Special ed question

[tonymoo]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? New York

Thanks for reading. I'm leaving out some details, that I don't think matter, to make this less identifiable . My high functioning autistic 9 year old son is in an integrated 4th grade classroom. He has an IEP that outlines some therapies and other accommodations but nothing involving discipline.

He and a few other boys got in trouble for xxxx during lunch (nothing violent or sexual) and a note was sent home to all parents saying if they did it again they would be banned from the cafeteria for the rest of the school year. I spoke to my son and hope he behaves but his autism tends to make him less well behaved than my other children.

My questions:
1) My understanding is that discipline for IEP students is supposed to be addressed on a student by student basis taking all circumstances into account. Isn't including him a form letter group the exact opposite of that?
2) Would removing him from the cafeteria (for more than 10 days) trigger the change in placement protections?

Thanks.

 

[ecmst12]

I don't think you should allow your son to use his autism as an excuse for behaving badly. He is obviously high functioning enough to be in an integrated classroom with his correct age group. And if he is not capable of behaving, then perhaps removing him from the tempting situation is the best way to make sure he follows the rules.

 

[Username1001]

Not to come to the defense of the misbehaving child, but where exactly did Tonymoo state he wasn't angry with his son, or that he didn't punish his son? On another note, what are integration classes for other than to take children almost ready for regular social activities and teach them what is and isn't socially acceptable? Is the goal of one of these integration classrooms not to teach a socially handicapped child what is and isn't okay? Third of all, Tonymoo wasn't making any excuses for his son's misbehavior, but instead was merely asking some legal advice based on the fact that one, he thinks the blank form letter was against the rules, and two that he thinks removing his AUTISTIC son from an environment he has grown used to could be detrimental mentally, and perhaps even socially.
Autism hits close to home to me, and when I saw you "attack" this man, I immediately made an account. Tonymoo, I don't know the exact laws for your area, but I'm sure removing him from the cafeteria would do more harm than good.

 

[stealth2]

Not to come to the defense of the misbehaving child, but where exactly did Tonymoo state he wasn't angry with his son, or that he didn't punish his son? On another note, what are integration classes for other than to take children almost ready for regular social activities and teach them what is and isn't socially acceptable? Is the goal of one of these integration classrooms not to teach a socially handicapped child what is and isn't okay? Third of all, Tonymoo wasn't making any excuses for his son's misbehavior, but instead was merely asking some legal advice based on the fact that one, he thinks the blank form letter was against the rules, and two that he thinks removing his AUTISTIC son from an environment he has grown used to could be detrimental mentally, and perhaps even socially.
Autism hits close to home to me, and when I saw you "attack" this man, I immediately made an account. Tonymoo, I don't know the exact laws for your area, but I'm sure removing him from the cafeteria would do more harm than good.

It was hardly an attack.

 

[I'mTheFather]

Not to come to the defense of the misbehaving child, but where exactly did Tonymoo state he wasn't angry with his son, or that he didn't punish his son? On another note, what are integration classes for other than to take children almost ready for regular social activities and teach them what is and isn't socially acceptable? Is the goal of one of these integration classrooms not to teach a socially handicapped child what is and isn't okay? Third of all, Tonymoo wasn't making any excuses for his son's misbehavior, but instead was merely asking some legal advice based on the fact that one, he thinks the blank form letter was against the rules, and two that he thinks removing his AUTISTIC son from an environment he has grown used to could be detrimental mentally, and perhaps even socially.
Autism hits close to home to me, and when I saw you "attack" this man, I immediately made an account. Tonymoo, I don't know the exact laws for your area, but I'm sure removing him from the cafeteria would do more harm than good.

I don't think Stealth attacked the OP, either. In fact, your post contains so many inaccuracies regarding Stealth's post that it is very clear that OP's post hit close to home.

ETA correction: I don't think Ecmst attacked the OP, either. In fact, your post contains so many inaccuracies regarding Ecmst's post that it is very clear that OP's post hit close to home.

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? New York

Thanks for reading. I'm leaving out some details, that I don't think matter, to make this less identifiable . My high functioning autistic 9 year old son is in an integrated 4th grade classroom. He has an IEP that outlines some therapies and other accommodations but nothing involving discipline.

He and a few other boys got in trouble for xxxx during lunch (nothing violent or sexual) and a note was sent home to all parents saying if they did it again they would be banned from the cafeteria for the rest of the school year. I spoke to my son and hope he behaves but his autism tends to make him less well behaved than my other children.

My questions:
1) My understanding is that discipline for IEP students is supposed to be addressed on a student by student basis taking all circumstances into account. Isn't including him a form letter group the exact opposite of that?
2) Would removing him from the cafeteria (for more than 10 days) trigger the change in placement protections?

Thanks.

1) If your son's IEP contains language on discipline, then the school should have abided by what is outlined in the IEP. Otherwise, unless your son is suspended from school (classes), the consequence would not be inappropriate.

2) No, his placement is in the classroom, not the cafeteria.

If you are concerned about your child's discipline, you are entitled to request a meeting to address those concerns in his IEP.

 

[ecmst12]

Not an attack in the slightest. Just a suggestion that dad allow the school to hold his child accountable for his actions.

 

[Username1001]

It was hardly an attack.

Sorry, I misinterpreted your statement. It wasn't an attack, you're right. Statement(s) withdrawn.

 

[Username1001]

Not an attack in the slightest. Just a suggestion that dad allow the school to hold his child accountable for his actions.

And I do completely agree with you about that. The child misbehaved, but he shouldn't be removed from the lunchroom.

 

[ecmst12]

If he CONTINUES to misbehave, removing him from the situation where he continually misbehaves is not an inappropriate response. Sounds like whatever the infraction was, was serious enough to warrent serious punishment, yet the boys are being given another chance to get their act together.

Also, "for the rest of the school year" is only about another month, remember.

 

[stealth2]

I don't think Stealth attacked the OP, either. In fact, your post contains so many inaccuracies regarding Stealth's post that it is very clear that OP's post hit close to home.

Uuuuh... peeps?Try rereading... *I* didn't address the OP AT ALL!

 

[I'mTheFather]

Uuuuh... peeps?Try rereading... *I* didn't address the OP AT ALL!

Whoops! You are so right! I'll fix that.....

 

[sandyclaus]

IMHO, as a child that is capable of being integrated into a regular 4th grade class, he should also be held to the same standards of behavior - especially since discipline was not included in the IEP. Apparently, those in charge of writing the IEP believed the same thing, based on his abilities, because they DID NOT include specific disciplinary accommodations in the IEP.

That means if he misbehaves like the other 4th graders, he should suffer the same consequences as the other 4th graders. If that means he is banned from the cafeteria for the remaining month or so of the school year, so be it. Part of dealing with the autistic child is teaching them how to adapt their behavior to social norms as much as possible. Allowing him to get away with his misbehavior and not suffer the same consequences as the other children only serves to teach him it's OK for HIM to misbehave just because he is autistic, which kind of defeats the whole purpose.

 

[I'mTheFather]

I need to clarify something.

If the OP's son was facing a new placement or suspension, then the school would review the child's actions with regard to his disability to determine if the behavior was a manifestation of the disability. If it was determined that it was, then other actions would be taken, including a change to the IEP and a behavior plan for the child. Those with IEPs do have added protections in such cases, as they should.

With regard to placement in regular ed, it is a mistake to assume that all children who are integrated into regular ed classrooms have the same potential to achieve academically and behaviorally as their peers in the classroom. Some do, some do not. That's one of the reasons for the IEP. In many school districts throughout the country, inclusion is the norm, and only the most severely disabled are placed in self-contained special ed classrooms.

If OP feels that his son needs behavioral/disciplinary accommodations, then he is entitled to pursue that with the school. I won't presume to know what's best for his son, but OP and the child's school team do.

 

[ecmst12]

I think it might be different if this child was misbehaving continually and incongruently with what his peers were doing. That might justify a change in the IEP and might indicate that his special needs were related to the misbehavior. This was a single incident which other kids were also guilty of. That sounds to me like "normal" acting up/acting out behavior that kids engage in from time to time and a strong message from administration is the best way to deter all of them from continuing this kind of behavior in the future.

 

[I'mTheFather]

I think it might be different if this child was misbehaving continually and incongruently with what his peers were doing. That might justify a change in the IEP and might indicate that his special needs were related to the misbehavior. This was a single incident which other kids were also guilty of. That sounds to me like "normal" acting up/acting out behavior that kids engage in from time to time and a strong message from administration is the best way to deter all of them from continuing this kind of behavior in the future.

You may very well be right.

However, it is also possible that other factors may be at play that affected his behavior in this instance and resulted in the single incident of bad behavior. I'm not saying that's the case here. The father certainly didn't suggest that. But it does happen. Legally, if this was an actual suspension, the school would have to consider it. A pattern of bad behavior is not necessary.