Supreme Court to Hear Oral Argument in New Case <\/p>\n
On Monday, October 1, 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral
\nargument in New York City Board of Education v. Tom F., on Behalf of
\nGilbert F., a Minor Child. <\/p>\n
The Court will decide whether all children with disabilities,
\nincluding those who are enrolled in private programs, are entitled to
\na free appropriate public education. The decision will have
\nsignificant implications for parents, school districts, and children
\nwith disabilities who receive special education services. <\/p>\n
Facts of the Case: <\/p>\n
The Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA) guarantees students with
\ndisabilities a “free appropriate public education.” Tom Freston
\nenrolled his son Gilbert in a private school for students with
\nspecial needs, because the New York City school district was unable
\nto establish an adequate “individualized education program.” The
\nschool district reimbursed Freston for the private school tuition.
\nAfter two years the school district offered to place Gilbert in
\nanother public school, but Freston chose to keep his son in private
\nschool and again sought tuition reimbursement from the district. <\/p>\n
A U.S. district court ruled that the school district was not required
\nby the IDEA to reimburse Freston, because Gilbert had never been
\nenrolled in public school. The relevant section of the IDEA
\nauthorizes tuition reimbursement to the parents of a disabled child
\n“who previously received special education and related services under
\nthe authority of a public agency,” but it does not explicitly state
\nthat parents of children who have never received public education are
\nnot entitled to reimbursement. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the
\nSecond Circuit vacated the district court. By comparing the disputed
\nsection of the IDEA with other sections of the statute, the Second
\nCircuit reasoned that the IDEA was not meant to deny reimbursement to
\nstudents who have never been enrolled in public school. To rule
\notherwise, the Circuit Court held, would be to require parents like
\nFreston to enroll children in inadequate public schools in order to
\nbe eligible for tuition reimbursement. <\/p>\n
Question: <\/p>\n
Does the Individuals with Disabilities Act provide for public tuition
\nreimbursement for private school when a child has not previously
\nreceived special education from a public school? <\/p>\n
Source: National Council on Disability staff<\/p>\n
—<\/p>\n
BETTER IP RELAY – EVERYWHERE! i711.com makes all your relay calls better.
\nBetter web calls. Better wireless calls. Better AIM calls. Why settle for
\nordinary IP relay? Go beyond! Try http:\/\/www.i711.com for free today!<\/p>\n
NOTE: DeafNetwork.com does not endorse any of the products, vendors,
\nconsultants, or documentation referenced in this message or. Any mention of
\nvendors, products, or services is for informational purposes only.<\/p>\n
Powered by http:\/\/www.CrazyWebHosting.com<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court to Hear Oral Argument in New Case On Monday, October 1, 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral argument in New York City Board of Education v. Tom F., on Behalf of Gilbert F., a Minor Child.…<\/p>\n