D
|
|
D
|
|
|
Bulletin Boards |
Front page |
CHADD CHIEF: PREPARATION, COOPERATION HELP AVOID CONFRONTATIONAL IEP MEETINGSOctober 7, 1999WASHINGTON - With a mountain of paperwork, legalities and consequences hanging over their heads like an avalanche waiting to happen, people on all sides of today's special education equation say IEP meetings have become more like battles. But Matthew Cohen, a Chicago special ed. attorney and president of Children and Adults with Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder, says there are a few key ways parents, educators and advocates can avoid coming to blows over an individualized education plan. In fact, even though the 1997 Individuals with Disabilities Education Act makes due process hearings a legal option for ending such disputes, Cohen argues such hearings should be avoided whenever possible.
As an advocate helping students lodge legal complaints against the schools, Cohen makes his living from unresolved disputes over IEPs and behavior plans under Section 504 of the Americans with Disabilities Act. But he says he spends most of his time teaching parents and educators how to cooperate, then seek mediation before making a dispute an official legal case. An IEP meeting will go more smoothly, with more satisfactory results for both sides, if both the parents and the schools prepare for them in advance. Parents must fully understand their rights, the school representatives should have a good knowledge of what services and resources are available to them, and both should have a clear picture of what the student needs. All of those things are open for discussion at the IEP or 504 meeting, but doing some "prep work" can save everyone time, Cohen said. "I want to do a reality check with the school, but I also want to do a reality check with the parents, because it doesn't serve my client's interests to come into a meeting with the school district and ask for things that are pie-in-the-sky, that aren't realistic," Cohen said. Equally important, if one meeting participant uncovers valuable information during that prep time, sharing it with everyone else involved can turn an adversarial situation into a cooperative one, Cohen said. Information hoarding and secrecy, often viewed as strategies to gain the upper hand in the meeting, not only set a hostile tone, he argued, but also delay any meaningful discussion because some of the people at the meeting have not had time in advance to review the information. "In the end, everybody could save a lot of time and a lot of conflict if we did more of that information sharing," he said. Schools and parents should also investigate what behavioral supports and modifications are within the school districts' power to provide, Cohen said. Most school districts and parents "are not real familiar with what's available in their school systems under IDEA or 504," he said. Noting Chicago's schools as an example, he said, "They're willing to give. Often they just don't know their own program options." When the time for the meeting rolls around, Cohen said, informed parents who understand the terminology, the law and their options become active participants able to contribute to the planning, rather than reactive bystanders responding to the school's dictates. In their more active role, parents can ensure the child's needs are adequately assessed, that goals and objectives set at the meeting are appropriate for the child and that there will be plenty of follow-up and communication among school personnel and parents. Critical to making these things happen, Cohen argued, is making sure it is all documented in the IEP. Under both IDEA and Section 504, what is written in the IEP or 504 plan is legally binding. Remember the old adage, he said: "If it's not written down, it didn't happen."8 |
