This article discusses the potential negligence-based liability risks that orientation and mobility (O&M) specialists often face when assisting visually impaired students with independent travel in uncontrolled environments. It also presents strategies that may minimize the risks of O&M training for both students and O&M specialists.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Association for Education and Rehabilitation of the Blind and Visually Impaired. (1994). Code of ethics for orientation and mobility specialists.Alexandria, VA: Author.
2.
BanjaJ. (1994). The determination of risks in orientation and mobility services: Ethical and professional issues. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 88, 401–409.
3.
Berman v. Philadelphia Bd. of Educ, 456 A.2d 545 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1983).
4.
BinaM. (1976). Legal implications of solo experiences in orientation and mobility training. New Outlook for the Blind, 69, 225–231.
5.
Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1232(g) (1996).
6.
Griffin-ShirleyN., MarshR. A., & HartmeisterF. (in press). Orientation and mobility specialists’ practices concerning liability issues. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness.
7.
Hamilton v. Independent Sch. Dist. No. 114, 335 N.W.2d, 182 (Minn. 1984).
8.
HillE. (1986). Orientation and mobility. In SchollG. (Ed.), Foundations of education for blind and visually handicapped children and youth (pp. 315–340. New York: American Foundation for the Blind.
9.
HillE., & BlaschB. (1987). Concept development. In WelshR. & BlaschB. (Eds.), Foundations of orientation and mobility (pp. 265–290. New York: American Foundation for the Blind.
10.
HillE., & PonderP. (1976). Orientation and mobility techniques: A guide for the practitioner.New York: American Foundation for the Blind.
11.
ImberM., & van GeelT. (1995). A teacher's guide to education law.New York: McGraw-Hill. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, as amended, 1997. P.L. 105–17, § 602(22).
12.
JacobsonW. (1993). The art and science of teaching orientation and mobility to persons with visual impairments.New York: AFB Press.
13.
KemererF., & WalshJ. (1997). Texas educators’ guide to school law (4th ed.). Austin: University of Texas Press.
14.
LawsonC. (1995, October). The potential tort liability of orientation and mobility specialists. Paper presented at a conference of the Nebraska Orientation and Mobility Association, Omaha. Mancha v. Field Museum of Nat. Hist., 283 N.E.2d 899 (Ill. 1972).
15.
MatthewsN. (1994, November). Legal issues regarding orientation and mobility. Paper presented at a conference of the Southwest Orientation and Mobility Association, Piney Woods, TX.
16.
OlsonW. (1997). The excuse factory.New York: Martin Kessler Books.
17.
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. § 794 (1998).
18.
RothsteinL. (1995). Special education law.New York: Longman.
19.
Smith v. Archbishop of St. Louis, 632 S.W.2d 516 (Mo. App. Ct. 1982).
20.
StrahanR., & TurnerR. (1987). The courts and the schools.New York: Longman.
21.
Texas Education Agency, Division of Special Education. (1995, August). Rules and regulations of providing special education services.Austin, TX: Author.
22.
Texas Administrative Code 19 §68.23 (1997).
23.
Texas Education Code § 21.051 (1999).
24.
ValenteW. (1985). Education law, public and private (Vol. 2). St. Paul, MN: West.
