Legal Protections for Children with Disabilities

undefined
 
 
Sarah Fech-Baughman, American Diabetes Association
Seth Packrone, Disability Rights Advocates
2019 Jacobus tenBroek Law Symposium
 
I.  Overview of Section 504 and the ADA
II. Hurdles to Enforcing Section 504 and the
ADA
III. Strategies for Individual and Systemic
Reform
IV. Relevant Litigation by the ADA and DRA
IV. Discussion: Challenges to Enforcing
Section 504 and the ADA
 
 
The Individuals with Disabilities Education
Act (“IDEA”) has important limitations
:
It does not apply to all students with
disabilities who need services
It only applies to public schools
Some services that students need cannot be
provided through an Individualized
Education Program
 
The ADA offers important protections for
children with disabilities:
Title II of the ADA’s prohibitions against
discrimination apply in schools and other
settings that provide services to children
,
see, e.g.
, 28 C.F.R. 
§ 35.130(b)(1), (2)
Service Animals 
28 C.F.R. § 35.136
Cullman County (AL) Schools, 118 LRP 4838
(Sept. 2017)
 
Like the ADA, Section 504 fills in where the
IDEA does not apply:
34 C.F.R. § 104.31 “preschool, elementary,
secondary, and adult education programs or activities
that receive Federal financial assistance”
§ 104.33 FAPE “appropriate education is the provision
of regular or special education and related aids and
services that (i) are designed to meet individual
educational needs of handicapped persons as
adequately as the needs of non handicapped
persons are met and (ii) are based upon adherence to
procedures that satisfy the requirements of §§
104.34 (LRE), 104.35 (evaluation/placement), and
104.36 (procedural rights)
 
Section 504 and the ADA are particularly
important for children with certain
disabilities:
Disabilities that may require modification to
the physical environment: Blindness/low
vision, disabilities affecting mobility
Disabilities that require medication
administration during school: diabetes,
AD/HD, severe allergy, asthma, epilepsy,
cerebral palsy, HIV
 
 
Some of the most important differences
between Section 504/ADA and IDEA are:
To qualify:
504
 person with a disability
IDEA
 person with a disability* who, by reason thereof,
requires special education and related services
The IEP process vs. the 504 process
Procedural protections not as specific under 504
34 C.F.R. § 104.36 (Section 504) v. 34 C.F.R. § 300.121
(IDEA)
Definition of FAPE roughly the same
34 C.F.R. § 104.33 v. 34 C.F.R. § 300.17
 
 
Despite the importance of Section 504 and
the ADA for certain students, they are
underenforced:
Schools have less expertise and formalized
processes for seeking accommodations under
these laws
In other settings, including childcare centers
and summer camps, the lack of formalized
due process routes for rights holders
contributes to underenforcement
 
State law considerations:
Nurse Practice Act:
Ambiguous: (CA) Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 2700 et seq
Clear and Restrictive: (MA; NY) N.Y. Educ. Law § 6900 et
seq; 105 CMR 210.004
State laws in the education or childcare codes
creating an exception to the Nurse Practice Act:
Can be directed at specific disabilities, medications, or
medication delivery routes
E.g. Pennsylvania 24 P.S. § 14-1414.1-1414.2 (Epi and
inhalers); 24 P.S. § 14-1414.3–1414.6 (diabetes)
Federal preemption arguments
 
 
The effects can be devastating for families of
children with diabetes:
Exclusion of children with diabetes from
childcare, summer camps, and school-related
activities
The burden shifts to parents to provide care,
with dire employment and financial
consequences
Children’s health is at risk without services
 
This is an area of huge need and individual
and systemic advocacy are both necessary:
Types of individual advocacy include informal
demand letters/negotiations, Office of Civil
Rights Complaints, and individual due
process cases
Systemic advocacy includes efforts to change
state laws, Department of Justice actions, and
impact and class action litigation
 
The ADA has clearly laid out guidelines that can
be used in individual and/or systemic advocacy:
ADA position statements for school and childcare
settings fully describe best practices for diabetes
care—good resource for negotiation and to support
expert witnesses
Highlights include:
3 levels of training (school setting)
In general, nurse coordinating care with lay staff
trained to competently watch for issues and step in if
nurse is unavailable
The more people who are trained, the better (more
likelihood of coverage on fieldtrips, through staff
changes, etc.)
 
