Education, Citizenship and Social Justice 2008 Gvion 147 66

http://esj.sagepub.
com/
Justice
Education, Citizenship and Social
http://esj.sagepub.com/content/3/2/147
The online version of this article can be found at:
DOI: 10.1177/1746197908090080
2008 3: 147 Education, Citizenship and Social Justice
Liora Gvion and Diana Luzzatto
placement-committees in Israel
Affluent parents' advocacy for special-education children's rights vis-a-vis
Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com
can be found at: Education, Citizenship and Social Justice Additional services and information for
http://esj.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Email Alerts:
http://esj.sagepub.com/subscriptions Subscriptions:
http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Reprints:
http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav Permissions:
http://esj.sagepub.com/content/3/2/147.refs.html Citations:
What is This?
- Jun 6, 2008 Version of Record >>

at Alexandru Ioan Cuza on June 29, 2014 esj.sagepub.com Downloaded from at Alexandru Ioan Cuza on June 29, 2014 esj.sagepub.com Downloaded from
147
Gvion & Luzzatto: Affluent parents advocacy for special-education childrens rights
Affluent parents advocacy for
special-education childrens
rights vis-a-vis placement-
committees in Israel
Liora Gvion
The Kibbutzim College of Education Tel-Aviv, Israel
Diana Luzzatto
The Academic College of Tel-Aviv Yaffo, Israel
A B S T R A C T
This article focuses on the strategies that Israeli parents of children with
high functioning communication disorders apply in their negotiations with
municipal placement-committees, in order to realize their right to be fully
involved in matters concerning their childrens schooling. Our claim is
that the parents introduce into the negotiation process alternatives to the
professional discourse inherent in the committees working culture.
The alternative discourse rests on the self-awareness of the parents to their
cultural capital and their understanding of a democratic culture, which
reinforces their perception of city officials duties to grant them educational
services which accord with their world view. Our study distinguishes
between formal and informal strategies of action that assist the parents
turning from passive subjects who accept the committees decisions into
active individuals who establish a culture of resistance.
K E Y WO R D S children with special needs, democracy, placement-
committees, strategies of action, subjects
introduction
This article examines the meanings assigned by professional middle-class
parents to children with minor communication disorders (high-functioning
pervasive developmental disorder [PDD], Aspergers Syndrome, hyperlexia) to
their negotiations with municipal placement-committees regarding the school
placement of their child, and the means they adopt to become equal partners in
education, citizenship and social justice
Copyright
2008, SAGE Publications (www.sagepublications.com)

Vol 3(2) 147166 [ISSN 1746-1979 DOI 10.1177/1746197908090080]
e
c
s
j
at Alexandru Ioan Cuza on June 29, 2014 esj.sagepub.com Downloaded from
148
education, citizenship and social justice 3(2)
these negotiations. It claims that parents actively introduce both a liberal-
democratic and a parental discourse as alternatives to the professional-
bureaucratic discourse that dominates the meetings. Such assertive behavior
on the parents part, uncommon in contacts with professional bureaucracy,
stems from their consciousness of their belonging to a relatively high socio-
economic class, of their being professionals and of their possessing a significant
cultural capital. These together provide them with tools for learning how
the establishment functions and for coping with its demands. Such capital
is useless in face-to-face interactions with the city officials in charge of
placement-committees, as they choose to ignore the parents socio-economic
and educational background, in order to keep their power intact. However,
the parents learn and adopt strategies to exercise their capital indirectly,
e.g. through hired professionals, and by disseminating formal and informal
knowledge about the best coping techniques. Such strategies emerge most
out of parents informal encounters with peers, which, in turn, reinforce their
consciousness of belonging to a group that shares not only common problems,
but also powerful socio-economic and cultural tools.
The analysis of such behavioral patterns allows tracing strategies through
which parents improve their chances of realizing their wishes, even when
they do not accept decisions made by placement-committee officers. Such
strategies reveal the political dimension embedded in the working culture of
placement-committees and helps parents make sure their childs best interests
are taken care of. Thus, bureaucratic concerns, which often govern the process
of decision-making, are re-determined.
The contribution of this article is threefold. First, it proposes an alternative
to previous research, which emphasized the frustration of citizens in their
interactions with bureaucrats, by presenting a case study in which frustration
is turned into a vehicle for empowerment and the promotion of alternative
discourses. Second, the study points to the central role of cultural capital in the
process of negotiation with experts and city officials. Third, the article opens
up a venue for further studies to identify cases in which the subjects choose to
become active agents who shape the social arena in which they are forced to act.
citizenship, democracy and special education
Foucaults (1979, 1980, 1983) notion of the discourse of power centers on ways
in which the latter, through professionals and experts, obtains a status of truth
which is a legitimate basis for exercising power over subjects (Amir, 1995;
Luzzatto, 1995; Turner, 1984; Zur, 1991). Power is diffused and operates by
colonizing terrains of knowledge that function with the full cooperation of the
subjects on which power is exercised. Once formed, discourses are sustained
through professional terms and practices unfamiliar to the layperson. The
149
exercise of power institutionalizes and reproduces particular professional
interests, which surpass individuals interests. As a result, fellow citizens are
denied participation in decision-making processes, regarding their own lives
(Zur, 1991).
Simultaneously, professionals challenge knowledge in possession of experts
in competing disciplines, and individuals upholding to practical, intuitive or
informal knowledge. Laypeople, mostly, are seen as being incompetent of dis-
cussing professional matters even when they apply to their own lives. Lives
of individuals, regardless of their status, class and level of education, depend
on professionals, who converse with one another disregarding the neces-
sities of the individuals who seek their help, and therefore should be entitled
to realize their needs. Consequently, individuals feel powerless, if not helpless,
in presence of professional authorities that exercise intellectual colonialism,
which further empowers them and simultaneously devalues the power of
individuals (Magrass et al., 1990).
