Educators, families, and policy actors rely on federal and state special education law to inform many decision-making processes. Vague eligibility criteria within the laws can result in conflict between school districts and parents. Resulting due process hearing decisions can have important implications for future practice. One area of particular ambiguity and inconsistency is the disability category—other health impairment—for which students with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder may qualify. We examined outcomes of cases regarding disputes about eligibility for other health impairment where attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder was considered, including judges’ decisions, rationales, and factors influencing their decision-making, as well as trends over time and location. The systematic search process yielded 202 relevant cases wherein the majority of judges’ decisions (67%) were in favor of the school district, often citing educational need, or lack thereof, in their rationale. The second most common rationale was the evaluation itself being deemed (in)appropriate. Parents who had an expert witness were almost four times more likely to prevail in their cases. We discuss implications for parents, practitioners, and policy.
AggelerK. L. (2000). Is ADHD handy excuse? Remedying judicial bias against ADHD. UMKC Law Review, 68(3), 459–482. https://doi.org/https://heinonline.org/HOL/P?h=hein.journals/umkc68&i=469
2.
AhramR.VoulgaridesC.CruzR. A. (2021). Understanding disability: High-quality evidence in research on special education disproportionality. Review of Research in Education, 45(1), 311–345. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X20985069
AnnammaS.FerriB. A.ConnorD. J. (2018). Cultivating and expanding disability critical race theory (DisCrit). In EllisK.Garland-ThomsonR.KentM.RobertsonR. (Eds.), Manifestos for the future of critical disability studies (Vol. 1, pp. 230–238). Routledge.
5.
AroraP.G.SullivanA.L.SongS. Y. (2023). On the Imperative for Reflexivity in School Psychology Scholarship. School Psychology Review, 52(5), 665–677. https://doi.org/10.1080/2372966X.2022.2105050
6.
ArtilesA. J. (2025). Taming the duality of disability: Critical-historical tools to disrupt equity paradoxes. Revista Española de Pedagogía, 83(290), 5–20.https://doi.org/10.22550/2174-0909.4241
7.
BarkleyR. A. (2022). Improving clinical diagnosis using the executive functioning—self-regulation theory of ADHD. The ADHD Report, 30(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1521/adhd.2022.30.1.1
8.
BradyK. P.RussoC. J.DieterichC. A.OsborneA. G.SnyderN. D. (2019). Legal issues in special education: principles, policies, and practices. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429451492
9.
BrieschA. M.WaldronF. M.BenevilleM. A. (2023). State variation regarding other health impairment eligibility criteria for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. School Mental Health, 15(3), 765–776. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12310-023-09581-2
10.
CaterinoL. C.SullivanA. L.SiqueirosN. K. (2006). New Supreme Court ruling: Schaffer v. Weast. NASP Communiqué, 35(1), 4–5.
ChristT. J. (2008). Best practices in problem analysis. In ThomasA.GrimesJ. (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology V (pp. 159–176). NASP.
13.
DuPaulG. J.Chronis-TuscanoA.DanielsonM. L.VisserS. N. (2019). Predictors of receipt of school services in a national sample of youth with ADHD. Journal of Attention Disorders, 23(11), 1303–1319. https://doi.org/10.1177/1087054718816169
14.
DuPaulG. J.JimersonS. R. (2014). Assessing, understanding, and supporting students with ADHD at school: Contemporary science, practice, and policy. School Psychology Quarterly, 29(4), 379–384. https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000104
15.
EdelmanL. B.UggenC.ErlangerH. S. (1999). The endogeneity of legal regulation: Grievance procedures as rational myth. American Journal of Sociology, 105(2), 406–454. https://doi.org/10.1086/210316
16.
Encinitas Union School District. 105 LRP 2650 (California State Educational Agency, 2004).
17.
FabianoG. A.PyleK. (2019). Best practices in school mental health for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: A framework for intervention. School Mental Health, 11(1), 72–91. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12310-018-9267-2
FitzgeraldJ. L.WatkinsM. W. (2006). Parents’ rights in special education: The readability of procedural safeguards. Exceptional Children, 72(4), 497–510. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290607200407
20.
FloresG., & Committee on Pediatric Research. (2010). Racial and ethnic disparities in the health and health care of children. Pediatrics, 125(4), e979–e1020. https://doi.org/www.pediatrics.org/cgi/doi/10.1542/peds.2010-0188
21.
FornessR. F.KavaleA. K. (2001). ADHD and a return to the medical model of special education. Education and Treatment of Children, 24(3), 224–247.
22.
GiniS.KnowlandV.ThomasM. S.Van HerwegenJ. (2021). Neuromyths about neurodevelopmental disorders: Misconceptions by educators and the general public. Mind, Brain, and Education, 15(4), 289–298. https://doi.org/10.1111/mbe.12303
ItkonenT.TomlinB.CorreiaM. G.SanchezL. A.SchneiderT.KookerK. (2022). Schaffer v. Weast ’s Effects on California Special Education Hearing Decisions. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 33(2), 71–80. https://doi.org/10.1177/10442073211066780
30.
KulkarniT.SullivanA. L. (2019). The relationship between behavior at school entry and services received in third grade. Psychology in the Schools, 56(5), 809–823. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.22231
31.
LakeJ. F.BillingsleyB. S. (2000). An analysis of factors that contribute to parent-school conflict in special education. Remedial and Special Education, 21(4), 240–251. https://doi.org/10.1177/074193250002100407
32.
LovettB. J.NelsonJ. M. (2021). Systematic review: Educational accommodations for children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 60(4), 448–457. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaac.2020.07.891
33.