The ADA can assist you with individual
advocacy
:
Staff attorneys available to provide
information and referrals to individuals facing
discrimination
Dir. of Litigation
Consult with attorneys litigating on behalf of
individuals
Connect practitioners with expert witnesses
Submit amicus briefs
 
ADA and DRA have partnered together on
systemic reform efforts:
Know-your-rights presentations to
parents/other stakeholders
Law reform efforts at the state level
Targeted negotiation efforts with entities with
illegal policies
Litigation against national and citywide
entities on behalf of children with diabetes
 
There are pros and cons to individual reform
efforts:
Reasonable likelihood of success in the
negotiation stage (in the absence of
entity/schoolwide policy)
Faster route when there are impending health
or financial consequences
If negotiation fails, arguable need to exhaust
under 
Fry
 
 
There are pros and cons to systemic reform
efforts:
Seek policy change rather than
accommodations to obviate the need for
further actions by other students
Strong arguments for excusing exhaustion
Mootness
 
 
K.C. v. O’Connell
, 3:05-cv-04077; 
ANA v.
O’Connell
,
 
304 P.3d 1038 (Cal. 2013)
Pair of lawsuits fighting over ambiguity in CA
state law about who can administer insulin
ADA filed suit with co-plaintiff families (K.C., et
al.) to enjoin CA to issue a directive allowing
lay staff to administer insulin
Settled with the state and school district
defendants allowing unlicensed, trained
personnel to administer insulin when a school
nurse was not available
 
 
 
 
 
K.C. v. O’Connell
, 3:05-cv-04077; 
ANA v.
O’Connell
,
 
304 P.3d 1038 (Cal. 2013)
American Nurse’s Assoc. filed suit in CA state
court (
ANA
), arguing that the 
K.C.
 directive
violated state law
CA Supreme Court ultimately determined
state law permitted lay administration of
insulin
Lessons learned:
CA nurse shortage contributed to this victory
Nurse shortages exist across the country
 
American Diabetes Association v. US Dep’t of the
Army (formerly M.W. v. U.S. Dep’t of the Army)
(5:16-cv-04051, N.D. CAL., 2016) (9
th
 Circuit,
pending)
DRA filed suit on behalf of the ADA and an individual
child (M.W.) challenging the Army’s policy not
permitting staff to administer necessary care (insulin
administration, glucagon administration) in its childcare
programs
The suit sought a national policy change under Section
504
Given the geographic isolation of many military bases,
parents across the country reported having to quit their
jobs to provide care for their children
 
 
ADA v. US Dep’t of the Army (formerly M.W.
v. U.S. Dep’t of the Army) 
(5:16-cv-04051,
N.D. CAL., 2016) (9
th
 Circuit, pending) (cont.)
In December of 2017, the case was dismissed
on standing/mootness grounds
An appeal is pending in the 9
th
 Circuit
Lessons learned
 
M.F., et al., v. New York City Department of
Education, et al., 
1:18-cv-06109 (E.D.N.Y
2018)
The ADA and DRA filed a putative class action on behalf of the
ADA and three individual children who were being denied basic
diabetes care at school and school-related activities
The Complaint alleges systemic violations of Section 504, the
ADA, and the New York City Human Rights Law, including:
Failure to have care in place at the start of the year, forcing
parents to provide care at school for weeks or even months;
Exclusion of students from field trips, school breakfasts, and
after-school activities;
Forcing students to unnecessarily miss class for routine care;
and
Failure to train staff to administer diabetes care
 
