Lisa Lightner

Yes, you absolutely should have been informed—especially since restraint or a “safety escort” was used and a staff member involved was untrained. Here is the statute: https://www.pa.gov/agencies/education/resources/policies-acts-and-laws/basic-education-circulars-becs/pa-code/use-of-restraints-for-students-with-disabilities.html While they may not be legally required to tell you someone was fired (since that’s a personnel matter), the fact that an untrained person participated in a physical restraint or escort should have been disclosed—because that’s not just an HR issue, that’s a violation of procedure and could pose a safety risk to your child. I'd suggest putting your concerns in writing and asking the school to: Clarify who is trained and certified in crisis intervention or restraint protocols; Explain how an untrained person was allowed to participate; Detail what corrective actions have been taken to prevent this in the future. You can also file a state complaint with the Pennsylvania Department of Education’s Bureau of Special Education, especially if they failed to follow state guidelines on restraint reporting.

I'm so sorry this happened to your child—what you’ve described is beyond unacceptable, and you're absolutely right to be outraged. In Pennsylvania, schools are mandated reporters, and photographing a child in a state of undress—especially in a bathroom—is potentially a criminal matter, not just a school discipline issue. Failing to report that to ChildLine may be a violation of mandated reporting laws. Since you've already contacted the PA Department of Education, I’d recommend also filing a formal complaint with the Office for Civil Rights (OCR) at the U.S. Department of Education. The OCR investigates violations related to disability and sex-based harassment under Section 504 and Title IX. What your child experienced could be seen as both. Additionally, because the school failed to ensure safety and refused a DOE-approved safety plan, I’d also suggest a state complaint under IDEA (if your child has an IEP) or a 504 complaint with the Office for Civil Rights. You may also want to contact your state representative or senator, especially if you’re not getting traction elsewhere. Elected officials sometimes help move the needle when agencies go quiet. Another idea is giong to the media...but I have lots of ideas about that. It doesn't always go the way we want. I'm sorry you're not getting help from people who should be helping, but we can help guide you here.

Thank you for sharing this—and I can feel how upsetting and unfair this feels, because it is. You’re absolutely right to question it. Here’s the thing: Students with disabilities are still protected by Section 504 on field trips, just like they are in the classroom. That protection doesn’t stop just because the trip is off school property. Denying access to a trip because of behavior related to his disability could be considered disability discrimination if the behavior was part of his ADHD and the school didn’t consider how to support him before punishing him. Schools can set behavior expectations, but they are also required to make reasonable accommodations so that students with disabilities have equal access to school activities, including trips. That means looking at whether his behavior was a result of his disability, and whether other supports or interventions could have helped him succeed instead of just excluding him. You might want to ask the school for a 504 team meeting to review how they’re supporting his behavior before they make exclusion decisions. You can also ask to see their written policy on field trips and discipline, and how they ensure it applies fairly to students with 504 plans. You’re right to speak up. He deserves support, not set-ups.

You can get a BIP without an FBA, but it's not best practice. More here: https://adayinourshoes.com/behavior-iep-special-education/ And, more here (sorry I'm on my way out the door): https://adayinourshoes.com/one-on-one-aide-paraprofessional-iep-special-education/

I love Tera Sumpter at Seeds of Learning

I agree with Carolyn and Judi on this one. It’s tricky because, legally, parents can’t dictate who the school hires—only that the person is qualified and trained to meet the child’s needs. That’s where you have the strongest footing. If they name a person as a 1:1 in an IEP, if that person quits tomorrow, they're instantly out of compliance. So yes, lean hard into specific training requirements in the IEP. Get your doctor or therapist to spell out exactly what skills, experience, or training the 1:1 must have—position it as a service requirement, not a staffing preference.—things like: Supporting eye gaze communication systems Physical positioning and mobility assistance Recognizing signs of medical distress related to his condition Supporting non-verbal social interaction Managing transitions with low stress and predictability That shifts the conversation from “we want this person” to “we need someone with these skills.” I also love the idea of asking for your current attendant to support the transition alongside the school’s staff. Frame it as a transition support, not a permanent placement. You already have medical backing for that, and it helps your child and the school. As for Medicaid, every state handles that a little differently, but you can absolutely ask the school if they’d allow your current attendant to be on-site, even if you’re the one paying or using Medicaid to do so. Some schools are open to that, others have union or liability barriers—but you won’t know unless you ask.

