Legal Considerations in Interdisciplinary Treatments

McGinley, Maria C.

doi:10.1007/978-3-030-13027-5_5

Maria C. McGinley³

Part of the book series: Autism and Child Psychopathology Series ((ACPS))

2269 Accesses

Abstract

The laws applicable to individuals with ASD can be challenging to understand and navigate. It is important for the interdisciplinary team, including parents, to be knowledgeable about students’ rights and entitlements. Parental access to legal representation can be an important and valuable part of an interdisciplinary team. This chapter addresses common legal considerations and rights as they pertain to individuals with ASD and the interdisciplinary team.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Chapter: USD 29.95; Price excludes VAT (USA)

eBook: USD 219.00; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Softcover Book: USD 279.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Hardcover Book: USD 279.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

1.
https://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/autism/data.html.
2.
Id.
3.
Id.
4.
Id.
5.
Christensen, Baio, Braun, et al. (2016); See also https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/statistics/prevalence/autismspectrumdisorder-chart_148067.pdf.
6.
Kanner (1943).
7.
Kanner (1946).
8.
Lovaas (1987).
9.
Id.
10.
McCeachin, Smith, and Lovaas (1993).
11.
Jacobson, Mulick, and Green (1998).
12.
Id.
13.
34 C.F.R. 300.101(a).
14.
United States Code Congressional and Administrative News (USCCAN) 1975 at page 1433.
15.
Schiller, Ellen, Fran O’Reilly, Tom Fiore, Marking the Progress of IDEA Implementation, published by the Office of Special Education Programs. URL: http://nclid.unco.edu/Resources/IDEA_Progress.pdf.
16.
IDEA Parent Guide, National Center for Learning Disabilities, April 2006. URL: http://www.ncld.org/images/stories/downloads/parent_center/idea2004parentguide.pdf.
17.
Id.
18.
Id.
19.
Pub.L. 108-446.
20.
29 U.S.C. Section 701 et seq.
21.
Id.
22.
29 U.S.C. § 794; 34 C.F.R. Section 104.
23.
34 C.F.R. § 104.33.
24.
U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil Rights—Parent and Educator Resource Guide to Section 504 in Public Elementary and Secondary Schools, December 2016. https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/504-resource-guide-201612.pdf.
25.
Pub.L. 101-336, see also 42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq.
26.
Id.
27.
20 U.S.C. Section 1232.
28.
Id.
29.
20 U.S.C. Section 1400(d).
30.
20 U.S.C. Section 1432.
31.
34 C.F.R. 300.111, 20 U.S.C. 1412 (a)(3).
32.
34 C.F.R. 300.301(c)(2); 20 U.S.C. 1401(3).
33.
34 C.F.R. 300.304; 34 C.F.R. 300.300(a).
34.
34 C.F.R. 300.304(c)(4).
35.
34 C.F.R. 300.304(b)(1).
36.
34 C.F.R. 300.304 (b)(2).
37.
34 C.F.R. 300.305 (a)(1).
38.
34 C.F.R. 300.306(a)(1); 20 U.S.C. Section 1400 (602).
39.
34 C.F.R. Section 300.502(b).
40.
See, e.g., Bettinger v. New York City Dep’t of Educ., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 86116 (“the parent’s lack of cooperation … and their refusal to visit a state-approved, non-public school frustrated the placement process”); See also M.C. ex. Rel. Mrs. C. v. Voluntown Bd. of Educ. 226 F.3d 60, 68 (2d Cir. 2000) (“courts have held uniformly that reimbursement is barred where parents have unilaterally arrange for private educational services without ever notifying the school board of their dissatisfaction with their child’s IEP”).
41.
34 C.F.R. 300.320.
42.
34 C.F.R. 300.321.
43.
34 C.F.R. 300.322.
44.
34 C.F.R. 300.321 (a)(6); 34 C.F.R. 300.321 (a)(7).
45.
In each italicized “case study,” students’ names and identifying information have been changed to protect the privacy of each student.
46.
“PROMPT is an acronym for Prompts for Restructuring Oral Muscular Phonetic Targets. The technique is a tactile-kinesthetic approach that uses touch cues to a patient’s articulators (jaw, tongue, lips) to manually guide them through a targeted word, phrase or sentence.” See http://www.promptinstitute.com.
47.
20 U.S.C. Section 1414(d)(1).
48.
34 C.F.R. Section 300.530(f).
49.
20 U.S.C. Section 1414(d)(3)(B)(i).
50.
20 U.S.C. Section 1412(a)(1)(A), Rowley 458 U.S. at 179.
51.
20 U.S.C. Section 1401(9).
52.
Rowley (1982) at 206-207.
53.
Doe v. Tullahoma (1993).
54.
Rowley (1982) at 207.
55.
20 U.S.C. 1400(c)(4).
56.
20 U.S.C. Section 1400(c)(3)-(5).
57.
Id at 493.
58.
Brown v. Bd. of Educ., 349 U.S. 294, 301 (1955).
59.
Smith (2012).
60.
Pennsylvania Associate for Retarded Children (P.A.R.C.) v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 334 F. Supp 1257 (E. D. Pa. 1971) and 343 F. Supp. 279 (E. D. Pa. 1972).
61.
Id at 284-285.
62.
Mills v. Board of Education, 348 F.Supp. 866 (DC Dist. of Columbia 1972).
63.
Id at 875.
64.
Id at 878.
65.
Id. at 876 (emphasis added).
66.
Rowley at 211.
67.
Id at 200-201.
68.
School Committee of Town of Burlington, Mass. V. Department of Educ. of Mass., 471 U.S. 359 (1985).
69.
Burlington at 395, 368.
70.
Florence County School Dist. Four v. Carter, 510 U.S. 7 (1993).
71.
Carter at 15.
72.
Honig at 323 (emphasis added).
73.
Id at 311.
74.
Id at 311.
75.
See also Bd. of Educ. of City Sch. Dist. of N.Y. v. Tom F., 552 US 1 (2007) (holding that IDEA was not meant to deny reimbursement to students who have never been enrolled in public school).
76.
Zobrest at 10.
77.
Deal at 857.
78.
Id at 861-862.
79.
Draper, citing Reid ex rel. Reid v. Dist. of Columbia, 401 F.3d 516 at 518, 525 (D.C. Cir. 2005).
80.
20 U.S.C. § 1412(a)(5)(A).
81.
20 U.S.C. 1412(a)(5)(A); 34 C.F.R. Section 300.114.
82.
34 C.F.R. Section 300.115.
83.
34 C.F.R. 300.115(b)(1).
84.
34 C.F.R. Section 300.115(b).
85.
34 C.F.R. 300.116(b).
86.
34 C.F.R. 300.116 (c).
87.
34 C.F.R. 300.116 (d)-(e).
88.
Id.
89.
See, e.g., T.M. v. Cornwall Central School District, 752 F.3d 145 (2d Circ. 2014); P. v. Newington Bd. of Educ., 546 F.3d 111 (2d Cir. 2008); Oberti v. Clementon Bd. of Educ., 995 F.2d 1204 (3d Cir. 1993).
90.
T.M. v. Cornwall, 752 F.3d 145 at 150 (2d Circ. 2014).
91.
See, e.g., Rowley at 201 (1982).
92.
United Nations, Statement from the United Nations Secretary-General, Ban Ki-moon, on World Autism Awareness Day, Apr. 2, 2015 (available at http://www.un.org/en/events/autismday/2015/sgmessage.shtml).
93.
H.R. Rep. 105-95 at 89 (1997).
94.
Id. at 102.
95.
20 U.S.C. §1400 §601.
96.
20 U.S.C. § 1400(c)(4).
97.
Id.
98.
20 U.S.C. §§ 1401(34), 1414(d)(1)(A)(i)(VIII).
99.
20 U.S.C. §§ 1401(34), 1414(d)(1)(A)(i)(VIII), 1415(b)(3), 1415(c)(1); 34 C.F.R. §§ 300.320(b), 300.321(b).
100.
458 U.S. at 202.
101.
See 20 U.S.C. § 1414(a)–(d).
102.
34 C.F.R. 300.105.
103.
34 C.F.R. 300.105(b).
104.
34 C.F.R. 300.502(a)(3)(i), 20 U.S.C. 1415 (b)(1).
105.
20 U.S.C. Section 1415(b)(6).
106.
20 U.S.C. Section 1415 (b)(6)-(b)(7), 1415(e).
107.
20 U.S.C. Section 1415 (e).
108.
Id.
109.
20 U.S.C. Section 1415(f), 1415(b)(6).
110.
20 U.S.C. 1415(o).
111.
20 U.S.C. 1415 (f)(1)(B).
112.
20 U.S.C. 1415 (f)(1)(B)(ii).
113.
20 U.S.C. 1415 (h).
114.
34 C.F.R. 300.518, Honig v. Doe, 1988; Zvi v. Ambach, 1982.
115.
Honig v. Doe, 1988.
116.
See School Comm. of Burlington v. Dep’t of Educ., 471 U.S. 359, 369-370 (1985); Florence County School Dist. Four v. Carter, 510 U.S. 7 (1993).
117.
Burlington at 373-374.
118.
R.E. v. New York City Department of Education, 2012; Florence County School District IV v. Carter, 1993; Frank G. v. Board of Education (2006).
119.
20 U.S.C. 1412 (a)(10)(C)(iii); See, e.g., Forest Grove Sch. Dist. v. T.A., 557 U.S. 230, 129, S.Ct. 2484, 2496, 174 L.Ed.2d 168 (2009) (finding that the Court “retain[s] discretion to reduce the amount of a reimbursement award if the equities so warrant”); Thies v. New York City Board of Education, 2008 WL 344728, at *4 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 4, 2008) (the court denied reimbursement because the parents “demonstrated they did not seriously intend to enroll [their child] in public school” and instead selected a private school “without first fulfilling their obligation to work together with school officials to find a placement that was appropriate”).
120.
20 U.S.C. Section 1415 (i)(3)(B)(i)(II).
121.
Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424 (1983).
122.
Buckhannon v. West Virginia Dept. of Health and Human Resources, 532 U.S. 598, 121 S. Ct. 1835 (2001).
123.
See US Department of Education (“USDOE”) Office of Civil Rights (“OCR”) 2014 Dear Colleague Letter on Bullying of Students with Disabilities, http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/letters/colleague-bullying-201410.pdf (“2014 Letter”); USDOE Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (“OSERS”) 2013 Dear Colleague Letter on Bullying of Students with Disabilities, http://www.ed.gov/policy/speced/guid/idea/memosdcltrs/bullyingdcl-8-20-13.doc (“2013 Letter”); USDOE OCR 2010 Dear Colleague Letter on Harassment and Bullying, http://www.ed.gov/ocr/letters/colleague-201010.pdf (“2010 Letter”); USDOE OCR-OSERS 2000 Dear Colleague Letter: Prohibited Disability Harassment, http://www.ed.gov/ocr/docs/disabharassltr.html (“2000 Letter”).
124.
T.K. v. New York City Dep’t of Educ., 810 F.3d 869 (2d. Cir. 2016).
125.
20 U.S.C. Section 1415(i)(2)(C)(iii).
126.
Draper, 518 F3d. at 1289 (citing Reid ex rel. Reid v. Dist of Columbia, 401 F.3d 516, 525 (D.C. Cir. 2005)); see also G. ex rel. RG v. Fort Bragg Dependent Schs., 343 F.3d 295, 309 (4th Cir.2003).
127.
See Park v. Anaheim, 464 F.3d 1025 (9th Cir. 2006) at *1033.
128.
See Orange Unified Sch. Dist. v. C.K., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 92423 at *33.
129.
See, e.g., Park v. Anaheim Union High Sch. Distr., 464 F.3d 1025 (9th Cir. 2005).
130.
P. v. Newington Bd. of Educ., 546 F.3d 111 (2d Cir. 2008).
131.
20 U.S.C. 1415(i)(2)(A).