Nakars (1998) study on placement-committees in Israel addresses both
the interactions, during hearings, among in-service officers and between them
and the parents. She describes the ways in which the committee members
present themselves as professional authorities, solely interested in the childs
wellbeing. This position entitles them to criticize the parents attitude toward
their child and blame them for failing to provide him with his needs. Officers
perceive themselves as saviors of a miserable child whose parents are in
denial of his condition. Furthermore, they often grade parental capabilities,
defining the parents as either supporting or sabotaging the committees work.
This study shows that even professional, knowledgeable, and affluent parents,
who are also likely to consult private experts, are perceived by in-service
officers as subjects on which bureaucratic decisions can be imposed. Parents
are requested to trust the committee members, due to their position in the edu-
cational system, and taken for granted expertise, even if their suggestions and
solution are, to the parents opinion, not in the childs best interest.
Following Foucault, we show how these parents introduce alternative dis-
courses to the ones practiced in placement-committees. We claim that the
parents perceive the hearings as arenas in which various discourses, carried out
by groups with different professional profiles, should negotiate propositions
regarding the educational placement of a child with special needs. The parents
inclination, to state their profession, educational achievements and status, is
often met by dismay. Moreover, in-service officers tend to be upset when parents
express proficiency in the professional lingo applied in the committee. Such a
state of affairs makes the analysis of the negotiation process between the two
groups, each of which is prestigious and powerful in its sphere of knowledge,
and aware of its entitlement to partake in state resources, an interesting case
study for the examination of democratic discourse in bureaucratic contexts.
150
Scholars claim the formation of professional discourses is followed by
developments of inter-disciplinary discourse, as experts from one discursive
space are engaged into parallel or competing discursive spaces. Artiles (2004),
for instance, argues it is often the case where experts, operating in different
discursive terrains, form liaisons in order to sustain the dominance of dis-
cursive themes and the persistence of independent discursive spaces. With the
intention of excluding subjects from professional discourses and of preserv-
ing the supremacy of both experts and discourses, professional disagreements
among experts are concealed in favor of forming coalitions among profes-
sionals. Discussing boundary-work, Gieryn (1999) argues that when practical
decisions are made, professional working cultures and norms, all latent, become
manifested and turn into means for each of the parties involved to shift the
discussion to his/her discursive space. Hacker and Shamir (2003) show that
when custodial arrangements between divorcees are negotiated, the juridical
discourse is subjected to boundary-work conjoining the former with a psy-
chological discourse. In the name of the childs best interest, psychological
evaluations rather than the childs own or their parents understanding of the
childs needs, are the focal points of the discussion.
Negotiations between parents and experts regarding the placement of chil-
dren with special needs show how, on the one hand, experts are engaged in
boundary-work in order to maintain both the boundaries and supremacy of
discursive spaces. While on the other, by hiring professionals to solicit their
claim, mastering the terminology of the discourse and introducing a parental
discourse based on democratic rights, parents encourage disagreement among
professionals of various disciplines and weaken the supremacy of professional/
bureaucratic discourses.
Sznaider (1997, 2001) discusses the role of public institutions in charge of
public compassion and calls to study the services they render to individuals.
Although he applauds Foucault for highlighting the institutionalization of
social control in society, he departs from Foucault in his characterization
of the nature of actions of powerful institutions. What Foucault sees as power
he sees as public expression of sentiments. What Foucault sees as social
control, Sznaider sees as societys control of itself, which is explicitly different
from state or religious control. Thus, Sznaider brings back into the analysis
individuals as active actors who instill meaning to their deeds rather than as
subjects cooperating with power holders, as described by Foucault.
Sznaiders observation is applicable for our study. Whereas personal pain
and the entitlement of one to raise his own child according to his personal
beliefs are handled in the private sphere, institutions, which operate in the
public sphere, are expected to express public compassion and to provide
adequate solutions to parents needs. These solutions are not only meant to
address the clinical/educational problem of the child but to coincide with his
151
parents values and their perceptions of his needs (Noi, 1984; Dixon, 1992;
Lucks, 1992; Stein and Harpaz, 1995). Nevertheless, public institutions handle
personal pain, based on clinical definitions and bureaucratic considerations,
disregarding individuals beliefs. This implies that many of their propositions
seem to the individuals involved standard and inadequate (Habermas, 1974;
Dimaggio and Powell, 1980; Laumann and Knock, 1988).
Sznaiders perception of public compassion allows studying ways in which
negotiation processes strengthen the new democratic-liberal discourse. This
discourse, according to Jans (2004), is open to all and claims childrens rights
are realized through their parents, who are morally and legally responsible
for their wellbeing. The mobilization of the liberal-democratic discou rse
enables equality to parents to children with special needs (Inbar, 1997). In
the name of the liberal discourse parents demand not only to present their
claims during their hearings but also that they be considered as seriously as
claims and suggestions made by professionals operating in either the clinical
or bureaucratic discourse. This discursive space expands to include parental
experience; even if the latter does not accord with professional views.
Our study shows that when placement-committee officers interact with
professional and affluent parents, who decline the role of passive subjects,
hearings turn into arenas of oppositions. According to Bordo (1993), where
there is power there is resistance, which emerges and develops out of the daily
experiences of fellow-citizens. Whereas Foucault believes resistance matures
in cases where subjects have little to lose, we suggest studying patterns of
objections through the perspective of active citizens, who insert meanings into
their deeds, and aim to affirm their rights in society. Such a perspective allows
demarcation of personal boundaries that, from a citizen point of view, are not
penetrable by state agencies or experts of its part.
Parents claim for equality to participate in the decision-making process
emerges, in addition to their class and cultural consciousness, from their per-
ception of the importance of parental involvement in schools. Whereas every
parent is entitled to choose a school for his child within his district, a parent to
a child with special needs is required to seek help from placement-committees.
Parents perceive them as denying their right to choose a school for their child.
They seek support from the growing belief according to which parents involve-
ment in their childrens schooling is essential for childrens educational and
behavioral achievements and schools benefit from involvement as well
(Chavkin and Williams, 1987; Cotton and Wikellund, 1989; Moles, 1982; Edge
et al., 1984; Becher, 1994; Goldring and Haussman, 1996; Soen, 1996; Lovitt
and Cushing, 1999; Smrekar and Goldring, 1999; Hausman and Goldring, 2000;
Roll-Pettersson, 2003).