 
M.F., et al., v. New York City Department of
Education, et al.,
 1:18-cv-06109
 
(E.D.N.Y
2018) (cont.)
Parents are left to fill in the gaps for the
school district’s failures to provide care:
Parents have to be on-call to provide care during
the school hours; and
Parents frequently have to attend field trips as a
condition of their child’s attendance
Challenges to reform
 
M.F., et al., v. New York City Department of
Education, et al.
, 1:18-cv-06109 (E.D.N.Y
2018) (cont.)
Current status: 
The litigation is stayed while the
parties seek to negotiate a settlement through
Structured Negotiations
Lessons learned
 
There are legal challenges to individual and
systemic advocacy:
Widespread ignorance of the law
Conflicting state laws and dearth of case law
Exhaustion
Class certification
 
There are practical challenges to individual
and systemic advocacy:
Underdeveloped Section 504 and ADA
processes
Identifying impacted students and families
Stereotypes about diabetes
The urgent need for individualized remedies
 
Please contact Sarah at 
sfech@diabetes.org
 or Seth at
spackrone@dralegal.org
 to discuss these issues in
your state or to share strategies and results. Thank
you!
Slide Note
Embed
Share

Understanding the legal frameworks of Section 504, the ADA, and IDEA is crucial for ensuring the rights of children with disabilities in educational settings. While IDEA has limitations and only applies to public schools, the ADA and Section 504 offer important protections for children with various disabilities, ensuring access to necessary services and accommodations. These laws fill in the gaps where IDEA falls short, particularly for disabilities that require modifications to the physical environment or medication administration at school.

  • Disabilities
  • Legal Protections
  • Childrens Rights
  • Section 504
  • ADA

Uploaded on Sep 14, 2024 | 0 Views


Download Presentation

Please find below an Image/Link to download the presentation.

The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author. Download presentation by click this link. If you encounter any issues during the download, it is possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Sarah Fech-Baughman, American Diabetes Association Seth Packrone, Disability Rights Advocates 2019 Jacobus tenBroek Law Symposium

  2. I. Overview of Section 504 and the ADA II. Hurdles to Enforcing Section 504 and the ADA III. Strategies for Individual and Systemic Reform IV. Relevant Litigation by the ADA and DRA IV. Discussion: Challenges to Enforcing Section 504 and the ADA

  3. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act ( IDEA ) has important limitations It does not apply to all students with disabilities who need services It only applies to public schools Some services that students need cannot be provided through an Individualized Education Program The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act ( IDEA ) has important limitations:

  4. The ADA offers important protections for children with disabilities: Title II of the ADA s prohibitions against discrimination apply in schools and other settings that provide services to children, see, e.g., 28 C.F.R. 35.130(b)(1), (2) Service Animals 28 C.F.R. 35.136 Cullman County (AL) Schools, 118 LRP 4838 (Sept. 2017) The ADA offers important protections for children with disabilities:

  5. Like the ADA, Section 504 fills in where the IDEA does not apply: 34 C.F.R. 104.31 preschool, elementary, secondary, and adult education programs or activities that receive Federal financial assistance 104.33 FAPE appropriate education is the provision of regular or special education and related aids and services that (i) are designed to meet individual educational needs of handicapped persons as adequately as the needs of non handicapped persons are met and (ii) are based upon adherence to procedures that satisfy the requirements of 104.34 (LRE), 104.35 (evaluation/placement), and 104.36 (procedural rights) Like the ADA, Section 504 fills in where the IDEA does not apply:

  6. Section 504 and the ADA are particularly important for children with certain disabilities: Disabilities that may require modification to the physical environment: Blindness/low vision, disabilities affecting mobility Disabilities that require medication administration during school: diabetes, AD/HD, severe allergy, asthma, epilepsy, cerebral palsy, HIV Section 504 and the ADA are particularly important for children with certain disabilities:

