[blindkid] Was: To Sign or not To Sign - NOW IEPs

[Carrie Gilmer]

Chantel,
I do not speak for Heather...or would not even attempt a clarification for her..unnecessary...but will state why I agree with her IEP points...knowing Heather as I do, and her vast experience...I took it not literally as much as an idea of what "should be"...we (Heather and I)both well know it is a legal contract and the need for it...but I would argue the actual need is because the education of blind children has been largely unmet...or at least not equivalent or equal to a sighted child's overall (in every way)..and the actual educational needs have been largely misunderstood...or not a priority or not believed in....and unfortunately that legal power and individual clarification is needed to ensure...even though in reality "on paper" is NO guarantee it is done. i would also argue that many many children who do not have a disability could benefit from a personal program with goals...overall our system, leaves much to be improved. i would also submit I have witnessed many times people bogged down in small small bits of progress...the whole IEP program kind of taking over....like in a teaching to test kind of way. and it does indeed to not a rare classroom teacher mean at first thought "ugh a high need child"..."what do I have to do?"...and not in a good way...in the end i think it overall a poor comparison as it is so complicated to the issue of signs...I also think other tools, like a cane a very poor comparison. we have plenty of data and evidence to suggest the need for other tools,and how pros vastly outweigh any con.

For me it is quite simple with the sign. Does the child NEED "super" i.e. above average or normal Protection? then they should not be unsupervised. they need supervision, not a sign. if the answer to uber protection is no, then no sign is needed. people drown in front of human lifeguards sometimes...and sometimes that is due to caregivers relaxing supervision and relying on a lifeguard. Ask any professional lifeguard, they certainly have saved lives, but they would tell you not to rely on them...a sign may prevent...but wHen, where, with which driver will it and with which driver will it not? How much less a sign can protect than a human being there to intervene and vigilantly watch out? 
 Carrie
Sent from my iPad

On Feb 25, 2013, at 8:15 AM, Chantel Alberhasky <chantel at alberhaskylaw.com> wrote:

> Heather questions why a blind child should have an IEP  states "that it would be simpler to say 'do whatever you have to do to ensure that this blind child can do what his same age peers can do'".   I couldn't disagree more although I am sure many schools would be right there with you because that would mean parents and their children would have no legal rights and school districts would be off the legal hook. 
> 
> Heather says "Blind children just need to learn what their sighted classmates are learning and, if they need a nonvisual technique to accomplish it, the teacher of blind students or parents (and parents friends/mentors who are
> blind adults) should show the child how to do it. I just don't get why it all needs to be written out." 
> It is very important to realize that an IEP is a contract, an enforceable contract. If it isn't written down, then it is not part of the contract and thus not enforceable. When a child is eligible for special education services they are bestowed  many rights they wouldn't have if they did not receive special education (FAPE, stay put, compensatory education, parent participation, manifestation determination hearings, etc).   A school has no obligation to provide Braille,  assistive technology instruction, etc unless the child qualifies for special education.  Parent struggle to get these things now under the IDEA, I can't imagine what it would be like if they didn't have the IDEA as
> mechanism to enforce their child's right to an education.
> 
> 
> Heather states  "The IEP perpetuates, in the mind of the classroom teacher, that the blind child needs all this incredible amount of additional, special 'stuff.'"    I don't think my son's teacher thinks this because of Drake's IEP. If he does think this, it is probably because Drake has a CCTV on his desk, a braille note, manipulatives for math, an abacus and a cubby for his braille textbooks.   In any event, having an IEP doesn't say to the teacher a child is less than, or less capable.  It simply says a child has to have specialized instruction and certain accommodations to receive educational benefit.     
> Heather states "IEPs are considered necessary to ensure that an under informed, underfunded public school monolith
> doesn't under-educate blind children. . There are lots of reasons, I'd be happy to chat about them when we next catch up, why IEPs for blind children are so often not the helpful documents we wish they were, and can, in the hands of some professionals, actually be a hindrance to some blind children."IEPs for any child - no matter the category in which they have found eligible - are necessary because school districts were not educating children who learn differently.  It is the square peg and round hole analogy.  In any event, I doubt you need to tell any parents how IEPs are often so pathetic that they provide little to no educational benefit to our children.  As you know, parents are (hopefully) relentless advocates for the children, fighting their school districts for Braille, fighting for enough Braille instruction, for assistive technology, O&M services, etc.  And once you get the
> services, you have to keep a watchful eye to ensure the school is implementing the IEP.  It is exhausting.   
> If parents have to be so vigilant and active with the law on their side, imagine what it would be like if they discarded their child's rights (removed them from special education)?  I shudder to think.
> 
> Chantel L. Alberhasky, Esq
> 419 Boonville Avenue
> Springfield, MO 65806
> 417.865.4444
> 
> The Missouri Bar Disciplinary Counsel requires all Missouri attorneys 
> to notify all recipients of e-mail that (1) e-mail communication is not a
> secure method of communication, (2) any e-mail that is sent to you or 
> by you may be copied and held by various computers it passes through as it
> goes from me to you or vice versa, (3) persons not participating in our
> communication may intercept our communications by improperly accessing
> your computer or my computer or even some computer unconnected to 
> either of us which the e-mail passed through. I am communicating to you via
> e-mail because you have consented to receive communications via this
> medium. If you change your mind and want future communications to be
> sent in a different fashion, please let me know AT ONCE.
> _______________________________________________
> blindkid mailing list
> blindkid at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindkid:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/carrie.gilmer%40gmail.com