Re: Autism Legislation for Education

November 10, 2008

One proposal I have made to the Senate Education Committee is to allow

parents access to any training on IDEA that the ISD's attend,

including stipends from our advocacy agencies if money can't be found

within the district to provide this kind of " parent training. " Then

the conflict of interest isn't material. It's the exclusion that is

the problem - allowing the teaching of the whole concept of

outmaneuvering parents and defeating them in due process that is the

subject of many of these trainings. I agree that there is a huge

conflict of interest and that parents shouldn't have to " police " these

seminars in order to make sure they are fair, so I like the idea of

also requiring that the ESC's, ISD's and the TEA ensure these

trainings are conducted by a neutral party. (Remember though that this

is how due process and the IHO's are supposed to work, and it isn't

happening as long as the TEA oversees things. You can't legislate

conscience or compliance. You can only impose sanctions and incentives

to get them to comply, such as freezing funds or a scholarship

program.) It would also be critical to include in-service trainings,

which can be some of the most damaging " guidance " delivered straight

to the teachers that work with the kids.

Speaking of stipends from our advocacy agencies, this might also be a

source for funding a lobbyist/PAC. Hundreds of thousands of dollars

are dispersed through the Texas Council for Developmental Disabilities

for the purposes of Protection and Advocacy. This council and the

funding is overseen by the Governor. , if you are serious

about this, I'd suggest you contact the Governor's office about

getting some of this funding sent our way for exactly this purpose.

Definitely worth a shot.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Yep, it is quite obvious ... anything but provide MONEY,

> > FUNDS,

> > > > > AND

> > > > > > OPTIONS to escape a brutal, denial of services for

> individual

> > > > > > families. You are very selective in your word choice if you

> > ask

> > > > > me.

> > > > > > I doubt the ARC and this coalition wants to derail the

> gravy

> > > > > train.

> > > > > > You are advocating keeping it the same, MINIMIZE the damage

> > to

> > > > > > individual families, but year after year your suggestions

> > won't

> > > > > > reform the system.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > You are allowing families to be beat down quietly, even

> > though

> > > > > they

> > > > > > believe that the environment that their child is in is

> > harming

> > > > and

> > > > > > denying them better options/services. There is no way we

> > > > > > can " litigate our way to FAPE " .

> > > > > >

> > > > > > The real issue seems to be the protection of the system

> IMO.

> > > > > This

> > > > > > system allows FOR PROFIT legal firms unlimited access to

> our

> > > > taxes.

> > > > > > I say the system should be reformed and defeated with the

> > help

> > > of

> > > > > our

> > > > > > legislators this session.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > I think your suggestions are just putting lipstick on a

> pig.

> > > The

> > > > > > legal firms will CONTINUE THEIR BILLINGS and individual

> > > families

> > > > > will

> > > > > > suffer.

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

November 10, 2008

The parents have the frozen funds. Do you agree? The money is

provided to the parents in a legal binding agreement that is signed

by the ISD and parents. If an agreement is not reached on the

educational setting, the legal document binds an ISD to send money to

the parent's checking account.

How is that for a civil discussion? Straight up, the money is going

to the families who are trying to help their child with ASD or their

intellectual/neurological difference and challenge.

No more litigation ... no more due process ...

A win/win for the parents and their child.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Yep, it is quite obvious ... anything but provide

> > > MONEY,

> > > > > FUNDS,

> > > > > > > > > AND

> > > > > > > > > > OPTIONS to escape a brutal, denial of services

for

> > > > > individual

> > > > > > > > > > families. You are very selective in your word

> choice

> > if

> > > > you

> > > > > ask

> > > > > > > > > me.

> > > > > > > > > > I doubt the ARC and this coalition wants to

derail

> > the

> > > > > gravy

> > > > > > > > > train.

> > > > > > > > > > You are advocating keeping it the same, MINIMIZE

> the

> > > > damage

> > > > > to

> > > > > > > > > > individual families, but year after year your

> > > suggestions

> > > > > won't

> > > > > > > > > > reform the system.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > You are allowing families to be beat down

quietly,

> > even

> > > > > though

> > > > > > > > > they

> > > > > > > > > > believe that the environment that their child is

in

> > is

> > > > > harming

> > > > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > > > denying them better options/services. There is no

> way

> > > we

> > > > > > > > > > can " litigate our way to FAPE " .

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > The real issue seems to be the protection of the

> > system

> > > > > IMO.

> > > > > > > > > This

> > > > > > > > > > system allows FOR PROFIT legal firms unlimited

> access

> > > to

> > > > > our

> > > > > > > > taxes.

> > > > > > > > > > I say the system should be reformed and defeated

> with

> > > the

> > > > > help

> > > > > > > of

> > > > > > > > > our

> > > > > > > > > > legislators this session.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > I think your suggestions are just putting

lipstick

> on

> > a

> > > > > pig.

> > > > > > > The

> > > > > > > > > > legal firms will CONTINUE THEIR BILLINGS and

> > individual

> > > > > > > families

> > > > > > > > > will

> > > > > > > > > > suffer.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

November 10, 2008

So instead of letting the parents use the money for the benefit of the child, you would rather have the funds frozen so no one can use them?

That doesn't make sense.

This is the same thing as the Autism Insurance Bill. It does not benefit all, but it benefits some. So we shouldn't have passed that? So that at least some can benefit while we continute to advocate for all insurance plans for children of all ages can have access?

M. GuppyMy autism journey isn't about waiting for the storm to pass, it's about learning to dance in the rain.... Texas Autism Advocacy: www.TexasAutismAdvocacy.org

"There are some aspects of a person's life that we have no right to compromise. We cannot negotiate the size of an institution. No one should live in one. We cannot debate who should get an inclusive education. Everyone should. We cannot determine who does and who does not get the right to make their own choices and forge their own futures. All must."

Subject: Re: Autism Legislation for EducationTo: Texas-Autism-Advocacy Date: Monday, November 10, 2008, 8:47 PM

However this gets dressed up it is still in essence a voucher and a contested issue that is not agreed on. Nagla> > > > > > >> > > > > > > Yep, it is quite obvious ... anything but provide MONEY, > > FUNDS, > > > > > > AND > > > > > > > OPTIONS to escape a brutal, denial of services for > > individual > > > > > > > families. You are very selective in your word choice if > you > > ask > > > > > > me. > > > > > > > I doubt the ARC and this coalition wants to derail the > > gravy > >

> > > > train. > > > > > > > You are advocating keeping it the same, MINIMIZE the > damage > > to > > > > > > > individual families, but year after year your suggestions > > won't > > > > > > > reform the system.> > > > > > > > > > > > > > You are allowing families to be beat down quietly, even > > though > > > > > > they > > > > > > > believe that the environment that their child is in is > > harming > > > > > and > > > > > > > denying them better options/services. There is no way we > > > > > > > can "litigate our way to FAPE".> > > > > > > > > > > > > > The real issue seems to be the protection of

the system > > IMO. > > > > > > This > > > > > > > system allows FOR PROFIT legal firms unlimited access to > > our > > > > > taxes.> > > > > > > I say the system should be reformed and defeated with the > > help > > > > of > > > > > > our > > > > > > > legislators this session.> > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think your suggestions are just putting lipstick on a > > pig. > > > > The > > > > > > > legal firms will CONTINUE THEIR BILLINGS and individual > > > > families > > > > > > will > > > > > > > suffer.> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > >

>> > > >> > >> >>

November 10, 2008

You would think that ISD's would welcome parents to attend the trainings-it would help for evryone to be on the same page with regard to what is being explained to the teachers-regardless of whether or not everyone is in agreement. I do know that many times teachers do not have a choice or a say in how things are run or where the money is spent. I also remember knowing the laws by name or code number, but I did not understand what they meant or how they impacted my students. I had to do my own research, ask questions and attend seminars on my own and I continue to educate myself and network with parents. There MUST be a way to work together....LesliSent via BlackBerry from T-MobileDate: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 02:53:09 -0000To: <Texas-Autism-Advocacy >Subject: Re: Autism Legislation for Education One proposal I have made to the Senate Education Committee is to allow parents access to any training on IDEA that the ISD's attend, including stipends from our advocacy agencies if money can't be found within the district to provide this kind of " parent training. " Then the conflict of interest isn't material. It's the exclusion that is the problem - allowing the teaching of the whole concept of outmaneuvering parents and defeating them in due process that is the subject of many of these trainings. I agree that there is a huge conflict of interest and that parents shouldn't have to " police " these seminars in order to make sure they are fair, so I like the idea of also requiring that the ESC's, ISD's and the TEA ensure these trainings are conducted by a neutral party. (Remember though that this is how due process and the IHO's are supposed to work, and it isn't happening as long as the TEA oversees things. You can't legislate conscience or compliance. You can only impose sanctions and incentives to get them to comply, such as freezing funds or a scholarship program.) It would also be critical to include in-service trainings, which can be some of the most damaging " guidance " delivered straight to the teachers that work with the kids. Speaking of stipends from our advocacy agencies, this might also be a source for funding a lobbyist/PAC. Hundreds of thousands of dollars are dispersed through the Texas Council for Developmental Disabilities for the purposes of Protection and Advocacy. This council and the funding is overseen by the Governor. , if you are serious about this, I'd suggest you contact the Governor's office about getting some of this funding sent our way for exactly this purpose. Definitely worth a shot. > > > > > > > > > > > > Yep, it is quite obvious ... anything but provide MONEY, > > FUNDS, > > > > > AND > > > > > > OPTIONS to escape a brutal, denial of services for > individual > > > > > > families. You are very selective in your word choice if you > > ask > > > > > me. > > > > > > I doubt the ARC and this coalition wants to derail the > gravy > > > > > train. > > > > > > You are advocating keeping it the same, MINIMIZE the damage > > to > > > > > > individual families, but year after year your suggestions > > won't > > > > > > reform the system. > > > > > > > > > > > > You are allowing families to be beat down quietly, even > > though > > > > > they > > > > > > believe that the environment that their child is in is > > harming > > > > and > > > > > > denying them better options/services. There is no way we > > > > > > can " litigate our way to FAPE " . > > > > > > > > > > > > The real issue seems to be the protection of the system > IMO. > > > > > This > > > > > > system allows FOR PROFIT legal firms unlimited access to > our > > > > taxes. > > > > > > I say the system should be reformed and defeated with the > > help > > > of > > > > > our > > > > > > legislators this session. > > > > > > > > > > > > I think your suggestions are just putting lipstick on a > pig. > > > The > > > > > > legal firms will CONTINUE THEIR BILLINGS and individual > > > families > > > > > will > > > > > > suffer. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

November 10, 2008

Ah but I doubt any legislation would allow the money to go directly to the wicked parent. Remember Medicaid Waiver Services? No way would we allow the PARENT to be the Case Manager or the PARENT to get paid for providing the services the agency cannot.

I think paying a BCBA, BCABA, Tutoring Agency, or Private School - or some agreed-upon list of credentialed professionals, would be best listed as to where the funds would go....

Or - the parent defense fund. I realllllyyyyy like that. So groups like TOPAA and other parent-friendly law firms can receive funding for representing parents who can't afford representation.

That is something Senator Dan seemed to agree on -- that when an agency cannot provide a provider for the individual - that the PARENT should be able to be paid for providing that care.

All ya'll on CLASS, HCS, etc who have no attendant care providers -- need to be writing Senator Dan to support that Medicaid provision -- that the Parent can be the provider for someone under 18 and where the parent has guardianship....

Sincerely,

M. GuppyMy autism journey isn't about waiting for the storm to pass, it's about learning to dance in the rain.... Texas Autism Advocacy: www.TexasAutismAdvocacy.org

"There are some aspects of a person's life that we have no right to compromise. We cannot negotiate the size of an institution. No one should live in one. We cannot debate who should get an inclusive education. Everyone should. We cannot determine who does and who does not get the right to make their own choices and forge their own futures. All must."

Subject: Re: Autism Legislation for EducationTo: Texas-Autism-Advocacy Date: Monday, November 10, 2008, 8:58 PM

The parents have the frozen funds. Do you agree? The money is provided to the parents in a legal binding agreement that is signed by the ISD and parents. If an agreement is not reached on the educational setting, the legal document binds an ISD to send money to the parent's checking account.How is that for a civil discussion? Straight up, the money is going to the families who are trying to help their child with ASD or their intellectual/ neurological difference and challenge.No more litigation ... no more due process ...A win/win for the parents and their child.> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Yep, it is quite obvious ... anything but provide > > > MONEY, > > > > > FUNDS, > > > > > > > > > AND > > > > > > > > > > OPTIONS to escape a brutal, denial of services for > > > > > individual > > > > > > > > > > families. You are very selective in your word > choice

> > if > > > > you > > > > > ask > > > > > > > > > me. > > > > > > > > > > I doubt the ARC and this coalition wants to derail > > the > > > > > gravy > > > > > > > > > train. > > > > > > > > > > You are advocating keeping it the same, MINIMIZE > the > > > > damage > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > individual families, but year after year your > > > suggestions > > > > > won't > > > > > > > > > > reform the system.> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You are allowing families to be beat down quietly, > > even > > >

> > though > > > > > > > > > they > > > > > > > > > > believe that the environment that their child is in > > is > > > > > harming > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > denying them better options/services. There is no > way > > > we > > > > > > > > > > can "litigate our way to FAPE".> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The real issue seems to be the protection of the > > system > > > > > IMO. > > > > > > > > > This > > > > > > > > > > system allows FOR PROFIT legal firms unlimited > access > > > to > > > > > our > > >

> > > > > taxes.> > > > > > > > > > I say the system should be reformed and defeated > with > > > the > > > > > help > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > our > > > > > > > > > > legislators this session.> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think your suggestions are just putting lipstick > on > > a > > > > > pig. > > > > > > > The > > > > > > > > > > legal firms will CONTINUE THEIR BILLINGS and > > individual > > > > > > > families > > > > > > > > > will > > > > > > > > > > suffer.> > > > > >

> > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> >>

November 10, 2008

The funds are still there for that student, they are frozen as an

incentive to make the mediation process quicker and give parents an

edge make it possible for more resolutions at that level. The idea

is not to take the money out of the school, but to use it as a reason

to provide needed services.

If the school loses that money, how will they be able to provide the

needed services?

Nagla

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Yep, it is quite obvious ... anything but provide

> MONEY,

> > > FUNDS,

> > > > > > > AND

> > > > > > > > OPTIONS to escape a brutal, denial of services for

> > > individual

> > > > > > > > families. You are very selective in your word choice

if

> > you

> > > ask

> > > > > > > me.

> > > > > > > > I doubt the ARC and this coalition wants to derail

the

> > > gravy

> > > > > > > train.

> > > > > > > > You are advocating keeping it the same, MINIMIZE the

> > damage

> > > to

> > > > > > > > individual families, but year after year your

> suggestions

> > > won't

> > > > > > > > reform the system.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > You are allowing families to be beat down quietly,

even

> > > though

> > > > > > > they

> > > > > > > > believe that the environment that their child is in

is

> > > harming

> > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > denying them better options/services. There is no way

> we

> > > > > > > > can " litigate our way to FAPE " .

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > The real issue seems to be the protection of the

system

> > > IMO.

> > > > > > > This

> > > > > > > > system allows FOR PROFIT legal firms unlimited access

> to

> > > our

> > > > > > taxes.

> > > > > > > > I say the system should be reformed and defeated with

> the

> > > help

> > > > > of

> > > > > > > our

> > > > > > > > legislators this session.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > I think your suggestions are just putting lipstick on

a

> > > pig.

> > > > > The

> > > > > > > > legal firms will CONTINUE THEIR BILLINGS and

individual

> > > > > families

> > > > > > > will

> > > > > > > > suffer.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

November 10, 2008

I had an ISC personnel person e-mail and ask if they could come to the Town Hall meeting. I said of course! We don't pick and choose who can attend our meetings or events... all are welcome - as it should be with any such event....

M. GuppyMy autism journey isn't about waiting for the storm to pass, it's about learning to dance in the rain.... Texas Autism Advocacy: www.TexasAutismAdvocacy.org

"There are some aspects of a person's life that we have no right to compromise. We cannot negotiate the size of an institution. No one should live in one. We cannot debate who should get an inclusive education. Everyone should. We cannot determine who does and who does not get the right to make their own choices and forge their own futures. All must."

