Sunday, August 1, 2010

Objection to Disclosure of Student Records

February 14, 2010 by colleen  
Filed under Brain Training to Improve Learning


NJ Parents – I wanted to pass along this important info regarding a class action lawsuit which may impact you; feel free to forward to anyone else who may be impacted - Additional e-mail to follow

 

 Objection to Disclosure of Student Records (.pdf for your convenience)

 




While it may be helpful to have some clarification from a representative of SPAN, it is important to keep in mind that SPAN is one of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit at issue, and therefore clearly has a vested interest in having these records released. 

In the interest of full disclosure for anyone who cares to read this post, I am both a parent of children with autism and an education attorney.  In part because of my "dual interests," I rarely post on listserves, but I feel it is important to further clarify this issue.  I apologize for the long-ish post here, but I hope that people will take the time to read and understand it. 

At the outset, be wary of the fact that this process has been set up so that the CONFIDENTIAL RECORDS of your child(ren) with special educational needs WILL BE AUTOMATICALLY DISCLOSED UNLESS you, as a parent, give written notification of your disagreement.  As you know, typically, written consent must be given in order for confidential records to be released.  Beware.  That is not the case here.  Your child's records WILL BE DISCLOSED unless you provide the proper formal written notification that you DO NOT want your child's records disclosed. 

With regard to the impact of releasing the information, keep in mind that although parents are being told that it will not be used to make changes to any one child's IEP, the gist of the lawsuit is that these organizations are trying to prove that too many children with special educational needs are being educated in out-of-District placements. 

If you do nothing, and allow your child's information to be disclosed, you are providing information that will used to assist these organizations in their efforts to show that too many students are being educated in out-of-District placements.  The organizations bringing this lawsuit are essentially arguing that the IEP process is not effective with regard to Least Restrictive Environment considerations, and that they speak for parents of children with special educational needs as a whole in their claims that too many students are being educated in out-of-District placements. 

If you support the position that too many students are being educated in out-of-District placements, then you likely will want to help that cause by doing nothing and letting your child's records be disclosed.   This means that if you don't think Districts are doing enough to educate students with disabilities in-District, you probably don't want to do anything. 

If you DO NOT support the position that there are too many students are being educated in out-of-District placements, then essentially, you are not in support of the contentions in the underlying lawsuit, and you likely will not want to help that cause by letting your child's records be disclosed.  

This means that if your child is being educated in an out-of-District placement, and you like it that way, you will likely want to take action.  In other words, you will want to timely sign and send back the form objecting to the disclosure of your child's records. 

Whatever decision you make, make it an informed one. 

I hope this helps. 

Feel free to forward this information to any parents you know seeking further clarification on this issue. 

 


Shelly Milstein


Rachelle H. Milstein
Attorney at Law
45 Nottingham Drive
Watchung , NJ   07069
(908) 561-1977 phone
(908) 561-4678 fax
smilstein@milsteinl aw.com

Share the Knowledge Now:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Mixx
  • Google Bookmarks
  • email
  • LinkedIn
  • MSN Reporter
  • MySpace
  • NewsVine
  • Ping.fm
  • StumbleUpon
  • Tumblr
  • Twitter
  • Yahoo! Buzz

Related Posts:

  • Search for Related Posts

Comments

One Response to “Objection to Disclosure of Student Records”
  1. colleen says:


    Further explanation for NJ families -

     

     

    1) In your post, you note this is a "class action lawsuit." What is the
    defined class and why were parents not given an opportunity to consider
    opting out of this class before the suit was filed?

    -A class action lawsuit is what is brought when you don't want to have
    to fight every single situation individual case by individual case,
    which we know most parents can't afford. (In addition, many parents
    are intimidated by their district and fear retribution if they go to
    due process). The class action lawsuit was filed consistent with
    federal rules in terms of identifying the class. The lawsuit does not
    allege that every single special education student could or should be
    in a general education classroom, merely that the state and districts
    are not implementing the law's requirements regarding LRE.

    2) We are already experiencing the wholesale return of students to
    in-district placements — whether appropriate or not — due to current
    budgetary issues. This action seems to be focused purely on a numerical
    model (i.e., the total percentage of children who are educated
    out-of-district or in segregated settings) and not at all concerned
    with outcomes of the education process. How will this action protect
    special ed students from an exacerbation of the prevailing
    one-size-fits-all program model already being offered as both
    "appropriate" and representative of "the LRE" by districts across the
    state? In other words, how will this lawsuit safeguard the
    *Individualized* nature of programming?

