St. Ann’s (NYC) - Private School Horror Show

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

We do know that the school sent the decline to enroll in February, which is too late to transfer elsewhere

I am in full agreement that they should have let the family know of the decline earlier, so that they could apply to privates specializing in kids with disabilities, if private is what they wanted. However, it is not accurate to say it was "too late to transfer elsewhere." Public school, which the vast majority of children in the US attend, and is legally required to provide accommodations, is always an option.

Oh come on. In order to get accommodations in public school districts, you need an IEP. And those take months and months, and usually by February are done for services for the following year. The PP was correctly summarizing the situation.

100% nonsense. You clearly have no understanding of the law. Schools can't just say "Welp, we're done providing services this year." That's not at all how it works.

This private told the parents they could not support this child for several years and the parents refused to listen. They did not have a specialist for ADD and dyslexia. This shouldn't have come as a surprise to the parents. They were asked to switch their child and the parents refused. Most privates cannot support moderate to severe special needs. The parents answer was to get a tutor and when that didn't help, they still refused to change schools.

Who are you talking to? The PP said that a public school would not give services for the next year after February. That is patently false.

I have no idea how what you said here relates.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

We do know that the school sent the decline to enroll in February, which is too late to transfer elsewhere

I am in full agreement that they should have let the family know of the decline earlier, so that they could apply to privates specializing in kids with disabilities, if private is what they wanted. However, it is not accurate to say it was "too late to transfer elsewhere." Public school, which the vast majority of children in the US attend, and is legally required to provide accommodations, is always an option.

Tell me you don’t live in NYC without telling me you don’t live in NYC. You have to APPLY to public high school in NYC and there is a super complicated ranked choice algorithm. You do so in the Fall of 8th grade. The art schools require portfolios/auditions and the specialized high schools (academic) require exams, all administered in the Fall. A student who misses this process could end up in a very under resourced school that might be much more worried about migrant newcomers, homeless students, chronic absentees, than this child’s dyslexia, or a school 90 minutes away by train in a different borough. You can’t just enroll in your neighborhood school. Finding out about his counseling out in February essentially left him high and dry even for public.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

We do know that the school sent the decline to enroll in February, which is too late to transfer elsewhere

I am in full agreement that they should have let the family know of the decline earlier, so that they could apply to privates specializing in kids with disabilities, if private is what they wanted. However, it is not accurate to say it was "too late to transfer elsewhere." Public school, which the vast majority of children in the US attend, and is legally required to provide accommodations, is always an option.

Oh come on. In order to get accommodations in public school districts, you need an IEP. And those take months and months, and usually by February are done for services for the following year. The PP was correctly summarizing the situation.

100% nonsense. You clearly have no understanding of the law. Schools can't just say "Welp, we're done providing services this year." That's not at all how it works.

You are wildly ignorant of reality. I’m not even sure where to start with this. It’s like you are reading some sort of school propaganda and ignorant of how the actual system works.

My child has an IEP in a public school. Where in the world did you get the idea that there's a cutoff in the school year to get evaluated for an IEP? You can start the process at any time. The district needs to respond within 45 days by law. You cannot be denied an evaluation regardless of the time of year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As the parent of a child with a disability, it seems like a classic case of the parents focusing on the child they want instead of the child they have. Private schools are the educational equivalent of at-will employment - it can end anytime for no real reason. The tuition isn't buying you a custom education, it's simply buying you exclusivity. I assume they always imagined that for their son and it never occurred to them that the universe thought otherwise. It's quite common, unfortunately.

These parents insisted on keeping their child at a school that wasn't going to support his disability, probably because the prestige of the school felt more important than having a right-fit education for their child. They could have spent their money on a school that would nurture and develop the child they had and help him close his learning gaps, but they chose otherwise. It's normal to mourn the child you thought you'd have, but you can't let that get in the way of doing right by the child in front of you. Even though there were no grades (and accordingly no standards to measure improvement or set goals), I'm sure he was acutely aware of his differences, it affected his self-esteem, and the school wasn't built to support him emotionally or academically. The expulsion was just the final straw. There's a lot the school could have done better, namely push him out in elementary. But I have a hard time finding fault with the school.

You are making so many assumptions based on zero facts. A school sending a no contract is brutal and this baloney of at will-we are talking children. If they wanted to keep their child there with tutors then fine esp if not any behavioral issues. A child is dead and that is sad and any other talk that doesn’t acknowledge a child is dead is just wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What kind of ghoul takes a story like this and tries to spin out a bigger narrative about private schools?

I have some tough news for you if you think suicide doesn’t happen in public school.

The issue with "counseling out" is that it is often done in an opaque manner.

For adolescents who are struggling in some way, it can be hugely traumatic to have your routine and long-nurtured friend group yanked away from you. Some kids never recover from that and it becomes a major setback in their life trajectory.

