-
1972 Pennsylvania Association for Retarded Children (PARC) vs. Common Wealth of Pennsylvania
Each party’s stance for this case was that all children, whether having an intellectual disability or not, could benefit from any type of free education. It was also argued that not having free educational resources would negatively affect the way a child developed. The plaintiffs argued that this was unlawful and unjust. -
1972 Pennsylvania Association for Retarded Children (PARC) vs. Common Wealth of Pennsylvania
The final court ruling was given by the U.S. District Court. It stated that the law restricting children and young adults ages 6-21 years of age with a disability to attend an institution or private school unconstitutional, and required Pennsylvania to provide a free public education to all children equally regardless of their disabilities. -
1972 Pennsylvania Association for Retarded Children (PARC) vs. Common Wealth of Pennsylvania
The historical legal rulings for Pennsylvania Association for Retarded Children (PARC) vs. Common Wealth of Pennsylvania opened the doors for all children no matter what their disability to receive a free public education. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QtFmp3XduaQ -
Period: to
Influential Landmark Cases
-
1984 Irving Independent School District vs. Tatro
The Tatro family’s stance was that the Educational of the Handicapped Act require public school districts to provide special services. Their daughter who had spina bifida, Amber Tatro, had been denied her catheter services while attending Irving Independent School district. The Independent School district’s stance was that they were unqualified to administer Amber’s CIC at school. -
1984 Irving Independent School District vs. Tatro
The final court ruling by the U.S. Supreme court for Irving Independent School District v. Tatro, was that, under the Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975 the school board in Texas had to provide catheterization services to Amber during school hours. -
1984 Irving Independent School District vs. Tatro
The historical legal rulings for this case helped support the needs of students with disabilities by defining the difference in medical services and school health services. Which open doors for students with not only disabilities but medical conditions to be able to receive a free public education. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYAjHaG_XBI -
1988 Honig vs. Doe
Party’s stance Doe, who qualified for special educational services under the EAHCA, filed suit, alleging that their disciplinary actions, violated the so-called “stay-put” provision of the act. Whereas California school board wanted the student removed indefinitely until the hearing process was completed. -
1988 Honig vs. Doe
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the California school board had violated the Education for All Handicapped Children Act, when it indefinitely suspended and changed the educational setting of the students with disabilities for violent behavior. -
1988 Honig vs. Doe
The historical legal rulings I selected have supported the needs of students with by protecting children from being removed from a school setting without following the proper steps. As well as, allowing behavioral disabilities the right to a free and public education.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=koh5PiiK8qM