Subject: Re: Re: Autism Legislation for EducationTo: Texas-Autism-Advocacy Date: Monday, November 10, 2008, 9:04 PM

You would think that ISD's would welcome parents to attend the trainings-it would help for evryone to be on the same page with regard to what is being explained to the teachers-regardless of whether or not everyone is in agreement. I do know that many times teachers do not have a choice or a say in how things are run or where the money is spent. I also remember knowing the laws by name or code number, but I did not understand what they meant or how they impacted my students. I had to do my own research, ask questions and attend seminars on my own and I continue to educate myself and network with parents. There MUST be a way to work together....Lesli

Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

From: "mom2boysplano" <emilyrhillhotmail (DOT) com>Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 02:53:09 -0000To: <Texas-Autism- Advocacy@ yahoogroups. com>Subject: [Texas-Autism- Advocacy] Re: Autism Legislation for Education

One proposal I have made to the Senate Education Committee is to allowparents access to any training on IDEA that the ISD's attend,including stipends from our advocacy agencies if money can't be foundwithin the district to provide this kind of "parent training." Thenthe conflict of interest isn't material. It's the exclusion that isthe problem - allowing the teaching of the whole concept ofoutmaneuvering parents and defeating them in due process that is thesubject of many of these trainings. I agree that there is a hugeconflict of interest and that parents shouldn't have to "police" theseseminars in order to make sure they are fair, so I like the idea ofalso requiring that the ESC's, ISD's and the TEA ensure thesetrainings are conducted by a neutral party. (Remember though that thisis how due process and the IHO's are supposed to work, and it isn'thappening as long as the TEA oversees things. You

can't legislateconscience or compliance. You can only impose sanctions and incentivesto get them to comply, such as freezing funds or a scholarshipprogram.) It would also be critical to include in-service trainings,which can be some of the most damaging "guidance" delivered straightto the teachers that work with the kids.Speaking of stipends from our advocacy agencies, this might also be asource for funding a lobbyist/PAC. Hundreds of thousands of dollarsare dispersed through the Texas Council for Developmental Disabilitiesfor the purposes of Protection and Advocacy. This council and thefunding is overseen by the Governor. , if you are seriousabout this, I'd suggest you contact the Governor's office aboutgetting some of this funding sent our way for exactly this purpose.Definitely worth a shot.> > > > > >> > > > > > Yep, it is quite obvious ... anything but provide MONEY, > > FUNDS, > > > > > AND > > > > > > OPTIONS to escape a brutal, denial of services for > individual > > > > > > families. You are very selective in your word choice if you > > ask > > > > > me. > > > > > > I doubt the ARC

and this coalition wants to derail the > gravy > > > > > train. > > > > > > You are advocating keeping it the same, MINIMIZE the damage > > to > > > > > > individual families, but year after year your suggestions > > won't > > > > > > reform the system.> > > > > > > > > > > > You are allowing families to be beat down quietly, even > > though > > > > > they > > > > > > believe that the environment that their child is in is > > harming > > > > and > > > > > > denying them better options/services. There is no way we > > > > > > can "litigate our way to FAPE".> > > > > > > > > > > > The real issue seems to be the protection of the system

> IMO. > > > > > This > > > > > > system allows FOR PROFIT legal firms unlimited access to > our > > > > taxes.> > > > > > I say the system should be reformed and defeated with the > > help > > > of > > > > > our > > > > > > legislators this session.> > > > > > > > > > > > I think your suggestions are just putting lipstick on a > pig. > > > The > > > > > > legal firms will CONTINUE THEIR BILLINGS and individual > > > families > > > > > will > > > > > > suffer.> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> >>

November 10, 2008

Use the SHARS money they get from medicaid that goes into general funding for football fields and the 50 buses they take to each ball game to transport the drill team, football team, coahing staff, band, marching band, cadettes, cheerleaders, etc... etc.... etc.....

M. GuppyMy autism journey isn't about waiting for the storm to pass, it's about learning to dance in the rain.... Texas Autism Advocacy: www.TexasAutismAdvocacy.org

"There are some aspects of a person's life that we have no right to compromise. We cannot negotiate the size of an institution. No one should live in one. We cannot debate who should get an inclusive education. Everyone should. We cannot determine who does and who does not get the right to make their own choices and forge their own futures. All must."

Subject: Re: Autism Legislation for EducationTo: Texas-Autism-Advocacy Date: Monday, November 10, 2008, 9:07 PM

The funds are still there for that student, they are frozen as an incentive to make the mediation process quicker and give parents an edge make it possible for more resolutions at that level. The idea is not to take the money out of the school, but to use it as a reason to provide needed services. If the school loses that money, how will they be able to provide the needed services?Nagla> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Yep, it is quite obvious ... anything but provide > MONEY, > > > FUNDS, > > > > > > > AND > > > > > > > > OPTIONS to escape a brutal, denial of services for > > > individual > > > > > > > > families. You are very selective in your word choice if > > you > > > ask >

> > > > > > me. > > > > > > > > I doubt the ARC and this coalition wants to derail the > > > gravy > > > > > > > train. > > > > > > > > You are advocating keeping it the same, MINIMIZE the > > damage > > > to > > > > > > > > individual families, but year after year your > suggestions > > > won't > > > > > > > > reform the system.> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You are allowing families to be beat down quietly, even > > > though > > > > > > > they > > > > > > > > believe that the environment that their child is in is > > > harming > > > > > > and > > > > > >

> > denying them better options/services. There is no way > we > > > > > > > > can "litigate our way to FAPE".> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The real issue seems to be the protection of the system > > > IMO. > > > > > > > This > > > > > > > > system allows FOR PROFIT legal firms unlimited access > to > > > our > > > > > > taxes.> > > > > > > > I say the system should be reformed and defeated with > the > > > help > > > > > of > > > > > > > our > > > > > > > > legislators this session.> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think your suggestions are just putting lipstick on a

> > > pig. > > > > > The > > > > > > > > legal firms will CONTINUE THEIR BILLINGS and individual > > > > > families > > > > > > > will > > > > > > > > suffer.> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> >>

November 10, 2008

I completely agree!!:)Sent via BlackBerry from T-MobileDate: Mon, 10 Nov 2008 19:09:08 -0800 (PST)To: <Texas-Autism-Advocacy >Subject: Re: Re: Autism Legislation for Education I had an ISC personnel person e-mail and ask if they could come to the Town Hall meeting. I said of course! We don't pick and choose who can attend our meetings or events... all are welcome - as it should be with any such event.... M. GuppyMy autism journey isn't about waiting for the storm to pass, it's about learning to dance in the rain.... Texas Autism Advocacy: www.TexasAutismAdvocacy.org"There are some aspects of a person's life that we have no right to compromise. We cannot negotiate the size of an institution. No one should live in one. We cannot debate who should get an inclusive education. Everyone should. We cannot determine who does and who does not get the right to make their own choices and forge their own futures. All must."From: specialeffectstutoring <specialeffectstutoring>Subject: Re: Re: Autism Legislation for EducationTo: Texas-Autism-Advocacy Date: Monday, November 10, 2008, 9:04 PMYou would think that ISD's would welcome parents to attend the trainings-it would help for evryone to be on the same page with regard to what is being explained to the teachers-regardless of whether or not everyone is in agreement. I do know that many times teachers do not have a choice or a say in how things are run or where the money is spent. I also remember knowing the laws by name or code number, but I did not understand what they meant or how they impacted my students. I had to do my own research, ask questions and attend seminars on my own and I continue to educate myself and network with parents. There MUST be a way to work together....LesliSent via BlackBerry from T-MobileFrom: "mom2boysplano" <emilyrhillhotmail (DOT) com>Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 02:53:09 -0000To: <Texas-Autism- Advocacy@ yahoogroups. com>Subject: [Texas-Autism- Advocacy] Re: Autism Legislation for EducationOne proposal I have made to the Senate Education Committee is to allowparents access to any training on IDEA that the ISD's attend,including stipends from our advocacy agencies if money can't be foundwithin the district to provide this kind of "parent training." Thenthe conflict of interest isn't material. It's the exclusion that isthe problem - allowing the teaching of the whole concept ofoutmaneuvering parents and defeating them in due process that is thesubject of many of these trainings. I agree that there is a hugeconflict of interest and that parents shouldn't have to "police" theseseminars in order to make sure they are fair, so I like the idea ofalso requiring that the ESC's, ISD's and the TEA ensure thesetrainings are conducted by a neutral party. (Remember though that thisis how due process and the IHO's are supposed to work, and it isn'thappening as long as the TEA oversees things. You can't legislateconscience or compliance. You can only impose sanctions and incentivesto get them to comply, such as freezing funds or a scholarshipprogram.) It would also be critical to include in-service trainings,which can be some of the most damaging "guidance" delivered straightto the teachers that work with the kids.Speaking of stipends from our advocacy agencies, this might also be asource for funding a lobbyist/PAC. Hundreds of thousands of dollarsare dispersed through the Texas Council for Developmental Disabilitiesfor the purposes of Protection and Advocacy. This council and thefunding is overseen by the Governor. , if you are seriousabout this, I'd suggest you contact the Governor's office aboutgetting some of this funding sent our way for exactly this purpose.Definitely worth a shot.> > > > > >> > > > > > Yep, it is quite obvious ... anything but provide MONEY, > > FUNDS, > > > > > AND > > > > > > OPTIONS to escape a brutal, denial of services for > individual > > > > > > families. You are very selective in your word choice if you > > ask > > > > > me. > > > > > > I doubt the ARC and this coalition wants to derail the > gravy > > > > > train. > > > > > > You are advocating keeping it the same, MINIMIZE the damage > > to > > > > > > individual families, but year after year your suggestions > > won't > > > > > > reform the system.> > > > > > > > > > > > You are allowing families to be beat down quietly, even > > though > > > > > they > > > > > > believe that the environment that their child is in is > > harming > > > > and > > > > > > denying them better options/services. There is no way we > > > > > > can "litigate our way to FAPE".> > > > > > > > > > > > The real issue seems to be the protection of the system > IMO. > > > > > This > > > > > > system allows FOR PROFIT legal firms unlimited access to > our > > > > taxes.> > > > > > I say the system should be reformed and defeated with the > > help > > > of > > > > > our > > > > > > legislators this session.> > > > > > > > > > > > I think your suggestions are just putting lipstick on a > pig. > > > The > > > > > > legal firms will CONTINUE THEIR BILLINGS and individual > > > families > > > > > will > > > > > > suffer.> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> >>