Following Foucault, we claim that the more complex the discourse on power
gets, the more sophisticated fellow-citizens become especially when they
152
themselves experience power and prestige in professional zones in which
they operate. Consequently, groups that enjoy social and professional prestige
develop formal and informal means to challenge power-relations in which they
partake against their will. By becoming active participants professional/affluent
parents feel they regain control over their lives, their rights are guaranteed,
and their satisfaction from the school along with their willingness to cooperate
with school authorities grows. This article maps the techniques parents have
developed in aim to challenge the system and the strategies they develop in
order to realize what they perceive as their democratic right to guarantee their
childs best interests.
special education in Israel
In 1988, the Israeli Parliament issued the law of special education in order
to establish systematic regulations regarding the right of schooling for chil-
dren with special needs. There are three kinds of arrangements to meet the
needs of these children. A small number of children study in special-education
schools. A greater number of children attend special-education classes in
regular schools. These classes consist of no more than 13 students and have two
teachers instead of one. A third group studies in regular classes. Some because
their parents object to their placement in a special-education class and others
because their parents conceal their childrens needs for fear that once made
public the system would insert pressure to transfer them to a special-education
class. Some are not aware of having a child with special needs and often believe
the child is lazy, clumsy or lacking any motivation to succeed.
The placement-committee has seven members: a chair, who is a represen-
tative of the local district, two school inspectors one of whom is an inspector of
a special-education school, a pediatrician, an educational psychologist working
for the local district, a social worker and a representative of the parents
national committee. Although illegal, even when not all seven members are
present, the hearing takes place. The schooling system is unable, by law, to
force parents to place their children in special-education classrooms. However,
many parents are willing to do so for fear that their child would not cope with
the demands imposed on children in a regular classroom, or would be ridiculed
by their class-mates.
Data indicate a general dissatisfaction from placement-committees in gen-
eral and in the Tel-Aviv area in particular. This is why, in February 2000, a
state committee under the ruling of Professor Margalit from the School of
Education at Tel-Aviv University was instigated. The committee interviewed
parents, teachers, officers of the municipalities, experts and who ever was
willing to testify publishing its recommendations on July, 2000. The committee
pointed to conflicts in clinical definitions versus educational definitions.
153
Moreover, it emphasized the rise of a culture of offence, suspicion and anger,
developed among both parents and school personnel, who complained that in-
service officers tended to talk above their head using professional terminology
incomprehensible to them. Furthermore, it stressed the need to provide the
parents with official information regarding their childs condition, such as
school records, experts reports, clinical evaluations and information about
suitable educational and therapeutic settings. Finally, the committee sug-
gested incorporating alternative methods of evaluating the child and claimed
placement-committees to undermine the information presented by the parents,
humiliating both the child and the expert carrying out the diagnosis.
The Margalit committee report raised a lot of hope for many parents. Fol-
lowing its publication a few changes have taken place. The most important
being that parents, denied their wish for their child, appealed to the Supreme
Court which has ruled in their favor.
methodology
This study contributes to the integration of qualitative field-methods into the
discourse of special needs. The application of interviews and participant
observation has been chosen to fit the theoretical symbolic-interaction approach
(e.g. Blumer, 1969; Weiss, 1991, 1995), as particularly suited to educational
research of this kind (Denzin and Lincoln, 1998).
In discussing the issue of childrens rights and inclusion, scholars have
stressed the need for authorities to increase their commitment to children with
special needs and childrens participation in decisions regarding their lives
(Dixon, 1992; Armstrong et al., 1993; Armstrong, 1995; Bines and Loxley, 1995;
Mittler, 2000; Tett, 2001; Bruslin and Pepin, 2003). Cook and Swain (2001), for
example, show that parents attempt to make sense of what policy-makers are
telling them, in light of their own knowledge of their childrens educational
needs, and to reach a higher degree of partnership in decisional processes.
However, in Israel, there exists a paucity of qualitative research on said issues,
in particular with regard to parents responsibilities versus social systems
responsibilities. In a research based on participant observation, Nakar (1998)
found that the members of placement-committees used their professional stand
to impose decisions on parents, qualified as emotional and incapable of making
decisions regarding their children. However, the majority of the parents in said
study belonged to lower socio-economic strata, and lacked the cultural and
economic resources possessed by parents in the present study.
This study is based both on informal conversations and interviews with
20 couples of middle-class professionals, parents to children with minor
communication disorders (high PDD; Aspergers Syndrome and hyperlexia).
154
Data were gathered in two sport clubs in Tel-Aviv and its outskirts, from July
2000 throughout July 2004 that offered leisure activities for children with special-
needs. Most parents knew each other, shared experiences and information, and
tended to consult each other. One of the authors has a child who participated
in the above activities during that time period and kept in touch with many of
the children. As information kept coming, through personal connections and
informal encounters, we chose to integrate it into the study as well.
All parents went, at least, through three hearings: one before the child
entered kindergarten, one before he entered primary school and one before he
moved to fourth grade, as required by law. Late information refers to hearings
prior to entering junior high-school. All parents appeared before a placement-
committee both before and after the Margalit Committee and most of them
reported little changes have taken place. A first interview was conducted three
months after the sport program had started, and another one a few days after
each of the couples attended a hearing, finding out about the decision and
the degree to which the parents were able to influence the committee, and to
persuade it to send their child to the class or school they felt was right for him.
Given that one of the researcher was in touch with all the parents and they
all approved of her research, as required ethically (Blumer, 1982; Lincoln and
Guba, 1989; Lincoln, 1990; Smith, 1990; Howe and Dougherty, 1993; Guillemin
and Gillam, 2004) implied that information was provided constantly. There
was only one couple who refused to be included in the study and their wish
was respected. When asked for their reason to cooperate with the researchers,
all parents mentioned that they hoped the study to be published in Israel
and affect the work of the placement-committee. In order to protect both the
childrens and their parents privacy, all private/identifiable information was
concealed.
