-
PARC v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
PARC took the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania to court because they were not allowing mentally retarded children to attend public school. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania would continually use this law in order to ensure that the mentally ill students under five years old would not receive an education. Also,the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania believed that the children were more of a problem in the classroom setting. -
PARC v, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Continued
The U.S. District Court gave a consent decree informing the Commonwealth that what they were doing was unconstitutional and that they were to provide education to special students from the age of six to twenty-one. This case meant that all children including special education had the right to free education. It is important that all children are to be able to have access to free and appropriate education in order for them succeed. http://www.rootedinrights.org/15321-revision-v1/ -
Mills v. Board of Education District of Columbia
The Mill case was known to be a precedented case. Mills family and friends were suing the School District of Columbia for excluding students from school if they had behavioral disabilities. The District of Columbia stated that children with behavioral issues were too expensive. The court decided that segregating theses students was unlawful and they were to receive a free and suitable education. -
Mills v. Board of Education of The District of Columbia Continued
The court said that the Board was failing to provide the students with suitable education. The Board informed them that all children had a right to equal protection. This was a precented case because it helped children that had behavioral disablilities to be included in school and to receive free public education regardless of their mental status. It also forced the Board to disperse the money for providing education for the students. http://www.rootedinrights.org/15321-revision-v1/ -
The Education for all Handicapped Children Act (EHA)
PL. 94-142 was enacted by President Gerald Ford. This act ensures that special education children will have access to FAPE and special education students must have IEP's completed. Also, teachers had to be hightly qualified and trained teachers in one or more subjects. This mandate helped deliver due process for the child and their families. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DUn6luZQaXE -
Irving Independent School District v. Tatro
Amy Tatro was an eight year old special education student who has Spina Bifida that caused her to have various impairments. She needed to have a clean catheter inserted every three to four hours in order to prevent bladder injury. IISD were willing to provide her with an IEP for physical and occupational therapy. However, they were unwilling to provide services for Amy to have someone change her catheter in school. -
Irving Independent School District v. Tatro (Part Two)
IISD admitted to their willingness to provide Amy with an IEP who was three and one- half years old then. IISD exclaimed that under the EHA of 1975 did not state any provisions that stated the school staff had to do change the catheter. The District Court denied the injunction on the basis of the school district did not have to provide government health service. Ultimately the Court of Appeals reversed the ruling of the District Court -
Irving Independent School District v. Tatro (Part 3)
The Court of Appeals deemed that the service to be provided was not a medical service. They also informed the IISD that they had to provide this service under EHA would mean that they are violating Section 504. Today it is important that school districts are aware various amendments that pertain to providing all services. School districts must adhere to federal guidelines. http://www.specialeducationadvisor.com/irving-independent-school-district-tatro-468-us-883-1984/ -
No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) 2002
President George W. Bush enacted NCLB formerly known as ESEA.. Students were to be tested in grades 3-8 and in high school. Schools would receive federal funding depending the improvement in school sujects such as science, reading and math. Students were able to attend a better school if their scores did not increase. Henley, M., Ramsey, R. S., & Algozzine, R. (2009). Characteristics of and strategies for teaching students with mild disabilities. Upper Saddle River, N.J: Pearson