  7. Some of the most important differences between Section 504/ADA and IDEA are: To qualify: 504 person with a disability IDEA person with a disability* who, by reason thereof, requires special education and related services The IEP process vs. the 504 process Procedural protections not as specific under 504 34 C.F.R. 104.36 (Section 504) v. 34 C.F.R. 300.121 (IDEA) Definition of FAPE roughly the same 34 C.F.R. 104.33 v. 34 C.F.R. 300.17 Some of the most important differences between Section 504/ADA and IDEA are:

  8. Despite the importance of Section 504 and the ADA for certain students, they are underenforced: Schools have less expertise and formalized processes for seeking accommodations under these laws In other settings, including childcare centers and summer camps, the lack of formalized due process routes for rights holders contributes to underenforcement Despite the importance of Section 504 and the ADA for certain students, they are underenforced:

  9. State law considerations: Nurse Practice Act: Ambiguous: (CA) Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code 2700 et seq Clear and Restrictive: (MA; NY) N.Y. Educ. Law 6900 et seq; 105 CMR 210.004 State laws in the education or childcare codes creating an exception to the Nurse Practice Act: Can be directed at specific disabilities, medications, or medication delivery routes E.g. Pennsylvania 24 P.S. 14-1414.1-1414.2 (Epi and inhalers); 24 P.S. 14-1414.3 1414.6 (diabetes) Federal preemption arguments State law considerations:

  10. The effects can be devastating for families of children with diabetes: Exclusion of children with diabetes from childcare, summer camps, and school-related activities The burden shifts to parents to provide care, with dire employment and financial consequences Children s health is at risk without services The effects can be devastating for families of children with diabetes:

  11. This is an area of huge need and individual and systemic advocacy are both necessary: Types of individual advocacy include informal demand letters/negotiations, Office of Civil Rights Complaints, and individual due process cases Systemic advocacy includes efforts to change state laws, Department of Justice actions, and impact and class action litigation This is an area of huge need and individual and systemic advocacy are both necessary:

  12. The ADA has clearly laid out guidelines that can be used in individual and/or systemic advocacy: ADA position statements for school and childcare settings fully describe best practices for diabetes care good resource for negotiation and to support expert witnesses Highlights include: 3 levels of training (school setting) In general, nurse coordinating care with lay staff trained to competently watch for issues and step in if nurse is unavailable The more people who are trained, the better (more likelihood of coverage on fieldtrips, through staff changes, etc.) The ADA has clearly laid out guidelines that can be used in individual and/or systemic advocacy:

  13. The ADA can assist you with individual advocacy Staff attorneys available to provide information and referrals to individuals facing discrimination Dir. of Litigation Consult with attorneys litigating on behalf of individuals Connect practitioners with expert witnesses Submit amicus briefs The ADA can assist you with individual advocacy:

  14. ADA and DRA have partnered together on systemic reform efforts: Know-your-rights presentations to parents/other stakeholders Law reform efforts at the state level Targeted negotiation efforts with entities with illegal policies Litigation against national and citywide entities on behalf of children with diabetes ADA and DRA have partnered together on systemic reform efforts:

  15. There are pros and cons to individual reform efforts: Reasonable likelihood of success in the negotiation stage (in the absence of entity/schoolwide policy) Faster route when there are impending health or financial consequences If negotiation fails, arguable need to exhaust under Fry There are pros and cons to individual reform efforts:

  16. There are pros and cons to systemic reform efforts: Seek policy change rather than accommodations to obviate the need for further actions by other students Strong arguments for excusing exhaustion Mootness There are pros and cons to systemic reform efforts:

  17. K.C. v. OConnell O Connell Pair of lawsuits fighting over ambiguity in CA state law about who can administer insulin ADA filed suit with co-plaintiff families (K.C., et al.) to enjoin CA to issue a directive allowing lay staff to administer insulin Settled with the state and school district defendants allowing unlicensed, trained personnel to administer insulin when a school nurse was not available K.C. v. O Connell, 3:05 O Connell, , 304 P.3d 1038 (Cal. 2013) , 3:05- -cv cv- -04077; 04077; ANA v. ANA v. 304 P.3d 1038 (Cal. 2013)