November 10, 2008

I know some parents that have children with severe autism, and

siblings who are on the drill team, football team etc..They like

having the football field, transporter buses etc...

Nagla

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Yep, it is quite obvious ... anything but provide

> > MONEY,

> > > > FUNDS,

> > > > > > > > AND

> > > > > > > > > OPTIONS to escape a brutal, denial of services for

> > > > individual

> > > > > > > > > families. You are very selective in your word

choice

> if

> > > you

> > > > ask

> > > > > > > > me.

> > > > > > > > > I doubt the ARC and this coalition wants to derail

> the

> > > > gravy

> > > > > > > > train.

> > > > > > > > > You are advocating keeping it the same, MINIMIZE

the

> > > damage

> > > > to

> > > > > > > > > individual families, but year after year your

> > suggestions

> > > > won't

> > > > > > > > > reform the system.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > You are allowing families to be beat down quietly,

> even

> > > > though

> > > > > > > > they

> > > > > > > > > believe that the environment that their child is in

> is

> > > > harming

> > > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > > denying them better options/services. There is no

way

> > we

> > > > > > > > > can " litigate our way to FAPE " .

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > The real issue seems to be the protection of the

> system

> > > > IMO.

> > > > > > > > This

> > > > > > > > > system allows FOR PROFIT legal firms unlimited

access

> > to

> > > > our

> > > > > > > taxes.

> > > > > > > > > I say the system should be reformed and defeated

with

> > the

> > > > help

> > > > > > of

> > > > > > > > our

> > > > > > > > > legislators this session.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > I think your suggestions are just putting lipstick

on

> a

> > > > pig.

> > > > > > The

> > > > > > > > > legal firms will CONTINUE THEIR BILLINGS and

> individual

> > > > > > families

> > > > > > > > will

> > > > > > > > > suffer.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

November 10, 2008

,

I agree ... the wicked parents, but in reality the GREATEST and most

WONDERFUL parents on earth :>) which I know was what was in your

heart and what you were saying to us on the listserve.

I am not as excited about matching funds or a parent defense fund,

because I could care less about winning something in court.

I just want Special Need families to have dignity, options and the

least resistance path to gaining educational services to deal with

Autism.

I will try to help if it comes to a parent legal fund ... but I am

not so excited by being around attorneys. It all seems hollow ...

because they don't provide anything for our children.

Thanks for the discussion tonight. I guess it will continue for

another day.

Mark

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Yep, it is quite obvious ... anything but

provide

> > > > MONEY,

> > > > > > FUNDS,

> > > > > > > > > > AND

> > > > > > > > > > > OPTIONS to escape a brutal, denial of services

> for

> > > > > > individual

> > > > > > > > > > > families. You are very selective in your word

> > choice

> > > if

> > > > > you

> > > > > > ask

> > > > > > > > > > me.

> > > > > > > > > > > I doubt the ARC and this coalition wants to

> derail

> > > the

> > > > > > gravy

> > > > > > > > > > train.

> > > > > > > > > > > You are advocating keeping it the same,

MINIMIZE

> > the

> > > > > damage

> > > > > > to

> > > > > > > > > > > individual families, but year after year your

> > > > suggestions

> > > > > > won't

> > > > > > > > > > > reform the system.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > You are allowing families to be beat down

> quietly,

> > > even

> > > > > > though

> > > > > > > > > > they

> > > > > > > > > > > believe that the environment that their child

is

> in

> > > is

> > > > > > harming

> > > > > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > > > > denying them better options/services. There is

no

> > way

> > > > we

> > > > > > > > > > > can " litigate our way to FAPE " .

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > The real issue seems to be the protection of

the

> > > system

> > > > > > IMO.

> > > > > > > > > > This

> > > > > > > > > > > system allows FOR PROFIT legal firms unlimited

> > access

> > > > to

> > > > > > our

> > > > > > > > > taxes.

> > > > > > > > > > > I say the system should be reformed and

defeated

> > with

> > > > the

> > > > > > help

> > > > > > > > of

> > > > > > > > > > our

> > > > > > > > > > > legislators this session.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > I think your suggestions are just putting

> lipstick

> > on

> > > a

> > > > > > pig.

> > > > > > > > The

> > > > > > > > > > > legal firms will CONTINUE THEIR BILLINGS and

> > > individual

> > > > > > > > families

> > > > > > > > > > will

> > > > > > > > > > > suffer.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

November 10, 2008

I like this idea. What about some kind of trust that is set up through an organization that the school gives to and that parents can work with in order to find the best placement using the funds that would be allocated in the SD? For example if student X recieves 5,000 per year that money should be put into a trust thru an organization that allows the parents to choose the services and SD don't need to worry that parents are going to spend the money on anything other than the child's education...just a thoughtSent via BlackBerry from T-MobileDate: Mon, 10 Nov 2008 19:04:28 -0800 (PST)To: <Texas-Autism-Advocacy >Subject: Re: Re: Autism Legislation for Education Ah but I doubt any legislation would allow the money to go directly to the wicked parent. Remember Medicaid Waiver Services? No way would we allow the PARENT to be the Case Manager or the PARENT to get paid for providing the services the agency cannot. I think paying a BCBA, BCABA, Tutoring Agency, or Private School - or some agreed-upon list of credentialed professionals, would be best listed as to where the funds would go.... Or - the parent defense fund. I realllllyyyyy like that. So groups like TOPAA and other parent-friendly law firms can receive funding for representing parents who can't afford representation. That is something Senator Dan seemed to agree on -- that when an agency cannot provide a provider for the individual - that the PARENT should be able to be paid for providing that care. All ya'll on CLASS, HCS, etc who have no attendant care providers -- need to be writing Senator Dan to support that Medicaid provision -- that the Parent can be the provider for someone under 18 and where the parent has guardianship.... Sincerely, M. GuppyMy autism journey isn't about waiting for the storm to pass, it's about learning to dance in the rain.... Texas Autism Advocacy: www.TexasAutismAdvocacy.org"There are some aspects of a person's life that we have no right to compromise. We cannot negotiate the size of an institution. No one should live in one. We cannot debate who should get an inclusive education. Everyone should. We cannot determine who does and who does not get the right to make their own choices and forge their own futures. All must."From: mark colditz <markdebctx (DOT) rr.com>Subject: Re: Autism Legislation for EducationTo: Texas-Autism-Advocacy Date: Monday, November 10, 2008, 8:58 PMThe parents have the frozen funds. Do you agree? The money is provided to the parents in a legal binding agreement that is signed by the ISD and parents. If an agreement is not reached on the educational setting, the legal document binds an ISD to send money to the parent's checking account.How is that for a civil discussion? Straight up, the money is going to the families who are trying to help their child with ASD or their intellectual/ neurological difference and challenge.No more litigation ... no more due process ...A win/win for the parents and their child.> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Yep, it is quite obvious ... anything but provide > > > MONEY, > > > > > FUNDS, > > > > > > > > > AND > > > > > > > > > > OPTIONS to escape a brutal, denial of services for > > > > > individual > > > > > > > > > > families. You are very selective in your word > choice > > if > > > > you > > > > > ask > > > > > > > > > me. > > > > > > > > > > I doubt the ARC and this coalition wants to derail > > the > > > > > gravy > > > > > > > > > train. > > > > > > > > > > You are advocating keeping it the same, MINIMIZE > the > > > > damage > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > individual families, but year after year your > > > suggestions > > > > > won't > > > > > > > > > > reform the system.> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You are allowing families to be beat down quietly, > > even > > > > > though > > > > > > > > > they > > > > > > > > > > believe that the environment that their child is in > > is > > > > > harming > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > denying them better options/services. There is no > way > > > we > > > > > > > > > > can "litigate our way to FAPE".> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The real issue seems to be the protection of the > > system > > > > > IMO. > > > > > > > > > This > > > > > > > > > > system allows FOR PROFIT legal firms unlimited > access > > > to > > > > > our > > > > > > > > taxes.> > > > > > > > > > I say the system should be reformed and defeated > with > > > the > > > > > help > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > our > > > > > > > > > > legislators this session.> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think your suggestions are just putting lipstick > on > > a > > > > > pig. > > > > > > > The > > > > > > > > > > legal firms will CONTINUE THEIR BILLINGS and > > individual > > > > > > > families > > > > > > > > > will > > > > > > > > > > suffer.> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> >>

