The issue of educability, or whether or not severely handicapped persons have a right to education or can benefit from it, is examined from a legal perspective. The analysis begins with a description of the purpose of education as defined in the Constitution, case law, and legislation. Since educability is a question related to the Fourteenth Amendment, it is discussed in the context of the Supreme Court's approach to applying the rational basis, middle-tier, or strict scrutiny approach to equal protection cases. Very strong arguments are presented both in support of and against educability. The authors conclude that the right to education for severely handicapped persons is seriously at risk.
A note on professional testimony and opinions in the Partlow Case. Mental Retardation, 1979, 17, 165–166.
2.
Analysis and Intervention in Developmental Disabilities, 1981, 1(1).
3.
Armstrong v. Kline, 476 F. Supp. 590–92, 600 (1979).
4.
BaerD. M.A hung jury and a Schottish verdict: “Not proven.”Analysis and Intervention in Developmental Disabilities, 1981, 1, 91–98.
5.
BaileyJ. S.Wanted: A rational search for the limiting conditions of habilitation in the retarded. Analysis and Intervention in Developmental Dsiabilities, 1981, 1, 45–52.
6.
BaumeisterA. A.The right to habilitation: What does it mean?Analysis and Intervention in Developmental Disabilities, 1981, 1, 61–74.
7.
Beattie v. Board of Education, 169 Wis. 231, 172 N.W. 153 (1919).
8.
BrickerD. D.Vincent-SmithL.BrickerW. A.Receptive vocabulary: Performance and selection strategies of delayed and nondelayed toddlers. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 1973, 77, 579–584.
9.
Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483, 493, 74 S. Ct. 686, 691, 98 L. Ed. 873, 880 (1954).
10.
Cleveland Board of Education v. LaFleur, 414 U.S. 632 (1974).
11.
Craig v. Boren, 429 U.S. 190 (1976).
12.
Cuyahoga County Association for Retarded Children and Adults v. Essex, 411 F. Supp. 46 (1976).
13.
Department of Mental Hygiene v. Kirchner, 62 Cal. 2d 586, 588, 43 Cal. Rptr. 329, 400 P. 2d 321 (1965).
14.
DimondP. R.The constitutional right to education: A quiet revolution. 24Hastings L. J. 1087 (1973).
15.
Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975, 20 USC 1401, 1412.
16.
EllisN. R.The Partlow case: A reply to Dr. Roos. Law and Psychology Review, 1979, 5, 15–49.
17.
FavellJ. E.RisleyT. R.WolfA. F.RiddleJ. I.RasmussenP. R.The limits of habilitation: How can we identify them and how can we change them?Analysis and Intervention in Developmental Disabilities. 1981, 1, 37–44.
18.
Fialkowski v. Shapp, 405 F. Supp. 946, 958–59 (E. D. Pa. 1975).
19.
Frederick L. v. Thomas, 408 F. Supp. 832 (1976).
20.
Frontiero v. Richardson, 444 U.S. 677, 93 S. Ct. 1764, 36 L. Ed. 2d 583 (1973).
21.
Graham v. Knutzker, 351 F. Supp. 642 (1972), 362 F. Supp. 881 (1973).
22.
Guempel v. State, 159 N.J. Super. 166, 387 A. 2d 399 (Super. Ct. Law Div. 1978).
23.
GuntherG.In search of evolving doctrine. Harvard Law Review, 86 (November 1972): 1–48.
24.
Halderman v. Pennhurst State School and Hospital, 446, F. Supp. 1298 (E.D. Pa. 1977).
25.
HaringN. G.BrickerD.Overview of comprehensive services. In HaringN. G.BrownL. J. (Eds.), Teaching the severely handicapped (Vol. 1). New York: Grune & Stratton, 1976, 17–32.
26.
HaydenA. H.DmitrievV.Early developmental and educational problems for the child with Down's Syndrome. In FriedlanderB. Z.KirkG.SterrittG. (Eds.), The exceptional infant (Vol. III). New York: Brunner/Mazel, 1975, 193–221.
27.
HaydenA. H.HaringN. G.Programs for Down's Syndrome children at the University of Washington. In TjossemT. D. (Ed.), Intervention strategies for high-risk infants and young children. Baltimore: University Park Press, 1975.
28.
HerrS.Retarded children and the law: Enforcing the constitutional rights of the mentally retarded. Syracuse Law Review, 1972, 23, 995–1035.
29.
HorstmanP.Protective services for the elderly: The limits of parens patriae. 40Mo. L. Rev., 215, 231–235 (1975).
30.
In re G. H. 218 N.W. 2d 441, 447 (N.D. 1974).
31.
International League of Societies for the Mentally Handicapped, & The Association for the Severely Handicapped, Amici Cariae for Pennhurst State School and Hospital v. Terri Lee Halderman, No. 79–1404, 79–1408, 79–1414, 79–1415, 79–1489 (1980).
32.
James v. Almond, 170 F. Supp. 331 (1959).
33.
