indicated that the medication be stopped.

The known adverse reactions are also glossed over by peds and psyches when talking to parents struggling to make the decision to medicate or not. For instance, Risperdal is known to cause Tardive Dyskinesia, a permanent movement disorder that can occur. The peds will tell the parents that this is very rare, implying the chances of contracting it are next to impossible. In fact, that adult label for Risperdal has the warning 1 in 6 may develope TD (I never considered 1 in 6 to be rare myself). Another good example is the overwhelming number of complaints against Prozac. No other medication has anywhere close to the volume of adverse reaction complaints that Prozac does, only vaccines have more, and that is for the entire class of vaccines. The reports against Prozac may be higher yet still if they included the adverse reactions noted in children, but they cannot report off-label usage, so they are not included. Eli Lilly went so far as to distance themselves from off-label usage in the Spring of 2000 (shortly after the latest class action against them was filed in CT). EL knows what will happen when the class actions start against “off-label” usage, and they are assuring themselves that the Pediatricians and Psychiatrists who prescribe Prozac in minors hang by themselves.

On the topic of the schools being unable to find certified counselors/teachers/staff. That is because they pay too little. If they paid closer to what market will bear for people with that training, they would get applicants. But it is completely unreasonable to expect someone to come work for the schools at $28K starting out when they can start at $35-40K in a private setting such as a clinic. Seems to me if the schools would spend a little more on fully trained staff and less on developing strategies to defeat parent looking for FAPE or in excessive legal fees in their attempt to coast thru with inadequate and inappropriate services much of this problem could be avoided.

Let me close by saying I do not believe that children who are a bonafide threat to themselves or those around them should be included. The services offered to the child need to be appropriate for their needs, including more structured environments for those children who pose a very risk in the general ed classroom. One size fits all is a damn foolish idea for the application of LRE, just as it is in all other areas of IDEA.

Ken, Crystal, Anitya and All,

I see this problem with experience in parenting, school social work, and substitute teaching in a high school. I have some thoughts, and hope no one feels personally slighted. I simply want to speak from my perspective, which may be a little different from some of yours. I suspect we will have to agree to disagree on some of this, but that’s OK.

I think IDEA needs some fine tuning. I have little confidence that a student who “can’t control” what he says in making threats against others, can be trusted to control what he does. That student may not belong in a regular classroom, and alternative placement may be appropriate… and the sooner the better for everyone involved.

Drs. Ratey and Hallowell wrote several years ago in one of their books on ADD that ADD can explain…but not EXCUSE…behavior. I agree. I believe this could also be applied to learning differences. We can understand but need not routinely excuse inappropriate behavior that results from the pain, anger and frustration of learning disabilities. To be successful in school, all students must learn to manage and control their own behavior, lest they “stand out” in a negative way. Nothing should be “off the table” if it has the potential to enhance learning. Removing a student from an environment in which he or she is disrupting the learning of other students will enhance THEIR learning. Smaller classes in alternative settings can help troubled students.

The first priority in school is safety for all students and staff. I believe it is impossible to “know” with certainty which threats are real, and which are not. Even if it were, is it possible to determine how a particular school should respond to a particular threat from the distant halls of Washington DC? Of course not. A one size fits all discipline policy dictated out of Washington will do justice to no one. Just as we do not wait and see if someone is serious about suicide, we would be foolish to wait to see if a student was “serious” about harming another person he or she had threatened.

With a suicidal person, mental health professionals assess lethality. The most drastic step, hospitalization to protect the patient, is one option that may be used because it may be NECESSARY.

In the same way, appropriate disciplinary action must be taken immediately when threats are made against other people. That action may well include an alternative placement or suspension in order to protect every other person in the school. This is not an unreasonable option, and it seems absurd that former federal prosecutor, Rep. Barr, must ask the federal goverment to give schools “permission” to protect the student body and staff from those who cannot control themselves.

A student who is willing to threaten adults in authority is unlikely to have a problem with threatening and bullying classmates. Among the most vulnerable students may be those with learning problems, low self esteem, and those students who cannot “read” the emotions of others. These students also have rights that must be protected. When any student, special needs or not, makes the CHOICE…and it is a choice, despite being an impulsive act…to repeatedly violate the rules and the rights of others, this kind of behavior MUST carry consequences that actually mean something to the student. Without meaningful consequences, the student has no reason to change behavior.

If a student is repeatedly disruptive in school, the parents are obviously unable to persuade the student to stop this behavior. Whatever consequences, punishments or incentives they have tried have obviously been ineffective. They have lost control. Yet what I think I am hearing is that parents do not want the student to suffer the same consequences other students do for the same behavior. Now wait a minute! The last thing students with poor impulse control need is a message that they are “untouchable” or exempt from normal consequences because of their diagnosis. Rather than helping them to become better socialized, the notion that students should have a pass to make threats without having expulsion or alternative placement hanging over their heads will, in my opinion, not improve their behavior one bit. It actually gives the student power over the authorities, a distortion in the way things ought to work that is clearly a prescription for disaster. The message to all students should be comforting and unambiguous that the ADULTS are in control. Best wishes JJ

Enjoyed your thoughts. Many of the extremely difficult behavior problems are oppositional-defiant, ODD. No, this is not simply the case of a frustrated LD younster who is struggling in school who becomes overwhelmed and lashes out. Some might paint this picture for us (indeed academic frustrations can exacerbate tendencies). ODD occurs in relatively good students, in non-sped students, as well.

Dr. Daniel Amen considers this disorder to be caused by a pattern of chemical imbalances within the brain and he successfully treats it with medication. I would probably go this route if my child were in this situation.