Showing posts with label criminal. Show all posts
Showing posts with label criminal. Show all posts

Sunday, June 1, 2008

A Great Place to Visit, But...


photo credit-metrohicKS
creative commons license



Florida is a great place to visit. There's all sorts of things to amuse and satisfy both kids and adults. There's NASA,

photo credit-http2007
creative commons license


Florida oranges,

photo credit-Viewoftheworld
creative commons license


sandy beaches,

photo credit-heather0714
creative commons license


and a park where a somewhat famous mouse lives.


But while one could certainly have a great time visiting Florida with one's kids, it increasingly seems that Florida is not a place one would choose to live with their kids anytime soon. It would seem that Florida may soon have to change their motto from "The Sunshine State" to the "We Hate Kids" state.

Christschool the other day had a great post about the Alex Barton/Portillo case that brought up issues such as the increasing use of police to handle routine school discipline problems, possible inappropriate training of such personnel, and teachers' complicity in ostracizing those who are "different" in their classrooms. This last point was also blogged by Joeymom.

As Shawn pointed out recently, there is a whole system that's at fault here, and not just the teacher (which does not absolve the teacher in any way for her part in this).

One does not have to look far to see other instances where very young children's actions in Florida schools are criminalized, rather than being addressed with behavioral intervention plans. Indeed, some see a "school to prison pipeline" that has developed in the Florida education system.

Given the undisputed facts of the Barton case and the general climate of making criminals out of young students with undesirable behaviors in Florida, I have to agree with Christschool in saying "I believe Alex, too".

I'm on the road right now, and visited with my brother and sister-in-law tonight. My SIL works as a "para" in a 2nd grade classroom. I mentioned the facts of the Barton case to her (she had not heard about the case) using a very neutral voice. She was appalled, as are many good teachers who have read about this case. Yes, I realize that most teachers are great, and really work for the good of all of their students. I also realize that most teachers work under conditions that are less than ideal, without proper supports in place. And that puts a great deal of stress on teachers.

I'm waiting for the investigation by the Port St. Lucie school district, but absent some finding (backed up by evidence) that great portions of Barton's account were made up, I believe Alex.

It's time for Florida to get on the stick, and to stick up for all of its students, not just the ones that are compliant. This means not only rightfully having sanctions on the teacher involved in this case (Ms. Portillo), but also examining the whole education process in Florida and the whole problem with criminalizing school behaviors that have no place in the criminal justice system.

Thursday, June 14, 2007

An Eye on School Safety




I am no fan of the rapidly rising rate of the use of closed circuit television cameras (CCTV cams) in public places for surveillance purposes. I agree with the ACLU that they are intrusive and don't generally accomplish what we are told that they will. I think that they contribute to the formation of a "nanny state" where those in power can abuse information gleaned from them. Not that I personally do any dastardly deeds in public, but I just don't want to be watched whenever I am walking around in public.

Great Britain has been a leader in installing CCTV cams in public places. Although still a bit controversial, for the most part citizens across the pond in the UK have embraced the concept of having public spaces actively surveilled by cameras.

Here in the US, what once was the province of only a few places (such as at bank teller stations) has now mushroomed not only in private establishments, but also in public places. This is probably due to many factors. One, certainly, is the decreasing cost of such video equipment. For about $500, one can get a camera and software to record fairly good quality video on your computer while you're away. Another reason is increased public uneasiness following the 9/11 attacks in 2001. Video surveillance is sold to the public as a preventive measure against such attacks occurring again. Yet another reason is the role that video surveillance cameras have played in assisting in solving crime. Although there is not good data to back it up, there are an increasing number of abducted or attacked teens (and others) where video turns up on the news shows within 24 hours. Whether or not the video helps solve the crime, a voyeuristic public wants to see those same frames of video over and over and over again.

But there's another side of video cameras that's not altogether bad at all. The Rodney King case in California would not have gotten the press it did without the compelling video of King being beaten in the streets by the LA police. The rise of cameras being integrated into cell phones has also allowed us an insight into events that we might not have had otherwise. Michael Richards' outrageous tirade at a comedy club might have been a story buried in the paper for one day, but for the video that was caught on a cell phone which allowed Richards to hang himself with his own words.


