Disability is a controversial factor that has affected the education fraternity overtime. In most cases, students with disabilities have been denied opportunities to enroll in schools and other educational institutions.
Disability is a controversial factor that has affected the education fraternity overtime. In most cases, students with disabilities have been denied opportunities to enroll in schools and other educational institutions. This move has been viewed as discriminatory since it denies the students the right to free and fair education. In order to understand the arguments presented for and against enrolment of students with disabilities, it is important to assess the situation through an illustration. The illustration involves a high school principal, Debbie Young, who denies the admission of a student, Jonathan, with multiple disabilities in a school. Her reasons are based on the extraordinary expenses involved in taking care of the student and the incongruity of the school to cater for such disabilities.
Arguments for Young’s Decision
In defense of Young’s decision, various reasons necessitate the need to refuse the admission of the student with multiple disabilities. These multiple disabilities include intense mental disorder, spastic quadriplegia and seizure disorders. Such disabilities require the availability of consistent care by a specially trained nurse. Moreover, the student with multiple disabilities displays a variety or amalgamation of restrictive characteristics such as speech problems, limited or null verbal communication proficiency, insufficient physical mobility and limited self-care facilities. Other traits arising from the mentioned disabilities involve problems encompassing attention and perception, limited memory and skill retention, slow learning rate and self-injurious behaviors. Hence, Young’s decision is defensible since an ordinary school cannot cater for all the special requirements associated with the student with the multiple disabilities. Moreover, the school will require additional funding in order to cater for the student’s education aside from the employment of a consistent nurse. The expenses incurred will be based on the provision of instructional tools such as switch-driven technology, enhancing communication systems, environmental control units and computer based applications that will nurture the development of basic concepts associated with the impairments attributed to the student’s disabilities.
Arguments against Young’s Decision
Arguments developed against Young’s decision in hindering the admission of the disabled student are mostly based on the legal statutes provided. In the United States, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) governs the provision of special education and associated services to disabled children. It addresses educational needs for children from birth to age 18. The legislation allows for the issuance of federal funding to educational institutions and agencies. Apparently, the legislation only applies to States that acknowledge funding under the Act. However, every state in the United States receives funding from the IDEA to encourage special education in schools. Thus, Young’s decision to refuse admission for Jonathan is viewed as an infringement to the right of the student to receive education despite the presence of disabilities. Moreover, if the educational institution lacks funds and appropriate materials to cater for the disabled student, the IDEA males it possible for the high school to admit Jonathan since the legislation will ensure that enough funds are provided to enable the school incorporate the necessary facilities required to for the education of the student with multiple disabilities. Despite the principal asserting that the student is significantly disabled for enrollment in the school, the IDEA legislation emphasizes that the degree of disability does not qualify as a basis for admission and provision of education to disabled children (Apling & Jones, 2005). Therefore, Young’s decision will not apply since the law allows the student with multiple disabilities to receive admission in the high school despite his degree of disability.
Court’s Decision
If such a case were to be submitted to the courts, then the case would be ruled in favor of the Jonathan, the student with multiple disabilities. This is because there are statutes provided that govern the provision of education for disabled students. For instance, the IDEA legislation asserts a Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE), which requires schools to avail educational services to children with limited or null voluntary movement, poor communication and other impairments (Turnbull, 2007). Moreover, because of the IDEA, children in temporary or permanent vegetative states or undergoing severe mental disorder are able to receive appropriate educational services. Apparently, the district in which the school is located in is mandated to provide ongoing nursing services to disabled students under the IDEA. In the case of Cedar Rapids Community School District versus Garret F., it was deemed by the United States Supreme Court that the school district is responsible for the provision of specific supportive services for a child dependent on a ventilator, despite the argument raised by the school district based on the costs of providing services. The decision made by the Supreme Court was drawn from the provision of related services for disabled students or children in the IDEA (Sheen, 2000).
Presently, children with disabilities are able to access free and fair education due to the support provided for them by the laws. Regardless of the intervention of the law, some schools fail to implement and follow the provided legislation. The reasons provided for breaching the decrees involve the bias of the laws in protection of parents and students without regarding schools, insufficient qualification of some children for special education services, wastage of valuable time attributed to unnecessary procedures and formalities and the expensive nature of services. However, every person has a privilege and a right to pursue and receive education for enlightenment and preparation fro the future regardless of any encumbrance, including disability.
References
Apling, R. & Jones, L. N. (2005). The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). I. O. Javier (Ed.). New York: Nova Science Publishers.
Sheen, D. M. (January 01, 2000). Civil Rights/Education-Accommodating Disabilities: How Far Must Schools Go in Providing Related Services of a Medical Nature for Students with Disabilities? Cedar Rapids Community Sch. Dist. v. Garret F., 526 U.S. 66 (1999). Land and Water Law Review, 35, 625-644.
Turnbull, H. R. (2007). Free appropriate public education: The law and children with disabilities. Denver, Colorado: Love Pub. Co.