November 10, 2008

Nagla,

Please ...

is expressing the inner most desire for her DS and all

families that deal with Autism. A football game is a fun event, but

it surely has no impact on the future for those dealing with the

future ... the very uncertain future and how Texas will provide for

community and settings for children as they become adults.

Football is a game.

Mark

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Yep, it is quite obvious ... anything but provide

> > > MONEY,

> > > > > FUNDS,

> > > > > > > > > AND

> > > > > > > > > > OPTIONS to escape a brutal, denial of services

for

> > > > > individual

> > > > > > > > > > families. You are very selective in your word

> choice

> > if

> > > > you

> > > > > ask

> > > > > > > > > me.

> > > > > > > > > > I doubt the ARC and this coalition wants to

derail

> > the

> > > > > gravy

> > > > > > > > > train.

> > > > > > > > > > You are advocating keeping it the same, MINIMIZE

> the

> > > > damage

> > > > > to

> > > > > > > > > > individual families, but year after year your

> > > suggestions

> > > > > won't

> > > > > > > > > > reform the system.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > You are allowing families to be beat down

quietly,

> > even

> > > > > though

> > > > > > > > > they

> > > > > > > > > > believe that the environment that their child is

in

> > is

> > > > > harming

> > > > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > > > denying them better options/services. There is no

> way

> > > we

> > > > > > > > > > can " litigate our way to FAPE " .

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > The real issue seems to be the protection of the

> > system

> > > > > IMO.

> > > > > > > > > This

> > > > > > > > > > system allows FOR PROFIT legal firms unlimited

> access

> > > to

> > > > > our

> > > > > > > > taxes.

> > > > > > > > > > I say the system should be reformed and defeated

> with

> > > the

> > > > > help

> > > > > > > of

> > > > > > > > > our

> > > > > > > > > > legislators this session.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > I think your suggestions are just putting

lipstick

> on

> > a

> > > > > pig.

> > > > > > > The

> > > > > > > > > > legal firms will CONTINUE THEIR BILLINGS and

> > individual

> > > > > > > families

> > > > > > > > > will

> > > > > > > > > > suffer.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

November 10, 2008

dealing with Autism ... edit

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Yep, it is quite obvious ... anything but

provide

> > > > MONEY,

> > > > > > FUNDS,

> > > > > > > > > > AND

> > > > > > > > > > > OPTIONS to escape a brutal, denial of services

> for

> > > > > > individual

> > > > > > > > > > > families. You are very selective in your word

> > choice

> > > if

> > > > > you

> > > > > > ask

> > > > > > > > > > me.

> > > > > > > > > > > I doubt the ARC and this coalition wants to

> derail

> > > the

> > > > > > gravy

> > > > > > > > > > train.

> > > > > > > > > > > You are advocating keeping it the same,

MINIMIZE

> > the

> > > > > damage

> > > > > > to

> > > > > > > > > > > individual families, but year after year your

> > > > suggestions

> > > > > > won't

> > > > > > > > > > > reform the system.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > You are allowing families to be beat down

> quietly,

> > > even

> > > > > > though

> > > > > > > > > > they

> > > > > > > > > > > believe that the environment that their child

is

> in

> > > is

> > > > > > harming

> > > > > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > > > > denying them better options/services. There is

no

> > way

> > > > we

> > > > > > > > > > > can " litigate our way to FAPE " .

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > The real issue seems to be the protection of

the

> > > system

> > > > > > IMO.

> > > > > > > > > > This

> > > > > > > > > > > system allows FOR PROFIT legal firms unlimited

> > access

> > > > to

> > > > > > our

> > > > > > > > > taxes.

> > > > > > > > > > > I say the system should be reformed and

defeated

> > with

> > > > the

> > > > > > help

> > > > > > > > of

> > > > > > > > > > our

> > > > > > > > > > > legislators this session.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > I think your suggestions are just putting

> lipstick

> > on

> > > a

> > > > > > pig.

> > > > > > > > The

> > > > > > > > > > > legal firms will CONTINUE THEIR BILLINGS and

> > > individual

> > > > > > > > families

> > > > > > > > > > will

> > > > > > > > > > > suffer.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

November 10, 2008

What happened to the obscene " use " and " funding " of attorneys against

Special Need families?

Now, we are talking about football games and drill teams.

Really, what kind of discussion is this?

Mark

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Yep, it is quite obvious ... anything but provide

> > > MONEY,

> > > > > FUNDS,

> > > > > > > > > AND

> > > > > > > > > > OPTIONS to escape a brutal, denial of services

for

> > > > > individual

> > > > > > > > > > families. You are very selective in your word

> choice

> > if

> > > > you

> > > > > ask

> > > > > > > > > me.

> > > > > > > > > > I doubt the ARC and this coalition wants to

derail

> > the

> > > > > gravy

> > > > > > > > > train.

> > > > > > > > > > You are advocating keeping it the same, MINIMIZE

> the

> > > > damage

> > > > > to

> > > > > > > > > > individual families, but year after year your

> > > suggestions

> > > > > won't

> > > > > > > > > > reform the system.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > You are allowing families to be beat down

quietly,

> > even

> > > > > though

> > > > > > > > > they

> > > > > > > > > > believe that the environment that their child is

in

> > is

> > > > > harming

> > > > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > > > denying them better options/services. There is no

> way

> > > we

> > > > > > > > > > can " litigate our way to FAPE " .

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > The real issue seems to be the protection of the

> > system

> > > > > IMO.

> > > > > > > > > This

> > > > > > > > > > system allows FOR PROFIT legal firms unlimited

> access

> > > to

> > > > > our

> > > > > > > > taxes.

> > > > > > > > > > I say the system should be reformed and defeated

> with

> > > the

> > > > > help

> > > > > > > of

> > > > > > > > > our

> > > > > > > > > > legislators this session.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > I think your suggestions are just putting

lipstick

> on

> > a

> > > > > pig.

> > > > > > > The

> > > > > > > > > > legal firms will CONTINUE THEIR BILLINGS and

> > individual

> > > > > > > families

> > > > > > > > > will

> > > > > > > > > > suffer.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

November 10, 2008

You know Mark, personally I could care less if there is another

football game played anywhere ever, same goes for the drill team. I

find them utterly boring and useless. I do however respect the folks

that are invested in them and find a great benefit for their kids

from participating in these games and activities. My best friend has

a son with ASD and a daughter who is a drill team captain. Ask her if

she would give up her daughter's drill team activities so her son can

have better transition and employment training services, she would be

hard pressed to do that. Her daughter's drill team participation is

just as important to her as her son's transition and employment

services.

Nagla

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Yep, it is quite obvious ... anything but

provide

> > > > MONEY,

> > > > > > FUNDS,

> > > > > > > > > > AND

> > > > > > > > > > > OPTIONS to escape a brutal, denial of services

> for

> > > > > > individual

> > > > > > > > > > > families. You are very selective in your word

> > choice

> > > if

> > > > > you

> > > > > > ask

> > > > > > > > > > me.

> > > > > > > > > > > I doubt the ARC and this coalition wants to

> derail

> > > the

> > > > > > gravy

> > > > > > > > > > train.

> > > > > > > > > > > You are advocating keeping it the same,

MINIMIZE

> > the

> > > > > damage

> > > > > > to

> > > > > > > > > > > individual families, but year after year your

> > > > suggestions

> > > > > > won't

> > > > > > > > > > > reform the system.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > You are allowing families to be beat down

> quietly,

> > > even

> > > > > > though

> > > > > > > > > > they

> > > > > > > > > > > believe that the environment that their child

is

> in

> > > is

> > > > > > harming

> > > > > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > > > > denying them better options/services. There is

no

> > way

> > > > we

> > > > > > > > > > > can " litigate our way to FAPE " .

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > The real issue seems to be the protection of

the

> > > system

> > > > > > IMO.

> > > > > > > > > > This

> > > > > > > > > > > system allows FOR PROFIT legal firms unlimited

> > access

> > > > to

> > > > > > our

> > > > > > > > > taxes.

> > > > > > > > > > > I say the system should be reformed and

defeated

> > with

> > > > the

> > > > > > help

> > > > > > > > of

> > > > > > > > > > our

> > > > > > > > > > > legislators this session.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > I think your suggestions are just putting

> lipstick

> > on

> > > a

> > > > > > pig.

> > > > > > > > The

> > > > > > > > > > > legal firms will CONTINUE THEIR BILLINGS and

> > > individual

> > > > > > > > families

> > > > > > > > > > will

> > > > > > > > > > > suffer.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

November 10, 2008

Yes, or use it for THEIR attorney fee's..... the parent's that is....

M. GuppyMy autism journey isn't about waiting for the storm to pass, it's about learning to dance in the rain.... Texas Autism Advocacy: www.TexasAutismAdvocacy.org

"There are some aspects of a person's life that we have no right to compromise. We cannot negotiate the size of an institution. No one should live in one. We cannot debate who should get an inclusive education. Everyone should. We cannot determine who does and who does not get the right to make their own choices and forge their own futures. All must."

From: mark colditz <markdebctx (DOT) rr.com>Subject: [Texas-Autism- Advocacy] Re: Autism Legislation for EducationTo: Texas-Autism- Advocacy@ yahoogroups. comDate: Monday, November 10, 2008, 8:58 PM

The parents have the frozen funds. Do you agree? The money is provided to the parents in a legal binding agreement that is signed by the ISD and parents. If an agreement is not reached on the educational setting, the legal document binds an ISD to send money to the parent's checking account.How is that for a civil discussion? Straight up, the money is going to the families who are trying to help their child with ASD or their intellectual/ neurological difference and challenge.No more litigation ... no more due process ...A win/win for the parents and their child.> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Yep, it is quite obvious ... anything but provide > > > MONEY, > > > > > FUNDS, > > > > > > > > > AND > > > > > > > > > > OPTIONS to escape a brutal, denial of services for > > > > > individual > > > > > > > > > > families. You are very selective in your word > choice

> > if > > > > you > > > > > ask > > > > > > > > > me. > > > > > > > > > > I doubt the ARC and this coalition wants to derail > > the > > > > > gravy > > > > > > > > > train. > > > > > > > > > > You are advocating keeping it the same, MINIMIZE > the > > > > damage > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > individual families, but year after year your > > > suggestions > > > > > won't > > > > > > > > > > reform the system.> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You are allowing families to be beat down quietly, > > even > > >

> > though > > > > > > > > > they > > > > > > > > > > believe that the environment that their child is in > > is > > > > > harming > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > denying them better options/services. There is no > way > > > we > > > > > > > > > > can "litigate our way to FAPE".> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The real issue seems to be the protection of the > > system > > > > > IMO. > > > > > > > > > This > > > > > > > > > > system allows FOR PROFIT legal firms unlimited > access > > > to > > > > > our > > >

> > > > > taxes.> > > > > > > > > > I say the system should be reformed and defeated > with > > > the > > > > > help > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > our > > > > > > > > > > legislators this session.> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think your suggestions are just putting lipstick > on > > a > > > > > pig. > > > > > > > The > > > > > > > > > > legal firms will CONTINUE THEIR BILLINGS and > > individual > > > > > > > families > > > > > > > > > will > > > > > > > > > > suffer.> > > > > >

> > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> >>

November 10, 2008

I know --- I agree... But I don't think we will get out of having to do some sort of Due Process -- and leveling the playing field in that arena - will only occur if parents have the funds necessary to essentially buy their decision as the schools do.

Schools should have a cap - and parents should have an equal opportunity for taxpayer funds for their representation.

If Due Process is supposed to follow a civil type suit where 2 parties go to court for a decision, then just as those in those civil cases must have an attorney provided for them at no cost, then so too should parents in a Due Process.

If taxpayers can pay for a criminal to have a just defense, then taxpayers can pay for parents in the school system to have a just defense.

Or at least a better chance at it.

Maybe THEN taxpayers will see the waste in both sides of that!

M. GuppyMy autism journey isn't about waiting for the storm to pass, it's about learning to dance in the rain.... Texas Autism Advocacy: www.TexasAutismAdvocacy.org

"There are some aspects of a person's life that we have no right to compromise. We cannot negotiate the size of an institution. No one should live in one. We cannot debate who should get an inclusive education. Everyone should. We cannot determine who does and who does not get the right to make their own choices and forge their own futures. All must."

Subject: Re: Autism Legislation for EducationTo: Texas-Autism-Advocacy Date: Monday, November 10, 2008, 9:14 PM

,I agree ... the wicked parents, but in reality the GREATEST and most WONDERFUL parents on earth :>) which I know was what was in your heart and what you were saying to us on the listserve.I am not as excited about matching funds or a parent defense fund, because I could care less about winning something in court.I just want Special Need families to have dignity, options and the least resistance path to gaining educational services to deal with Autism.I will try to help if it comes to a parent legal fund ... but I am not so excited by being around attorneys. It all seems hollow ... because they don't provide anything for our children.Thanks for the discussion tonight. I guess it will continue for another day.Mark> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Yep, it is quite obvious ... anything but provide > > > > MONEY, > > > > > > FUNDS, > > > > > > > > > > AND > > > > > > > > > > > OPTIONS to escape a brutal, denial of services > for > > > > > > individual > > > > > > > > > > > families. You are very selective in your word > > choice > > > if > > > > > you > > > > > > ask > > > > > > > > > > me. > > > > > > > > > > > I doubt the ARC and this coalition wants to > derail >

> > the > > > > > > gravy > > > > > > > > > > train. > > > > > > > > > > > You are advocating keeping it the same, MINIMIZE > > the > > > > > damage > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > individual families, but year after year your > > > > suggestions > > > > > > won't > > > > > > > > > > > reform the system.> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You are allowing families to be beat down > quietly, > > > even > > > > > > though > > > > > > > > > > they > > > > > > > > > > > believe that the environment

that their child is > in > > > is > > > > > > harming > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > denying them better options/services. There is no > > way > > > > we > > > > > > > > > > > can "litigate our way to FAPE".> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The real issue seems to be the protection of the > > > system > > > > > > IMO. > > > > > > > > > > This > > > > > > > > > > > system allows FOR PROFIT legal firms unlimited > > access > > > > to > > > > > > our > > > > > > > > > taxes.> > > >

> > > > > > > I say the system should be reformed and defeated > > with > > > > the > > > > > > help > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > our > > > > > > > > > > > legislators this session.> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think your suggestions are just putting > lipstick > > on > > > a > > > > > > pig. > > > > > > > > The > > > > > > > > > > > legal firms will CONTINUE THEIR BILLINGS and > > > individual > > > > > > > > families > > > > > > > > > > will > > > > > > > > > >

> suffer.> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> >>

November 10, 2008

Using the frozen funds for parent attorney fees if they need to go to

due process is definitely an incentive for schools to resolve issues

during mediation.

Nagla

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Yep, it is quite obvious ... anything but

provide

> > > > MONEY,

> > > > > > FUNDS,

> > > > > > > > > > AND

> > > > > > > > > > > OPTIONS to escape a brutal, denial of services

> for

> > > > > > individual

> > > > > > > > > > > families. You are very selective in your word

> > choice

> > > if

> > > > > you

> > > > > > ask

> > > > > > > > > > me.

> > > > > > > > > > > I doubt the ARC and this coalition wants to

> derail

> > > the

> > > > > > gravy

> > > > > > > > > > train.

> > > > > > > > > > > You are advocating keeping it the same,

MINIMIZE

> > the

> > > > > damage

> > > > > > to

> > > > > > > > > > > individual families, but year after year your

> > > > suggestions

> > > > > > won't

> > > > > > > > > > > reform the system.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > You are allowing families to be beat down

> quietly,

> > > even

> > > > > > though

> > > > > > > > > > they

> > > > > > > > > > > believe that the environment that their child

is

> in

> > > is

> > > > > > harming

> > > > > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > > > > denying them better options/services. There is

no

> > way

> > > > we

> > > > > > > > > > > can " litigate our way to FAPE " .

