Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My child has learning issues (ADHD and extremely low processing speed). He needed speech therapy until fourth grade. And he has mental health issues. I never paid for an advocate or attorney. I did pay for private texting twice.

The services my son got were unbelievably valuable. I could not have duplicated them privately. I worked endlessly with the schools - teachers, counselors and IEP team. My son got a combination of accommodations, services and eventually a non mainstream placement.

I know many people who spent tens of thousands on attorneys and advocates. I know of only two that benefited - in both cases the kids needed a private placement and they got it. I don’t know if that would have happened without an attorney but knowing the people, I don’t think they had the skills to accomplish what their attorneys did. Most of the people I know who paid for attorneys and advocates feel like they wasted their money. Everyone I know, me included, thinks the outside testing was with the expense.

which school system?

Anonymous wrote:My kid just has dyslexia and I agree 100%. Nothing against the teachers, special ed program or anything like that. I would never pay for what they offer. In fact, knowing what I know now, I would go back in time and decline services.

It's great to advocate for your kid but don't waste your money advocating for public school services. Spend that same money on private pay services.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I stared teaching 28 years ago, OP, and I have taught in one really terrible school system and two of the best. I can say with near certainty that what you are paying does not justify any possible outcome it could produce, simply because the money is just not there in public schools to adequately staff and service so many high needs kids. It is just not possible. Caseloads are impossibly high. If you have a child on the autism spectrum, unless you think the child is in a wholly inappropriate placement or is receiving no support and being actively hurt by it, I would focus your money toward paying direct providers of services to your child. I’ve seen parents spend thousands of dollars in legal support for changes that resulted in changes in goals or slight servicing hours that realky didn’t make that big of a difference since school staff were still just as constrained by current staff availability. So a child was maybe added to another small group for supper in math with an IA for 20 more minutes daily or something like that. But that same exact $$& could have done directly to a certified SpEd teacher to tutor your child for an hour daily, 1-1, with much higher impact. Or to hire an in-home therapist 3x/wk.

I mean this as no bash to SpEd teachers or programs in general (except the one truly bad school where I spent one year, which was malpractice all around.) The vast majority of staff are already shortening their lives with stress trying to help your kid. And the fact is that changes in an IEP, if you’re child is already in a team taught class, is not going to magically result in a lot more direct help for your kid, just because the changes IRP doesn’t magically provide the school with more IA’s or teachers.

The only big blanket exception I would say for this would be for advocating for students with emotional disabilities to be in a nurturing, supportive, small-class environment for students with EDs. My former school had a full wrap around program for those students, including art and music therapy, a fully staffed calm-down room, more staffing for social workers and psychologists, etc., and extra in-class support for those students beginning to mainstream for some subjects. Fighting for that kind of placement that might actually be a substantially different *program* might be worth it.

I’m a Special Education teacher and agree with this 100%.

Anonymous wrote:My child has learning issues (ADHD and extremely low processing speed). He needed speech therapy until fourth grade. And he has mental health issues. I never paid for an advocate or attorney. I did pay for private texting twice.

The services my son got were unbelievably valuable. I could not have duplicated them privately. I worked endlessly with the schools - teachers, counselors and IEP team. My son got a combination of accommodations, services and eventually a non mainstream placement.

I know many people who spent tens of thousands on attorneys and advocates. I know of only two that benefited - in both cases the kids needed a private placement and they got it. I don’t know if that would have happened without an attorney but knowing the people, I don’t think they had the skills to accomplish what their attorneys did. Most of the people I know who paid for attorneys and advocates feel like they wasted their money. Everyone I know, me included, thinks the outside testing was with the expense.

Anonymous wrote:Agree. Don't know what school system you are in, but at the beginning of the school year, mcps had 90 open special ed spots. I guarantee you most of those are filled with long-term subs, and most of those long-term subs are not qualified to be teaching those classes.

Anonymous wrote:I stared teaching 28 years ago, OP, and I have taught in one really terrible school system and two of the best. I can say with near certainty that what you are paying does not justify any possible outcome it could produce, simply because the money is just not there in public schools to adequately staff and service so many high needs kids. It is just not possible. Caseloads are impossibly high. If you have a child on the autism spectrum, unless you think the child is in a wholly inappropriate placement or is receiving no support and being actively hurt by it, I would focus your money toward paying direct providers of services to your child. I’ve seen parents spend thousands of dollars in legal support for changes that resulted in changes in goals or slight servicing hours that realky didn’t make that big of a difference since school staff were still just as constrained by current staff availability. So a child was maybe added to another small group for supper in math with an IA for 20 more minutes daily or something like that. But that same exact $$& could have done directly to a certified SpEd teacher to tutor your child for an hour daily, 1-1, with much higher impact. Or to hire an in-home therapist 3x/wk.

I mean this as no bash to SpEd teachers or programs in general (except the one truly bad school where I spent one year, which was malpractice all around.) The vast majority of staff are already shortening their lives with stress trying to help your kid. And the fact is that changes in an IEP, if you’re child is already in a team taught class, is not going to magically result in a lot more direct help for your kid, just because the changes IRP doesn’t magically provide the school with more IA’s or teachers.

The only big blanket exception I would say for this would be for advocating for students with emotional disabilities to be in a nurturing, supportive, small-class environment for students with EDs. My former school had a full wrap around program for those students, including art and music therapy, a fully staffed calm-down room, more staffing for social workers and psychologists, etc., and extra in-class support for those students beginning to mainstream for some subjects. Fighting for that kind of placement that might actually be a substantially different *program* might be worth it.

Anonymous wrote:I stared teaching 28 years ago, OP, and I have taught in one really terrible school system and two of the best. I can say with near certainty that what you are paying does not justify any possible outcome it could produce, simply because the money is just not there in public schools to adequately staff and service so many high needs kids. It is just not possible. Caseloads are impossibly high. If you have a child on the autism spectrum, unless you think the child is in a wholly inappropriate placement or is receiving no support and being actively hurt by it, I would focus your money toward paying direct providers of services to your child. I’ve seen parents spend thousands of dollars in legal support for changes that resulted in changes in goals or slight servicing hours that realky didn’t make that big of a difference since school staff were still just as constrained by current staff availability. So a child was maybe added to another small group for supper in math with an IA for 20 more minutes daily or something like that. But that same exact $$& could have done directly to a certified SpEd teacher to tutor your child for an hour daily, 1-1, with much higher impact. Or to hire an in-home therapist 3x/wk.

I mean this as no bash to SpEd teachers or programs in general (except the one truly bad school where I spent one year, which was malpractice all around.) The vast majority of staff are already shortening their lives with stress trying to help your kid. And the fact is that changes in an IEP, if you’re child is already in a team taught class, is not going to magically result in a lot more direct help for your kid, just because the changes IRP doesn’t magically provide the school with more IA’s or teachers.

The only big blanket exception I would say for this would be for advocating for students with emotional disabilities to be in a nurturing, supportive, small-class environment for students with EDs. My former school had a full wrap around program for those students, including art and music therapy, a fully staffed calm-down room, more staffing for social workers and psychologists, etc., and extra in-class support for those students beginning to mainstream for some subjects. Fighting for that kind of placement that might actually be a substantially different *program* might be worth it.