First—great job pushing to get this clarified in the IEP. Vague accommodations are basically useless when every teacher gets to “interpret” them differently. A few tips to consider: Define It in Plain Language Example: “Student will receive two additional school days, not calendar days, beyond the original due date for all assignments, unless otherwise mutually agreed upon in writing.” Add Clarification for When Teachers Are Absent Example: “If the teacher is absent on the original or extended due date, the due date will automatically extend by the number of days the teacher is unavailable.” Include a Communication Expectation Example: “Teachers will communicate any adjusted due dates in writing (email or learning management system) so the student and parent have clear documentation.” Specify for Tests and Quizzes Example: “Student will receive time and a half for all in-class tests and quizzes, consistent with College Board-approved accommodations.” Request Staff Training or Clarification Ask that teachers be given written instructions from the case manager or IEP team about how this is supposed to work across all classes. You’re definitely on the right track. Tightening up the language now will save you a ton of headaches later.

Whether it’s “Always get it in writing” or “Know your procedural safeguards,” we all pick up little gems of wisdom along the way. What’s one advocacy tip that has helped you the most?

Whew—this is such a powerful, clear, and unfortunately very common story for 2e (twice exceptional) kids in public school. First, you’re doing everything right—you’ve documented, provided outside data, shown samples, advocated consistently, and kept the focus on your child’s actual experience—not just the grades or scores. Here’s the heart of the issue: your son is masking his disabilities with his strengths, and the school is choosing to see only the strengths. That’s not just frustrating—it’s a systemic failure for so many 2e kids. You're right that "relative to ability" isn't part of the eligibility criteria under IDEA anymore, and that makes it harder to qualify under SLD if a student is still performing at or above grade level. But nothing in the law says schools can't consider the discrepancy between a student’s ability and their actual performance—or how hard they’re working to maintain those grades. That’s a red flag the team is ignoring. Here are some suggestions and next steps: 1. Ask for an Independent Educational Evaluation (IEE) at public expense. If the school’s reevaluation was surface-level or didn't fully assess his functional performance, especially in reading and writing under stress or timed conditions, this is your next move. You have the right to request it if you disagree with their evaluation. Read up before you do this (info on my site) because if the school declines, they're required to file for due process. 2. Ask for data on how the writing accommodations are being implemented. Teacher conferencing sounds nice, but without documentation, it's fluff. Ask: How often is it happening? What is being taught or corrected? How is progress tracked? I have a mini course on IEP progress monitoring. 3. Push for goals and services in written expression. You have the samples. You have the documentation. He’s not meeting grade-level expectations independently. Use that language. Ask for a meeting to specifically address writing fluency, spelling, and on-demand writing without supports. 4. Bring in the emotional impact. Stress, shutdown, refusal—these are all signs that he's not accessing the curriculum in a meaningful, functional way. Emotional distress is educational impact under IDEA. 5. Reframe the “good grades” argument. Say: “Good grades with heavy scaffolding are not the same as skill mastery. He is not progressing independently or sustainably. That’s not FAPE.” 6. Consider requesting an FBA. If he's overwhelmed, shutting down, or showing behavior at home tied to school stress, an FBA for emotional regulation in response to school demands might help. It also gives you a documented path toward support if burnout increases. 7. Lean into transition goals as you head toward high school. That self-advocacy skill you mentioned? That should be in the IEP. You can ask for direct instruction in self-advocacy and executive functioning as he prepares for the next stage. I know it’s exhausting—and it’s not fair that your son’s strengths are being used against him. But the fact that he wants to be in school, wants to do well, and is finally starting to speak up for himself? That’s a huge win. You’re not overreacting. You’re seeing the iceberg the school is trying to ignore—and trying to steer your son safely past it. I have sample language for these requests, letter templates, in the IEP toolkit which is being revised right now. You're doing an incredible job.

