Running head: The Rights of Special Education Students 1

The Rights of Special Education Students

Erin A DeSelms

College of Southern Nevada

The Rights of Special Education Students 2

Abstract

Miss Debbie Young, an educator and principal at an affluent high school in the South,

has made the decision to deny admission to a student based upon his mental and physical

disabilities. In the United States students are protected against discrimination based upon their

disability and Miss Young could be breaking some laws. The Individuals with Disabilities

Education Act provides a “free and appropriate education to all students with disabilities ages

3-21. Based upon IDEA and other similar court cases I do believe that Miss Debbie Young

would lose a court case if one was brought upon her due to the circumstances.

Keywords:​ IDEA, education, disabilities.

The Rights of Special Education Students 3

The Rights of Special Education Students

Special needs students in America have very specific education rights defined by the

government. When Debbie Young, a seasoned professional teacher and principal in the South,

was approached by the parents of a severely disabled high school student she made the decision

that his disabilities were too expensive to care for and denied their request to have him join her

school. The boy has spastic quadriplegia, a seizure disorder, and is mentally handicapped

requiring a nurse to care for him during the day. Debbie Young did not think that her school

should possess the burden of paying for that medical care and therefore did not want this young

man attending her school. Is Ms. Young in the wrong in this situation? Is she justified in her

decision of saving money for the school? placerat libero ullamcorper. Maecenas id luctus ligula.

Cras condimentum eleifend nibh sit amet iaculis. Suspendisse placerat sollicitudin mi, vel ornare

augue hendrerit ac. Nulla sed suscipit sapien. Cras pellentesque orci lectus, eu consequat enim.

Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 “stipulates that otherwise qualified

individuals shall not be excluded from participating in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected

to discrimination by recipient programs or activities, if that treatment is due to their disabilities”.

(Legal Rights of Teachers and Students, 144) Section 504 would apply to this case because while

the student is disabled, he shall not be denied the benefits of public school that every American

child without a disability is receiving. Along with Section 504, the Americans with Disabilities

Act establishes that public and private schools cannot discriminate against people with

disabilities. Part B of the Americans with Disabilities Act is known as Individuals with

Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and applies to the funding received by schools. A state can

deny IDEA funds and do not have to follow this law, but states receiving IDEA funds must abide
The Rights of Special Education Students 4

by the requirements. A child must qualify as “disabled” outlined in the law and would receive

funds for education. IDEA provides many rights to students with special needs and requires they

receive free appropriate public education at public expense.

In the case of Board of Education of the Hendrick Hudson Central School District v.

Rowley the parents of a deaf girl sued the school district for refusing to provide a sign language

interpreter for her. This case was brought all the way to the supreme court. The decision that the

Court handed down was in favor of the school district. The court stated that the school did not

have to provide an interpreter for the student because that was going above and beyond what

they were required to do by law. By law the school district is to provide a “free and appropriate

education”. The use of an interpreter was not needed for the student to receive an “appropriate”

education according to the Court. This case would bring into question, “what actually defines an

appropriate education?” in the future. According to this case Debbie Young and the school

district would win their case and not have to provide the special needs student with a nurse

because that was not defined as an appropriate education by the law.

In the Court case P.P. v. West Chester Area School District a boy who is going into

fourth grade who has special needs is denied reimbursement for funds his parents paid for him to

attend a private school. The parents of P.P. claimed that the district was responsible to vision

therapy, summer school programs, and reimbursement of payment to a private school which

specialized in special needs education. Defined in IDEA a disabled student is guaranteed by law

a free and appropriate education. While this school was specializing in disabled students, the

parents chose to place him in the private school when they had the option of sending him to a

public school, but did not. Therefore the Court sided with the defendant and the parents did not
The Rights of Special Education Students 5

get reimbursement for the student’s schooling. Although this case is regarding private school, I

still believe because of the decision handing down by the Court during this case, Debbie Young

would win her court case provided she could prove that the disabled student would be provided a

free and appropriate education elsewhere. The student may live out of area and the parents are

contacting this principle because of the affluent area and want their son to go to this school. If

the school district was able to prove the boy could receive an appropriate education elsewhere,

Debbie Young would win this court case.

In a similar case to Miss Young’s case, Timothy W. v. Rochester New Hampshire School

District, Timothy is a four year old severely handicapped boy. His parents tried to have him

evaluated to receive an IEP so that he could attend public school. Because of his severe

disability, including quadriplegia, a group of professionals determined not one but on two

occasions, that Timothy would not benefit from an education. Timothy’s parents filed suit and

eventually won their case after a judge made the decision that even though Timothy was severely

mentally and physically handicapped, that did not bar him from a formal education. Further the

Court stated that even though a child may appear “uneducable” that does not mean they, just like

other children, do not deserve an education. Because this case is so similar to Miss Young’s case,

I do not think the Court would rule in the district’s favor. I believe that the district would have to

pay for the student’s nurse because that would provide him with an appropriate education

because that is what he needs to survive and be there throughout the day. The Court would

decide that the burden of cost would be put on the public to educate this child.

In an even more shockingly similar case, Cedar Rapids Community School District v.

Garrett F., a young boy was denied a nurse for a severe disability due to a motorcycle accident.
The Rights of Special Education Students 6

During his early school years, he was cared for by his aunt and then by a nurse that his mother

paid for with the settlement funds she received from the motorcycle accident. Garrett was able to

fully speak and move using a blow/suck wheelchair. Although he was severely physically

handicapped, he had no known mental disabilities. In 1993, Garrett’s mother requested that the

school district pay for his nurse and other accommodations so that he could continue attending

school. Her request was denied and eventually resulted in a court case. The district claimed they

did not have the responsibility to provide nurse services to Garrett and that was the parents

responsibility. The Court ruled that because nurse services were required for Garrett to stay in

school, the district would be responsible for providing those services. Because this case is also so

similar to the case brought against Debbie Young, I believe that she would also lose this case.

The parents can claim that their son requires a one-on-one nurse and other medical

accommodations for him to be in school. The Court would rule that since the child is, by law,

guaranteed a free and appropriate education that the district would be responsible for these costs.

Having an appropriate education for this child may require these certain medical

accommodations.

Based upon the findings in the preceding cases, I believe that Miss Young would lose her

court case against the parents of the disabled child. The child who is severely disabled is still

entitled to a “free and appropriate education” which cannot be provided unless certain medical

needs are met first. As we saw in the Timothy W. v. Rochester New Hampshire School District

case, the Court upheld that even though Timothy was visibly uneducable, that did not bar him

from receiving an education. That is every child’s right in America and just because they are
The Rights of Special Education Students 7

disabled does not mean they are stripped of that right. I do not think the district would have a

case because IDEA was put in place specifically for situations just like this.
The Rights of Special Education Students 8

References

Nelda H. Cambron, Martha, M McCarthy, Suzanne E. Eckes (2014). Legal Rights of Teachers

and Students Vol 3, 144.