I have scanned the Press Release regarding the settlement of May 2, 2000, Whitehead vs. HCSD. The contact information at the bottom of the press release has changed. The link can be found on my side bar "May 2008 - How much money will the District spend this time?"
There are many issues regarding this case. If nothing else, the word "Ethics" should be of grave concern to anyone associated with HCPS. What is bad for students and parents is also bad for teachers and administrators.
Frequent readers of my blogs know that I mock the use of the phrase "isolated incident" because I know how it is used by the system as a blanket dismissal of issues.
While there are many, many details of this case that should be examined by all concerned, I find it interesting that U.S. Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Jenkins uses that same phrase as follows:
"These violations of the procedural rights of the Whiteheads cannot be dismissed as either technical or minor. They were not inadvertent or isolated instances of a violation of parent's procedural rights under Section 504."
Is it possible that parents and teachers and some administrators are crying out for ethical oversight?
(click on page to enlarge)
Sunday, June 8, 2008
Isolated Incidents become Federal Fodder
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
9 comments:
I am still a bit confused when I see all the dates, e.g. 1998, 1993, and 2000, and I think this is a reprint of a case from years ago. However, it is in the news as if it is current. Can you help clear up some of my confusion? Why are we talking about a case that is over ten years old as if it were current?
Response to Goader 3:28
The original case was an administrative hearing (due process) filed by the parents in 1993. The school district lost, and then responded by suing for fees (they knew the rest of the case didn't stand a chance on appeal) and did so interestingly enough in a state court that did not have jurisdiction over IDEA cases.
This meant the Whiteheads would be forced into a circuitously legal morass where they would lose their fees despite winning the case. So in response, and with only 24 hours to make the decision, the Whiteheads counter sued in federal court. Then the retaliation began in full.
By the time they made it into court the issues had multiplied. The result was a two week trial by jury where the district was found guilty of retaliation against both parents for advocating for their son, and a not guilty verdict on discrimination against the son. (That is a whole other blog piece- maybe more on that later).
The second trial was a "bench" trial - really a continuation of the jury trial, but this is heard only by a federal judge who makes decision based on law only. The Whiteheads prevailed in the bench trial as well, where the federal court required several policy changes, the establishment of Superintendent's ESE Advisory Council, and other relevant anti-retaliation and anti-discrimination policies, as well as the removal of Liz Argott from her position as ESE Director.
Each of these decisions by a jury and federal judge represent the various dates you are seeing.
Is this still current?
Absolutely, the Whitehead case set a national precedent and changed the way school districts treated parents of children with disabilities.
Is there still retaliation and discrimination?
Yes, unfortunately so.
But if more teachers knew about the resulting policies established as a result of the Whitehead case, then they would be more empowered to speak out and utilize those policies (we can explore that more as well)
I appreciate your efforts to clarify the message.
[url=http://buycialispremiumpharmacy.com/#cecyt]buy cialis online[/url] - buy cialis , http://buycialispremiumpharmacy.com/#rczvi buy cheap cialis
[url=http://buyviagrapremiumpharmacy.com/#cvlef]buy viagra online[/url] - viagra online , http://buyviagrapremiumpharmacy.com/#mvhot viagra online
Hi, ativan without rx - order lorazepam online http://www.onlinepharmdiscount.com/ativan/, [url=http://www.onlinepharmdiscount.com/ativan/]ativan sale [/url]
Li, generic prozac - buy fluoxetine online no prescription http://www.prozacorder365.net/, [url=http://www.prozacorder365.net/]prozac online[/url]
Hi, [url=http://www.ciprofloxacyn4saleonline.com/]order cipro online no prescription [/url] - cipro online pharmacy - cost of ciprofloxacin http://www.ciprofloxacyn4saleonline.com/.
4, Generic Accutane Cost - accutane without rx http://www.benefitsofisotretinoin.net/, [url=http://www.benefitsofisotretinoin.net/]Cheap Accutane[/url]
2, [url=http://www.sheddesignhub.com/] Buy Sumatriptan [/url] - Sumatriptan Price - sumatriptan without prescription http://www.sheddesignhub.com/ .
Post a Comment