This is a risk families face when enrolling in private schools. You are paying a lot of money, but ultimately you are powerless if the administration wants your kid out of the school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

We do know that the school sent the decline to enroll in February, which is too late to transfer elsewhere

I am in full agreement that they should have let the family know of the decline earlier, so that they could apply to privates specializing in kids with disabilities, if private is what they wanted. However, it is not accurate to say it was "too late to transfer elsewhere." Public school, which the vast majority of children in the US attend, and is legally required to provide accommodations, is always an option.

Oh come on. In order to get accommodations in public school districts, you need an IEP. And those take months and months, and usually by February are done for services for the following year. The PP was correctly summarizing the situation.

100% nonsense. You clearly have no understanding of the law. Schools can't just say "Welp, we're done providing services this year." That's not at all how it works.

This private told the parents they could not support this child for several years and the parents refused to listen. They did not have a specialist for ADD and dyslexia. This shouldn't have come as a surprise to the parents. They were asked to switch their child and the parents refused. Most privates cannot support moderate to severe special needs. The parents answer was to get a tutor and when that didn't help, they still refused to change schools.

Who are you talking to? The PP said that a public school would not give services for the next year after February. That is patently false.

I have no idea how what you said here relates.

You completely misread that post. The point of the comment about February is delay, not denial. Goodness.

[Anonymous]

Seems like the younger child was stuck in the shadow of the older one. Leaving the older one there and even waiting to sue until they finished seems really odd to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Seems like the younger child was stuck in the shadow of the older one. Leaving the older one there and even waiting to sue until they finished seems really odd to me.

I think they made the rationale choice to wait to sue.

They didn’t want their older child to get retaliated against and thrown out of school right before his junior year.

Older brother needed the stability of his friend group after younger brother commits suicide. Suing would like bring down a torrent of consequences for the older brother.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

We do know that the school sent the decline to enroll in February, which is too late to transfer elsewhere

I am in full agreement that they should have let the family know of the decline earlier, so that they could apply to privates specializing in kids with disabilities, if private is what they wanted. However, it is not accurate to say it was "too late to transfer elsewhere." Public school, which the vast majority of children in the US attend, and is legally required to provide accommodations, is always an option.

Oh come on. In order to get accommodations in public school districts, you need an IEP. And those take months and months, and usually by February are done for services for the following year. The PP was correctly summarizing the situation.

100% nonsense. You clearly have no understanding of the law. Schools can't just say "Welp, we're done providing services this year." That's not at all how it works.

You are wildly ignorant of reality. I’m not even sure where to start with this. It’s like you are reading some sort of school propaganda and ignorant of how the actual system works.

My child has an IEP in a public school. Where in the world did you get the idea that there's a cutoff in the school year to get evaluated for an IEP? You can start the process at any time. The district needs to respond within 45 days by law. You cannot be denied an evaluation regardless of the time of year.

I have multiple kids with IEPs in public and private, now in high school and college. I have been through the wringer as far as advocating for services. You are talking about the idealistic theory under the law, I am talking about the real world. Yes, of course you can start the process any time. And yes, of course the school has to respond in 45 days. That theory is all correct.

But the reality is that it is much harder to get services if there is no IEP in place for a new student coming in, especially if there is no recent neuropsych report. Also, school districts by February have assessed their staffing needs for the following year. That means that totally new students, sure, yes they can request. Anyone can request anything. But it is harder, in many districts, to get a full evaluation with services towards the end of the school year. The “reserve” districts have for staffing will be prioritized to those more extreme students, which there is no indication this child was.

The fact remains that if this child was only formally told that he would not be re-enrolled in February after years of waffling, the school acted unconscionably.

[Anonymous]

Here's how counseling-out goes down when you have a ND kid in a private school--and believe me they counsel out kids yearly and usually have it planned--  they call the family to tell them verbally in late November or December giving them the holiday break to process it. They rarely put it in writing --putting instead copious internal CYA notes in writing to the file, in emails, documenting all the meetings. Then in Feb when contracts go live, theirs won't be there- they’ll call again. They never will say " we don't support autism and dyslexia"--instead they will point to loads of issues that are specific to the kid's learning style and navigation of the social environment. They need the message to be blurry (and the data on the kid they want out , to be extensive) so they can pick and choose who they like. Autistic but the family is powerful or loaded? Maybe! Dyslexic but the kid uses a lot of support services up and is on financial aid? Maybe not..

When enrollment is down, these kids get carried,  year after year after year— and when enrollment is up, they bite the bullet and counsel them out decisively. So parents get constant mixed messages, and when the time comes to say goodbye, whether intentionally or not, the blame is placed squarely on the kid “ they can not support” and on the kid’s inability to "meet the expectations of the environment". They will always blame the kid -in subtle ways and in soft warm thoughtful tones.

It is insidious and very much enrollment driven, donation driven and diversity driven--schools are much more comfortable counseling out white kids as there is less liability. Prior discussions of problems with the kid years back are a somewhat irrelevant pattern once the contract is offered. Contracts speak much louder than meetings. Signed contracts come with serious ethical but not legal obligations to support students and families in healthy kind ways. The dilemma for schools is that they do "sort-of" know that the process of pressuring kids and families to leave ( which includes a lot of passive aggressive criticism of parenting styles, detailed deconstruction of the kid’s flaws, intense observation and documentation of any little aberrant behavior and learning lapse ) causes severe emotional harm and creates a psychologically unsafe environment-but what can they do?.. it’s a litigious world - they’re  protecting themselves —and I am sure St Anne’s is ready for this lawsuit with a big fat horrible file on a well meaning bright but dead …child.