LuW. (2017). Child and adolescent mental disorders and health care disparities: Results from the national survey of children's health, 2011–2012. Journal of Health Care for the Poor and Underserved, 28(3), 988–1011. https://doi.org/https://dx.https://doi.org/10.1353/hpu.2017.0092
34.
MakA. D. P.LeeS.SampsonN. A.AlborY.AlonsoJ.AuerbachR. P.BaumeisterH.BenjetC.BruffaertsR.CuijpersP.EbertD. D.Gutierrez-GarciaR. A.HaskingP.LapsleyC.LochnerC.KesslerR. C. (2022). ADHD Comorbidity structure and impairment: Results of the WHO world mental health surveys international college student project (WMH-ICS). Journal of Attention Disorders, 26(8), 1078–1096. https://doi.org/10.1177/10870547211057275
McLaughlinM. J.VerstegenD. A. (1998). Increasing regulatory flexibility of special education programs: Problems and promising strategies. Exceptional Children, 64(3), 371–384. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440299806400306
MuellerT. G. (2015). Litigation and special education: The past, present, and future direction for resolving conflicts between parents and school districts. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 26(3), 135–143. https://doi.org/10.1177/1044207314533382
39.
MuellerT. G.CarranzaF. (2011). An examination of special education due process hearings. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 22(3), 131–139. https://doi.org/10.1177/1044207311392762
RogersM.Bélanger-LejarsV.TosteJ. R.HeathN. L. (2015). Mismatched: ADHD symptomatology and the teacher-student relationship. Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties, 20(4), 333–348. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632752.2014.972039
44.
SadehS.SullivanA. L. (2017). Ethical and legal landmines: Causal inference in special education decisions. Psychology in the Schools, 54(9), 1134–1147. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.22046
SchnoesC.ReidR.WagnerM.MarderC. (2006). ADHD Among students receiving special education services: A national survey. Exceptional Children, 72(4), 483–496. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290607200406
47.
ShahR. P.KunnavakkamR.MsallM. E. (2013). Pediatricians’ knowledge, attitudes, and practice patterns regarding special education and individualized education programs. Academic Pediatrics, 13(5), 430–435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acap.2013.03.003
48.
SkrticT. M.SaatciogluA.NicholsA. (2021). Disability as status competition: The role of race in classifying children. Socius, 7(1), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1177/23780231211024398
49.
SparrowR. M. (2015). Lifelong impact: Non-uniform interpretation of special education eligibility standards for students with ADHD. UC Davis Journal of Juvenile Law and Policy, 19(2), 193–231. https://heinonline.org/HOL/P?h=hein.journals/ucdajujlp19&i=206
50.
SullivanA. L.OsherD. (2019b). IDEA’s double bind: A synthesis of disproportionality policy interpretations. Exceptional Children, 85(4), 395–412. https://doi.org/10.1177/0014402918818047
51.
SullivanA.ProctorS. (2016). The shield or the sword?: Revisiting the debate on racial disproportionality in special education and implications for school psychologists. School Psychology Forum: Research in Practice, 10(3), 278–288.
52.
SullivanA. L.SadehS. S. (2014). Differentiating social maladjustment from emotional disturbance: An analysis of case law. School Psychology Review, 43(4), 250–271. https://doi.org/10.17105/spr-13-0038.1
53.
SullivanA. L.SadehS.HouriA. K. (2019a). Are school psychologists’ special education eligibility decisions reliable and unbiased?: A multi-study experimental investigation. Journal of School Psychology, 77(1), 90–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2019.10.006
54.
TeferaA. A.FischmanG. E. (2020). How and why context matters in the study of racial disproportionality in special education: Toward a critical disability education policy approach. Equity & Excellence in Education, 53(4), 433–448. https://doi.org/10.1080/10665684.2020.1791284
55.
ThoriusK.ArtilesA. J. (2023). Accountability elasticity in relation to U.S. Federal legislation at the intersection of race and disability. In PostiglioneG. A.JohnstoneC.TeterW. R. (Eds.), Handbook of education policy (pp. 181–195). Edward Elgar Publishing.
56.
ThoriusK. K.LindoE. J.Martínez-ÁlvarezP.SullivanA. L. (2023). Introduction to the new editors of Exceptional Children: The editorial vision of the new team. Exceptional Children, 90(1), 4–10. https://doi.org/10.1177/00144029231196264
57.
ThoriusK. K.LindoE. J.Martínez-ÁlvarezP.SullivanA. L. (2024). Editorial perspectives on critical issues affecting special education to be addressed by Exceptional Children. Exceptional Children, 90(2), 100–109. https://doi.org/10.1177/00144029231219344
58.
U. S. Government Accountability Office. (2019). Special education: IDEA Dispute resolution activity in selected states varied based on school districts’ characteristics. https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-20-22.
59.
Virginia State Educational Agency v. Student with a Disability, 105 LRP 33067. (2004).
WodrichD. L.SchmittA. J. (2006). Patterns of learning disorders: Working systematically from assessment to intervention. Guilford Press.
63.
ZgodicA.McLainA. C.EberthJ. M.FedericoA.BradshawJ.FloryK. (2023). County-level prevalence estimates of ADHD in children in the United States. Annals of Epidemiology, 79(1), 56–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annepidem.2023.01.006
64.
ZirkelP. A. (2014). The law in the special education literature: A brief legal critique. Behavioral Disorders, 39(2), 102–107. https://doi.org/10.1177/019874291303900206
65.
ZirkelP. A.KaranxhaZ. (2024). Longitudinal trends in special education case law: An updated analysis. Journal of Special Education Leadership, 34(1), 42–60.
66.
ZirkelP. A.ScalaG. (2010). Due process hearing systems under the IDEA: A state-by-state survey. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 21(1), 3–8. https://doi.org/10.1177/1044207310366522
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