Closer to the theme of this post, cell phone videos have shown teachers behaving badly, when they didn't know they were being recorded.

But what does any of this have to do with schools (and special ed classrooms in particular)? A lot, I think. I am sure that I in the minority opinion (especially if one surveyed teachers), but I think it would be an excellent idea to install passive video surveillance in all school classrooms and other areas where students gathered ("quiet rooms", resource rooms, gymnasiums, playgrounds, lunchrooms, etc.). By passive video surveillance, I mean that the video would be continuously recorded onto tape or hard drive, and be available for retrieval for a fixed period of time (say, 60-90 days). After that time it would be erased. Now, like the ACLU, I believe that such recordings open up the possibility for abuse, so I would have strict rules for how they could be used.

First of all, no one would view the tapes unless there was an "incident" that had occurred. Anytime any student got "written up" for a disciplinary infraction, or anytime anyone (police, parents, students, teachers) made any allegations of possible wrongdoings, a neutral investigator would be appointed (someone outside of the school) and all of the recorded material from that school for the day in question would be stored until the incident could be settled. The recordings would be availabe for all interested parties to watch. It would be the law that this was legal (so that the schools couldn't hide behind some false claim of privacy of other students).

Why do I think this is a good idea? Well, read Kristina Chew's blog entry from today, where 4 educators in a New York school are being charged with multiple cases of abusing disabled children. In a different context, Amanda Baggs has described what it's like to be institutionalized in what is considered a "good" situation.

Having such a system in place (passive surveillance kept confidential unless there was a dispute) would serve a number of different purposes. First of all, it would go a long way towards levelling the playing field in what is always a very unequal power relationship. School teachers and administrators wield a considerable amount of control and power over their students, and having a neutral observer in the classroom would be essential in many cases of showing what really occurred in a given situation. Secondly, when there is a pattern of neglect and not addressing educational goals that have been laid out and agreed to (in an IEP), video can be reviewed to see if this is actually the case or not.

Many (especially teachers) will recoil at this suggestion. But it's not as if this would be the first place where recordings of events when someone was working would take place. As I stated, in businesses all over, the employees as well as the customers are under surveillance. Police officers have become accustomed to having video cameras in their cars recording routine (and non-routine) traffic stops and car chases. Many officers have been glad to have these recordings to back their side of the story up when they have been accused. Emergency rooms have had such surveillance, and so have some operating rooms (theatres). There would certainly be a psychological period of adjustment on the part of teachers, but with the safeguards I have included, I do not think that this would be too great.

And we might just be able to weed out several bad apples in the process.

Saturday, March 3, 2007

What a difference a day makes


What a difference a day makes.

It was only yesterday that I was flying high, rejoicing in the good news regarding an autistic young adult being accepted and honored in our department.

This morning, right before going to work, I log on and peruse a couple of blogs, and what do I see but this story, quoted by MommyGuilt .

...On Monday, February 26, a 6-year-old autistic boy was read his rights and charged with Assault II for jumping on his special education teacher. This arrest was made when he and his mother went to pick up some files at the Kailua-Kona, Hawaii Police Department ...

I think that the reason that this case struck me so hard was that many of the facts of this case seemed to parallel what had happened to our son a year and a half ago.

...Prior to jumping on his teacher, he was removed from his current classroom because the staff was worried he would hurt himself or others, and kept him in time- out from 10:55 a.m. until his mother picked him up at 2:00 p.m. ...

When Buddy Boy was in Kindergarten (last school year, as a 5 year old) he, like many kids on the autism spectrum, had issues with self control. Some of it was reacting to things in the environment, some of it may have been from delayed maturation, and I believe the majority of it probably stemmed from the system expecting a 5 year old with autism to be compliant at all times. All of their “interventions” were directed at getting him to be compliant. They didn’t care whether he learned anything at all. Indeed, any subject matter they presented was way below the types of worksheets that his mom, Liz, had him doing at home. And when they did do things in class, they insisted on repetition to the nth degree. This, of course, resulted in boredom and frustration on Buddy Boy’s part. Despite having all these things pointed out to them, his “teachers” persisted.

