I meant righteous indignation.

Anonymous wrote:Title III of the ADA applies to public accommodations, which includes private schools. The only schools that are ADA exempt are, ironically, parochial schools. If you scroll down on the links I posted you'll see there are three laws that protect kids with disabilities (mental or physical): IDEA applies to public schools, Section 504 applies to public and private schools that receive federal aid, and Title III of the ADA, applies to public accommodations, including non-religious private schools.
So, if a kid is otherwise qualified to be at the school (passed admissions requirements, is ok academically) and can be reasonably accommodated, a non-religious private school cannot remove a child for a disability.
Funny, we paid full tuition and got counseled out anyway. A friend in a similar situation just made a $25k donation to the school and suddenly everything's right again. How is that any different than extorting extra money out of families with disabled kids? And no, it is not legal to charge disabled kids extra.

Your parenthesis says it all. "Otherwise qualified." Thats not a one off determination. If a school can no longer meet that child's needs, the child is no longer qualified. And just saying your child has a disability isn't enough for the ADA, you have to show it can be reasonably accommodated. Its reasonable for schools to have elevators for students and employees with mobility issues. It is not reasonable for a teacher to have to divert attention away from other students. I am not aware of any case in which a private school was required to accommodate a student it found it couldn't support.

Plus your DC doesn't have a diagnosed disability. SPD is not a medical diagnosis. Its possible your DC has another diagnosis -- this is often the case when parents think they know what "it" is because an OT told them their child has SPD. Its quite possible your DC has something else that isn't being addressed and that compromised her ability to function at school. I don't know but many parents would take what happened as a kick in the pants to get a full evaluation by a developmental pediatrician and address the problems, rather than blaming the school.

You're angry. You have some right to be. But you've worked yourself up into a froth about rights being violated to prop up your anger with righteous indication. All of that energy should be redirected to helping your DD so she can succeed. I have a DS with AS (so now diagnosed as autism, but very high functioning). He has been in an educational setting that didn't work and, as is usually the case when this happens, the school handled it badly. I was angry, sure. But I also took it as a lesson that I needed to fit the school to my child, not my child to the school. Thats my responsibility if my child is in a private school, there is no private school that has a responsibility to educate my child. Having found the right school, he is thriving.

Title III of the ADA applies to public accommodations, which includes private schools. The only schools that are ADA exempt are, ironically, parochial schools. If you scroll down on the links I posted you'll see there are three laws that protect kids with disabilities (mental or physical): IDEA applies to public schools, Section 504 applies to public and private schools that receive federal aid, and Title III of the ADA, applies to public accommodations, including non-religious private schools.
So, if a kid is otherwise qualified to be at the school (passed admissions requirements, is ok academically) and can be reasonably accommodated, a non-religious private school cannot remove a child for a disability.
Funny, we paid full tuition and got counseled out anyway. A friend in a similar situation just made a $25k donation to the school and suddenly everything's right again. How is that any different than extorting extra money out of families with disabled kids? And no, it is not legal to charge disabled kids extra.

Anonymous wrote:

[/quote=Anonymous]

I think your child was counseled out appropriately. It wasn't done because your family receives aid it was because the school can't meet his needs.

Other kids might behave badly but if it's just crappy behavior of a NT kid that is something different than a child with autism.

We are a financial aid family at a private school and we sacrifice a lot to pay our portion of the tuition. We do it because our public options are bad and quite frankly I expect the school to maintain a student body that they can reasonably serve academically and behavior wise without taking away from my child.

[/quote=Anonymous]



I agree that it was appropriate for my child to be counseled out. The WAY that they counseled him out was reprehensible. Some of the things that the staff said about him and TO him were demeaning and cruel. They let other children tease and humiliate him. This was at the same time they were singing their own praises about the caring, family-like feel of the school, and how they could turn children around by believing in them, and individualizing to meet their needs.

How do YOU know it had nothing to do with financial aid? You have no idea what school it even was; I was deeply involved for years.

To answer another PP's question, we moved to a better school district, and ds is happy in public school.

I think we were counseled out of a parochial because we were not Catholic. We were paying the Prot. rate (more money) but the school was undergoing management problems and kids were falling through cracks. But we were shabbily treated and and I think a lot of it - and the nastiness of the teachers and administrators - was due to the fact that they were Catholic and were were not. Which is why I will never become a Catholic nor will be children. So you parochials did a really super job of being inclusive and encouraging other Christians to take that step to become CAtholic.

[/quote=Anonymous]

I think your child was counseled out appropriately. It wasn't done because your family receives aid it was because the school can't meet his needs.

Other kids might behave badly but if it's just crappy behavior of a NT kid that is something different than a child with autism.

We are a financial aid family at a private school and we sacrifice a lot to pay our portion of the tuition. We do it because our public options are bad and quite frankly I expect the school to maintain a student body that they can reasonably serve academically and behavior wise without taking away from my child.

[/quote=Anonymous]



I agree that it was appropriate for my child to be counseled out. The WAY that they counseled him out was reprehensible. Some of the things that the staff said about him and TO him were demeaning and cruel. They let other children tease and humiliate him. This was at the same time they were singing their own praises about the caring, family-like feel of the school, and how they could turn children around by believing in them, and individualizing to meet their needs.

How do YOU know it had nothing to do with financial aid? You have no idea what school it even was; I was deeply involved for years.

To answer another PP's question, we moved to a better school district, and ds is happy in public school.

Anonymous wrote:SPD is only not a medical diagnosis because the insurance companies don't want to pay for it. The ADA does not require that the disability be included in the DSM-V (for example, Asperger's is not). All it has to be is an impairment that affects a major life function, which includes learning. All learning disabilities and ADHD are covered by Title III of the ADA. I would guess that 75% of students "counseled out" of private schools have a disability that impacts their learning.
http://www.ada.gov/learnfac.htm
http://www.ldonline.org/article/6108/

Asperger's is no longer a stand alone diagnosis and is now included in the DSM-5 under "Autism Spectrum Disorder" (ASD) and recognized and paid for by insurance companies and school systems as part of ASD.

The DSM-5 specifically chose not to include SPD as a stand alone diagnosis. Since it is not a medical diagnosis, most insurance companies and public school systems do not recognize it as a disability.

Private schools do not have to provide accommodations under ADA or IDEA since they are PRIVATE schools. Only public schools are covered by ADA and IDEA.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

PP, if you are still reading this thread, why do you think your DS was singled out or targeted for "counseling out" as opposed to the other kids whose behavior seemed worse? If you stated it earlier, I must have missed it so please forgive.

I think it was for a few reasons. One, we were a financial aid family. I volunteered a lot for the school, but our family could contribute little in the way of money and power. Two, ds was still in elementary when this happened-- elementary grade kids are easier to replace (and pay less tuition) than upper schoolers. It seemed like the school tried very hard to gain and retain older kids, even if they were badly behaved, academically deficient, or both.

Thirdly, I think it was because of the kinds of behaviors ds was exhibiting. He has since been diagnosed with High Functioning Autism, and the kinds of things he got in trouble for reflect that-- inattentiveness, noises (like humming) in class, touching others but not wanting to be touched in return, getting emotional.... The behaviors weren't usually "bad," (and his grades were great), but they were chronic. I think they didn't know how to "handle" him, and decided that he was a "bad kid." I heard a lot of "He's manipulative," and "He needs a firmer hand" from the staff. That's exactly the wrong advice for a HFA kid, but they (and we) didn't know that at the time.

His current school is much better at valuing his strengths and dealing with his weaknesses, thank goodness!

I think your child was counseled out appropriately. It wasn't done because your family receives aid it was because the school can't meet his needs.

Other kids might behave badly but if it's just crappy behavior of a NT kid that is something different than a child with autism.

We are a financial aid family at a private school and we sacrifice a lot to pay our portion of the tuition. We do it because our public options are bad and quite frankly I expect the school to maintain a student body that they can reasonably serve academically and behavior wise without taking away from my child.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

PP, if you are still reading this thread, why do you think your DS was singled out or targeted for "counseling out" as opposed to the other kids whose behavior seemed worse? If you stated it earlier, I must have missed it so please forgive.

I think it was for a few reasons. One, we were a financial aid family. I volunteered a lot for the school, but our family could contribute little in the way of money and power. Two, ds was still in elementary when this happened-- elementary grade kids are easier to replace (and pay less tuition) than upper schoolers. It seemed like the school tried very hard to gain and retain older kids, even if they were badly behaved, academically deficient, or both.

Thirdly, I think it was because of the kinds of behaviors ds was exhibiting. He has since been diagnosed with High Functioning Autism, and the kinds of things he got in trouble for reflect that-- inattentiveness, noises (like humming) in class, touching others but not wanting to be touched in return, getting emotional.... The behaviors weren't usually "bad," (and his grades were great), but they were chronic. I think they didn't know how to "handle" him, and decided that he was a "bad kid." I heard a lot of "He's manipulative," and "He needs a firmer hand" from the staff. That's exactly the wrong advice for a HFA kid, but they (and we) didn't know that at the time.

His current school is much better at valuing his strengths and dealing with his weaknesses, thank goodness!

Sure would like to know what the current school is!

Anonymous wrote:I believe you, PP whose child was targeted.

We didn't get counseled out, but withdrew our children voluntarily because of a bullying situation. The teacher decided that our ds was a problem child because he cried too easily. Well, he cried because he was being tortured by other kids.

The administration finally figured it out, but we had already decided to leave. So now that school is stuck with a terrible bully, one who continues (according to multiple friends) on a destructive path. The school says the bully deserves another chance. Whatever. My kid is no longer the target, and his frequent crying is a thing of the past.

Well I'm sure the bully pays full tuition and OP's family could have stayed if they did.

I believe you, PP whose child was targeted.

We didn't get counseled out, but withdrew our children voluntarily because of a bullying situation. The teacher decided that our ds was a problem child because he cried too easily. Well, he cried because he was being tortured by other kids.

The administration finally figured it out, but we had already decided to leave. So now that school is stuck with a terrible bully, one who continues (according to multiple friends) on a destructive path. The school says the bully deserves another chance. Whatever. My kid is no longer the target, and his frequent crying is a thing of the past.

SPD is only not a medical diagnosis because the insurance companies don't want to pay for it. The ADA does not require that the disability be included in the DSM-V (for example, Asperger's is not). All it has to be is an impairment that affects a major life function, which includes learning. All learning disabilities and ADHD are covered by Title III of the ADA. I would guess that 75% of students "counseled out" of private schools have a disability that impacts their learning.
http://www.ada.gov/learnfac.htm
http://www.ldonline.org/article/6108/

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

PP, if you are still reading this thread, why do you think your DS was singled out or targeted for "counseling out" as opposed to the other kids whose behavior seemed worse? If you stated it earlier, I must have missed it so please forgive.

I think it was for a few reasons. One, we were a financial aid family. I volunteered a lot for the school, but our family could contribute little in the way of money and power. Two, ds was still in elementary when this happened-- elementary grade kids are easier to replace (and pay less tuition) than upper schoolers. It seemed like the school tried very hard to gain and retain older kids, even if they were badly behaved, academically deficient, or both.

Thirdly, I think it was because of the kinds of behaviors ds was exhibiting. He has since been diagnosed with High Functioning Autism, and the kinds of things he got in trouble for reflect that-- inattentiveness, noises (like humming) in class, touching others but not wanting to be touched in return, getting emotional.... The behaviors weren't usually "bad," (and his grades were great), but they were chronic. I think they didn't know how to "handle" him, and decided that he was a "bad kid." I heard a lot of "He's manipulative," and "He needs a firmer hand" from the staff. That's exactly the wrong advice for a HFA kid, but they (and we) didn't know that at the time.

His current school is much better at valuing his strengths and dealing with his weaknesses, thank goodness!

Others may not agree but if you are a financial aid family I think your kid shouldn't have any behavior problems. There are plenty of kids who don't have behavior problems who could benefit from financial aid. I am amazed why schools let poorly behaved kids whose families Ned financial aid stay.

Anonymous wrote:

PP, if you are still reading this thread, why do you think your DS was singled out or targeted for "counseling out" as opposed to the other kids whose behavior seemed worse? If you stated it earlier, I must have missed it so please forgive.

I think it was for a few reasons. One, we were a financial aid family. I volunteered a lot for the school, but our family could contribute little in the way of money and power. Two, ds was still in elementary when this happened-- elementary grade kids are easier to replace (and pay less tuition) than upper schoolers. It seemed like the school tried very hard to gain and retain older kids, even if they were badly behaved, academically deficient, or both.

Thirdly, I think it was because of the kinds of behaviors ds was exhibiting. He has since been diagnosed with High Functioning Autism, and the kinds of things he got in trouble for reflect that-- inattentiveness, noises (like humming) in class, touching others but not wanting to be touched in return, getting emotional.... The behaviors weren't usually "bad," (and his grades were great), but they were chronic. I think they didn't know how to "handle" him, and decided that he was a "bad kid." I heard a lot of "He's manipulative," and "He needs a firmer hand" from the staff. That's exactly the wrong advice for a HFA kid, but they (and we) didn't know that at the time.

His current school is much better at valuing his strengths and dealing with his weaknesses, thank goodness!

Anonymous wrote:My child was counseled out of a (not top) private. He was put "on probation" and we were told he might not be allowed to return if his behavior didn't improve. Soon after that, EVERYONE seemed to know he was on probation (staff, students, parents), even though it was supposed to be private. They began writing him up for EVERYTHING-- things he wouldn't have gotten more than a verbal reprimand for before, and things that no other child got written up for.

It got to the point that ds couldn't breathe funny without being written up, while the classmates who were teasing/bullying him only got a "talking to:" no paper trail, and in some cases, the parents weren't even made aware of what their little darlings had been up to.

With ds, it was "We're documenting everything, so you're aware of his behavior problems." With the kids who got to stay, it was "They're good kids who made a mistake. We don't need to record this, or bother their parents." When I heard this (principal's words, second hand from the teacher), I knew they'd already decided about ds, and the "probation" was a farce.

The school let many kids with MUCH worse issues than ds stay. The moral judgment could give you whiplash. Some kids were dismissed and swept out like trash, while other kids got the "diamond in the rough," "We just need to keep loving him until he blossoms" treatment.

PP, if you are still reading this thread, why do you think your DS was singled out or targeted for "counseling out" as opposed to the other kids whose behavior seemed worse? If you stated it earlier, I must have missed it so please forgive.

Anonymous wrote:My child was counseled out of a (not top) private. He was put "on probation" and we were told he might not be allowed to return if his behavior didn't improve. Soon after that, EVERYONE seemed to know he was on probation (staff, students, parents), even though it was supposed to be private. They began writing him up for EVERYTHING-- things he wouldn't have gotten more than a verbal reprimand for before, and things that no other child got written up for.

It got to the point that ds couldn't breathe funny without being written up, while the classmates who were teasing/bullying him only got a "talking to:" no paper trail, and in some cases, the parents weren't even made aware of what their little darlings had been up to.

With ds, it was "We're documenting everything, so you're aware of his behavior problems." With the kids who got to stay, it was "They're good kids who made a mistake. We don't need to record this, or bother their parents." When I heard this (principal's words, second hand from the teacher), I knew they'd already decided about ds, and the "probation" was a farce.

The school let many kids with MUCH worse issues than ds stay. The moral judgment could give you whiplash. Some kids were dismissed and swept out like trash, while other kids got the "diamond in the rough," "We just need to keep loving him until he blossoms" treatment.

This is exactly what happens. Seen it myself, with kids and with TEACHERS