References

Christensen, D. L., Baio, J., Braun, K. V., et al. (2016). Prevalence and characteristics of autism spectrum disorder among children aged 8 years—Autism and developmental disabilities monitoring network, 11 Sites, United States, 2012. MMWR Surveillance Summaries, 65(SS-3), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.ss6503a1
Article PubMed Central Google Scholar
Jacobson, J. W., Mulick, J. A., & Green, G. (1998). Behavioral Interventions, 13, 201–226.
Article Google Scholar
Kanner, L. (1943). Autistic disturbances of affective contact. Nervous Child, 2, 217–250.
Google Scholar
Kanner, L. (1946). Irrelevant and metaphorical language in early infantile autism. American Journal of Psychiatry, 103, 242–246.
Article PubMed Google Scholar
Lovaas, O. I. (1987). Behavioral treatment and normal education and intellectual functioning in young autistic children. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 55, 3–9.
Article PubMed Google Scholar
McCeachin, J. J., Smith, T., & Lovaas, O. I. (1993). Long-term outcome for children with autism who received early intensive behavioral treatment. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 97(4), 359–372.
Google Scholar
Smith, J. E. (2012). Eisenhower in war and peace (p. 723). New York, NY: Random House.
Google Scholar

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Mayerson and Associates, New York, NY, USA
Maria C. McGinley

Authors

Maria C. McGinley
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Maria C. McGinley .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Department of Psychology, Idaho State University, Pocatello, ID, USA
Robert D. Rieske

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

McGinley, M.C. (2019). Legal Considerations in Interdisciplinary Treatments. In: Rieske, R.D. (eds) Handbook of Interdisciplinary Treatments for Autism Spectrum Disorder. Autism and Child Psychopathology Series. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-13027-5_5

Download citation

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-13027-5_5
Published: 30 April 2019
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-13026-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-13027-5
eBook Packages: Behavioral Science and PsychologyBehavioral Science and Psychology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics