Naperville special education teacher sues District 204 for stud...

it's about time they take action against these nut bag kids and also start pointing the fingers at the parents who demand the kids be allowed to abuse students and teachers...most of the time the kid keeps getting away with this and the parents refuse to discipline the brat..how does a special needs kid manage to hit a teacher with a chair....why can't the students and teachers sue the parents of these thugs?

I know why. Instead of the STATE paying for special needs kids who cannot be controlled in even a special ed classroom (and I must stress here that MOST are not like this boy), the state requires the individual school district where this child resides to pay his "tuition" to a school that is better equipped to handle cases like his. It is enormously expensive to do so. So most school districts attempt to keep the child at their 'own' home school or at least within the public school district.

It remains to be seen whether or not the cost of this litigation will be more than or less than the cost of their paying that particular child's tuition.

How dare you blame a child who is obviously in need of a great deal of emotional help. The schools don't want to spend the money to put him in a more appropriate place that would be safer for him, the students and teachers. How dare you call a child names. He is a CHILD with DISABILITIES not a THUG! It is people like you who cannot accept anyone who is different from them and make it harder for children with disabilities to be a part of society. I guess we cannot be so lucky as to have perfect children and be perfect parents. You are the type of person who would rather get rid of a child from a classroom and leave them in the office instead of using your brains and working to better the situation for the long term. You are arrogant and selfish and will not let people like you go on making stupid comments about kids in need and their parents struggle to do the best for them in a system that doesn't always work. People like you are always waving the finger in the face of parents. Try waving it at the school district that wants to keep as much money in their pockets instead of spending it to place him in a safe and appropriate environment.

karin wrote:

it's about time they take action against these nut bag kids and also start pointing the fingers at the parents who demand the kids be allowed to abuse students and teachers...most of the time the kid keeps getting away with this and the parents refuse to discipline the brat..how does a special needs kid manage to hit a teacher with a chair....why can't the students and teachers sue the parents of these thugs?

Rebecca wrote:

How dare you blame a child who is obviously in need of a great deal of emotional help. The schools don't want to spend the money to put him in a more appropriate place that would be safer for him, the students and teachers. How dare you call a child names. He is a CHILD with DISABILITIES not a THUG! It is people like you who cannot accept anyone who is different from them and make it harder for children with disabilities to be a part of society. I guess we cannot be so lucky as to have perfect children and be perfect parents. You are the type of person who would rather get rid of a child from a classroom and leave them in the office instead of using your brains and working to better the situation for the long term. You are arrogant and selfish and will not let people like you go on making stupid comments about kids in need and their parents struggle to do the best for them in a system that doesn't always work. People like you are always waving the finger in the face of parents. Try waving it at the school district that wants to keep as much money in their pockets instead of spending it to place him in a safe and appropriate environment. <quoted text>

he is a thug..where are the parents and why should my child be punished because the parents are dropping the ball and demanding more of my child than theirs..why a kid is allowed to be abusive when he is a problem..why should a kid be allowed to abuse teachers and children because he has a "special need"..if appears the teachers should be protected as well as fellow students..stp[ making excuses for bad behavior..what happens when the kid is 17-18 and really creating problems?

There are a couple things wrong with this picture. First of all...why sue the school district? Sue the family. And secondly, when you CHOOSE to work with special ed kids...it is a whole different ball game.

The teacher needs a different job, and the parents need to work with their child on manners.

Caffeinated wrote:

... when you CHOOSE to work with special ed kids...it is a whole different ball game.
The teacher needs a different job, and the parents need to work with their child on manners.

Why?

The overwhelming majority of special ed kids are not violent! Why should any teacher have to deal with that? It is NOT part of the job to have to tolerate violence toward her or any other student!

bits and pieces wrote:

<quoted text>
Why?
The overwhelming majority of special ed kids are not violent! Why should any teacher have to deal with that? It is NOT part of the job to have to tolerate violence toward her or any other student!

I agree...it isn't.

However..."special" implies that there is something wrong with the kid...and there is.

If this teacher wanted a safe job, then they should be working with infants or bunnies. ;)

Sorry, I don't agree. I think there are many very dedicated teachers out there (and Lord knows those who teach special ed are among the best) who do a fantastic job with the children in their classrooms.

But violence is neither tolerable nor expected. "Something" being wrong doesn't mean a teacher should have to deal with a child who can actually intentionally harm her or the other students.

There ARE special classrooms with a plethora of aides (one of which could be assigned specifically to this student). But it's costly for the district to basically pay "tuition" for such a child and that's why they avoid it if it is at all possible.

That's where the state should step up and pay for that particular child's education. Other students in the school should not suffer because so much money is sent out of district for this one student.

But I also think the parents have to be involved partners here! The story doesn't make clear whether or not the child exhibits this kind of behavior at home, or if he does, how the parents handle it.

By the way, the state has all sorts of "rules" for special ed. Unfortunately they're much better at MAKING rules than they are about financially supporting the costs of implementing those rules.

bits and pieces wrote:

Sorry, I don't agree. I think there are many very dedicated teachers out there (and Lord knows those who teach special ed are among the best) who do a fantastic job with the children in their classrooms.
But violence is neither tolerable nor expected. "Something" being wrong doesn't mean a teacher should have to deal with a child who can actually intentionally harm her or the other students.
There ARE special classrooms with a plethora of aides (one of which could be assigned specifically to this student). But it's costly for the district to basically pay "tuition" for such a child and that's why they avoid it if it is at all possible.
That's where the state should step up and pay for that particular child's education. Other students in the school should not suffer because so much money is sent out of district for this one student.
But I also think the parents have to be involved partners here! The story doesn't make clear whether or not the child exhibits this kind of behavior at home, or if he does, how the parents handle it.
By the way, the state has all sorts of "rules" for special ed. Unfortunately they're much better at MAKING rules than they are about financially supporting the costs of implementing those rules.

Like I said...I don't condone violence...I think the teacher should sue the PARENTS...not the school district.

A special ed teacher complaining about unusual behavior is like a fireman complaining about flames.(eye roll)

I also said that the parents need to work with this child. However...who is to say this kid's behavior isn't improved already?

Caffeinated wrote:

A special ed teacher complaining about unusual behavior is like a fireman complaining about flames.(eye roll)

"Unusual behavior" doesn't include putting herself/himself and other students at risk. Unusual behavior includes many behavioral situations, but not violence.

What you are suggesting is more like a fireman complaining about someone shooting at him as he tries to put out the flames!

What part of "I don't condone violence" aren't you getting?

The teacher sounds like a numbskull!

Caffeinated wrote:

The teacher sounds like a numbskull!

Why do you think the teacher sounds like a numbskull?
Because she couldn't physically control a violent student who should not have been in her class in the first place because he endangered both her and the other kids?
Because children who exhibit physical rage require so much of the teacher's time that the other children in her class don't get THEIR needs met?
Or what?

bits and pieces wrote:

<quoted text>
Why do you think the teacher sounds like a numbskull?
Because she couldn't physically control a violent student who should not have been in her class in the first place because he endangered both her and the other kids?
Because children who exhibit physical rage require so much of the teacher's time that the other children in her class don't get THEIR needs met?
Or what?

Because she is suing the taxpayers instead of the family who is responsible.

Obviously, special ed students aren't "right", so violence is hardly a shock. Sounds like she is unrealistic about her job description.

If we were talking about a "normal" student, then I would understand where you are coming from.

I can assure you that although today "special ed" encompasses many different kinds of conditions (both physical and mental), it is not a catch all for anything and everything that deviates from the 'norm'.

The boy in question has (apparently) very severe behavioral problems which the school district has been aware of now for at least a few years. He should have been outplaced into a facility with the type of classroom and the multiple aides such a child would require. He wasn't, even though virtually every teacher or other school personnel who had come in contact with this child had said he needed it.

As was mentioned above, it is very costly for a school district to "outsource" a student. It takes money from the other both normal and special ed kids, thereby penalizing all of them, and the state does NOT make up the difference. It should, because those are ITS rules! But it is also easy to understand why the districts are so reluctant to actually use "outside" facilities.