  18. K.C. v. OConnell O Connell American Nurse s Assoc. filed suit in CA state court (ANA), arguing that the K.C. directive violated state law CA Supreme Court ultimately determined state law permitted lay administration of insulin Lessons learned: CA nurse shortage contributed to this victory Nurse shortages exist across the country K.C. v. O Connell, 3:05 O Connell, , 304 P.3d 1038 (Cal. 2013) , 3:05- -cv cv- -04077; 04077; ANA v. ANA v. 304 P.3d 1038 (Cal. 2013)

  19. American Diabetes Association v. US Dept of the Army (formerly M.W. v. U.S. Dep t of the Army) (5:16 pending) DRA filed suit on behalf of the ADA and an individual child (M.W.) challenging the Army s policy not permitting staff to administer necessary care (insulin administration, glucagon administration) in its childcare programs The suit sought a national policy change under Section 504 Given the geographic isolation of many military bases, parents across the country reported having to quit their jobs to provide care for their children American Diabetes Association v. US Dep t of the Army (formerly M.W. v. U.S. Dep t of the Army) (5:16- -cv pending) cv- -04051, N.D. CAL., 2016) (9 04051, N.D. CAL., 2016) (9th thCircuit, Circuit,

  20. ADA v. US Dept of the Army (formerly M.W. v. U.S. Dep t of the Army) N.D. CAL., 2016) (9 In December of 2017, the case was dismissed on standing/mootness grounds An appeal is pending in the 9thCircuit Lessons learned ADA v. US Dep t of the Army (formerly M.W. v. U.S. Dep t of the Army) (5:16 N.D. CAL., 2016) (9th (5:16- -cv cv- -04051, 04051, thCircuit, pending) (cont.) Circuit, pending) (cont.)

  21. M.F., et al., v. New York City Department of Education, et al., 2018) The ADA and DRA filed a putative class action on behalf of the ADA and three individual children who were being denied basic diabetes care at school and school-related activities The Complaint alleges systemic violations of Section 504, the ADA, and the New York City Human Rights Law, including: Failure to have care in place at the start of the year, forcing parents to provide care at school for weeks or even months; Exclusion of students from field trips, school breakfasts, and after-school activities; Forcing students to unnecessarily miss class for routine care; and Failure to train staff to administer diabetes care M.F., et al., v. New York City Department of Education, et al., 1:18 2018) 1:18- -cv cv- -06109 (E.D.N.Y 06109 (E.D.N.Y

  22. M.F., et al., v. New York City Department of Education, et al., 2018) (cont.) Parents are left to fill in the gaps for the school district s failures to provide care: Parents have to be on-call to provide care during the school hours; and Parents frequently have to attend field trips as a condition of their child s attendance Challenges to reform M.F., et al., v. New York City Department of Education, et al., 1:18 2018) (cont.) 1:18- -cv cv- -06109 06109 (E.D.N.Y (E.D.N.Y

  23. M.F., et al., v. New York City Department of Education, et al. 2018) (cont.) Current status: The litigation is stayed while the parties seek to negotiate a settlement through Structured Negotiations Lessons learned M.F., et al., v. New York City Department of Education, et al., 1:18 2018) (cont.) , 1:18- -cv cv- -06109 (E.D.N.Y 06109 (E.D.N.Y

  24. There are legal challenges to individual and systemic advocacy: Widespread ignorance of the law Conflicting state laws and dearth of case law Exhaustion Class certification There are legal challenges to individual and systemic advocacy:

  25. There are practical challenges to individual and systemic advocacy: Underdeveloped Section 504 and ADA processes Identifying impacted students and families Stereotypes about diabetes The urgent need for individualized remedies There are practical challenges to individual and systemic advocacy:

  26. Please contact Sarah at sfech@diabetes.org or Seth at spackrone@dralegal.org to discuss these issues in your state or to share strategies and results. Thank you!

Related


More Related Content

giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#