Due mostly to an idiotic curriculum not suited to him, and probably partially to lack of self control (in the face of being taught by idiots) Buddy Boy trashed the classroom one day. He first threatened to trash the classroom (“I’m going to throw things”) to which they responded with their direction of “Sit down, Buddy Boy” three times, dutifully recorded on their chart that he had refused to sit down, then stood back when he started pulling things off the shelf. No one acknowledged that he was angry and/or frustrated. No one tried to find out why he was upset. Just a command to sit down repeated three times. Mom was called to come and get him and take him home.

Buddy Boy was suspended for three days for that, and moved to a “resource room” where he was the only student. We were warned at that time that if he continued to be violent and a threat to others and himself that the police would be involved. Despite our convening another IEP (which they kept delaying) and attempting to get a much better behavioral intervention plan in place, the staff continued to do things to set him off (deliberately, I suspect, but have no way of knowing other than their e-mails obtained later which intimated that they had a plan for a solution in place, while during this time they were telling us that everything was fine). They had him “taught” by as many as 7-8 different “teachers” per day, on no consistent schedule. They would print up a schedule and show him on the clock when he would have a break, then another teacher would come in and cut the break short. Still, all they were teaching was compliance with rules, and repetition of busywork. He lashed out a couple of times at them (slapping and kicking), and each time he got “written up” without suspension. The disciplinary write ups had these check off boxes on the form for reasons they thought the behavior occurred. Almost all of the boxes had to do with the student (acting out, seeking attention, secondary gain, etc.). There maybe was one for the environment, and none at all for “provoked by idiot staff”, which was what I would have checked off.

Buddy Boy acted out again (in this stellar teaching environment) and threw a stapler across the room. This earned him another 4 days suspension. At this point he was one suspension away from a mandatory placement in another setting. We had already surmised that they were trying to build a case against Buddy Boy as an out of control kid that was a menace to himself and others, and had to be removed. The placement that they had in mind was in a separate school in a class of emotionally disturbed kids.

Meanwhile, just so one can understand how Buddy Boy was doing in general, this is what was happening outside of school. He had a weekly gymnastics class (that he grudgingly went to, didn’t look forward to) where he functioned within a group setting with individual assistance by a high school student with no special ed training. He also attended swimming class every Saturday morning (another non-preferred activity-he likes free swimming, but not swimming class). He also functioned just fine in this class being taught by high school kids for the most part. He attended church services without acting up, and though he argued with us a lot at home, we had gotten to the point where he was not aggressive with us.

...The school has been asked repeatedly to at the very least provide a one-on-one aide that is trained in the art of dealing with autistic children, or move him to a school for autistic children. ...

In our case we had asked several times (since before he was even admitted to Kindergarten) for a 1:1 aide. Each time we were refused.

By this time we had progressed from just having an advocate with us to having a lawyer involved. We short circuited their attempt to have him expelled by withdrawing him for a medical leave, and Liz home schooled him for six months (to complete the school year). He had someone from the school provide some instruction in the home, but again they were somewhat clueless (instruction below level, repetition, repetition, show me you are compliant).

Meanwhile we continued to convene an IEP for the following year (this year) with multiple meetings with staff and lawyers. I think one of their strategies was to try and bankrupt us by having more and more meetings. I think they also thought that if they had enough meetings then only my wife would show up, and not me. They thought wrong.

Our compromise that we agreed to was half time in their emotionally disturbed classroom (though we had it in writing that they did not have permission to use their preferred methods of discipline-physically removing kids into a padded room or a wooden box). The other half time was to be spent in a special ed class located in a regular school (NOT the school he was in before). For agreeing to this we got them to agree to an outside evaluation of Buddy Boy’s behavior. We had to wait a few months into the school year to get the evaluation, but the outside group said Buddy Boy was doing fine, and indeed should be in the least restrictive environment, and that there was no reason to bus him back and forth between two schools every day.

So now Buddy Boy is in the special ed classroom in the regular school, and just this week he had his first inclusion in a “regular” class for art, which went just fine.

I thought I was getting past my anger at how my son was railroaded last year, and of how idiotic many of the “experts” at his previous school acted. And how malignant they were in plotting behind the scenes to get him thrown out, even if it meant having a police record. My reaction to this article today tells me I have a ways to go.

The mother in Hawaii further relates:
Many people have told me that I need take this to the media to finally get the help we need, and that is what I hope to do. I have done everything the school has asked and tried to work with them, to no avail. Now, here I am with a disabled 6-year-old with Assault II charges against him.

Getting the media involved might just work. It is my impression that Americans in general have become much more hardnosed and unforgiving of the acts of adolescents, and this has also led to prosecutors trying to prosecute younger children (some as young as 10 years old) as adults in violent crimes. But I still think that 6 year olds get somewhat of a pass in society, and media attention might help. Of course, being disabled lowers the age of what is considered acceptable to prosecute, as does being poor or a member of a minority.

Finally, the mom writes:
We are filing for a Fair Hearing. But I understand this will take months and my child is not being educated nor is the school providing any help with his education, even though they know neither he nor I are able to go on school grounds because of the temporary restraining order."

Finally, something they definitely can’t do. As I hope the mother is aware, she needs a lawyer. Maybe two. Definitely one for the educational case, and possibly a second one for the criminal case. If she's lucky the special ed/disability rights lawyer can do both for her.

IDEA 2004 spells out specifically how they can kick your kid out of school (suspensions, expulsions), and how they can place him in an alternative setting. It also spells out what they have to do in terms of providing education. They end up not having to do much, but they have to do something.

The mother needs to inform herself what IDEA 2004 actually says, and the first place to start is at the Wrightslaw website. If you scroll down the left hand side there is a section called "Law Library". In there you can see a button to click on for IDEA 2004. If click thru to the IDEA 2004 Statute and Regulation page, there is a link to download the whole law with commentary from the Federal Register.

Basically the law says that the school can suspend a child for up to 10 days without providing any instruction. After that the IEP must meet to decide what is appropriate to be provided (this, of course, is the same IEP team that got you into this mess to begin with). The school also must provide a functional behavioral assessment and behavioral intervention services and modifications, that are designed to address the behavioral violation so that it does not recur.

Once a change in placement is determined (and they can't kick you out without a change in placement), within 10 school days an IEP team meeting must take place to determine whether the behavior was a result of the child's disability or not (of course, I've never heard of a school in this situation admit that the behavior was a result of the disability, or a failure to follow the IEP).

Finally, they can remove a child to an "interim alternative educational setting" for not more than 45 days, even if the violation was secondary to the child's disability if one of the following special circumstances occurs: 1) carries or possesses a weapon at school, 2) uses or possesses illegal drugs at school, or 3) has inflicted serious bodily injury to another person while at school or a school function. Of note, "serious bodily injury" is defined in the US Code as follows:

Title 18 USC Sec. 1365
(3) the term "serious bodily injury" means bodily injury which
involves -
(A) a substantial risk of death;
(B) extreme physical pain;
(C) protracted and obvious disfigurement; or
(D) protracted loss or impairment of the function of a bodily
member, organ, or mental faculty; and

(4) the term "bodily injury" means -
(A) a cut, abrasion, bruise, burn, or disfigurement;
(B) physical pain;
(C) illness;
(D) impairment of the function of a bodily member, organ, or
mental faculty; or

(E) any other injury to the body, no matter how temporary.


My guess (and I am NOT a lawyer, and none of this is to be construed as legal advice)is that they would have a hard time proving "serious bodily injury". But unfortunately, this person needs a lawyer badly, to try and stop the steamroller that this school district has set in motion.

I really wanted to bask in the good feeling I had yesterday for a while. I'm a realist, and I know that not everyday is good. And part of me wishes I didn't see that blog posting this morning.

But part of me knows that being vigilant, and keeping our legal ducks in a row is an important part of advocating for Buddy Boy. Because one of my worst fears is that something like this will happen to us.

Joe is 209