|
Post by majorianthrax on Aug 1, 2008 13:01:38 GMT -5
August 1, 2008
An Indian Prairie School District 204 teacher has sued the district, alleging she was seriously hurt because of the district’s failure to expel a violent student.
In the case, filed Monday in federal court, Paula Jackson, a special education support teacher at White Eagle Elementary School since 2003, is claiming that administrators decided the student should remain at the school despite 150 documented incidents of violence or aggression against her, other teachers and fellow students.
RELATED PDF • Read the complaint And, Jackson claims, she was seriously injured during one such incident this spring.
According to the suit, the student, an unnamed fourth-grader “threw a book at one of his teachers after which the student fell into a tantrum and began throwing chairs and books at his classroom door. Mrs. Jackson was called to the situation. When Mrs. Jackson entered the room, the student raised a chair over his head to strike her with it. Mrs. Jackson grabbed the chair and the student refused to let it go but instead gave Mrs. Jackson a shove, causing her to fall backwards and hit the back/side of her head on the room’s whiteboard and her neck on the whiteboard’s ledge.”
Jackson claims the student exhibited his propensity for violence within minutes of meeting her on the first day of the 2005-2006 school year, when he, a second-grader at the time, stepped out of his mother’s car and began to punch, kick and bite her. And, she claims, because of his extensive record of violent outbursts, administrators recommended at the end of the 2006-2007 school year that the student not be permitted back at White Eagle the next fall. According to the suit, they recommended that he be transferred to a “therapeutic school outside of the district and more suitable for his needs.”
However, the suit states the student’s parents opposed such a transfer.
So, Jackson claims, the administrators consulted with the district’s lawyer, and two weeks later, told Jackson the student would be permitted to return to White Eagle because the parents promised to take certain actions to address the student’s behavior over the summer.
But, states the suit, the parents didn’t fulfill their end of the deal, and the district knew as much, but still allowed the student to attend the school last year.
The suit doesn’t indicate whether the boy remains enrolled at White Eagle for the upcoming school year.
The suit was filed in federal court because it alleges violations of due process under the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, and it seeks unspecified damages.
District 204 Superintendent Steven Daeschner declined to comment because of the pending litigation.
Staff reporter Jennifer Golz contributed to this report.
|
|
|
Post by majorianthrax on Aug 1, 2008 13:02:21 GMT -5
Public comment So, analogies aside, why did District 204 continue to allow this violent student to remain in school, despite the repeated instances that demonstrated that this student was clearly out of control? Why did it take the injury of a teacher to induce the District to take action? What if it had been another student who wound up getting hurt here, or worse? Why did the District cave in to the protests of the parents, when it was clear this student should have been in a place more suited to dealing with him?
Maybe these questions can be answered once the teacher here gets her day in court. I personally would like to hear the District attempt to explain what happened here. Because I have a feeling this is not the first time something like this has happened in a District 204 school, nor do I think it will be the last.
As I said before, District 204 has some serious explaining to do here. Maybe a good prosecuting attorney can get them to do so.
|
|
|
Post by eb204 on Aug 1, 2008 14:42:42 GMT -5
Public comment So, analogies aside, why did District 204 continue to allow this violent student to remain in school, despite the repeated instances that demonstrated that this student was clearly out of control? Why did it take the injury of a teacher to induce the District to take action? What if it had been another student who wound up getting hurt here, or worse? Why did the District cave in to the protests of the parents, when it was clear this student should have been in a place more suited to dealing with him? Maybe these questions can be answered once the teacher here gets her day in court. I personally would like to hear the District attempt to explain what happened here. Because I have a feeling this is not the first time something like this has happened in a District 204 school, nor do I think it will be the last. As I said before, District 204 has some serious explaining to do here. Maybe a good prosecuting attorney can get them to do so. Let me start by stating that I in NO WAY condone this child's behavior. My guess is that this child has some disability that might impair his cognitive abilities and reasoning. I say this because this article states that the teacher was a supported edcuation teacher, so I'm guessing there were "issues". However, that in no way should give this child or his parents a "get out of jail free" card. After 150 incidences, this clearly has not been a rare occurence with this child. Again, my guess is he has an IEP which does give him certain rights and he cannot simply be expelled, especially if his actions are a result of a disability or impairment. However, I agree that if others' safety is in jeopardy, this should have been looked at long before incident #2. I also agree that perhaps other placement options should have been considered. If the parents "didn't agree to them", then that, IMO, becomes a whole 'nother ballgame. However, placement issues can take on their own legal issues, and I'm sure there is more to this story that can't be told because of privacy issues, as well. The fact that district attorneys advised the district to leave the kid there leaves me open to the idea that there are perhaps other legal issues involved here regarding placement and this kid's IEP. On the surface and by only reading the article, it would appear that the district dropped the ball. If this is indeed the case, and they put this teacher and other students in jeopardy, then shame on them. However, there might be more to it. And, again, why the district isn't commenting on it. We just don't know. Not knowing the entire situation, it's hard to be judgemental of either side. Being in similar shoes, I know what it's like to be judged on how your child behaves/misbehaves when there is a cognitive or developmental impairment that is not clearly understood by others. On the outside, the kid may seem like an ordinary kid just acting like a brat. But it may be out of their control and rational thinking. I'm sure this sort of thing happens everywhere, so it's not isolated to D204. The special ed laws are meant to protect the kids, but who/what is protecting the teachers and other students? It's a grey area, IMO, and one that often does wind up in the legal arena for this very reason. To repeat: I am in NO WAY condoning the child's actions or feel he or his parents should get to play the disabiilty card. I'll be watching to see how this plays out, as well.
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Aug 1, 2008 14:57:24 GMT -5
I have found that many of the methodologies implemented to 'control the child' or 'bring the child into comforming' actually make it worse and escalate things to the point where you get this (often) dangerous behavior out of the built up frustration. Some of those 'methods' include unwarranted 'handling' like a prisoner, barking/shouting commands like the child is some dog in training and not giving them a smooth 'notice' that sudden change is about to occur before it happens so it doesn't hit out of the blue or without explanation. These things (and others) can be precursors to the more drastic things that it can escalate to and are easier to prevent from the beginning.
The ones I have observed doing these things (and others) were completely clueless that these actions played any part in the escalation and instead it became a mental block of a "how dare you defy me?!?!" tunnel vision that furthered the escalations.
I think their training is all bass-ackwards in this department and their 'methods' make the problems spiral out of control at times when there's no need to make it do that.
I'm not sure about this incident in particular but I have first hand witnessed many incidents as described.
|
|
|
Post by majorianthrax on Aug 1, 2008 15:34:55 GMT -5
I my opinion which may be unpopular this teacher should not be in Special Edcuation. This sort of behavior is common among kids who are severe. I speak as the parent of an Autistic child and my wife has been a Special Education aide thoughout the district. She has been at all the middle schools as well as both Gold and main HS campus. Last year she injured her back, was constantly bruised, scratched, and struck. But she knew what she was getting in to and expected it. There was one Special Ed teacher in her class that broke her finger diving after a child who was trying to escape. That is the way it is. People who don't have kids like these have no idea. As for the parents attempting to keep their child at WE I can tell you it is desperation. They just want help.
|
|
|
Post by eb204 on Aug 1, 2008 16:26:46 GMT -5
I my opinion which may be unpopular this teacher should not be in Special Edcuation. This sort of behavior is common among kids who are severe. I speak as the parent of an Autistic child and my wife has been a Special Education aide thoughout the district. She has been at all the middle schools as well as both Gold and main HS campus. Last year she injured her back, was constantly bruised, scratched, and struck. But she knew what she was getting in to and expected it. There was one Special Ed teacher in her class that broke her finger diving after a child who was trying to escape. That is the way it is. People who don't have kids like these have no idea. As for the parents attempting to keep their child at WE I can tell you it is desperation. They just want help. I agree. Most of these teachers know what they are getting into, or they should. Again, not condoning the behavior, but if it is truly a disability, then the teacher should have known that as well. I feel for these parents. I've been in their shoes and know what it is like to feel so desparate and not know where to turn for help. I'm just wondering why after 150 or more incidents, they were surely offered some options, no? I would hope so. And if so, what prevented the family from exploring those options? This is the other side to the story, I would guess, and something we are not in a position to judge.