[Anonymous]

Tell me you don’t live in NYC without telling me you don’t live in NYC

I think the fact that this website is "DCUM" may have already been a tip off.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here's how counseling-out goes down when you have a ND kid in a private school--and believe me they counsel out kids yearly and usually have it planned--  they call the family to tell them verbally in late November or December giving them the holiday break to process it. They rarely put it in writing --putting instead copious internal CYA notes in writing to the file, in emails, documenting all the meetings. Then in Feb when contracts go live, theirs won't be there- they’ll call again. They never will say " we don't support autism and dyslexia"--instead they will point to loads of issues that are specific to the kid's learning style and navigation of the social environment. They need the message to be blurry (and the data on the kid they want out , to be extensive) so they can pick and choose who they like. Autistic but the family is powerful or loaded? Maybe! Dyslexic but the kid uses a lot of support services up and is on financial aid? Maybe not..

When enrollment is down, these kids get carried,  year after year after year— and when enrollment is up, they bite the bullet and counsel them out decisively. So parents get constant mixed messages, and when the time comes to say goodbye, whether intentionally or not, the blame is placed squarely on the kid “ they can not support” and on the kid’s inability to "meet the expectations of the environment". They will always blame the kid -in subtle ways and in soft warm thoughtful tones.

It is insidious and very much enrollment driven, donation driven and diversity driven--schools are much more comfortable counseling out white kids as there is less liability. Prior discussions of problems with the kid years back are a somewhat irrelevant pattern once the contract is offered. Contracts speak much louder than meetings. Signed contracts come with serious ethical but not legal obligations to support students and families in healthy kind ways. The dilemma for schools is that they do "sort-of" know that the process of pressuring kids and families to leave ( which includes a lot of passive aggressive criticism of parenting styles, detailed deconstruction of the kid’s flaws, intense observation and documentation of any little aberrant behavior and learning lapse ) causes severe emotional harm and creates a psychologically unsafe environment-but what can they do?.. it’s a litigious world - they’re  protecting themselves —and I am sure St Anne’s is ready for this lawsuit with a big fat horrible file on a well meaning bright but dead …child.

This is spot on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here's how counseling-out goes down when you have a ND kid in a private school--and believe me they counsel out kids yearly and usually have it planned--  they call the family to tell them verbally in late November or December giving them the holiday break to process it. They rarely put it in writing --putting instead copious internal CYA notes in writing to the file, in emails, documenting all the meetings. Then in Feb when contracts go live, theirs won't be there- they’ll call again. They never will say " we don't support autism and dyslexia"--instead they will point to loads of issues that are specific to the kid's learning style and navigation of the social environment. They need the message to be blurry (and the data on the kid they want out , to be extensive) so they can pick and choose who they like. Autistic but the family is powerful or loaded? Maybe! Dyslexic but the kid uses a lot of support services up and is on financial aid? Maybe not..

When enrollment is down, these kids get carried,  year after year after year— and when enrollment is up, they bite the bullet and counsel them out decisively. So parents get constant mixed messages, and when the time comes to say goodbye, whether intentionally or not, the blame is placed squarely on the kid “ they can not support” and on the kid’s inability to "meet the expectations of the environment". They will always blame the kid -in subtle ways and in soft warm thoughtful tones.

It is insidious and very much enrollment driven, donation driven and diversity driven--schools are much more comfortable counseling out white kids as there is less liability. Prior discussions of problems with the kid years back are a somewhat irrelevant pattern once the contract is offered. Contracts speak much louder than meetings. Signed contracts come with serious ethical but not legal obligations to support students and families in healthy kind ways. The dilemma for schools is that they do "sort-of" know that the process of pressuring kids and families to leave ( which includes a lot of passive aggressive criticism of parenting styles, detailed deconstruction of the kid’s flaws, intense observation and documentation of any little aberrant behavior and learning lapse ) causes severe emotional harm and creates a psychologically unsafe environment-but what can they do?.. it’s a litigious world - they’re  protecting themselves —and I am sure St Anne’s is ready for this lawsuit with a big fat horrible file on a well meaning bright but dead …child.

This is really sad. It’s like the cut throat corporate world, but with kids.

[Anonymous]

I think 16:16 is probably spot on. It honestly makes me sick to my stomach.

[Anonymous]

16:16 nailed it.

Like the family that sued Lawrenceville after their son’s suicide, this family is not suing for money or out of simple spite. They don’t need the money and no amount will redress or assuage their loss.

They are doing this to highlight the issue and to help other children and families. They’ve already gotten St Ann’s to hire more support staff. If it helps them feel like their loss has some meaning, good.

I am saddened and the lack of empathy and compassion from the posters criticizing the family.

We should all be grateful to them for doing what they are doing.