Supreme Court: Schaffer v. Weast

Washington Post staff writer Lori Aratani was online Wednesday, Oct. 5, at 2 p.m. ET to discuss a special education dispute between a disabled student's parents and the Montgomery County public schools that is before the U.S. Supreme Court.

The justices will hear oral arguments today, Wednesday, on who bears the burden of proof in such legal disputes, parents or school systems.

Read Today's Story: High Court to Hear Md. Special-Ed Case (Post, Oct. 5)

More From The Post:

Bush Administration Supports Montgomery Schools in Lawsuit (Post, June 28)

High Court to Hear Md. Special-Ed Case (Post, Feb. 23)

Submit your questions or comments before or during the discussion.

The transcript follows.

____________________

Lori Aratani: Hello. Thank you all for joining us today.

_______________________

Silver Spring, Md.: I would like clarification on what happened during the Shaffer situation, did MCPS refuse to accommodate the Shaffer's desired IEP plan or were they unable to provide the accommodations?

Lori Aratani: The Schaffer Family and the Montgomery Public school system could not agree on an education plan for Brian, in part, because the experts on both sides could not agree on his diagnosis. The school system felt the plan they offered was the best setting for Brian, whereas the Schaffer Family felt Brian's disabilities were more severe and required a different sort of placement.

_______________________

Silver Spring, Md.: Does the current disabilities act not make a provision for this kind of dispute? Why isn't there something like binding arbitration by a third source?

Lori Aratani: A good question. While the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) offers some guidance in the event of a dispute between parents and the school system, it does not explicitly outline who should bear the "burden of proof" in when there is a disagreement. That's part of the reason why the Court decided to hear the case. Both sides are hoping to get clarification on this important question. Generally in legal disputes, the party that initiates the complaint bears the burden of proof.

_______________________

Upper Marlboro, Md.: If your child is in special education and you do not agree with his/her IEP and feel the school is not following IEP set up anyway, who should you contact?

Lori Aratani: If you don't agree with the IEP that the school district has laid out for your son or daughter, you have several options. The IDEA legislation encourages families to pursue mediation before requesting a due process hearing. (In a due process hearing, an administrative law judge will hear the case and make a determination as to whether the plan is sufficient). Depending on where you live, there are a number of non-profit groups that may be able to help you sort through the process. Also, check with your local PTA -- there may be parent groups in your school system that can offer some insight.

_______________________

Arlington, Va.: A friend of mine is a resource specialist in reading and mathematics in a very wealthy district. She says that the kids are fine but that the parents and paid advocates, frequently lawyers, are a continual nuisance in trying to assure more and more for the kids. This need to react actually takes time away from the basic requirement to teach. I am not sure what the solution is but administrative requirements do take time out of the basic teaching time.

Lori Aratani: I have heard this from many educators -- and it is part of the argument put forward by many school systems. Yes, there are millions of children in need of special help, but many advocates worry that only those whose parents have the means to navigate the system are able to get them the kind of help they need. Everyone wants what's best for children -- but it is a difficult dilemma faced by both parents and the school system. How much is enough for an individual child? On the other hand, there are parents of special needs children who argue that their children shouldn't be shortchanged because there aren't enough dollars to go around.

_______________________

Bethesda, Md.: I am a special education teacher, and I found your story extremely ill-informed. Special education services and placements in public schools in our county are relatively simple and convenient when parents enter the process with the goal of helping their child and working with teachers and other professionals, not finding a backdoor excuse for free schooling at a private school.

Lori Aratani: As I understand, the process for developing an IEP is designed to be collaborative -- a means to get everyone together to talk about what's best for a student. In many cases, they work out very well. I've talked to many parents who have been very pleased with the services their children have received as part of their IEP. However, there are cases when disputes arise.

_______________________

Germantown, Md.: Shouldn't a student's (even a special education student) test scores required by the No Child Left Behind Act be the final arbiter of whether a school-proposed IEP is adequate? I mean, isn't that the purpose of NCLB, to bring accountability to schools for the performance of students? And if students aren't making progress, then the school has to try something new.

Lori Aratani: School systems use many measures to determine whether an IEP is appropriate for a particular student. The No Child Left Behind Act also requires school districts to disaggregate test scores by subgroup, which helps give more insight in how well many different groups of students are doing. IEP are fluid documents -- the goal is to give educators the opportunity to make changes to a student's education plan depending on his or her progress.

_______________________

Special Ed Disputes: The current statistics are that, in Maryland, parents lose special education administrative hearings 86 percent of the time. The reality is that school systems have the resources, they control the timeline, the paperwork, the testing, the reports, the time and place of the IEP meeting, and just about every thing else associated with the process. They should bear the burden of proof in a hearing on the document they develop.

Lori Aratani: This is one of the arguments being put forward by the Schaffer Family.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Wouldn't placing the burden of proof on school districts to justify their placement decisions place a nearly insurmountable financial burden on the systems? D.C. already spends an outrageous percentage of its school budget on special education. I can't imagine what would happen if, for example, this percentage were to be doubled.

Lori Aratani: This is one of the arguments being put forth by the Montgomery County school system. They argue that if the burden of proof is placed on the school system, parents will be less inclined to cooperate during the IEP process. The result, they say, will be that more dollars will be spent on litigation, leaving fewer dollars for the classroom. However, attorneys for the Schaffer family argue that the school system has the expertise and the resources -- and therefore is in the best position to prove that an IEP is appropriate.

_______________________

Burke, Va.: Your article seems biased against the school district. No where is it mentioned that the federal government, three states, and more than a dozen national educational organizations -- including the NEA, the Council of Great City Schools, and various state school board associations -- filed in support of the school district.

Lori Aratani: This is part of what makes this such a fascinating case. States and non-profit groups from across the country have filed briefs on behalf of both sides. In fact, dueling briefs have emerged out of Virginia -- one supporting the parents, the other supporting the school system.

In the eight years it has taken this case to reach the Supreme Court, the federal government also has switched its position. The Clinton Administration supported the parents in the matter, but you are correct: earlier this year, the Bush Administration filed briefs in support of the Montgomery County public school system.

_______________________

Hopewell, N.J.: Parents who believe that the written IEP is not being implemented fully by the school district, or that the IEP does not provide for sufficient integration with non-disabled students may file complaints with the Office of civil rights of the Federal Department of Education. It's free and it's a very efficient government agency. Why haven't you discussed this agency?

Lori Aratani: Thank you for sharing this. I'm sure parents looking for help appreciate this information.

_______________________

Gaithersburg, Md.: According to schoolmatters.com , the students with disabilities subgroup in Montgomery County missed AYP goal by 2 percentage points in 2004. Besides English language learners, all other subgroups made AYP.

Isn't that indication enough that whatever MCPS is doing with students with disabilities isn't working and the school system should be held accountable? Or is the No Child Left Behind Act and AYP an empty promise, especially for affluent districts that can litigate their way out of responsibility to its students and families?

Lori Aratani: We're hoping to explore the very questions you raise in a series of stories that will examine the impact of No Child Left Behind on school systems.

_______________________

Bethesda, Md.: If the burden of proof were to rely on MCPS, wouldn't you expect the number of cases to go down, not up? They seem to think that they will always be in court. If the IEP is appropriate as well as the placement, then mediation and due process would be avoided.

Lori Aratani: The hope always is that parents and educators will walk away from the IEP process satisfied with what has been accomplished. And while people can speculate what might happen in the event the burden of proof is shifted to school systems (the school systems fear more litigation)-- the reality is that no one knows for certain how this will ultimately play out.

_______________________

Lori Aratani: Thank you all for taking the time to be a part of this discussion.

_______________________

Editor's Note: Washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions.