Anonymous wrote:OP here. I am not sure why this should matter, as I have paid taxes in dc for more than 20 years to support DCPS. But, let me explain things to the trolls (silly me). My family HAS tapped out all of our resources spending tuition on a very moderatly priced parochial school. Our DC was placed in a DCPS school, very she was subject and witness to violent bullying, in part due to her dissability. We asked the school to move her to a different class, and DCPS told us to go screw b/c our expectations for safety were "unrealustic." I'm talking bruises, hair pulled out in handfulls, pushing down stairs, etc. Our pediatrician recommended we pull our D/C out of DCPS for fear of long-term damage to her education. Our insurance will not pay one red cent of therapy, which costs $125 per hour. Just so you have the facts.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, it would make sense to me that public school districts provide services to public school students. Why should tax payers fund services for students not in public school? Imagine how much more resources public school students could have if funds were not funneled into providing services to those NOT in public school!

If the only way for parents to get services for their child is to enroll them in public school, the public schools are going to get a larger share of kids with SN. Making public schools responsible for some services, but not the entire education of kids with SN is a compromise that lowers the overall cost for the public school system.

Parents who can afford private school will not move thier children to public for the services. They will either suck it up and pay privately for them or move to a jurisdiction where they have better options.

Agree with this. And that's probably what DCPS is banking on.

Also agree with the scenario. My child received services but I still paid for private too. They gave us one day a week and I had to pay for the other 3 days of the week. They also would have put her into an ESL class if she had gone to a DCPS because my DH is Latino...never mind that she doesn't speak Spanish. They felt this would have been better than additional speech therapy. (...and this is why my children attend a private school!)

WTF? They told you this as part of the Early Stages/IEP process?

Yes!

I've heard that from others. My understanding is they can try but cannot force you to. They do it for the extra funding. You can refuse.

I wasn't aware I could refuse. Glad they feel the need to pimp my kid and put her somewhere that would provide zero benefit for her and might actually create problems. It was absurd and infuriated my DH that we immediately went with a private school. While I really liked her DCPS speech therapist, there was NO way our children will ever see the inside of a DC public school.

My understanding is you can and families do but you have to fight for it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, it would make sense to me that public school districts provide services to public school students. Why should tax payers fund services for students not in public school? Imagine how much more resources public school students could have if funds were not funneled into providing services to those NOT in public school!

Because they're entitled to services under civil rights law. No matter, I predict more parents suing for non-public placements. You could have had it on the cheap and just paid for the services, but now you'll get to food the entire bill - tuition plus the services. Enjoy that.

Not likely. DC private places more students per capita than the neighboring jurisdictions. If anything they are moving toward the norm and providing fewer private placements.

Anonymous wrote:

Don't like it? I think there's a DCPS public school 'round the corner from you, OP. I bet your kid can get an IEP and on-campus services once you enroll your kid.

-- private school parent in the District[/quote

Fine, how about me and all of the other parents who have moved their kids to private school at their own expense, for their kids own safety and development will just come galloping back to publuc schools. What do you think that will do? Take resources away from your kid, you delf rightous ass.

]Read a little more carefully. I said I am a private school parent.


That said, it's weird that you're using your child's power to hoard public money for himself as a weapon to threaten people whose opinion you don't like.

"Watch out! We're comin' for you and my my kid is gonna take shit away from your kid!" That's essentially your elegant threat.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, it would make sense to me that public school districts provide services to public school students. Why should tax payers fund services for students not in public school? Imagine how much more resources public school students could have if funds were not funneled into providing services to those NOT in public school!

If the only way for parents to get services for their child is to enroll them in public school, the public schools are going to get a larger share of kids with SN. Making public schools responsible for some services, but not the entire education of kids with SN is a compromise that lowers the overall cost for the public school system.

Parents who can afford private school will not move thier children to public for the services. They will either suck it up and pay privately for them or move to a jurisdiction where they have better options.

Agree with this. And that's probably what DCPS is banking on.

Also agree with the scenario. My child received services but I still paid for private too. They gave us one day a week and I had to pay for the other 3 days of the week. They also would have put her into an ESL class if she had gone to a DCPS because my DH is Latino...never mind that she doesn't speak Spanish. They felt this would have been better than additional speech therapy. (...and this is why my children attend a private school!)

WTF? They told you this as part of the Early Stages/IEP process?

Yes!

I've heard that from others. My understanding is they can try but cannot force you to. They do it for the extra funding. You can refuse.

I wasn't aware I could refuse. Glad they feel the need to pimp my kid and put her somewhere that would provide zero benefit for her and might actually create problems. It was absurd and infuriated my DH that we immediately went with a private school. While I really liked her DCPS speech therapist, there was NO way our children will ever see the inside of a DC public school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, it would make sense to me that public school districts provide services to public school students. Why should tax payers fund services for students not in public school? Imagine how much more resources public school students could have if funds were not funneled into providing services to those NOT in public school!

If the only way for parents to get services for their child is to enroll them in public school, the public schools are going to get a larger share of kids with SN. Making public schools responsible for some services, but not the entire education of kids with SN is a compromise that lowers the overall cost for the public school system.

Parents who can afford private school will not move thier children to public for the services. They will either suck it up and pay privately for them or move to a jurisdiction where they have better options.

Agree with this. And that's probably what DCPS is banking on.

Also agree with the scenario. My child received services but I still paid for private too. They gave us one day a week and I had to pay for the other 3 days of the week. They also would have put her into an ESL class if she had gone to a DCPS because my DH is Latino...never mind that she doesn't speak Spanish. They felt this would have been better than additional speech therapy. (...and this is why my children attend a private school!)

WTF? They told you this as part of the Early Stages/IEP process?

Yes!

I've heard that from others. My understanding is they can try but cannot force you to. They do it for the extra funding. You can refuse.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, it would make sense to me that public school districts provide services to public school students. Why should tax payers fund services for students not in public school? Imagine how much more resources public school students could have if funds were not funneled into providing services to those NOT in public school!

If the only way for parents to get services for their child is to enroll them in public school, the public schools are going to get a larger share of kids with SN. Making public schools responsible for some services, but not the entire education of kids with SN is a compromise that lowers the overall cost for the public school system.

Parents who can afford private school will not move thier children to public for the services. They will either suck it up and pay privately for them or move to a jurisdiction where they have better options.

Agree with this. And that's probably what DCPS is banking on.

Also agree with the scenario. My child received services but I still paid for private too. They gave us one day a week and I had to pay for the other 3 days of the week. They also would have put her into an ESL class if she had gone to a DCPS because my DH is Latino...never mind that she doesn't speak Spanish. They felt this would have been better than additional speech therapy. (...and this is why my children attend a private school!)

WTF? They told you this as part of the Early Stages/IEP process?

Yes!

I've heard that from others. My understanding is they can try but cannot force you to. They do it for the extra funding. You can refuse.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, it would make sense to me that public school districts provide services to public school students. Why should tax payers fund services for students not in public school? Imagine how much more resources public school students could have if funds were not funneled into providing services to those NOT in public school!

If the only way for parents to get services for their child is to enroll them in public school, the public schools are going to get a larger share of kids with SN. Making public schools responsible for some services, but not the entire education of kids with SN is a compromise that lowers the overall cost for the public school system.

Parents who can afford private school will not move thier children to public for the services. They will either suck it up and pay privately for them or move to a jurisdiction where they have better options.

Agree with this. And that's probably what DCPS is banking on.

Also agree with the scenario. My child received services but I still paid for private too. They gave us one day a week and I had to pay for the other 3 days of the week. They also would have put her into an ESL class if she had gone to a DCPS because my DH is Latino...never mind that she doesn't speak Spanish. They felt this would have been better than additional speech therapy. (...and this is why my children attend a private school!)

WTF? They told you this as part of the Early Stages/IEP process?

