In The Politics of Autism, I write about IEPs and FAPE. The Supreme Court ruled in Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District that the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) requires public schools to provide heightened educational benefits to students with disabilities.
Allison F. Gilmour at Education Next:
Consistent with its emphasis on individualization, IDEA includes procedures for families of students with disabilities to hold school districts accountable for upholding the law. These procedural safeguards outline dispute-resolution options for when their child’s rights under IDEA are violated. Importantly, the dispute-resolution process is intended both to protect the rights of individuals and to help make special education better for everyone. The theory of change is that parents, by advocating for their child, induce changes in local, state, and potentially even federal policies and practices that improve special education for all students.
This theory of action has mostly failed in more recent years. (There are some exceptions, like 2017’s Endrew F. v. Douglas County School District.) Due process complaints, the most serious and costly dispute-resolution option because they may result in lawsuits, have risen since 2015 (Figure 3). But these cases are often settled, sometimes with requirements that families not discuss the case or how it was resolved, limiting their potential to drive broader change. The resources poured into legal cases and their expensive resolutions—such as tuition payments to private schools—could be better used proactively within districts to address shortfalls in special education delivery.