    -One of the issues in the lawsuit is the fact that students with
    disabilities who are in general education classrooms are often not
    provided with the supports and services they need to succeed. This
    lawsuit is not just about out-of-district placements, it is about all
    of the requirements of LRE under federal law, including the requirement
    to provide appropriate supports and services to students in general
    education classrooms. The lawsuit will not change the requirement to
    have individualized annual IEP meetings, nor would we want to, One
    question I have for you, however. How individualized do you really
    think that out of district education is? We get many calls from
    parents whose children are placed in out of district placements and
    immediately the placement wants to call another IEP meeting to change
    the related services on the IEP because they don't provide them in the
    format or group size currently in the IEP.

    3) How will this lawsuit improve the outcomes for our children? How
    does this lawsuit help to better prepare them for post-secondary life
    (i.e., college, vocational schools, or work)?

    The lawsuit alleges that the state has violated IDEA by:

    (a) failing to provide children with disabilities with a free
    appropriate
    public education in the least restrictive environment;
    (b) failing to provide children with disabilities with appropriate
    supplemental aids, services, and accommodations in general education
    classrooms;
    (c) denying children with disabilities access to specially designed
    instruction and related services in general education classrooms, based
    on availability of services, extent or nature of the disability,
    configuration of the service delivery system, lack of teacher training,
    lack of available of space and other considerations that are unrelated
    to the needs of the child;
    (d) failing to institute a comprehensive system of personnel
    development and professional licensure standards which ensure that
    general education and special education personnel are trained and
    monitored in providing children with disabilities an inclusive
    education and the use of supplementary aids and services in general
    education classrooms;
    (e) failing to offer a full continuum of services, including specialized
    instruction and other supplementary aids and services in general
    education classrooms;
    (f) failing to provide children with disabilities with IEPs that confer
    real educational benefits;
    (g) failing to afford children with disabilities the opportunity to
    participate in academic and extra-curricular programs to the same
    extent as, and alongside, their non-disabled peers;
    (h) denying children with disabilities the opportunity to attend the
    neighborhood schools they would have attended if they did not have a
    disability;
    (i) maintaining state funding formulas that impede the mandated
    inclusion of children with disabilities;
    (j) failing to appropriately and effectively monitor school district
    compliance with special education mandates and ensure timely correction
    of noncompliance once identified;
    (k) approving the development of school facilities that impede the
    inclusion of children with disabilities;
    (l) approving district Long Range Facilities Plans that include models
    for school facilities that impede the inclusion of children with
    disabilities;
    (m) denying district applications for additional aid for “nonconforming
    spaces” which would allow children with disabilities to be included in
    general education programs; and
    (n) failing to provide sufficient, effective technical assistance and
    training to districts in the provision of inclusive education services.

    Further, it requests relief regarding each of these violations. If
    relief regarding these issues were provided, if, indeed, all teachers
    were prepared to teach all students, and if there was appropriate
    ongoing professional development and coaching; if children in the
    general education classroon weren't just dumped there but were instead
    actually provided with individualized and appropriate supports and
    services; then many more students in NJ would be able to be
    appropriately and successfully included, and would be more likely to be
    learning the core curriculum content standards, graduate, and have
    improved post-school outcomes.

    4) Won't more extensive, detailed records, such as IEPs and evaluation
    reports, need to be released in order to determine whether the more
    segregated placement is, indeed, the LRE for each (specific) student?
    What is the total estimated cost to the state DOE and various districts
    for production of these records? Where is it anticipated that money
    will come from, especially now that Governor Christie has frozen all
    state spending?

    Parents who are seeking their children's human, civil, and IDEA rights
    should not have to answer questions about "where will the money come
    from?" These parents have the same right as you, any other parent, or
    anyone who felt their rights were being violated, to exercise their
    constitutional and legal rights, including to sue. Plaintiffs' counsel
    wants to look at the state database, which comes with no names or
    birthdates, just year of birth, which we felt was
    "identifying-information free." The state argued that, for smaller
    districts, just the description of the disability and services along
    with year of birth required a FERPA notice, necessitating the mailing
    to every parent of a special education student.

    Diana MTK Autin


    Posted in NJStrongIDEA@yahoogroups.com

    To subscribe, send message to: NJStrongIDEA-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

    And then respond to the confirmation message.

Speak Your Mind

Tell us what you're thinking...
and oh, if you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!