Yes!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, it would make sense to me that public school districts provide services to public school students. Why should tax payers fund services for students not in public school? Imagine how much more resources public school students could have if funds were not funneled into providing services to those NOT in public school!

If the only way for parents to get services for their child is to enroll them in public school, the public schools are going to get a larger share of kids with SN. Making public schools responsible for some services, but not the entire education of kids with SN is a compromise that lowers the overall cost for the public school system.

Parents who can afford private school will not move thier children to public for the services. They will either suck it up and pay privately for them or move to a jurisdiction where they have better options.

Agree with this. And that's probably what DCPS is banking on.

Also agree with the scenario. My child received services but I still paid for private too. They gave us one day a week and I had to pay for the other 3 days of the week. They also would have put her into an ESL class if she had gone to a DCPS because my DH is Latino...never mind that she doesn't speak Spanish. They felt this would have been better than additional speech therapy. (...and this is why my children attend a private school!)

WTF? They told you this as part of the Early Stages/IEP process?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, it would make sense to me that public school districts provide services to public school students. Why should tax payers fund services for students not in public school? Imagine how much more resources public school students could have if funds were not funneled into providing services to those NOT in public school!

If the only way for parents to get services for their child is to enroll them in public school, the public schools are going to get a larger share of kids with SN. Making public schools responsible for some services, but not the entire education of kids with SN is a compromise that lowers the overall cost for the public school system.

Parents who can afford private school will not move thier children to public for the services. They will either suck it up and pay privately for them or move to a jurisdiction where they have better options.

Agree with this. And that's probably what DCPS is banking on.

Also agree with the scenario. My child received services but I still paid for private too. They gave us one day a week and I had to pay for the other 3 days of the week. They also would have put her into an ESL class if she had gone to a DCPS because my DH is Latino...never mind that she doesn't speak Spanish. They felt this would have been better than additional speech therapy. (...and this is why my children attend a private school!)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, it would make sense to me that public school districts provide services to public school students. Why should tax payers fund services for students not in public school? Imagine how much more resources public school students could have if funds were not funneled into providing services to those NOT in public school!

If the only way for parents to get services for their child is to enroll them in public school, the public schools are going to get a larger share of kids with SN. Making public schools responsible for some services, but not the entire education of kids with SN is a compromise that lowers the overall cost for the public school system.

Parents who can afford private school will not move thier children to public for the services. They will either suck it up and pay privately for them or move to a jurisdiction where they have better options.

Agree with this. And that's probably what DCPS is banking on.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, it would make sense to me that public school districts provide services to public school students. Why should tax payers fund services for students not in public school? Imagine how much more resources public school students could have if funds were not funneled into providing services to those NOT in public school!

If the only way for parents to get services for their child is to enroll them in public school, the public schools are going to get a larger share of kids with SN. Making public schools responsible for some services, but not the entire education of kids with SN is a compromise that lowers the overall cost for the public school system.

Parents who can afford private school will not move thier children to public for the services. They will either suck it up and pay privately for them or move to a jurisdiction where they have better options.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, it would make sense to me that public school districts provide services to public school students. Why should tax payers fund services for students not in public school? Imagine how much more resources public school students could have if funds were not funneled into providing services to those NOT in public school!

If the only way for parents to get services for their child is to enroll them in public school, the public schools are going to get a larger share of kids with SN. Making public schools responsible for some services, but not the entire education of kids with SN is a compromise that lowers the overall cost for the public school system.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, it would make sense to me that public school districts provide services to public school students. Why should tax payers fund services for students not in public school? Imagine how much more resources public school students could have if funds were not funneled into providing services to those NOT in public school!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, it would make sense to me that public school districts provide services to public school students. Why should tax payers fund services for students not in public school? Imagine how much more resources public school students could have if funds were not funneled into providing services to those NOT in public school!

Because they're entitled to services under civil rights law. No matter, I predict more parents suing for non-public placements. You could have had it on the cheap and just paid for the services, but now you'll get to food the entire bill - tuition plus the services. Enjoy that.