Since the passage of the Education for All Handicapped Children Act in 1975 many legal precedents have been established that serve to define the parameters of programs for students. These parameters, as well as emerging and as yet unresolved issues as they relate to students with severe handicaps, are discussed. The authors focus their discussions around an example of a student with severe handicaps and present the effects of the precedents on this child's free appropriate public education, including extended school year, related services, appropriate curriculum, and appropriate placement.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Battle v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 629 F.2d 269, 275 (3rd Cir. 1980).
2.
Birmingham and Lamphere School Districts v. Superintendent of Public Instruction for the State of Michigan, 328 N.W. 2d 59 (CT App. MI 1982).
3.
Board of Education of the Hendrick Hudson County School District v. Rowley, 102 S. Ct. 3034 (1982).
4.
Campbell v. Taladega County Board of Education, 518 F.Supp. 47 (N.D. Ala. 1981).
5.
Department of Education, State of Hawaii v. Dorr, 727 F.2d 809 (CA-9 1983).
6.
Georgia Association far Retarded Citizens v. McDaniel, 511 F.Supp. 1263 (N.D. GA. 1981).
7.
GuessD., & NoonanM. J. (1982). Curricular and instructional procedures for severely handicapped students. Focus on Exceptional Children, 14(5), 1–12.
8.
Hurry v. Jones, 560 F.Supp. 500 (D. RI 1983).
9.
Kruelle v. New Castle County School District, 642 F.2d 687 (3rd Cir. 1981).
10.
LaskiF. (1985). Judicial address of education for students with severe mental retardation: From access to schools to state-of-the-art. In BrickerD. & FillerJ. (Eds.), Severe mental retardation: From theory to practice (pp. 36–8). Reston, VA: Division on Mental Retardation, Council for Exceptional Children.
11.
Pennsylvania Association for Retarded Children v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 343 F.Supp. 279 (E.D. Pa. 1972).
12.
Pennsylvania Association for Retarded Children v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, C.A. #71–42 (E.D. Pa); Consent Decree on Enforcement Petition in Fialkowski, et al. v. School District of Philadelphia, et al. entered June 1982.
13.
Roncker v. Walters, 700 F.2d 1058 (6th Cir. 1983).
14.
ShrybmanJames A. (1982). Due process in education.Rockville, MD: Aspen Publication.
TawneyJ. W., & SniezekK. (1985). Educational programs for severely mentally retarded elementary-age children: Progress problems and suggestions. In BrickerO. & FilletJ. (Eds.), Severe mental retardation: From theory to practice (pp 76–96). Reston, VA: Division on Mental Retardation, Council for Exceptional Children.
