Toward the end of last year, I dropped some not-too-subtle hints that things were going poorly with Little Miss's school. Many of you suggested an advocate or a lawyer. We tried both. And it was after we hired the lawyer that I decided to stop talking about the whole school situation on my blog.
But that battle is over now and here I sit -- with a signed, implemented IEP. Heck, I even have the first quarter progress report in front of me.
Am I satisfied?
No.
But we have a new place to start. And our starting point is much more solid than what we had six months ago. And that much, I can live with.
I don't know how much of the details of the battle are worth re-telling. The 30,000-foot summary goes something like this:
- April: Little Miss was diagnosed with moderate autism. We were told to get 20-40 hours per week of ABA.
- April: I asked the school for ABA. The school told me that service was not available.
- July: My husband and I explored ABA programs in our area and enrolled Little Miss in one. It was only 15 hours a week, but it was the best we could afford.
- August: I researched our rights and decided to ask the school to help pay for ABA.
- September: The school suddenly had an ABA resource. Two hours of weekly ABA was added to Little Miss's IEP.
- October: We watched the program get started. We knew Little Miss needed more. We asked the school again to help pay for the outplacement ABA.
- December: The school offered to add five more hours of ABA to Little Miss's week. Attending the additional five hours would mean that Little Miss could no longer attend the out-placement ABA service.
- December: We declined. The lawyer advised us that since the school had made an attempt to offer an "appropriate" education, we had no case.
- December: We paid out bill for the out-placement ABA and moved on.
Was it fair? I don't know. In December, the governor of Ohio signed a bill stating that health insurance cannot discriminate against an Autism diagnosis and that ABA will be covered for those with the ASD dx. So, in a word, my state's government feels that ABA is a medical treatment -- and not the responsibility of the education system.
I tend to disagree with this line of thought. ABA allows Little Miss to engage in her educational programming. Without the skills she has learned in ABA, I do not think Little Miss would be able to participate as well as she does in her integrated classroom. She needs what she has learned in ABA in order to consume her schooling.
Along those lines, if ABA is solely the realm of medical offices and therapy clinics, how can we expect teachers to make their classrooms ABA-friendly? Part of the reason Little Miss has continued to grow this year was her classroom teacher's willingness to take the ABA concepts and integrate them into the classroom. But that sort of thing is all out the window if ABA becomes the domain of medical insurance.
I don't want the school to shell out money it doesn't need to. By all means, use the money you would have paid for Little Miss's ABA sessions and buy a therapy swing... or new text books... or something. But this unexpected windfall from the state has me worried. If the school doesn't have to pay for it, will they still be willing to invest in it?
You pose the million dollar question here...I could write an entire post about my thoughts to this. I may do that eventually.
ReplyDeleteI will say that I worry about similar things. Tate's teacher does an excellent job integrating ABA concepts into her classroom. She isn't trained, but she works with the district's specialist. But not all of the special education teachers in our district are able or willing to do it. And our district does not have special programs for Autism. *sigh*
I guess my rambling reply is that I completely understand the quandary you have right now.
If I had a dime for every time I have heard "if it doesn't affect his education, then we can't address it".
ReplyDeleteAnd no, they aren't likely going to invest in anything they do not have to pay for. At least, that's been our experience.
I know every child is different and maybe LM is far higher functioning than my son but we have had the recommendation from the director of our ABA provider since his diagnosis of 40 hours of ABA services per week- minimum. He needs a one on one aide to function and focus in his NT classroom, and requires programs outside the classroom to help him overcome the impediments of his disability both in school and in life. Joining with our PhD behaviorist is our neurologist who has written RXs for 40 hours per week of ABA services. I simply cannot fathom where my son would be if he was restricted to such a low amount of ABA service. I think he'd still be in kindergarten repeating his 2nd time there. And it's not because he doesn't understand the academics - it's because he is unable to communicate and socialize - to express what he understands without the assistance of the ABA programs.
ReplyDeleteYou wonder about the medical aspect of the ABA and how the schools view that. We are dealing with the same issue since our law in California is fairly new as well, finding the same as Ohio that ABA services must be provided through insurance. What has happened here is that the insurance companies have scrambled to "authorize" ABA providers, get them under contract and try to get them to agree to reduced rates which has the ABA providers fighting back. Meanwhile, the school still provides what it considers an "appropriate" education during school hours. Sorry, I could go on all day... I don't know how a lawyer concluded the paultry sum of ABA hours was appropriate for LM unless there are experts who have voiced that unianimously? If not, something is very wrong with that outcome, if you ask me, as a mom, you know...
(OK. Third try to post this, so it won't be quite as profound as earlier attempts ;)
ReplyDeleteShort and sweet. One state deciding that something should be covered by medical insurance should have little to no effect on it also needing to be done and/or paid for by schools. My daughter receives speech therapy at school. Our insurance also covers her for more. Several kids I work with at her school are provided with OT services at school. Their insurance pays for them to get more privately.
There is a good deal of legal precedent (including a Supreme Court decision) saying that schools must provide or pay for ABA services. One state cannot change that without it running through the court system and the Supreme Court finding in a different way (which will take years to happen, if it even ever does).
As to your lawyer, s/he is flat out wrong. The fact that the school made an offer and you rejected it does not have any bearing on whether or not you have a case. Parents have the full right to reject any IEP items they do not agree with. Doing so does not mean you have waived all right to further action. If it did, I would have very, very few cases to study in my special education law class this semester...
Find a new lawyer -- one who actually knows what they are talking about.
(From Pkinpatch -- wordpress wouldn't let me sign in...)
I'm so behind on blogs so I'm just seeing this now!
ReplyDeleteLike a previous commenter, we have PT/OT both covered by insurance and through school, so I would hope that it would be similar to ABA. Mini got speech through school and had speech evals through insurance. Often these were all going on concurrently.
I'm sorry to hear that the process was so long, difficult, and frustrating.
Mini's IEP expired (oops), but her medical stuff has just been so hectic that we haven't been able to do it.