Beth B. v. Van Clay, No. 01-3673 (7th Cir. March 5, 2002)

[Guest guest]

Beth B. v. Van Clay, No. 01-3673 (7th Cir. March 5, 2002)

http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/op3.fwx?submit1=showop & caseno=01-3673

Beth, a special education student, suffers from Rett

Syndrome, a cognitive disorder. In Beth's case, experts placed her

cognitive ability between one and six years. She is unable to walk

unassisted and communicates primarily by eye gaze. When Beth entered

kindergarten in 1994, she was placed in a regular classroom where she

received special education services. However, in 1997 the school

district developed an IEP that called for Beth to be placed in a

self-contained educational life skills program. She would be in a

classroom with five to seven students who suffer from autism. Beth’s

parents wanted her to continue in a regular classroom. The parents

rejected the placement and requested a due process hearing. A hearing

officer ruled for the school district. Under IDEA's stayput provision

Beth has remained in a regular classroom. A federal district court

upheld the hearing officer's ruling. It agreed with the hearing officer

that Beth’s place in a regular classroom was not mainstreaming in any

real sense and as a result her

placement in a regular classroom was not a viable least

restrictive environment (LRE). The court, therefore, concluded that the

dispute between the school district and the parents involved a

pedagogical decision, not a legal one, which was best left to educators

rather than the courts.

A Seventh Circuit panel affirmed the district court's

decision. For purposes of clarification, the panel noted that the free

appropriate public education provision (FAPE) of IDEA was not at issue.

It pointed out that the parents had confused the FAPE requirement with

IDEA's least restrictive environment (LRE) requirement. Specifically

only the LRE analysis was implicated regarding the question of the

educational benefit to Beth of placement in a regular classroom. Turning

to the issue of whether Beth was being educated in the least restrictive

environment, the panel concluded that " Lake Bluff[˜s] … decision to

remove Beth from her regular school did not violate the IDEA’s mandate

to mainstream disabled children to the maximum extent appropriate. " It

pointed out that Beth has spent approximately 50% of each day in regular

class during which her academic progress has been nonexistent and her

developmental progress limited. The panel found that even with the

assistance of aides and various educational

devices, Beth has received very little benefit from her time in the

regular classroom. As a result, the panel agreed with the school

district's decision to place her in the self-contained special education

classroom so long as it " includes reverse mainstreaming opportunities "

for Beth. It concluded, " the school officials decision about how to best

educate Beth is based on expertise that we cannot match. "

Source:

http://www.nsba.org/cosa/LawLibrary/whatsnew/special.htm

One can also find this opinion at:

http://laws.lp.findlaw.com/7th/013673.html

The states that are in the 7th Circuit court are,Illinois,

Indiana and Wisconsin.

To find out what circuit court one's state is in just click on this

map which will show you:

http://www.law.emory.edu/FEDCTS/

Mike Savory

SELf*AWAK(e)A-dvocacy © 2001

" Advocacy With Abundant Keys to

Excellence and Access "

Offering Advocacy in: Community Service,

Student Advocacy, & Facilitation

(Volunteer & Donations)

Adolescence Doesn't Die

IT Just Gets Buried !...

Don't Give Up The Fight.

Advocate for Children &

Persons Who Experience

Disabilities in daily living.

© 2001