In the last decade, parents have filed an increasing number of due process hearings and court cases requesting the Lovaas method, an intensive discrete trial training based on select principles of applied behavior analysis, for their young children with autism. This article examines provisions of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) that relate to these cases, the Lovaas method and research issues surrounding it, published federal cases decided since the revisions to IDEA in 1997, and public policy issues that have surfaced as a result of the controversial cases. Recommendations for addressing these issues are offered.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Adams v. State of Oregon, 195 E3d 1141 (9th Cir. 1999).
2.
Amanda J. v. Clark County School District, 260 F.3d 1106 (9th Cir. 2001).
3.
Baer, D.M., Wolf, M.M., & Risely, T.R. (1968). Some current dimensions of applied behavior analysis . Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1, 91-97.
4.
Bayley, N. ( 1969). Bayley Scales of Infant Development: Birth to 2 years. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.
5.
Berkman, M. (1997). The legal rights of children with disabilities to education and developmental services. In D. J. Cohen & E R. Volkmar (Eds.), Handbook of autism and pervasive developmental disorders (2nd ed., pp. 808-827). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
6.
Bird, R. (2002). Report to the legislature on the principal findings from the epidemiology study of autism in California: A comprehensive pilot study. MIND Institute, University of California at Davis .
7.
Board of Education of Clementon School District v. Oberti, 995 F2d 1204 (3d Cir. 1993).
8.
Board of Education of the County of Kanawha v. Michael M., 95 F Supp.2d 600; (S.D. W.Va. 2000).
9.
Board of Education of the Hendrick Hudson Central School District v. Rowley, 458 U.S. 176 ( 1982).
10.
Bryson, S. (1997). Epidemiology of autism: Overview and issues outstanding . In D. J. Cohen & E R. Volkmar (Eds.), Handbook of autism and pervasive developmental disorders (2nd ed., pp. 41-46). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
11.
Burilovich v. Board of Education of Lincoln Consolidated Schools, 208 F.3d 560 (6th Cir. 2000).
12.
CM v. Board of Education of Henderson County, 85 F Supp.2d 574 (W:D. N.C. 1999).
13.
CM v. Board of Education of Henderson County, 184 F Supp.2d 466 (W.D. N.C. 2002).
14.
CM v. Board of Education of Henderson County, 241 F3d 374 (4th Cir. 2001).
15.
Cohen, D.J., & Volkmar, F.R. (1997). Handbook of autism and pervasive developmental disorders (2nd ed.). New York : John Wiley & Sons.
16.
Dawson, G. & Osterling, J. (1997). Early intervention in autism. In M. Guralnick (Ed.), The effectiveness of early intervention (pp. 307-326). Baltimore: Brookes .
17.
Division for Early Childhood, Council for Exceptional Children. (2000). Developmental delay as an eligibility category: A position paper. Retrieved March 2, 2001 from dec-sped.org/positions/devdelayposition.html
18.
Dong v. Board of Education of the Rochester Community Schools, 197 E3d 793 (6th Cir. 1999).
19.
Feinberg, E., & Beyer, J. (1998). Creating public policy in a climate of clinical indeterminancy: Lovaas as the case example du jour. Infants and Young Children, 10 (3), 51-66.
20.
Gill v. Columbia 93 School District, 217 F3d 1027 (8th Cir. 2000).
21.
Green, G. ( 1996). Early behavioral intervention for autism: What does research tell us? In C. Maurice (Ed.), Behavioral intervention for young children with autism: A manual for parents and professionals (pp. 29~43). Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
22.
Greenspan, S.I., & Weider, S. (1998). The child with special needs: Intellectual and emotional growth. Reading, MA: Addison WesleyLong-man.
23.
Gresham, E.M., & MacMillan, D.L. (1997a). Autistic recovery? An analysis and critique of the empirical evidence on the Early Intervention Project. Behavioral Disorders, 22, 185-201.
24.
Gresham, E.M., & MacMillan, D.L. (1997b). Denial and defensiveness in the place of fact and reason: Rejoinder to Smith and Lovaas. Behavioral Disorders, 22, 219-30.
25.
Harris, S.L., Handleman, J.S., Arnold, M.S., & Gordon, R.F. (2000). The Douglass Developmental Disabilities Center: Two models of service delivery. In J. S. Handleman & S. L. Harris (Eds.), Preschool education programs for children with autism (2nd ed., pp. 233-269). Austin, TX: PRO-ED .
26.
Harris, S., & Weiss, M.J. (1998). Right from the start: Behavioral intervention for young children with autism. Bethesda, MD: Woodbine House.
27.
Hehir, T., & Gamm, S. (1999). Special education: From legalism to collaboration . In J. P Heubert (Ed.), Law and school reform: Six strategies for promoting educational equity. (pp. 205-243). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
28.
Heward, W.L., & Cooper, J.O. (1987). Definition and characteristics of applied behavior analysis. In J. O. Cooper, T. E. Heron, & W. L. Heward (Eds.), Applied behavior analysis (p. 14). Columbus, OH: Merrill.
29.
Huefner, D.S. (1997). The legalization and federalization of special education. In J. W. Lloyd, E. J. Kameenui, & D. Chard (Eds.), Issues in educating students with disabilities (pp. 343-362). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
30.
Huefner, D.S. (2000). Getting comfortable with special education law: A framework for working with children with disabilities. Norwood, MA: Christopher-Gordon .
31.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, Amendments of 1997, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq. (Supp. III 1997).
32.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Part B Regulations, 34 C.FR. Part 300 ( 1999).
