Anonymous | Aug 24, 2007

The change in who bears the proof of need is extremely important and very helpful for us. Thank you for sharing this with us.

Carmine DePalma | Aug 29, 2007

I think it's important to work collaboratively with your school district. Writing an IEP and actually having it implemented adequately are two different and important crafts. While working with the school district, I make a point of clearly showing the child's strength's and weaknesses in written form. I back up my information with current evaluations and progress notes. It's very easy to work collaboratively with a team when you're all addressing the same needs. Many times parents let their emotions get the best of them; they feel the district is against them, so they approach the process defensively. I truly think the burden of proof will always fall on both parties.. afterall, the parents know one dimension of their child, while the school may know another.

Be prepared, know your child's abilities and deficits, and then work with the school to address each piece in the IEP. If you always bring the goal back to the child, there can be no argument!

Anne Minihan | Sep 4, 2007

I am satisfied to hand over the legal burden of proof to the school district. Intuitively, it makes sense that the provider of special education services should have to defend the appropriateness of its services as provided to particular students. I do, however, like to think of the "burden" in a more conceptual way. Some of the actual "burden" of proof as to what is appropriate in our situation is too important to give away.

We made a decision as a family, early on in this process, to get our son the best, most comprehensive private evaluations that money can buy (which we can't really afford). It is our hope that this will keep our school district on notice that it must continue to prove to us that its concept of what is appropriate is actually so in our particular situation. The committee for special education knows that we come to the table with own ideas about what "appropriate" means as the term applies to the only student we are responsible for -- ours. Small school districts like ours have so much invested in making sure that their limited programs and resources are "appropriate" for the widest group of people. The school district has a vested interest in creating broad programs to try and catch up as many as it can in the widest net. It's our burden to prove to them that our child doesn't necessarily fit into the mold they have created.

Sheryl Frishman | Sep 11, 2007

I am thrilled with the burden of proof legislation. Generally, the school district has more resources and means than the parent so it is appropriate.

In terms of working with the school district - As a parent and an attorney that practices in this area, I feel that it is very important to work collaboratively with your district. Many parents my firm sees want to immediately set up an adversarial situation with the district and want an attorney involved from the start. Families of children with special needs may be involved with a school district until a child is 21 so it is important to set a tone that will encourage a good working relationship. There are certainly times where it is necessary to have an attorney at a CSE/CPSE meeting (my firm attends these meetings all of the time) and possibly file for a due process hearing and litigate. However, it is also important for a parent themself to be educated in the special education laws, learn how to effectively advocate for themself, and to learn basic negociation techniques. Our firm always encourages parents to work collaboratively with the district and a majority of our clients are able to resolve matters at the CPSE/CSE meeting instead of having to bear the burden of costly litigation. I find that districts are willing to change an IEP when a parent has been working collaboratively with them up to that point.

Scott D. Palermo | Jan 25, 2008

I am a local Pupil Personnel Services Director. I think that it is extremely important that school districts and parents work in partnership. That is not to say that agreement is easy to achieve all of the time. It does mean that the relationship is maintained even when disagreements develop. If we stay at the table together long enough, focus on the child's needs, and truly listen to each other, we can usually come up with solutions that meet the needs of the child, that may not be what either party came to the table suggesting, but frequently meets the child's needs well. These solutions are often less costly than the alternatives initially proposed. The burden of proof only comes into place when the legal system comes into play. Too often, at the same time the goal becomes winning rather than serving the child at that point. It rarely serves the child better to go that route rather than to try to work collaboratively to meet the child's needs. In response to the parent above, before you spend money that you can't afford, be careful not to assume that the best evaluations that money can buy are not available through your school district at no cost to you. You may be better served to see what the district does provide and supplement from there if you are not satisfied. School district's have highly qualified evaluators available to them and thier findings and opinions should not be dismissed simply because they work for a public school. Let's work together. The children need us to do so!