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > The real issue seems to be the protection of

the

> > > system

> > > > > > IMO.

> > > > > > > > > > This

> > > > > > > > > > > system allows FOR PROFIT legal firms unlimited

> > access

> > > > to

> > > > > > our

> > > > > > > > > taxes.

> > > > > > > > > > > I say the system should be reformed and

defeated

> > with

> > > > the

> > > > > > help

> > > > > > > > of

> > > > > > > > > > our

> > > > > > > > > > > legislators this session.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > I think your suggestions are just putting

> lipstick

> > on

> > > a

> > > > > > pig.

> > > > > > > > The

> > > > > > > > > > > legal firms will CONTINUE THEIR BILLINGS and

> > > individual

> > > > > > > > families

> > > > > > > > > > will

> > > > > > > > > > > suffer.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

November 10, 2008

Leveling the playing field by giving parents access to tax payer

money is something we can all agree on.

Nagla

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Yep, it is quite obvious ... anything but

> provide

> > > > > MONEY,

> > > > > > > FUNDS,

> > > > > > > > > > > AND

> > > > > > > > > > > > OPTIONS to escape a brutal, denial of

services

> > for

> > > > > > > individual

> > > > > > > > > > > > families. You are very selective in your word

> > > choice

> > > > if

> > > > > > you

> > > > > > > ask

> > > > > > > > > > > me.

> > > > > > > > > > > > I doubt the ARC and this coalition wants to

> > derail

> > > > the

> > > > > > > gravy

> > > > > > > > > > > train.

> > > > > > > > > > > > You are advocating keeping it the same,

> MINIMIZE

> > > the

> > > > > > damage

> > > > > > > to

> > > > > > > > > > > > individual families, but year after year your

> > > > > suggestions

> > > > > > > won't

> > > > > > > > > > > > reform the system.

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > You are allowing families to be beat down

> > quietly,

> > > > even

> > > > > > > though

> > > > > > > > > > > they

> > > > > > > > > > > > believe that the environment that their child

> is

> > in

> > > > is

> > > > > > > harming

> > > > > > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > > > > > denying them better options/services. There

is

> no

> > > way

> > > > > we

> > > > > > > > > > > > can " litigate our way to FAPE " .

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > The real issue seems to be the protection of

> the

> > > > system

> > > > > > > IMO.

> > > > > > > > > > > This

> > > > > > > > > > > > system allows FOR PROFIT legal firms

unlimited

> > > access

> > > > > to

> > > > > > > our

> > > > > > > > > > taxes.

> > > > > > > > > > > > I say the system should be reformed and

> defeated

> > > with

> > > > > the

> > > > > > > help

> > > > > > > > > of

> > > > > > > > > > > our

> > > > > > > > > > > > legislators this session.

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > I think your suggestions are just putting

> > lipstick

> > > on

> > > > a

> > > > > > > pig.

> > > > > > > > > The

> > > > > > > > > > > > legal firms will CONTINUE THEIR BILLINGS and

> > > > individual

> > > > > > > > > families

> > > > > > > > > > > will

> > > > > > > > > > > > suffer.

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

November 10, 2008

Nagla,

You have certainly lost me. I thought legislation to help Autism

families was the most important thing we were discussing tonight. I

understand different programs help other children, but for the most

part drill team captains are NOT part of the ASD world.

I just want you to see that attorneys are " obscene " and that they

provide so little for our families. Litigation actually takes away

our dignity.

I can think of no worse way to expose the uncertainity and

difficulties in our lives then having the legal system talk about our

children.

I am totally committed to having Special Need families have access to

the taxes they paid for their children. I don't want ONE CENT to go

to these attorneys who attack our dignity and our struggles.

Football is just a game. Dealing with Autism and finding options

and solutions for families is what we must discuss. Scholarship

families understood that the most important thing was that our

family's dignity must be protected. I hope you will protect the

dignity of our ASD families. We need to cut the attorneys out of

Special Education NOW. They don't give a damn about our lives.

Mark

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Yep, it is quite obvious ... anything but

> provide

> > > > > MONEY,

> > > > > > > FUNDS,

> > > > > > > > > > > AND

> > > > > > > > > > > > OPTIONS to escape a brutal, denial of

services

> > for

> > > > > > > individual

> > > > > > > > > > > > families. You are very selective in your word

> > > choice

> > > > if

> > > > > > you

> > > > > > > ask

> > > > > > > > > > > me.

> > > > > > > > > > > > I doubt the ARC and this coalition wants to

> > derail

> > > > the

> > > > > > > gravy

> > > > > > > > > > > train.

> > > > > > > > > > > > You are advocating keeping it the same,

> MINIMIZE

> > > the

> > > > > > damage

> > > > > > > to

> > > > > > > > > > > > individual families, but year after year your

> > > > > suggestions

> > > > > > > won't

> > > > > > > > > > > > reform the system.

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > You are allowing families to be beat down

> > quietly,

> > > > even

> > > > > > > though

> > > > > > > > > > > they

> > > > > > > > > > > > believe that the environment that their child

> is

> > in

> > > > is

> > > > > > > harming

> > > > > > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > > > > > denying them better options/services. There

is

> no

> > > way

> > > > > we

> > > > > > > > > > > > can " litigate our way to FAPE " .

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > The real issue seems to be the protection of

> the

> > > > system

> > > > > > > IMO.

> > > > > > > > > > > This

> > > > > > > > > > > > system allows FOR PROFIT legal firms

unlimited

> > > access

> > > > > to

> > > > > > > our

> > > > > > > > > > taxes.

> > > > > > > > > > > > I say the system should be reformed and

> defeated

> > > with

> > > > > the

> > > > > > > help

> > > > > > > > > of

> > > > > > > > > > > our

> > > > > > > > > > > > legislators this session.

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > I think your suggestions are just putting

> > lipstick

> > > on

> > > > a

> > > > > > > pig.

> > > > > > > > > The

> > > > > > > > > > > > legal firms will CONTINUE THEIR BILLINGS and

> > > > individual

> > > > > > > > > families

> > > > > > > > > > > will

> > > > > > > > > > > > suffer.

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

November 10, 2008

I think that is something we can all agree on ---- that we shouldn't have to do that taken into consideration --- but that time has not come...

So can we all agree that frozen funds need to be used for parent defense funds?

To clarify my point on football, drill teams, etc. -- it was from a funding perspective. Yes, those things add to the football experience and are good things -- but as an extra-curricular activity - the expense of transport must be weighed against the needs of services that are required.... So when we are asking how schools would pay for Special Education - that should be a consideration.

Cheerleaders can car pool to games and band members can haul their trumpet there themselves. My son can't teach himself.

I realize that is very opinionated, but when we are talking budgets and making cuts, that is the least critical cut one can make.

I would love to drive to every resource fair, meeting, and church activity, but when the gas was high, I didn't do any of that....

And I've seen the number of new trucks and cars and vans in the student parking lots at my school.... Those kids aren't hurting for a ride 3 miles away to a game.

Team players, yes, bus them... Cheerleaders? Band members? Marching band? Cadettes????

I'm not so sure.......I think they could find a way to get there..........

M. GuppyMy autism journey isn't about waiting for the storm to pass, it's about learning to dance in the rain.... Texas Autism Advocacy: www.TexasAutismAdvocacy.org

"There are some aspects of a person's life that we have no right to compromise. We cannot negotiate the size of an institution. No one should live in one. We cannot debate who should get an inclusive education. Everyone should. We cannot determine who does and who does not get the right to make their own choices and forge their own futures. All must."