33.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Part C Regulations, 34 C.FR. Part 303 (1999).
34.
Jaynes v. Newport News School Board, 2001 U.S. App. LEXIS 15580 (4th Cir. 2001 ).
35.
Johnson v. Special Education Hearing Office, 287 F.3d 1176 (9th Cir. 2002).
36.
J.P v. West Clark Community Schools, 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22443 (S.D. Ind. 2002).
37.
L.B. v. Nebo School District, 214 F Supp. 2d (D. Ut. 2002).
38.
Lovaas, O.I. ( 1987). Behavioral treatment and normal educational and intellectual functioning in young autistic children. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 55, 3-9.
39.
Marcus, L.M., Garfinkle, A., & Wolery, M. (2001). Issues in early diagnosis and intervention with young children with autism. In E. Schopler , N. Yirmiya, C. Shulman, & L. M. Marcus (Eds.), The research basis for autism intervention (pp.171-183). New York: Kluwer Acadaemic/ Plenum Publishers.
40.
Marcus, L.M., Schopler, E., & Lord, C. (2000). TEACCH services for preschool children. In J. S. Handleman & S. L. Harris (Eds.), Preschool education programs for young children with autism (2nd ed., pp. 631-649). Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
41.
McBride, S.L., Brotherson, M.J., Joanning, H., Whiddon, D., & Demmitt, A. (1993). Implementation of family-centered services: Perceptions of families and professionals. Journal of Early Intervention , 17, 414-430.
42.
McEachin, J.J., Smith, T., & Lovaas, O.I. (1993). Long term outcome for children with autism who received early intensive behavioral therapy. American Journal on Mental Retardation.97, 359-372.
43.
McGee, G., Daly, T., & Jacobs, H.A. (1994). The Walden Preschool. In S. Harris & J. S. Handleman (Eds.), Preschool education programs for children with autism (pp. 127-162). Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
44.
McGonigal, M.J., Kaufmann, R.K., & Johnson, B.H. ( 1991 ). Guidelines and recommended practices for the individualized family service plan. Bethesda, MD: Association for the Care of Children's Health.
45.
M.E. v. Board of Education for Buncombe County, 88 E Supp.2d 493 (W.D. N.C. 1999).
46.
M.E. v. Board of Education for Buncombe County, 186 F. Supp.2d 630 (W.D. N.C. 2002).
47.
MM v. School District of Greenville County, 303 F.3d 523 (4th Cir. 2002).
48.
National Research Council (2001). Educating children with autism. Washington DC: National Academy Press.
49.
Pitchford v. Salem-Keizer School District. No. 24J, 155 F Supp.2d 1213 (D. Or. 2001).
50.
Renner v. Board of Education of Ann Arbor, 185 F3d 635 (6th Cir. 1999).
51.
Schopler, E. (1997). Implementation of TEACCH philosophy. In D. J. Cohen & F R. Volkmar (Eds.), Handbook of autism and pervasive developmental disorders (2nd ed., pp. 767-796). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
52.
Schopler, E., Mesibov, G.B., & Hearsey, K. ( 1995). Structured teaching in the TEACCH system. In E. Schopler & G. Mesibov (Eds.), Learning and cognition in autism (pp. 243-286). New York: Plenum Press.
53.
Smith, T., Eikeseth, S., Klevstrand, M., & Lovaas, O.I. (1997). Intensive behavioral treatment for preschoolers with severe mental retardation and pervasive developmental disorder. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 102, 238-49.
54.
Smith, T., & Lovaas, O.I. (1998). Intensive and early behavioral intervention with autism: The UCLA young autism project. Infants and Young Children , 10(3), 67-78.
55.
Strain, P.S., & Cordisco, L.K. ( 1994). LEAP preschool. In S. Harris & J. S. Handleman (Eds.), Preschool education programs for children with autism (pp. 127-162). Austin, TX : PRO-ED.
56.
T.H. v. Board of Education of Palatine Community Consolidated School District, 55 F Supp.2d 830 (N.D. I1. 1999).
57.
Town of Burlington v. Department of Education, 736 R2d 773 (1st Cir. 1984), aff'd, 471 U.S. 359 (1985).
58.
Tyler v. Northwest Independent School District, 202 F Supp.2d 557 (N.D. Tx. 2002).
59.
U.S. Department of Education. (1996). Eighteenth annual report to Congress on the implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (Table 1.5). Retrieved June 1 from http://www.ed.gov/pubs/OSEP96An1Rpt/chap1b.html
60.
U.S. Department of Education. (1999). Analysis of final regulations for Part B of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 64 Fed. Reg.12406, 12552.
61.
U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs, Data Analysis Systems (2001). Number of children 6-21 served under IDEA Part B by disability during the 2000-01 school year (Table AA3). Retrieved June 1 from http://www.ideadata.orgJtables24th/ar-aa3.htm
62.
Volkmar, F.R., Klin, A., & Cohen, D.J. (1997). Diagnosis and classification of autism and related conditions: Consensus and issues. In D. J. Cohen & F R. Volkmar (Eds.), Handbook of autism and pervasive developmental disorders (2nd ed., pp. 5-41). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
63.
Wagner v. Board of Education of Montgomery County, 198 F Supp.2d 671 (D. Md. 2002).
64.
Wagner v. Short, 63 E Supp.2d 672 (D. Md. 1999).
65.
Wing, L. (1993). The definition and prevalence of autism: A review . European Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 2, 61-74.
66.
Yell, M.L., & Drasgow, E. (2000). Litigating a free appropriate public education: The Lovaas hearings and cases. Journal of Special Education , 33, 205-214.