|
|
|
Post by majorianthrax on Aug 1, 2008 16:53:22 GMT -5
I my opinion which may be unpopular this teacher should not be in Special Edcuation. This sort of behavior is common among kids who are severe. I speak as the parent of an Autistic child and my wife has been a Special Education aide thoughout the district. She has been at all the middle schools as well as both Gold and main HS campus. Last year she injured her back, was constantly bruised, scratched, and struck. But she knew what she was getting in to and expected it. There was one Special Ed teacher in her class that broke her finger diving after a child who was trying to escape. That is the way it is. People who don't have kids like these have no idea. As for the parents attempting to keep their child at WE I can tell you it is desperation. They just want help. I agree. Most of these teachers know what they are getting into, or they should. Again, not condoning the behavior, but if it is truly a disability, then the teacher should have known that as well. I feel for these parents. I've been in their shoes and know what it is like to feel so desparate and not know where to turn for help. I'm just wondering why after 150 or more incidents, they were surely offered some options, no? I would hope so. And if so, what prevented the family from exploring those options? This is the other side to the story, I would guess, and something we are not in a position to judge. Well money is one reason. There are some very good services out there but much of it is very expensive and beyond most people sadly to say. I have known people who have put second morgages on their homes to pay for them. And then there is a huge percentage of families that break up because the pressure is too difficult. Usually the father takes off and leaves the mother and the kid. Parents in the situation are desperate and do explore every option they can. I am sure this family did too.
|
|
|
Post by sardines on Aug 1, 2008 18:08:53 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by eb204 on Aug 1, 2008 18:20:15 GMT -5
I agree. Most of these teachers know what they are getting into, or they should. Again, not condoning the behavior, but if it is truly a disability, then the teacher should have known that as well. I feel for these parents. I've been in their shoes and know what it is like to feel so desparate and not know where to turn for help. I'm just wondering why after 150 or more incidents, they were surely offered some options, no? I would hope so. And if so, what prevented the family from exploring those options? This is the other side to the story, I would guess, and something we are not in a position to judge. Well money is one reason. There are some very good services out there but much of it is very expensive and beyond most people sadly to say. I have known people who have put second morgages on their homes to pay for them. And then there is a huge percentage of families that break up because the pressure is too difficult. Usually the father takes off and leaves the mother and the kid. Parents in the situation are desperate and do explore every option they can. I am sure this family did too. I'm sure they did explore those options. I didn't mean to imply that they didn't. I've been in a position with our son where options were presented to us and we had simply "been there, done that", so it was no longer an option. Perhaps this is the case with this family too.
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Aug 1, 2008 18:28:28 GMT -5
I sure hope the 'pilots' include ensuring those working with the children understand the emotional empathetic bridge that has to be there first and take the time (and even are allowed the time) to build it.
|
|
|
Post by eb204 on Aug 1, 2008 18:48:58 GMT -5
Being an avid reader of pretty much everything "Wrightslaw" and wrightslaw.com, I can tell you there are several cases that support the child's rights in these cases. If the behavior is related to the handicap, the school cannot expel the child. It can however, find an alternative placement, but if both parties are not in agreement, his current placement takes precedence. And since LRE (least restrictive environment) usually comes into play here, it is often difficult to come to an agreement. Therefore, the child stays put. My guess is this is what is happening in this case and again, a guess as to why the district can't comment on it because of the Privacy Act, and potentially a due process situation with the family. Not sure if this is the case with this family...just saying it is possible with these situations. LRE is tricky because you have a child like this one, who is prone to outbursts like this out of frustration, anger, anxiety, whatever that is possibly out of his control. However, academically, he could be excelling and therefore doesn't need to be in a separate classroom or facility for his studies. There could be even days when he is a sweet, rule abiding, average 5th grader. The problem is his trigger may be unknown or come up out of the blue. I speak from personal experience as my own child is like this. But if someone tried to tell me my child belongs in a separate classroom or a different school, I'm not sure I'd agree with it at all. And if we don't agree, we'd stay right where we are, too. ETA: I do really feel for this teacher, though, too. Again, having been told by teachers/staff about certain outbursts from my child, I feel so badly for the person on the receiving end. On the other hand, most of these teachers know what the possibilities are when working with such children. She probably feels she had enough and is pushing the district to do something about it. However, they may or may not be able to do anything about it at this time. Like I said, I'll be watching to see what happens with this and just hoping it isn't my child someday. These parents are probably at the end of their rope, too.
|
|
|
Post by asmodeus on Aug 3, 2008 0:14:13 GMT -5
I guess I need to know more about the nature of the 150 prior incidents with this kid, but if any involve throwing chairs or being physically threatening, I think the parents have a moral obligation to allow the SD to remove the kid and place him in an alternative school.
