Our school district has a policy that disallows what they call "school shopping". Their opinion is that each of their school sites that offers certain programs all offer THE SAME program. Of course we all know that this isn't true - otherwise why would parents prefer one school site over another? This isn't to say that one is necessarily better than another (although that may be the case), but could it be that one site is better or more appropriate for a specific child? I believe so. I believe it is disingenuous for the district to state that they are all THE SAME and therefore transfers are not necessary.
When our oldest was returning to district after having gotten all he could from the county program for kids with severe emotional difficulties he wanted to attend a particular high school that was not our neighborhood high school. It wasn't that our neighborhood high school was so bad, but he had made some enemies before going into the county program and he was nervous about how he would be welcomed back. The last time he had seen a group of about 6-8 boys was when they were chasing him and threatening to do him harm. The district agreed that he would be transferred to the other school site as part of his IEP.
My oldest daughter has had some difficulty in our neighborhood elementary school, mostly teasing and great difficulty making any friends. She is quite a cute girl, she is sweet and a good friend once she is your friend, but she is also painfully shy, has a great deal of anxiety, and if she is not diagnosable as depressed, she is very close. Her most recent psychological evaluation suggested that she is clinically depressed, but the district prefers to ignore that since she is not taking a specifically antidepressant medication - just a medication that is used for depression and anxiety. I have actually avoided making a big deal out of the depression with the school because from everything we have seen and discussed with various professionals her depression is primarily driven by her anxiety - so working on the anxiety helps to diminish the depression so we have chosen to work on the cause of the depression rather than focusing on what seems to be a diagnosis of outcome rather than a primary diagnosis. She has also been diagnosed with Partial Fetal Alcohol Syndrome - which tells us that she is a follower and that she is likely to follow anyone who accepts her down whatever rabbit hole they might lead her. All kids are like this to a certain degree, but kids with pFAS are especially vulnerable to this.
We had this particular child transferred in Jr High as the school in our area was in "Program Improvement" meaning they were not doing well at teaching the children that attended there. We had allowed her to attend a "Program Improvement" school prior to this and had seen her skills slip - especially her oral language skills. She went from a child who spoke mostly appropriately to a child who wouldn't use proper tenses and would use double negatives with regularity. We had seen her propensity for following the crowd already.
The school that she transferred to has been a wonderful opportunity for her. Her language didn't really improve, but then it didn't get worse either. She did however find a small group of caring and compassionate friends who although they don't invite her often or include her in all of their activities, are open to having her come along at times and treat her with caring and respect. This group is among the popular kids which then helps her to be treated kindly by other kids at the school. If someone is mean to her, the "cool kids" stand up for her, and so teasing and humiliation have been at a minimum. I don't think there are many kids who get through Jr. High completely unscathed so this was really a great situation for her.
Now, as it is time to move on to High School, the IEP "team" refuses to send her to the High School that her current Jr. High feeds into. They say she must return to her "home school". This decision of course does not take into account her Generalized Anxiety Disorder, her Partial Fetal Alcohol Syndrome, or her Clinical Depression that is included in her most recent Neuropsychogical Evaluation even though I have not made a big deal out it with the district. Their excuse is that the law states that when possible a child should be educated at the school of residence. We all know that the law they are referring to was intended to PROTECT our children, and is in this case being used to imprison this child in a situation where she will once again be placed with the children who have previously humiliated and teased this child. She will also have no group of friends who will stick up for her so she will hang out with whoever will tolerate her quirkiness, and she will once again be vulnerable to all manner of abuse since she will do whatever it takes to "have friends". Wouldn't we all be willing to go outside of our comfort zone if otherwise we were left with no one to have lunch with or talk about our favorite shows or tars or whatever with? Being lonely is a great motivator - most of us will do whatever it takes to avoid isolation.
Was the IEP process meant to force children to attend the local school even when their psychological diagnoses would recommend against it? Was it meant to allow a district to avoid taking responsibility for a child's well being? Was it meant to set up a pretense that all schools are equal for all children? I believe that emotional diagnoses are supposed to be considered as a part of the IEP process as well as educational diagnoses. I also believe that if all of the schools programs were actually the same then parents wouldn't prefer one setting over others.
No comments:
Post a Comment