It should be noted that while the sample in this study is limited in number, it
is quite representative of the socio-economic class studied, as most affluent
and academically educated families in Israel are geographically concentrated
in the researched area. In addition, the researched field reveals the possibility
of obtaining spontaneous information, produced in unstructured events, in
addition to interviews. This study points out the richness embedded in the
ethnographers social circles and personal network and their potential contri-
bution to research.
Studies in which the researcher is part of the field have become common
in the last years (Dushkin and Sabar, 2002). Writing as mother of a child with
special needs, Russell (2003) shows the lack of knowledge about expectations
of parents, and the need for more information in order to interact better with
professionals at a range of levels. Indeed, ethnographic research points to the
advantages stemming from being the researcher part of the field. For example,
in her study at a sport club, MacPhail (2004) reports that her entering into the
155
field was greatly facilitated by her belonging to the same club, which allowed
her to find informants and developing relations with them. However, she
stresses the need for the researcher to test her/his place and standpoint, so
to keep the balance between personal involvement and professional distance.
Similar reasons are given by other researchers involved in the field (Stanley
and Wise, 1993; Gouin, 2004). In our case, access to the field was greatly facili-
tated by the personal acquaintance of one researcher with the informants and
the field, while the work with the other researcher, not personally involved
in the field, served as a useful tool for keeping the balance between involvement
and distance.
findings
It is so often than parents approach me after their hearing feeling frustrated for
failing to establish a dialogue with city officials. Neither do they feel they are
meant to be heard.
Noa, the speaker, is a self-employed editor who serves regularly as a parents
representative in placement-committees in Tel-Aviv. Her observations clearly
support the distinctive features of the dialogue between parties meeting at the
hearing. The parents perceive the meetings as opportunities to discuss their
childrens needs and their negotiations with in-service officers as a means to
practice democracy and realize their right to educate their children according
to their beliefs. However, hearings often turn into arenas of confrontations
between different discursive themes: the bureaucratic one, the professional
one and the parental-emotional one. As a result, said negotiations have three
socially constructed outcomes. First, alternative definitions of the situation are
negotiated. Second, by mobilizing informal resources parents manage to gain
control over the decision, sometimes even reversing the committees decisions,
and turn the discourse of power in their favor by extending its professional
boundaries. Third, the parents, in the researched group, grasp their power
as equal to that of the in-service officials. By learning the way in which the
discourse operates, they use techniques that force the committees members
to stick to their task-definition and remember that they are meant to serve the
parents and help to solve their problems. In other words, the confrontation
between two equally powerful groups, each one in its field, allows a smoother
functioning of the bureaucratic machine in Israeli society.
negotiating alternative definitions of the situation
The subjects passivity, according to Foucault, stems from lack of professional
knowledge, which prevents him from instilling dialogue with the power-holders.
Bordo (1993), conversely, argues that power might have consequences that
156
are personally liberating and/or culturally transforming as it encourages the
development of opposition. The parents are acting in arenas in which different
situational definitions are in conflict. In their contacts with in-service officers,
they refuse to take the role of passive subjects. Rather they perceive hearings
as active arenas for developing resistance as they negotiate decisions regarding
their child.
The most valuable resource possessed by the committee members, in face
of disagreement, lies in accusing the parents of being emotional and making
it difficult for the committee to fulfill its task (Nakar, 1998). Indeed, parents
in our study report about accusations as such and claim that they are entitled
to be emotional once their son is treated as a non-person to be placed in the
school-system disregarding his parents perceptions of his needs. Moreover,
parents object to the experts use of professional language in order to prevent
them from participating in a discussion on equal terms. Doing so, experts re-
validate their supremacy stemming from a professional ideology, one that
places parental perspectives secondary in order. Challenging the experts
suggestions is interpreted by on-duty officials as disrespect and contempt to
their professional integrity and the system. Whereas officials aim to establish
a professional discourse based on the devaluation of the parents experience,
the latter claim the right to introduce a parental discourse based on their
experience.
Take for instance Sarit, a banker, and the mother of 11-year-old Elad. When
Elad turned five she wanted him to attend a special-education kindergarten,
however not one meant for children on the autistic spectrum, a demand rejected
by the committee and reversed by an appeal. When Elad was nine years old
she felt he could benefit from a class for children with PDD. The committee
was supportive, yet mentioned that the possibility was previously suggested
and refused by her. The committee, then, was willing to comply with her
wish because it was consistent with its first recommendation. Her request was
interpreted as surrender to the experts power rather than a parental decision.
Feelings of frustration lead the parents to develop negotiation skills that
improve their ways of coping with the bureaucratic system. They learn to stick
to their opinion and do not hesitate challenging the committee. When Erez
turned six and was about to enter first grade, his parents Lyn, a system analyst,
and Ron, a computer engineer, enrolled him in a class for children with high-
functioning PDD. Two years in the class caused Erez to regress terribly. Lyn
and Ron applied for a second hearing and provided evidence for their childs
regression. They presented three professional opinions, including one written
by Erezs teacher, all of which recommended his transfer to a regular class.
The committee refused on the grounds that PDD children were better off in
a special-education class. The parents, together with a few other couples in a
157
similar situation, appealed to the Supreme Court, which ruled in their favor.
Lyn described her experience as following:
They treated us as if all we wanted was to abuse the system. They said we were
emotional and could not expect the system to comply with our wishes. Our testing
him privately threatened them as well as the fact that his teacher supported us.
This example points to the need of in-service officers to maintain the discourse
of power intact in light of parents who refuse to surrender to their decisions
and hire experts, on their behalf, who think outside the framework of the
organizational discourse. Take the case of Jasmine and Samuel, a veterinarian
and a dermatologist respectively. Prior to their sons (Michael) entrance to first
grade they organized a group of parents to children in conditions similar to
their own son, and asked the committee to open a class for them. Their request
was rejected under the claim that parents were not to decide who their son
would be going to go to school with. Jasmine told:
Actually, I could see their point. Yet, they wouldnt even listen to me although
they admitted that my offer would have saved them a lot of work. There were six
of us and all they needed was to find two more kids to open the class.