|
|
|
Post by eb204 on Aug 3, 2008 12:17:13 GMT -5
I guess I need to know more about the nature of the 150 prior incidents with this kid, but if any involve throwing chairs or being physically threatening, I think the parents have a moral obligation to allow the SD to remove the kid and place him in an alternative school. Yes, I'm sure these parents are stuck between a rock and a hard place. Moral obligation to the community vs. their obligation to their child and his needs. All parents fight for their kids all the time and special needs families seem to have to "fight" for their kids even more - with school, with extended family members, with community leaders, insurance companies. I, too, wonder about the 150 other incidents. And I wonder what the school/staff might have done to let it get this far in the first place. As Arch has stated, training of the staff is key in these situations. It could be that staff might have unknowingly exaserbated the situation by using conventional means. If I had a dime for how many times our extended family members had said about my son "all he needs is a good spanking" or "have him spend some time with me and I'll straighten him out". Now you see why I included extended family members in the list above regarding those we have to fight with. If the staff isn't trained properly to deal with these episodes and notice the "rumbling stage" before it gets out of hand, it can all be downhill from there and a meltdown/tantrum can and will result in most cases. I would really hate to be in either party's shoes right now. Difficult decisions to be made by all.
|
|
|
Post by asmodeus on Aug 3, 2008 23:36:39 GMT -5
I guess I need to know more about the nature of the 150 prior incidents with this kid, but if any involve throwing chairs or being physically threatening, I think the parents have a moral obligation to allow the SD to remove the kid and place him in an alternative school. Yes, I'm sure these parents are stuck between a rock and a hard place. Moral obligation to the community vs. their obligation to their child and his needs. All parents fight for their kids all the time and special needs families seem to have to "fight" for their kids even more - with school, with extended family members, with community leaders, insurance companies. I, too, wonder about the 150 other incidents. And I wonder what the school/staff might have done to let it get this far in the first place. As Arch has stated, training of the staff is key in these situations. It could be that staff might have unknowingly exaserbated the situation by using conventional means. If I had a dime for how many times our extended family members had said about my son "all he needs is a good spanking" or "have him spend some time with me and I'll straighten him out". Now you see why I included extended family members in the list above regarding those we have to fight with. If the staff isn't trained properly to deal with these episodes and notice the "rumbling stage" before it gets out of hand, it can all be downhill from there and a meltdown/tantrum can and will result in most cases. I would really hate to be in either party's shoes right now. Difficult decisions to be made by all. Are we talking strictly about kids who have been diagnosed with a mental health issue? I'm curious -- how easy or difficult is it for the parents of a "brat" to claim attention deficit disorder? I guess I'm in the camp that believes many more of today's kids are spoiled rotten than in the past. And, as in many areas of society, people refuse to accept responsibility for their actions and instead portray themselves as victims. Look at the sub-prime lending fiasco. Or the fact that we are more obese than ever. Even if there is a verified mental illness, I think the burden should still fall on the parents to ensure the child is not threatening or disruptive to other students.
|
|
|
Post by JWH on Aug 4, 2008 7:38:01 GMT -5
Yes, I'm sure these parents are stuck between a rock and a hard place. Moral obligation to the community vs. their obligation to their child and his needs. All parents fight for their kids all the time and special needs families seem to have to "fight" for their kids even more - with school, with extended family members, with community leaders, insurance companies. I, too, wonder about the 150 other incidents. And I wonder what the school/staff might have done to let it get this far in the first place. As Arch has stated, training of the staff is key in these situations. It could be that staff might have unknowingly exaserbated the situation by using conventional means. If I had a dime for how many times our extended family members had said about my son "all he needs is a good spanking" or "have him spend some time with me and I'll straighten him out". Now you see why I included extended family members in the list above regarding those we have to fight with. If the staff isn't trained properly to deal with these episodes and notice the "rumbling stage" before it gets out of hand, it can all be downhill from there and a meltdown/tantrum can and will result in most cases. I would really hate to be in either party's shoes right now. Difficult decisions to be made by all. Are we talking strictly about kids who have been diagnosed with a mental health issue? I'm curious -- how easy or difficult is it for the parents of a "brat" to claim attention deficit disorder? I guess I'm in the camp that believes many more of today's kids are spoiled rotten than in the past. And, as in many areas of society, people refuse to accept responsibility for their actions and instead portray themselves as victims. Look at the sub-prime lending fiasco. Or the fact that we are more obese than ever. Even if there is a verified mental illness, I think the burden should still fall on the parents to ensure the child is not threatening or disruptive to other students. I agree. Over the years, I've known some parents to play the "Oh, he/she has ADD" card, when it's obvious the parenting skills are horrible, if present at all.
|
|