Ugh, what a mess—and I’m so sorry you’re dealing with this. The short answer? No, they should not be threatening to move your son back to his old school because of absences related to his disability. Here’s why: This is a disability-related attendance issue Your son has ADHD and severe anxiety, both of which are documented disabilities. The absences are excused and tied to medical and therapeutic needs, which means this isn’t just a truancy issue—it’s a disability access issue. Placement decisions must be based on the IEP—not attendance numbers IDEA requires that placement decisions (which include which school he attends) be made by the IEP team and based on the least restrictive environment for that student—not on whether a principal or teacher is frustrated with absences. They cannot unilaterally change his placement because it’s more convenient or “easier for them.” This could be disability discrimination under Section 504 If the school is penalizing your child because of disability-related absences, that can be seen as discrimination. Especially if the absences are backed by doctor’s notes and tied to therapy or health care. You need to put this in writing—now Send a formal letter/email to the school (cc the principal, IEP case manager, and district special ed director) stating: The absences are due to documented disabilities and supported by medical notes You are requesting that the IEP be reviewed and amended to include accommodations for medical-related absences You want written confirmation that they are not moving him without an IEP team meeting and without your consent And make it crystal clear: if they attempt to move him based on absences, you’ll consider it a procedural violation and possible 504/ADA discrimination. Also—document the teacher’s complaints if you haven’t already. That kind of pressure can sometimes lead to retaliation, and it’s better to have a paper trail. You’re doing exactly what you should: standing up and asking questions. Now it’s time to put it in writing and hold the district accountable. You’ve got this.

Schools love to say, “That never happened,” or “We didn’t say that,” or “We’ve never done that before.” What’s the worst case of gaslighting you’ve experienced? How did you document and push back?

It really just depends if it's going to open the door for you to get more services for the child, and if you want the services. Here in PA, it's advantageous to do so, but every place and every family is different. I've written about this quite a bit, to explain the differences. https://adayinourshoes.com/autism-whats-the-difference-between-medical-and-educational-diagnoses/

Short answer, yes, absolutely. There is nothing in Section 504 or IDEA that prohibits a school from doing this. https://adayinourshoes.com/can-a-504-plan-excuse-a-childs-absences/ Yes—1000% yes—an IEP can and should include accommodations for a chronic medical condition. What your team told you? That they “can only note it in Parent Concerns” and not include it as an accommodation? That’s straight-up and completely wrong under IDEA. Students with chronic health conditions—like your son's antibody deficiency—can qualify for special education services under the “Other Health Impairment (OHI)” category in IDEA. The key? The condition must impact the student’s strength, vitality, or alertness, and limit their ability to access their education—which, with 20% absences, is clearly happening. Accommodations and modifications in the IEP can address: Attendance and makeup work Flexible deadlines Modified instructional delivery Adjusted course expectations if needed Grading policies that reflect medical challenges, not just missed days Credit recovery options or waivers And Yes—Absences Can Be Excused in an IEP Schools do not get to just say, “We don’t excuse absences for chronic illness.” That’s illegal if it results in denying your child a Free and Appropriate Public Education (FAPE). The IEP team can and should put in writing: “Absences due to chronic illness or flare-ups will be excused with parent or medical documentation.” “Student will be allowed to make up missed work without penalty.” “Instructional support will be provided during prolonged absences, including access to class notes, recorded lessons, or homebound services if necessary.” What They Told You = Saying “we’ll just note it in Parent Concerns” is not a valid accommodation plan. That’s just… documentation theater. It does nothing to support your child when he’s missing class, falling behind, and potentially being told he won’t pass junior year. What You Can Say at the Next Meeting “I am requesting that the IEP include specific accommodations related to [Child’s Name]’s chronic medical condition, including excused absences with documentation and academic support during and after absences. Simply documenting this in ‘Parent Concerns’ does not constitute a meaningful accommodation and does not ensure FAPE.” You can also cite guidance from the U.S. Department of Education, which has been very clear: chronic illness is a valid basis for IEP eligibility and accommodations. (Ask them if they’d like you to send a link.) Admittedly, the Guidance Letters and Dear Colleague letters feel like thin ice right now. However, we have not been instructed as a nation, that ANYTHING has changed as far as Section 504 or IDEA. YES, the IEP can and should include accommodations for chronic illness. And the school saying it can’t? Not just wrong, but possibly violating IDEA. Keep pushing. You’re right. They're not. If you want specifics on details of how to gather data, document, ask the team and respond, check out my online training. Link in signature.