After all, the committee decided to open the class, which ended up being based
on Jasmines social-network. However, two severely autistic children were
assigned to the class, which made it hard for the two teachers to manage the
class properly. After two years in which Michael regressed and refused to go to
school, Jasmine and Samuel applied for another hearing.
There were different people this time. They were less preoccupied with clinical
definitions and more concerned about finding an educational solution. I told
them I was thinking of home-educating Michael. They agreed to place him in the
p.d.d. class in a neighborly school.
All examples above reveal a conflict between the medical/clinical diagnosis
of the child, emphasized by the committee members, and the educational/
emotional solution suggested by his parents as of major importance. Yet, it
is often the case that the primary problem of the child is not clearly defined.
Then, the nature of the solution depends on the social make-up of the com-
mittee members. Whereas some parents experience an open minded and
practically oriented discussion, others are under the impression that officers
have used their child to fill in a space in classes that have not been filled up yet.
Take the case of Anat, an academic and the mother of Saul. Although having
problems similar to high functioning PDD, Saul was in some ways different.
He never went to a PDD class and his parents never presented any documen-
tation suggesting he might be located on the autistic spectrum. Although the
committee was skeptical, Anat finally managed to convince the members to
comply with her wishes, yet she felt frustrated.
158
Every report I had insisted that the child should not be placed with autistic
children. Yet, the inspector wondered why she had to follow the reports rather
than her own understanding of my sons problems. The appeal-committee
reversed the decision in my favor.
In conclusion, hearings consist of both explicit and implicit levels of dis-
courses. The explicit level revolves around both parties interest to find proper
placement for children with special needs. The implicit discursive theme
refers to the reproduction of professional supremacy and legitimacy to ex-
clude the parents from the discussion or from seeing them as equal partners to
the process of decision-making. While officers believe that parental/emotional
discourse is second to the professional/bureaucratic one, and it is up to them
to grant parental participation in the decision-making process, the parents
struggle to affirm their right to equal participation in reference to their child
rights and needs. The belief in the rightness of such struggle stems from the
parents cultural capital that allows not only the understanding of the discourse-
of-power emerging from under the committees professional umbrella; it also
provides them with the understanding of the validity of the parental and
educational discourses as an alternative to the clinical and bureaucratic ones.
informal coping strategies
In aim to achieve full partnership in the decision-making process, parents
develop and disseminate informal means to cope with the bureaucratic system.
These consist of labeling officials on duty and on developing social networks
from which parents seek support. Labeling is applied only in reference to offi-
cials disrespect for the parents, and it allows the lessening of tensions and
anger. Once labeled, the parents spread the label and refer to the labeled indi-
vidual by his/her label mostly. For instance, a major persona in the placement-
committee, who is good-looking yet is considered as lacking sophistication, is
nicknamed Forrest Gump. The nickname was spread by a single mother, a
lawyer, on whom the labeled officer applied pressure to enroll her son in a
kindergarten meant for autistic children although the clinical report suggested
alternatives. The mother enlisted her child in a private school, directed by a
woman teacher who was not alarmed by the diagnosis, and in the course of
the year she looked for a school she liked and then asked for a second hearing.
Forrest Gump, however, renewed her pressures to place the child into the same
kindergarten she had previously suggested. The mother lost her temper:
I sarcastically asked if I could speak to someone more intelligent. The chairman,
who filled in for an officer on vacation, addressed Forrest Gump directly: cant
you see whom are you dealing with? Dont you understand that her request is
reasonable? Are you asking for another appeal? When I learnt she was nicknamed
Forrest Gump, I started nicknaming her too.
159
The parents, then, who worry that their child being labeled, label officials in
return on the basis of what they perceive as professional or personal functional
deficiencies. Not only does the label releases frustration, it also creates informal
knowledge, which helps them in their contacts with the placement-committee
members.
Another major figure, famous for her extra body-weight and considered by
the parents as manipulative and malicious, is nicknamed the anorexic. One
afternoon, a humorous discussion evolved on the subject of whether it was op-
portune to shorten her nickname to Rexy. A unanimous decision was reached
to stick to the original nickname, as Rexy was a common name for dogs that
connoted affection and fidelity.
Humor also reveals the extent to which the parents are willing to go for
the purpose of convincing the committee to place their child in a program
that they see as fit for him. Take the case of Amnon, the son of Hanan, an
archeologist, and Dalia, a professor of comparative-literature. Amnon joined the
club after his mother became friends with one of the authors. Amnon went to a
regular primary school and every afternoon had four hours of tutoring. No one
inside the system either knew or noticed that the child had a communication
disorder. Upon entering junior high school, his parents thoroughly surveyed
different possibilities and chose a special-education school in one of the
Tel-Aviv suburbs. The informal meetings in the club equipped Hanan and
Dalia with relevant information as to how to prepare for their hearing. They
were accompanied by eight different professionals and told that it took 10
minutes to find chairs for everyone. The macabre conversation that followed
Hanans description of the meeting, illustrates the central function of humor
among the parents:
We were determined to do all it takes in order to get him into the school, even if
it implied that one of us had either to sleep with an official or murder him/her.
One of the mothers said she could not imagine Hanan or Dalia with the anorexic.
1

Everybody laughed, and Hanan admitted Dalia took it into consideration,
as nowadays one couldnt be sure about ones sexual preferences. Another
mother commented killing was a better option as they would have gone to prison
knowing they did something good for the generations to come. Her words
elicited consensus accompanied by laughter and macabre remarks.
While Nakar (1998) shows that committee members use humor to label parents
and manifest proficiency in the professional terminology, our study shows how
humor helps to form a parental lingo, which is constantly reproduced and
propagated. Through humor parents illustrate the difficulties they encounter
in trying to instill productive dialogues, so essential to democracy, between
fellow citizens and civil servants who fail, to the parents belief, to fulfill their
duties. Such use of humor is strictly dependent on the cultural capital of the
160
parents, which directs them to enforce the neo-liberal ideology, in the belief that
they are not in any way inferior to the officials, and are worthy of respect for
themselves and for their children who are not to be treated as non-persons.