True, it would make more sense for her to sue the state of Illinois. She can't. Hopefully, someone somewhere sometime will go after the state for making rules that it subsequently fails to financially support. Maybe she hopes that will be the ultimate outcome?!

I will agree with you about one thing. She should have insurance and that insurance (which she pays for out of her paycheck) should have covered her medical expenses. So I'll freely admit that I'm honestly not too sure what that's all about. She shouldn't HAVE to sue anyone in order to be justly compensated!

I would not normally comment on something like this, but apparently some really stupid people thinkg that a teacher is signing up for violence and that she should have to deal with something that is outside of the norm. In my opinion, the parents should have to pay to send this child to a special school. It should not be on the state or the district.

dumbfounded wrote:

I would not normally comment on something like this, but apparently some really stupid people thinkg that a teacher is signing up for violence and that she should have to deal with something that is outside of the norm. In my opinion, the parents should have to pay to send this child to a special school. It should not be on the state or the district.

I agree with you on both counts.

1. I, like you, have no idea where people get the idea that teachers have signed up for combat duty! They have a reasonable expectation that both they and their students will be safe.

2. I also agree that ideally the parents of such a violent child should have to arrange for his education in a facility that is equipped and staffed to deal with him. But realistically, most parents couldn't honestly afford it. So the state should absorb the extra costs -- it's their law after all!, but WITHOUT using that district's funds to deal with this one child.

Sadly, the State of Illinois doesn't give diddly squat what I think. ;-)

Caffeinated wrote:

<quoted text>
Because she is suing the taxpayers instead of the family who is responsible.
Obviously, special ed students aren't "right", so violence is hardly a shock. Sounds like she is unrealistic about her job description.
If we were talking about a "normal" student, then I would understand where you are coming from.

For every "special ed" student there is a curriculum done by the school. The parent has very little choice -- unless you have the money to pay for a private education for whatever disability. Some people do not have the funds. It is the law that the school has to pay to educate the child -- our taxes go to it.

It is the school board's fault. They have the say-so where the child attends. Not the parents -- believe it or not.

bits and pieces wrote:

<quoted text>
I agree with you on both counts.
1. I, like you, have no idea where people get the idea that teachers have signed up for combat duty! They have a reasonable expectation that both they and their students will be safe.
2. I also agree that ideally the parents of such a violent child should have to arrange for his education in a facility that is equipped and staffed to deal with him. But realistically, most parents couldn't honestly afford it. So the state should absorb the extra costs -- it's their law after all!, but WITHOUT using that district's funds to deal with this one child.
Sadly, the State of Illinois doesn't give diddly squat what I think. ;-)

You are right -- except expecting the parents to know more than the "specialists". They bring in the psychologist, doctors, teachers, etc. into the meetings for a special ed student and you have to have them at least once a year. Usually the dean pushes for the placement of what is decided. Usually the deans aren't very well qualified, unfortunately -- but most schools defer to them.

Terri at home wrote:

<quoted text>
For every "special ed" student there is a curriculum done by the school. The parent has very little choice -- unless you have the money to pay for a private education for whatever disability. Some people do not have the funds. It is the law that the school has to pay to educate the child -- our taxes go to it.
It is the school board's fault. They have the say-so where the child attends. Not the parents -- believe it or not.

How dare you spout your drivel here. Please back up and let the adults finish.

CharlieRose wrote:

<quoted text>
How dare you spout your drivel here. Please back up and let the adults finish.

Why are you coming down so hard on "Terri at home"?

Basically she's pretty much got it right. Every child who is diagnosed as requiring Special Ed services has an IEP (Individual Education Program) drawn up by the teachers and administrators, nurses or whomever else may be deemed necessary for a particular child.

The law requires the attendance school district to pay for facilitating and implementing these programs. To some extent the state pays for the extra classroom Aides and some of the other expenses incurred.

But when a student requires such special situations as the one mentioned in this article, the state gets really balky and leaves the additional expense of that in the laps of the home school district. It's so far above and beyond the 'normal' amount of money needed that school districts are financially discouraged from making that out-placement. They simply can't afford it!