Are School Staff Allowed to Talk to the IEE Assessor Without the Parent? Short answer: Technically, yes. But only within reason. If you signed a general consent for the IEE, that often includes permission for the assessor to observe your child and communicate with school staff to complete the evaluation. That’s standard. However... What’s NOT okay? Using those communications to have off-the-record conversations about services, placement, eligibility, or future decisions before you—the parent—are brought in The district stalling or making decisions behind closed doors based on those communications Contacting the IEE assessor after the report is completed to try to spin or reshape interpretation before the IEP team discusses it So while a quick follow-up like, “Hey, what did you observe again?” might be within bounds if it’s part of the evaluator’s clarification, it starts getting shady if it’s being used to delay your FBA IEE or influence decisions before the meeting. What You’re Describing? Pattern of Delay and Noncompliance You requested an IEE. They dragged it out for over a year. They denied your initial choices (common stall tactic). Now, they’re reaching out to the assessor privately after the IEE is done. And they’re using those conversations to decide if they’ll even allow another IEE (FBA). That’s not collaboration. That’s obstruction. Here’s What You Can Say (In Writing): “I was recently informed that the district contacted the IEE assessor to discuss his observation outside of a scheduled IEP meeting. I did not give specific permission for post-report discussions outside the IEP process. I would like any further communication with the IEE evaluator to include me, as I am a required member of the IEP team. Additionally, I would like a written response regarding my request for an IEE in the area of FBA. Please consider this a formal follow-up request.” And you’re allowed to add some spice: “Given the timeline of delays and the district's previous refusal to accept qualified assessors I proposed, I am increasingly concerned about the lack of transparency and good faith.” Don’t Forget: Under IDEA, when you request an IEE, the school must respond without unnecessary delay—by either agreeing to the IEE or filing for due process to prove theirs was sufficient. Sitting in silence while they “talk to the assessor” is not a legal response.

You’re right to pause and question this, especially since you've already requested special education testing—and that’s the bigger issue here. First Things First: Your Evaluation Request You mentioned you've asked for her to be evaluated for special education. If you made that request in writing, the school is legally obligated to move forward—regardless of any accommodations they’re trying to tack on in the meantime. Accommodations (like oral testing) don’t take the place of a full evaluation. So let’s start with this: Confirm that your evaluation request was submitted in writing. If not—do it now. Email it to the principal and/or special education coordinator, and keep a copy. The “Oral Testing for ADHD” Suggestion Let’s be real: the fact that they say “most of their ADHD students are orally tested” is a red flag. That’s cookie-cutter accommodation thinking, not individualized support. And it contradicts what they also said: she has no reading issues. So… why oral testing? Here’s how to think about it: Pros of Oral Testing Can reduce pressure if a student has test anxiety or struggles with reading comprehension Might help if a student processes information better when heard rather than read Cons of Oral Testing in Your Case It doesn’t address the root cause: If your daughter is struggling due to attention, executive functioning, or processing challenges, oral testing just masks the issue It won’t fix disruptive behavior, academic delays, or social/emotional needs It might be used to delay or avoid giving her an IEP or more comprehensive support If your daughter is showing poor academic progress and behavior challenges, that is much bigger than just needing a test read aloud. This is exactly the situation where IDEA kicks in—and they need to evaluate to determine eligibility for an IEP. So here’s your move: Politely decline the oral testing for now, or agree only as a temporary measure while you wait for the evaluation. Say something like: “We appreciate the accommodation offer, but this doesn’t address the core concerns we have. We are requesting a full evaluation under IDEA to determine if she qualifies for specially designed instruction.”