Parental networks are another means to improve chances for a proper place-
ment of the child. Such networks are based not only on common experience
regarding their children, but also on the parents belonging to the same status
group, living in the same geographical surroundings, and sharing common
interests outside the educational frame. Thus parents establish friendly
relationships, which facilitate smooth contacts in view of their coping with
forthcoming hearings. Parents consult each other, bring with them an experi-
enced parent to negotiate with the committee and even talk to a parent repre-
sentative in advance to guarantee his/her support at the hearing. Aaron, an
agronomist, and his wife Danielle, a physician, agree:
We were very well prepared. A lot of parents advised us against providing a full
picture of our sons problems and suggested we stressed only those that would
guarantee his placement in the school we wanted. We were surprised by the
extent to which their advices were helpful.
Efrat, a historian, and her husband Simon, an organizational adviser, called a
parent representative they knew, and asked her to attend their hearing. Being
familiar with their previous experience at the hearing, she agreed at once:
We acted as if we have never seen her and didnt mention the fact that she and
I have coffee together once a week, when our children attend a swimming class.
She was capable of keeping the discussion in focus, making sure Forrest Gump
remained quiet most of the time. When the school inspector asked me what
I thought was an irrelevant question she was the one who stopped me from
answering before I would have said something that wouldnt have played in
my favor.
The mobilization of parental networks, based on cultural capital and shared
interests, enables parents to gain control over decisions regarding their child
and activate the system in their favor. Once parents feel participation is granted
and that their voice is heard, they are also more willing, as we shall see shortly,
to give positive consideration to the committees suggestions.
formal strategies: participating in the professional discourse
Whereas informal techniques, manifested through informal conversations with
peers are tension releasing, formal techniques rest on the accumulation of
knowledge of the system and on learning to function within its boundaries.
These, too, are propagated through parental networks during informal meetings.
A primary means to improve ones chance to be heard and considered in the
decision-making process is to hire skilful experts, who express proficiency in
the professional lingo, to solicit the parents claims at the hearings. Thus they
161
avoid being blamed as being irrational and lacking knowledge in the field of
special education, and get their chance to be heard and to be equal-rights partners
in the decision process without upsetting officers in-service. For instance, once
Nina, an accountant, has realized that an educational psychologist is more
likely to defeat experts on their own grounds, she hired one:
Once I figured that my parental instincts and years of experience didnt count
as much as an evaluation written by a stranger, yet a professional, I had my
daughter diagnosed by a famous child psychologist. It cost me a fortune but he
fought for us. After 45 minutes that felt like eternity, he defeated them.
Similarly, Naomi, a system-analyst, and her partner, a well-known writer, have
hired a child psychologist, who spent almost two hours at a meeting meant to
last 30 minutes:
I was under the impression they have made the decision prior to the hearing. Her
coming with us has proved to be helpful. It is possible that her reputation has
played to our favor. After all, they didnt want her to think badly of them.
Committee members express an ambivalent attitude toward hired experts as
they represent the parents and therefore are regarded as biased. Nonethe-
less, they are part of the professional discourse and therefore have to be respected.
Neta, an architect, says:
The psychologist mentioned both my husband and I were architects. My husband
has also won a prize and it was all over the papers. The anorexic said bitterly oh,
I am so impressed! The psychologist just looked at her in dismay. She remained
quiet throughout the meeting.
The fact that both of them were capable of stating their arguments and spare
themselves superfluous expenses is irrelevant in the committees eyes. They
were looked down on by the committee members for not having professions
relevant to the clinical discourse. It needed a highly estimated clinical expert,
and a generous sum of money to guarantee they would be heard.
Another formal strategy, to guarantee parents wishes are complied with, is
to introduce into the hearings the legal discourse, from which the committee
draws its legitimacy. The legal discourse is taken seriously and often causes
concern among the officials on duty. Said concern mostly originates from the
fear that it may be used against the authority of the committee officials. Irits
and Toms case stresses the limitation of the professional discourse, once the
legal discourse is mobilized, in order to realize ones right to be involved in a
selection of a school for his/her child. Iris brother, an attorney, accompanied
them to the meeting and was introduced as the childs uncle:
Forrest didnt like the fact that we brought an attorney. She was crossed. He
stated his credentials only when things seemed to go against our wishes. I know
I should have behaved differently but theyre leaving me no choice. Parents have
told me lawyers scare them and all I wanted was to guarantee my sons interests.
162
The introduction of the legal discourse into the hearing has limited the clinical/
educational/bureaucratic discourse. It placed bureaucratic concerns second to
democratic rights and a liberal mode of thought. The introduction of the legal
discourse as a major guardian of a democratic society, allows parents to guar-
antee that their childrens interests are taken care of.
When parents and officers do not agree on a childs placement, the parents face
a possibility of appealing to an out-of-district appeal committee. Data indicate
that in the Tel-Aviv area alone about 85 percent of decisions are reversed. On
the long run, this has had a positive affect on the local placement-committees,
which have been highly criticized by representatives in the appeal committee.
Anat, a teacher, who had appealed twice, says:
One notices the difference immediately. The discussions are civilized, there
is no aggression or disrespect and one really gets the feeling that these people
are there to help. The parents representative called us afterward and told us
that the chairwoman of the appeal committee said it was obvious that we hadnt
been treated in an appropriate way.
Assuming a possible appeal, experienced parents refrain often from wasting
resources on local hearings and hire experts to appear only in front of the appeal-
committee. For instance, Orly and her husband have twice hired a psychologist
to advance their claims in front of the placement-committee. Their hearing,
regarding their childs placement in junior high school, took place when the
psychologist was on holiday:
I assumed Id have to appeal as the school I wanted for him didnt fit their idea
of what my son needed. The anorexic asked where my private army was and
I didnt answer. The psychologist convinced the appeal-committee to reverse
the decision.