Subject: Re: Autism Legislation for EducationTo: Texas-Autism-Advocacy Date: Monday, November 10, 2008, 9:50 PM

Using the frozen funds for parent attorney fees if they need to go to due process is definitely an incentive for schools to resolve issues during mediation.Nagla> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Yep, it is quite obvious ... anything but provide > > > > MONEY, > > > > > > FUNDS, > > > > > > > > > > AND > > > > > >

> > > > > OPTIONS to escape a brutal, denial of services > for > > > > > > individual > > > > > > > > > > > families. You are very selective in your word > > choice > > > if > > > > > you > > > > > > ask > > > > > > > > > > me. > > > > > > > > > > > I doubt the ARC and this coalition wants to > derail > > > the > > > > > > gravy > > > > > > > > > > train. > > > > > > > > > > > You are advocating keeping it the same, MINIMIZE > > the > > > > > damage > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > > > individual families, but year after year your >

> > > suggestions > > > > > > won't > > > > > > > > > > > reform the system.> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You are allowing families to be beat down > quietly, > > > even > > > > > > though > > > > > > > > > > they > > > > > > > > > > > believe that the environment that their child is > in > > > is > > > > > > harming > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > denying them better options/services. There is no > > way > > > > we > > > > > > > > > > > can "litigate our way to FAPE".> > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The real issue seems to be the protection of the > > > system > > > > > > IMO. > > > > > > > > > > This > > > > > > > > > > > system allows FOR PROFIT legal firms unlimited > > access > > > > to > > > > > > our > > > > > > > > > taxes.> > > > > > > > > > > I say the system should be reformed and defeated > > with > > > > the > > > > > > help > > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > > our > > > > > > > > > > > legislators this session.> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > I think your suggestions are just putting > lipstick > > on > > > a > > > > > > pig. > > > > > > > > The > > > > > > > > > > > legal firms will CONTINUE THEIR BILLINGS and > > > individual > > > > > > > > families > > > > > > > > > > will > > > > > > > > > > > suffer.> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >>

>>

November 10, 2008

Absolutely, . And keep in mind that while these funds are

" frozen " , parents are still faced with having to hire an attorney and

possibly go through due process while the ISD still has all that other

tax money at their disposal. Then when the case is resolved in the

favor of the school, as it almost always is, that money just goes

right back to them. Not much incentive, but it IS something. When it

comes to money games, the ISD and the law firms will ALWAYS win.

Even though the legal defense fund is an idea I came up with a long

time ago, I view it as nothing more than a huge compromise to what, in

my opinion, cuts out all this waste of education dollars going to

attorneys and misguided ISD priorities in the first place, which is a

scholarship program. It make me sad that we are even contemplating

crumbs such as moving DPH to the SOAH and writing legislation about

legal trainings, etc. It all misses the point - that these dollars

should be going to the education for our kids, and all the staff and

parent hours invested in legal training should be UNNECESSARY and

going to train teachers in scientifically-based practices instead and

parents to help their children generalize skills to other environments

and acquire the self-help, social skills and vocational skills to

prepare them for independent living the ISD's neglect.

It also makes me sad to learn that some who opposed SB 1000 last

session are now neutral or might support another scholarship bill

that, frankly, we may not get another shot at. What has changed since

last session? We have more Democrats in the House, more legislators to

convince, and more Senators who have already " been there, done that "

and got burned. No one's eager to waste time and energy. And if we

can't at least get our community and advocacy agencies behind such an

effort, then how can we possibly convince them to spend all the time

trying to write and pass a similar bill this session? Still, I'm

willing to try, but it's got to be with a renewed commitment,

agreement to silently disagree from individuals and organizations who

are part of the autism community who may not have the same view of a

solution but do not wish to interfere with their efforts of

self-advocacy (there are plenty of paid lobbyists to represent those

views,) and greater understanding and compassion from our own for us

to even have a shot. We really hold the key and the power within our

own community - our greatest asset or our own worst enemy.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Yep, it is quite obvious ... anything but provide

> MONEY,

> > > FUNDS,

> > > > > > > AND

> > > > > > > > OPTIONS to escape a brutal, denial of services for

> > > individual

> > > > > > > > families. You are very selective in your word choice if

> > you

> > > ask

> > > > > > > me.

> > > > > > > > I doubt the ARC and this coalition wants to derail the

> > > gravy

> > > > > > > train.

> > > > > > > > You are advocating keeping it the same, MINIMIZE the

> > damage

> > > to

> > > > > > > > individual families, but year after year your

> suggestions

> > > won't

> > > > > > > > reform the system.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > You are allowing families to be beat down quietly, even

> > > though

> > > > > > > they

> > > > > > > > believe that the environment that their child is in is

> > > harming

> > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > denying them better options/services. There is no way

> we

> > > > > > > > can " litigate our way to FAPE " .

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > The real issue seems to be the protection of the system

> > > IMO.

> > > > > > > This

> > > > > > > > system allows FOR PROFIT legal firms unlimited access

> to

> > > our

> > > > > > taxes.

> > > > > > > > I say the system should be reformed and defeated with

> the

> > > help

> > > > > of

> > > > > > > our

> > > > > > > > legislators this session.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > I think your suggestions are just putting lipstick on a

> > > pig.

> > > > > The

> > > > > > > > legal firms will CONTINUE THEIR BILLINGS and individual

> > > > > families

> > > > > > > will

> > > > > > > > suffer.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

November 10, 2008

Well said ... great post. Are you sure you can't write some

legislation for Senator ?

Mark

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Yep, it is quite obvious ... anything but provide

> > MONEY,

> > > > FUNDS,

> > > > > > > > AND

> > > > > > > > > OPTIONS to escape a brutal, denial of services for

> > > > individual

> > > > > > > > > families. You are very selective in your word

choice if

> > > you

> > > > ask

> > > > > > > > me.

> > > > > > > > > I doubt the ARC and this coalition wants to derail

the

> > > > gravy

> > > > > > > > train.

> > > > > > > > > You are advocating keeping it the same, MINIMIZE

the

> > > damage

> > > > to

> > > > > > > > > individual families, but year after year your

> > suggestions

> > > > won't

> > > > > > > > > reform the system.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > You are allowing families to be beat down quietly,

even

> > > > though

> > > > > > > > they

> > > > > > > > > believe that the environment that their child is in

is

> > > > harming

> > > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > > denying them better options/services. There is no

way

> > we

> > > > > > > > > can " litigate our way to FAPE " .

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > The real issue seems to be the protection of the

system

> > > > IMO.

> > > > > > > > This

> > > > > > > > > system allows FOR PROFIT legal firms unlimited

access

> > to

> > > > our

> > > > > > > taxes.

> > > > > > > > > I say the system should be reformed and defeated

with

> > the

> > > > help

> > > > > > of

> > > > > > > > our

> > > > > > > > > legislators this session.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > I think your suggestions are just putting lipstick

on a

> > > > pig.

> > > > > > The

> > > > > > > > > legal firms will CONTINUE THEIR BILLINGS and

individual

> > > > > > families

> > > > > > > > will

> > > > > > > > > suffer.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

November 10, 2008

Nagla,

I have been following the discussion and you had my ears....up until now..

The day we pick football over Autism or even make it as important as special

need children is the day when we need to get our priorities straightened up.

I like having a lot of things as well...but can't and have to do without

most of the time.

Parents can not have it all at the expense of the tax payers....

Re: Autism Legislation for Education

I know some parents that have children with severe autism, and

siblings who are on the drill team, football team etc..They like

having the football field, transporter buses etc...

Nagla

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Yep, it is quite obvious ... anything but provide

> > MONEY,

> > > > FUNDS,

> > > > > > > > AND

> > > > > > > > > OPTIONS to escape a brutal, denial of services for

> > > > individual

> > > > > > > > > families. You are very selective in your word

choice

> if

> > > you

> > > > ask

> > > > > > > > me.

> > > > > > > > > I doubt the ARC and this coalition wants to derail

> the

> > > > gravy

> > > > > > > > train.

> > > > > > > > > You are advocating keeping it the same, MINIMIZE

the

> > > damage

> > > > to

> > > > > > > > > individual families, but year after year your

> > suggestions

> > > > won't

> > > > > > > > > reform the system.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > You are allowing families to be beat down quietly,

> even

> > > > though

> > > > > > > > they

> > > > > > > > > believe that the environment that their child is in

> is

> > > > harming

> > > > > > > and

> > > > > > > > > denying them better options/services. There is no

way

> > we

> > > > > > > > > can " litigate our way to FAPE " .

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > The real issue seems to be the protection of the

> system

> > > > IMO.

> > > > > > > > This

> > > > > > > > > system allows FOR PROFIT legal firms unlimited

access

> > to

> > > > our

> > > > > > > taxes.

> > > > > > > > > I say the system should be reformed and defeated

with

> > the

> > > > help

> > > > > > of

> > > > > > > > our

> > > > > > > > > legislators this session.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > I think your suggestions are just putting lipstick

on

> a

> > > > pig.

> > > > > > The

> > > > > > > > > legal firms will CONTINUE THEIR BILLINGS and

> individual

> > > > > > families

> > > > > > > > will

> > > > > > > > > suffer.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

------------------------------------

Texas Autism Advocacy

www.TexasAutismAdvocacy.org

Texas Disability Network

Calendar of Events

www.TexasAutismAdvocacy.org

Sign In

Re: Autism Legislation for Education

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Popular Days

Popular Days

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites