National Prevention Coalition opposes H.R. 1350: a bill to reauthorize the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act

A Letter to the Chairman of The Committee on Education and the Workforce

April 25, 2003y

The Honorable John Boehner
Chairman, Committee on Education and the Workforce
2181 Rayburn HOB
Washington, DC 20515

Dear Mr. Chairman:

As organizations dedicated to the prevention of mental illness and the promotion of mental health, the National Prevention Coalition opposes H.R. 1350, a bill to reauthorize the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.

We are deeply alarmed by the change in philosophy HR 1350 would bring to the education of children with special needs, a change that would diminish these children’s opportunity for success in school. We are especially concerned with the lack of emphasis on positive behavioral supports, functional behavioral assessments and training for school personnel. Those changes and the proposed elimination of both current due process protections and the requirement that students with disabilities receive an appropriate education and services, would, in our view, jeopardize the future of many children and youth with disabilities if enacted.

Discipline
We recognize that there are situations in which removal from the classroom is an appropriate disciplinary response for students with disabilities. We believe that current law, and in particular, amendments made to IDEA 1997, permit such removals and strike a fair balance between effective discipline and providing appropriate supports for children with disabilities. Even with current law protections, students with disabilities are over-represented among students who are expelled. This is despite the fact that few of those who are removed from school present serious dangers to students or staff. Removing provisions that take into account a child’s disability (ie, manifestation determination) and requirements related to tools designed to monitor and assist a child’s development (eg, functional behavioral assessments and behavioral intervention plans), as proposed under the bill, would unfairly deny students with disabilities access to the most appropriate educational services and put them at significantly greater risk. Without appropriate educational services, school dropout rates and delinquency will increase and communities will be less safe. The provision currently in the bill is completely unacceptable.

Ensuring Highly Qualified Personnel
The shortage of qualified personnel, including mental health providers, has hampered the full implementation of IDEA for 25 years. In No Child Left Behind, the Congress determined that every child should have a highly qualified teacher. It is critical that the same standard be applied to special education and related services personnel. Without such application, we cannot expect to increase the achievement levels or outcomes for students with disabilities served by IDEA. Indeed, virtually every contentious issue related to IDEA – discipline, disproportionate representation of minorities, over-identification of students referred to special education and others – needs to be addressed by ensuring an adequate supply of appropriately trained and highly qualified personnel.

While the bill makes some important progress in this area, critical problems remain. The elimination of the "highest requirement" provision for related services providers would lower standards at a time when high standards were never more important. A lack of standards related to state certification in special education would continue to allow people without sufficient special education skills to be certified as special education teachers. Personnel standards in Part C should be consistent with those set in Part B. In addition, we believe that related services personnel should be included throughout all aspects of Part D activities. Finally, the bill fails to provide for the significant infusion of funds needed to address the shortage of highly qualified special education teachers and related services personnel.

Changes in the Individual Education Plan (IEP)
We acknowledge the changes the Subcommittee made in postponing the elimination of short-term objectives and benchmarks until 2005-2006 for some children, while retaining them for others. However, our concerns remain in terms of eliminating these critical provisions at any time. In addition, we are concerned that the three-year IEP, as constructed in the bill, will result in students not receiving appropriate services. Without a scientific research base to indicate the efficacy of eliminating short-term objectives and benchmarks or of utilizing a three-year IEP, the consequences of such provisions remain unknown.

Eliminating the Dialogue Between School Professionals and Families
Lastly, we are deeply concerned with the Committee’s adoption of an amendment based on H.R. 1170 that would have almost assuredly result in school professionals curtailing communications with families about legitimate mental health related concerns. Schools are a critically important source of information for families about their children and their emotional and mental well being. While the measure does not explicitly proscribe such communication, its enactment would inevitably have a chilling effect in schools and school systems across the country. The premise underlying this provision is that school personnel across the country DO condition school attendance on children being medicated. Although there have been highly publicized and isolated events that cause us all concern, there is no reliable evidence that such practices regularly occur or that this is a pervasive problem.

School professionals frequently recommend that children be evaluated for vision or hearing related concerns. In fact, school nurses, psychologists, counselors, physical therapists, occupational therapists and speech therapists all have appropriate professional roles to play in schools in identifying potential problems in children that may impact their ability to learn. Surely it is as important to protect open communication between school personnel and parents about possible mental health concerns as about other health problems.

We look forward to working with your committee as you prepare for House floor consideration to advance legislation that would ensure that children with mental health needs are not left behind.

Sincerely,

American Psychiatric Association
American School Health Association
Association of Maternal and Child Health Programs
Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law
CHADD (Children & Adults with Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder)
Child and Adolescent Bipolar Foundation
Conquer Fragile X Foundation
Federation of Families for Children’s Mental Health
Paul Fink, MD
FRAXA Research Foundation, Inc.
MHA of Licking County, OH
National Association for Children’s Behavioral Health
National Association of School Psychologists
National Council on Alcoholism and Drug Dependency
National Council on Family Relations
National Fragile X Foundation
National Mental Health Association
Nobiling Associates
Organization for Autism Research
School Social Work Association of America
The Alliance for Children and Families
Veterans Aimed Toward Children, Inc.