In order for the parents to limit the states control over its citizens private life,
and realize their basic democratic rights to partake in decisions regarding
their childrens schooling, they often acquire knowledge about the system, its
mechanisms, the social make-up of the committee and the educational options
available to children with special needs. Said knowledge allows parents con-
ducting a matter-of-fact dialogue with the committees members. The parents
mention their familiarity with the system and the options available for their
child. Being a special-education teacher was of a benefit to Neta:
We emphasized that I was a special-education teacher and my husband was a
social-worker. We said we were familiar with the programs and we were sure that
the one we wanted suited our son. The discussion was very professional and we
were under the impression they listened to us and wanted us to be satisfied.
Gili, a drama therapist, who works in special-education schools in Tel-Aviv
and its outskirts, wanted her son to attend a special-education school out of
the district. It implied the municipality was to provide transportation. The
committee was against it at first:
163
Having known the schools in Tel-Aviv I could claim with certainty that no local
school had the kind of program he needed. I do not deny the possibility that my
job could have played in our favor.
The case of Nathan, an accountant, and his wife Emily, an English teacher,
recent immigrants from the USA, exemplifies the extent to which familiarity with
the system is essential for the realization of democratic rights. They presented
an evaluation that suspected their son had PDD. Yet, as speech therapy had
improved both his verbal and communication skills, it suggested enrolling him
in a school meant for children with speech disorders. The committee, against
Nathans will, insisted on sending the child to a kindergarten for autistic
children. Nathan felt lost:
It was only after talking to the parents representative, that I realized that there
was a game we needed to play. She suggested we appeal and instructed us as to
what we should and shouldnt say. Her suggestions helped as at the appeal level.
The above examples show that the parents both assimilate behavioral codes
to be applied in front of the committee, and develop strategies that allow for
defeating experts on their own grounds. While the socio-cultural capital in
possession of the parents is most times useless in face-to-face interactions with
committee officers, as it elicits negative responses, due to the unwillingness
of officers to lose their professional/bureaucratic supremacy, it is usefully ex-
ploited in indirect ways, to develop both formal and informal coping strategies.
To achieve their purpose parents often deliberately take the role of the
helpless citizen; enlisting expert representation to speak on their behalf. In this
manner they extend the boundaries of the discourse, and introduce alternative
means to implement a democratic discourse. By applying means acceptable
within the discourse of power, in face of the committee, the parents practically
shift decisions in their favor without challenging the system.
conclusion
This article has analyzed the strategies and actions used by upper middle-
class parents of children with high-functioning communication disorders, in
their negotiations with placement-committees in the Tel-Aviv area. Focusing
on families exercising their cultural capital allowed tracing the institutional-
ization of a culture of resistance to the role of the passive subject. Rather
than accepting decisions made by officials on duty, due to their professional
expertise and position within bureaucratic systems, the parents on the basis
of cultural capital, develop, disseminate and reproduce both formal and
informal techniques, all meant to realize their right to be equal partners in
decision-making regarding their childs schooling. Moreover, by extending the
boundaries of the professional/bureaucratic discourse and introducing both
the parental and the legal discourse, parents actually resist power relations
164
and make officials comply with their wishes. Thus they feel their basic demo-
cratic rights are respected.
It is our belief that this study could contribute to wider scholastic discussion
of the possibilities of subjects initiating and institutionalizing negotiations of
their basic rights to partake in the decision-making process regarding their
personal lives and the management of personal pain in the public sphere.
Negotiations as such negate power relations, professional expertise or positions
within the system that grant the right to exercise power over decisions affecting
personal matters, such as schooling. Further research could examine whether
or not the parents partial success here is limited to their access to cultural and
social capital or whether the possibility of developing sophisticated cultures of
resistance is transferable to all social classes.
note
1. Hanan and Dalia are small people.
references
Amir, D. (1995) Responsible, committed and wise: the foundation of Israeli femininity
(in Hebrew). Theory and Criticism, 7, 24753.
Armstrong, D. (1995) Power and Partnership in Education: Parents, Children, and Special
Educational Needs. New York: Routledge.
Armstrong, D., Galloway, D. and Tomlison, S. (1993) The assessment of special
educational needs and the proletarianisation of professionals. British Journal of
Sociology, 14(4), 399408.
Artiles, A. (2004) The end of innocence: historiography and representation in the
discursive practice of LD. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37(6), 55055.
Becher, R. M. (1994) Parent Involvement: A Review of Research and Principles of
Successful Practice. Urbana, IL: ERIC Clearinghouse on Elementary and Early
Childhood Education (ED 247 032).
Bines, H. and Loxley, A. (1995) Implementing the codes of practice for special
educational needs. Oxford Review of Education, 21(4), 38194.
Blumer, H. (1969) Symbolic Interactionism, Perspective and Method. New York:
Englewood Cliffs.
Blumer, M. (1982) Social Research Ethics. New York: MacMillan.
Bordo, S. (1993) Feminism, foucault and the politics of the body. In J. Price and
M. Shildrick (eds) Feminist Theory and the Body, pp. 24657. New York: Routledge.
Bruslin, C. and Pepin, B. (2003) Inclusion in schools: who is in need of what? European
Educational Research Journal, 2(2), 197201.
Chavkin, N. F. and Williams, D. L., Jr (1987) Enhancing parent involvement. Education
and Urban Society, 19, 16484.
Cook, T. and Swain, J. (2001) Parents perspectives on the closure of a special school:
towards inclusion in partnership. Educational Review, 53(2), 1918.
Cotton, K. and Reed Wikelund, K. (1989) Parent involvement in education, school
improvement research series (SIRS). NW.
Denzin, N. K. and Lincoln, S., eds (1998) Strategies of Qualitative Inquiry. London: SAGE.
Derber, C., Schwartz, W. A. and Magrass, Y. (1990) Power in the Highest Degree. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
165
Dimaggio, P. J. and Powell, W. 1990 The iron cage revisited: institutional isomorphism
and collective rationality in organizational fields. In W. Powell and P. Dimaggio
(eds) The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis, pp. 6382. Chicago, IL:
University of Chicago Press.
