1

Jonathon vs. Debbie Young

Davin Bach

Artifact #5

Nevada School Law 210

Professor Dr. Warby

February 27, 2017

 2
Jonathon vs. Debbie Young

Debbie Young was a seasoned high school principal. Moreover, she also served as a

special education teacher and an assistant principal. Due to extraordinary expenses and the view

that the school is not the most appropriate place. She refused the parents request to allow their

severely disabled son, Jonathan, enrollment in one of the schools in the district. Furthermore,

Jonathan had multiple disabilities that required constant care by a nurse. His disabilities

included mental retardation, spastic quadriplegia, and a seizure disorder.

The parents argued that their son, under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act

(IDEA), must have available to him a free and appropriate education regardless of the severity of

his disabilities. Before the court decisions in the 1970s case of Pennsylvania Association of

Retarded Citizens vs. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and Mills vs. Washington D.C. Board of

Education, laws allowed the expulsion from school or failed to provide education for children

who were unable to benefit from regular education programs (Underwood, Webb, 141). On the

other hand, in Mills vs. Board of Education, the District of Columbia Court made it clear that

students with disabilities must be given a public education, and that financial limits were a moot

point in providing education to these students (Mills vs. Board of Education of District of

Columbia, 348 F.Supp. 866 (1972). Even though Jonathans disabilities were severe and came

with expenses that principal Young deemed too costly. He should not be denied an education

due to the severity of his disabilities.

In addition, the school must also deal with the financial expenses that must be used to

accommodate the services related to Jonathans disabilities. In the case of Cedar Rapids

Independent School District vs. Garrett F., the parents requested a due process hearing under
 3
Jonathon vs. Debbie Young

IDEA concerning the schools refusal to provide their quadriplegic son nursing services.

Moreover, the judge ruled that the school district was required to provide the services under

IDEA as a related service (Cedar Rapids Independent School District vs. Garrett F., 526 U.S.

66 (1999). Jonathan required constant care by a trained nurse. He was profoundly mentally

retarded, had spastic quadriplegia, and had a seizure disorder. Under IDEA, the school district is

required to provide related services to Jonathan so that he may receive an appropriate education.

Principal Young does not believe that the school is the most appropriate placement for

Jonathan due to the severity of his disabilities. In the case McLaughlin vs. Holt Public Schools,

the Court found that a student could be served outside of the neighborhood school if another

school in the district offered the program the student needed (McLaughlin vs. Holt Public

Schools, 133 F.Supp.2d 994 (2001). In Jonathans case, although the law required schools to

provide supplemental services in the regular classroom before moving the child to a more

restrictive environment. This did not mean that all students are entitled to a placement in their

neighborhood school (Underwood, Webb, 155).

In retrospect, the case of Beth B. vs. Clay, the student had a disability where she could

not walk unassisted and communicated primarily by eye gaze. She also had a cognitive ability

ranging from a 1-year-old to a 6-year-old. Rightfully, the school developed an IEP that placed

her in a self-contained program. Her parents objected and the Court stated, The school

officials decision about how to best educate Beth is based on expertise that we cannot match

(Beth B. vs. Clay, 126 F.Supp.2d 532(2000). Just as in Jonathans situation, due to his severity
 4
Jonathon vs. Debbie Young

of his disabilities in a self-contained environment. It may be the most appropriate placement for

him so that he is able to receive the necessary attention needed to receive an appropriate

education.

In conclusion, given principal Youngs experience and knowledge as a special education

teacher. I believe that her decision is defensible as long as the district follows the proper

requirements under IDEA and Jonathan is given an evaluation and IEP to determine if his

placement is best suited in the regular classroom setting or in a self-contained environment. Just

as in the case of McLaughlin vs. Holt Public School Beths, severe disabilities required her to

attend a school that could accommodate her in a self-contained environment (McLaughlin vs.

Holt Public Schools, 133 F.Supp.2d 994 (2001). The severity of Jonathans disabilities, even

with the use of supplemental aids and services, cannot be satisfactorily achieved in the regular

classroom. Similarly, in Beth B vs. Clay the school, after providing an IEP, has the expertise to

determine the best placement and services possible for the student (Beth B. vs. Clay, 126

F.Supp.2d 532(2000). Principal Debbie Young cares about the well-being of Jonathan and

wanted the best placement for him so that he can satisfactorily develop the skills for academic

success. The courts have interpreted the Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) provision to

mean that children with disabilities should not be removed from the regular educational setting

unless the nature or severity of the disability is such that education in the regular classroom, even

with the use of supplemental aids and services, cannot be satisfactorily achieved (Underwood,

Webb, 155).
 5
Jonathon vs. Debbie Young

References

Beth B. vs. Clay, 126 F.Supp.2d 532 (2000).

Cedar Rapids Independent School District vs. Garrett F., 526 U.S. 66 (1999).

McLaughlin vs. Holt Public Schools, 133 F.Supp.2d 994 (2001).

Mills vs. Board of Education of District of Columbia, 348 F.Supp. 866 (1972).

Underwood, J., & Webb, L. (2006). Teacher's Rights. In School Law for Teachers (p. 141, 155).

Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Education.