Timothy W. V. Rochester School District Essay Example
Timothy W. V. Rochester School District Essay Example

Timothy W. V. Rochester School District Essay Example

Available Only on StudyHippo
  • Pages: 5 (1306 words)
  • Published: December 20, 2017
  • Type: Essay
View Entire Sample
Text preview

Timothy W. V.

Rochester School District Abstract The provision of resources to handicapped children is subject to a wide variety of federal and state laws and statutes. However, due the varied and spectacular range of disabilities and combination of disabilities it is often difficult to easily decide who should receive benefits and who should not. Often debated both within the court system, and without, is the subject of whether the child with a severe disability can actually benefit from the services and resources being allocated to that student. Timothy W. V.

Rochester School District addresses Just that Issue referred to as "Zero Reject.

" The Case Timothy W. , Plaintiff, Appellant, v. Rochester, New Hampshire, School District, Defendant, Appellate. United States Court of Appeals, 1st Circuit. 875 F.

Ad 954. Heard Feb.. 7, 1989. Decided


May 24, 1989.

As Amended May 31, 1989. Ronald K. Looseness's, Disabilities Rights Center, Inc. , Concord, N.

H. , for plaintiff, appellant. (Rottenest ; Johnson, 2010) (United States Court Of Appeals, 1989) Background Rochester School District denied the need for special education services stating that "... Handicapped child is not eligible for special education if he cannot benefit from hat education.

.. " The decision that Timothy W. Was a severely retarded and multiply handicapped child was not eligible under that standard" (The Education for All Handicapped Children Act (EACH) 1 988) was reversed by the court.

The EACH did not provide that a handicapped child must demonstrate that he or she will "benefit" from an educational program. (Wright & Wright, 2011 ) (United States Court Of Appeals, 1989) Timothy W. As diagnosed with brain damage, Joint conjunctures, cerebra

View entire sample
Join StudyHippo to see entire essay

palsy, severe spastic, cortical blindness, severe respiratory distress, quadriplegia, and hearing disability. His severe developmental disabilities resulted In a determination that he was not eligible for special education services because he was not educationally handicapped as he could not benefit from educational services provided. Timothy received services from a child development center, but none from the RSI.

A complaint against the decision by RSI nil 980 not to provide services was filed in 1984 which sparked four years of legal debate resulting in the 1989 ruling by the United States Court of Appeals.

The Issues The mall Issue, although complex, is easily stated In that school districts are squired to provide all children with Free and Appropriate Education (APE) In the Least Restrictive Environment (LURE) under the Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA) as well as federal and state statutes.

The complexity of the issue involves how far must a school go, and who pays, for the severe child? From basic bodily functions (changing, bathroom assistance, categorization, etc) to the most fragile of children, specialized staff are required to mitigate the issues and provide appropriate support. Provisions and large portions fall under what could be termed as unfunded andantes that burden school resources and restrict, or detract from, non-special education programming.

The Ruling 'The United States argued that a school district court may not refuse to provide a Child with a serious disability a free appropriate public education based on its determination that the child would not benefit from the educational services.

" (Wright ; Wright, 2011) This has set the precedent for such children to guarantee APE in accordance with IDEA. Congress ruled that provision

of educational services is "not guaranteed to produce any particular outcome" and as such there need not be proof that a child will benefit as a prerequisite to services.

Wright ; Wright, 2011) Board of Education of Hendricks Hudson Central School District v. Rowley was the basis for the school district argument against provision of services but the courts stated that the ruling that a child "must benefit" was misconstrued and misapplied. This ruling primarily concerned the schools responsibility to "maximize" student achievement and was more focused on the level of services provided rather than the exclusion of benefits due to lack of benefit.

United States Court Of Appeals, 1989) The Rowley case ultimately provided a basic 'floor of opportunity' and with regard to handicapped children specifically states that .

"[t]he Act requires special educational services for children 'regardless of the severity of their handicap,"' and "[t]he Act requires participating States to educate wide spectrum of handicapped children, from the marginally hearing-impaired to the profoundly retarded and palsied... " (United States Court Of Appeals, 1989) Although Robert Walkway and Karen Walkway V. Florida Union Free School District and

Maureen Flattery produced a ruling that a child should be placed in a program that provides for educational advancement it does not prescribe that a child must show ability to advance before services are rendered.

The Impact Irish case set the precedent for "zero reject" as an accepted policy, currently without substantial debate, for all children covered under disability statute and legislation. As such, children with severe disabilities who are perceived to be uneducable due to the severity of their condition are not withheld the educational services

granted their errs of lesser disability.

The ability to receive and benefit from the education provided is not a factor in its provision. Further impacts to consider are that a single Child can create staffing and logistics issues with regard to physical environment, staff (to include medical, transport, teaching, food services, counseling, hygiene, equipment maintenance, monitoring and personal assistance, interpreting, advocates, aide and benefit counselors, etc), Specialized PIPE team staffing and support, and in-classroom modifications, specialized curriculum and supplies, Just to name a few. Supporting and Precedence Case Law Ninth the Timothy W.

Ease the burden of proving that a child can benefit from education is removed and the requirement for accommodation has been placed on the school district. What must the school provide is further delineated by Sacramento City Unified School District v. Holland, which further states that LURE can be supported by modifying curriculum and provision off part-time aide. Georgia Association of Retarded Citizens v. McDaniel trumps the 180 day school year and mandates assistance stating under "related services" that IDEA compels schools to provide kissable students medical services.

Under Section 504 as well as Title II of the Americans with Disabilities ACT (DAD), schools must provide accommodations or modifications to meet the needs of disabled students. Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act states that a person with a disability is any person who" (I) has a physical or mental impairment which substantially limits one or more major life activities, (it) has a record of such an impairment, or (iii) is regarded as having such an impairment. " As such, the physical environment must be adjusted according to a 504 Plan.

Closing Thoughts

ere precedence setting case prevents schools from discriminating against a child regardless of disability and proscribes them from falling back on previous practices n that regard. There are a great many resources available, especially with new advances, and schools are required to take advantage of such. The main responsibility then becomes evaluation and appropriate development and application of an PIPE.

The ruling that all children in New Hampshire be provided with equal educational opportunities has set precedence for all educational institutions. Eve seen and worked with children whom educational services have little impact, but "little" is still something. For some of the most severe even the simple task of staying seated can be deemed progress. However, as in the case of Timothy, although t is considered unfair to withhold services simply because he cannot benefit there should be some measure of common sense applied.

Common sense, unfortunately, has no place in the execution and administration of legal entitlement.

Many teachers have argued that they are little more than "baby sitters" for the most severe of hillier with such disability that they (the child) are unable to benefit from the educational curriculum or support provided by the schools and are a drain on the scholastic budget. Although a harsh opinion it has been found in many cases that classes and services provided to the larger school community have been cut in specific instances in order to shape the budget to accommodate special needs expenditures.

Get an explanation on any task
Get unstuck with the help of our AI assistant in seconds