Dixon, A. P. (1992) Parents: full partners in the decision making process. NASSP
Bulletin, 76(543), 1518.
Dushkin, L. and Sabar Ben-Yehoshua, N. (2001) Ethics of qualitative research (in
Hebrew). In Naama Sabar Ben-Yehoshua (ed.) Genres and Traditions in Qualitative
Research, Or-Yehuda: Dvir Publishing House.
Edge, D., Strenecky, B. J., McLoughlin, J. A., and Edge, S. M. (1984) Involving parents
and families in the educational process. In C. A. Maher, R. J. Illback and J. E. Zins
(eds) Organizational Psychology in the Schools: A Handbook for Professionals.
Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.
Foucault, M. (1979) Discipline and Punish. New York: Vintage Books.
Foucault, M. (1980) The History of Sexuality. New York: Vintage Books.
Foucault, M. (1983) The subject and power. In H. L. Dreyfus and P. Rainbow (eds)
Michel Foucault: Beyond Structuralism and Hermeneutics. Chicago, IL: University of
Chicago Press.
Foucault, M. (1985) The Use of Pleasure. New York: Pantheon Books.
Gieryn, T. (1999) Cultural Boundaries of Science Credibility on the Line. Chicago, IL:
Chicago University Press.
Goldring, E. and Hausman, C. (1996) Parent empowerment: the key to productive
partnerships. Streamlined Seminar, 15(2).
Gouin, R. R. (2004) Whats so funny? Humor in womens accounts of their
involvement in social action. Qualitative Research, 4(1), 2544.
Guillemin, M. and Gillam, L. (2004) Ethics, reflexivity, and ethically important
moments in research. Qualitative Inquiry, 10(2), 26180.
Habermas, J. (1974) The public sphere. New German Critique, 3, 4955.
Hacker, D. and Shamir, R. (2003) Motherhood, fatherhood, family: between intuition
and jurisdiction. Israeli Sociology, 5(2), 31139.
Hausman, C. and Goldring, E. (2000) Parent involvement, influence, and satisfaction
in magnet schools: do reasons for choice matter?. Urban Review, 32(2), 10521.
Howe, K. R. and Dougherty, K. C. (1993) Ethics, institutional review boards and the
changing face of educational research. Educational Researcher, 22(9), 1621.
Inbar, Dan (1997) Choice in education. In Y. Arieli and M. Shlasky (eds) Lexicon of
Education and Teaching, pp. 545. Tel-Aviv: Ramot.
Jans, M. (2004) Children as citizens: toward a contemporary notion of child
participation. Childhood, 11(1), 2744.
Laumann, E. and Knoke, D. (1988) The Organization State. Chicago, IL: University of
Chicago Press.
Lincoln, Y. S. (1990) Toward a categorized imperative for qualitative research. In E.
Eisner and A. Peshkin (eds) Qualitative Enquiry in Education: The Continuing Debate.
New York: Teacher College Press.
Lincoln, Y. S. and Guba, E. G. (1989) Ethics: a failure of positivistic science. The Review
of Higher Education, 12(3), 22140.
Lovitt, T. and Cushing, S. (1999) Parents of youth with disabilities: their perceptions of
school programs. Remedial and Special Education, 20(3), 13442.
Lucks, H. (1992) Increasing parents and family involvement: ten ideas that work.
NASSP Bulletin, 76(543), 1923.
166
MacPhail, A. (2004) Athlete and researcher: undertaking and pursuing an
ethnographic study in a sport club. Qualitative Research, 4(2), 22745.
Mittler, P. (2000) Working Towards Inclusive Education: Social Contexts. London:
David Fulton.
Moles, O. (1982) Synthesis of recent research on parent participation in childrens
education. Educational Leadership, 40(2), 447.
Nakar, M. (1998) In fulfillment of the requirement for the degree on master of
sociology (in Hebrew). Control Versus Resistance: The Social Work of Placement
Committees. Tel-Aviv, Israel.
Noi, B. (1984) Parents Participation in Educational work at School. Jerusalem: School for
Senior Educators.
Roll-Pettersson, L. (2003) Perceptions of parents with children receiving special
education support in the Stockholm and adjacent areas. European Journal of Special
Needs Education, 18(3), 293310.
Russell, F. (2003) The expectations of parents of disabled children. British Journal of
Special Education, 20(30), 14449.
Smrekar, C. and Goldring, E. (1999) School choice in urban America. Magnet Schools
and the Pursuit of Equity. New York: Teachers College Press.
Soen, D. (1996) School as an experience-scene for practicing formal democracy.
Education and Context, 18, 3752.
Stanley, L. and Wise, S. (1993) Breaking Out Again: Feminist Ontology and Epistemology.
London: Routledge.
Stein, M. and Harpaz, Y. (1995) The Community School. Israel: The Society for
Community Schools.
Sznaider, N. (1997) Compassion and control: children in civil society. Childhood, 4,
22340.
Sznaider, N. (2001) The Compassion Temperament. United State, Maryland: Rowman
and Littlefield Publishers.
Tett, L. (2001) Parents as problems or parents as people? Parental involvement
programmes, schools and adult educators. International Journal of Lifelong
Education, 20(3), 18898.
Turner, B. (1984) The Body and Society. Great Britain: Basil Blackwell.
Weiss, M. (1995) Conditioned Love. Tel-Aviv: Sifriat Poalim.
Zur, A. (1991) The discourse of mental health in Israel as a creator of knowledge/
power (in Hebrew). Thesis submitted for Degree of Doctor of Philosophy. The Hebrew
University, Jerusalem, Israel.
correspondence details:
Liora Gvion, Kibbutzim College of Education, Tel-Aviv, Israel.
[email: gvion@macam.ac.il]

Education, Citizenship and Social Justice 2008 Gvion 147 66

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Education, Citizenship and Social Justice 2008 Gvion 147 66

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

http://esj.sagepub.

http://esj.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Email Alerts:

- Jun 6, 2008 Version of Record >>

2008, SAGE Publications (www.sagepublications.com)

You might also like