Johnson v. Town of Deerfield, 25 F. Supp. 918 affirmed 59 S. Ct. 791, 306 U.S. 621, 83 L. Ed. 1027 (1939).
34.
JohnsonW. E.Judicial analysis under the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Southern California Law Review, 47: 943 (1974).
35.
KauffmanJ. M.KrouseJ.The cult of educability: Searching for the substance of things hoped for; the evidence of things not seen. Analysis and Intervention in Developmental Disabilities, 1981, 1, 53–60.
36.
KolstoeO. P.Mental retardation: An educational viewpoint. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston, 1972.
37.
Levine, v. New Jersey Department of Institutions, 3 EHLR 552: 163 (1980).
38.
MarshallA. M.MarksH.Implementation of “zero reject” training in an institutional setting. Analysis and Intervention in Developmental Disabilities, 1981, 1, 23–36.
39.
Maryland Association for Retarded Children v. Maryland, Equity No. 100/182/77676 (Cir. Ct., Baltimore County, May 31, 1974), in BurgdorfR. L.Jr. (Ed.), The legal rights of handicapped persons. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes, 1980, 182–187.
40.
Matthews v. Campbell, C.A. No.78.0879-R. Dt. Ct. of Richmond, Va. (July, 16, 1979).
41.
MillerJ. F.YoderD. E.Language intervention for the mentally retarded. In SchiefelbuschR. L.LloydL. L. (Eds.), Language perspectives—Acquisition, retardation, and intervention. Baltimore: University Park Press, 1974.
42.
Mills v. D.C. Board of Education, 348 F. Supp. 866 (D.C. 1972).
43.
Mount Hermon Boys School v. Town of Gill, 145 Mass, 139, 13 N.E. 354 (1887).
44.
New York Association for Retarded Children v. Rockefeller, 357 F. Supp. 752, 762 (E. D. N.Y. 1973).
45.
Ordway v. Hargraves, 323 F. Supp. 1155 (1971).
46.
PeltasonJ. W.Understanding the Constitution. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston, 1979.
47.
Pennsylvania Association for Retarded Children v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 334 F. Supp. 1257 (E.D. Pa. 1971).
48.
Pennsylvania Association for Retarded Children v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 343 F. Supp. 279 (E.D. Pa. 1972).
49.
Pennhurst State School v. Terri Lee Halderman, ___F. Supp. ___, (1981).
50.
President's Committee on Mental Retardation, MR 74: A friend in Washington. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1975.
51.
Rainey v. Tennessee Department of Education, Chancery Ct. Davidson Cty, Tenn. (1976), No. A-3100 (Jan. 21, 1976).
52.
Reed v. Reed, 404 U.S. 71 (1971).
53.
Robinson v. Cahill, 303 A 2d 273 (1973).
54.
San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 1 (1973).
55.
ScheerenbergerR.A model for deinstitutionalization. Mental Retardation, 1974, 12, 3–7.
56.
ScheerenbergerR.Deinstitutionalization and institutional reform. Springfield, IL: Charles C Thomas, 1976.
57.
ScheerenbergerR.Public residential facilities: Status and trends. Mental Retardation, 1981, 19, 59–60.
58.
Serrano v. Priest, Sup., 96 Cal. Rptr. 601 (1971).
59.
SherrinJ. J.AbramsS.Equal protection challenges to consent judgments in right-to-treatment litigation: Are the states getting more than they bargain for?45Albany Law Review, 613 (1981).
60.
Shofstall v. Hollins, 515 P. 2d 590 (1973).
61.
State v. Senno, 79 N.J. 216, 226–227 (1979).
62.
Sterling v. Harris, 478 F. Supp. 1046 (1979).
63.
Stock v. Texas Catholic Interscholastic League, 364 F. Supp. 362 (1973).
64.
TribeL. H.American constitutional law. Mineola, NY: Foundation Press, 1978.
65.
TurnbullH. R.TurnbullA.Free appropriate public education: Law and implementation. Denver, CO: Love Publishing, 1978.
66.
United States v. Carotene Products Company, 304 U.S. 144, 152–53 n.4 (1938).
67.
Webster's new collegiate dictionary. Springfield, MA: G. & C. Merriam, 1977.
68.
West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624, 637, 63 S. Ct. 1178, 1185, 87 L. Ed. 1628, 1637 (1943).
69.
Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205, 222, 283, and n. 295 (1972).
70.
Wolfs. Legislature of Utah, Civil No. 182646 (3rd Jud. Dist. Ct. Utah, Jan. 8, 1969), in BurgdorfR. L.Jr. (Ed.), The legal rights of handicapped persons. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes, 1980, 70–75.
71.
Wyatt v. Ireland, ___ F. Supp. ___, ___ (M.D. Ala. Oct. 25, 1979). Wyatt v. Stickney, 325 F. Supp, 781, 334 F. Supp. 1341 (M.D. Ala. 1971) and 344 F. Supp. 373, 387 (M.D. Ala.).
