by Rick Colosimo on March 21, 2010
This post on paying for our own professionals from rickcolosimo.com was sparked by a health-care editorial, related to prohibitions on sharing legal fees with non-lawyers, and now belongs here.
The phrase “doctors and patients as enemies” is what knocked me over in the reposted editorial by Milton Friedman. Is there anyone who doubts that very many, and certainly too many, parents and schools see themselves as adversaries in the special education process?
This mindset comes from a few places: scarcity (only a few districts would oppose services paid for by someone else), fear of responsibility (some districts and teachers don’t want to be accountable), and simple distrust and fear all around (parents initially have few skills to address autism’s challenges and look to experts, expecting solutions).
But we can probably all agree (except for the misanthropes (and I need a special word for those who dislike children and people with autism)) that this shouldn’t be how it is. Many parents I’ve met who are unhappy with a child’s placement almost uniformly started out expecting the school’s child study team to have the child’s best interests at heart, finding out later that the placement isn’t merely right or wrong, appropriate or not, but “negotiated.” And, beyond the simple disconnect with the statutory imperatives of IDEA, this concept sets up parents to be wracked with guilt because there is an implication that they could have always negotiated for “more” or “better” and at the same time forces parents into antagonistic relationships with districts because the school could almost certainly have “given more.”
By taking the placements for children from autism from a research-based model to one that is perceived to be driven by other factors clearly NOT based on what works for which children, this dynamic is created. And it flourishes festers because there’s no clear path out.
I gave a presentation last week on NJ autism insurance reform and discussed the possible silver lining for parents of the golden lining of insurance coverage for medically necessary ABA and related therapy for children and adults with autism: to me, the notion that insurance companies will be paying for ABA and other therapy mean that they might investigate ways to achieve similar outcomes for less, or better outcomes for the same money. If they can figure out how to know which drug to give to which patients, maybe they can focus their much larger wallets on the problems facing our community.
by Rick Colosimo on February 19, 2010
Jen Laviano (@JenLaviano) has a post up this week that mentions my un-favorite urban legend about autism: that there are parents who get their kids a diagnosis so that they can get “extra help” from their school district.
Jen talks about having discussions with parents, friends, relatives, teachers, etc. to explain the value of special education laws and our goals of educating kids who fall into these statutory groups.
Jen, it’s not just friends and acquaintances who ask strange questions with missing premises. The anguish some parents feel is simply incomprehensible for parents of typical kids. I have colleagues, some of whom are also lawyers, and who I know/believe to be generally kind people.
Yet they will repeat (more than once) this urban legend about parents wanting to have their children classified so that their kids will get extra services in school. I have yet to meet one of these parents, of course. I doubt that the benefits of “extra help” will ever overcome the stigma of “special ed” in any parent so focused on the outcome for her typical child.
If you don’t think “special ed” carries any stigma, search twitter for #specialed and see what pops up from people outside of advocates, lawyers, and parents. These folks had to type that in on purpose.
I gently remind them that while that is a hypothetical possibility, it’s easy enough to identify far too many children whose deficits are so great that it absolutely interferes with their daily existence. “Like my son,” I say.
Perhaps that’s one of many “next jobs” on this front: identify these parents so ignorant of the label that they will push NT kids into our wonderfully effective special education system. Because then I can send all my clients’ kids to that school district where special ed works so well.
by Rick Colosimo on January 15, 2010
“Ignite” talks are presentations composed of 15 slides that automatically rotate every 20 seconds, meaning they’re only 5 minutes long.
Since I’ve been working on a similarly sized presentation to introduce my ideas on a comprehensive ASD curriculum planning & tracking tool, and since March 1-4 is Global Ignite Week, I wondered whether there are others in our community who would like to present a short presentation in this style.
There’s certainly more that can be done, but perhaps some focus might be an interesting way to get ideas on the table and excite each other about what we’re thinking in the background.
Please leave a comment if you’re interested in presenting or helping organize such an event. If there are only a few of us, perhaps we’ll piggyback on some NYC events that same week.
