Running Head: FIA of Section 504

Family Impact Analysis of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 Michelle Rutherford Louisiana State University

Running Head: FIA of Section 504 Family Impact Analysis of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 Background The United States Rehabilitation Act of 1973 declared discriminating against individuals based on their disabilities illegal. This discrimination was disallowed in anything related to federal employment, financial assistance, and programs. Section 504 was initially mentioned in the 1973 act, but no guidelines were included. A national program known as the American Coalition of Citizens with Disabilities became disenchanted with the unfulfilled promise of

change as mentioned in the Rehabilitation Act and notably staged a nonviolent sit-in that spanned ten cities and reignited interest in Section 504 (Rehabilitation Act, n.d.). In April of 1977, Section 504 was mandated by Congress. Originally, the program was only related to physical structures at public schools, including larger doorways and the placement of ramps and elevators to accommodate wheelchairs. The United States Department of Education Office for Civil Rights has worked over the years to widen the interpretation of Section 504 past solely physical structures. While physical structures has been expanded to include buses and playgrounds among other things, Section 504 now also applies to extracurricular activities such as field trips, clubs, assemblies, band, and graduation. The program now also applies not only to physical disabilities, but also any mental disability that can impair normal activities of day to day life (Smith, 2002, pg. 259). Over the years, Section 504 has continued to transform parts of society. During Ronald Reagan's presidency, people rebelled against the rights extended to disabled individuals. For more than twenty years, many public schools ignored Section 504, thinking they were doing what was legally required if they just followed the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act

Running Head: FIA of Section 504

(deBettencourt, 2002, pg. 16). More recently, Section 504 was used as a model for the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. This act upheld Section 504, making absolutely no changes in the powers or rights given to those with disabilities in federal employment, federal programs, or receiving federal financial aid. In addition, the act furthered these same rights to many types of private businesses, effectively strengthening the idea that the same rights extended to those with disabilities in 1977 are correct and should remain true to this day (Rehabilitation Act, n.d.). Family Support If one views Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 in terms of the six principles of family impact, it is observable that the act supports families in a variety of ways. The program adheres to principle one, family support and responsibilities, in that it supports family members' abilities to carry out their responsibilities by ensuring that parents and other caretakers give children the proper opportunities they would be receiving if they were not disabled. These opportunities most notably include a chance to succeed in school by making accommodations for children's disabilities and by providing programs that receive federal funding that are forced to accommodate these children with disabilities rather than exclude them. According to principle two, it strengthens parental obligations to children because it places pressure on parents to provide the same care that schools do. Additionally, children with disabilities can place strain on parents' relationships with each other, and the act allocates resources to help children with disabilities to succeed, which can only strengthen the bond parents share (Gross, Bogenschneider, & Johnson, n.d., pp. 2-3). Just as Section 504 bolsters family support and membership, it also strengthens family involvement and partnership. The program demonstrates recognition of the complexities and

Running Head: FIA of Section 504 responsibilities involved in caring for those family members with special needs. It involves immediate family members to work toward a solution because they must work together to make sure their special needs child is being adequately cared for and not taken advantage of. It also empowers and strengthens the family's partnership because it provides full disclosure as to what rights their child has, and it also promotes family interaction with the professionals who are working to ensure their child/client is receiving every accommodation he needs (Gross, Bogenschneider, & Johnson, n.d., pg. 3). Not only does Section 504 strengthen families in all of these ways, but it provides these strengths to families regardless of their diversities or vulnerabilities. The program definitely impacts various types of families; disabilities do not discriminate. Any type of family based on

race, location, or status can be affected by a disability. This policy is available to everyone just as free public education is free to all. Therefore, it does provide support for those families who are in the most extreme economic or social need. It does not target those families specifically, but it does still provide the same support (Gross, Bogenschneider, & Johnson, n.d., pg. 3). Family Subversion While Section 504 does a lot to support families, there are some aspects of the program that could undermine families as well. One such segment is that while Section 504 in many ways makes parents more responsible for ensuring their children with disabilities get as many opportunities as possible, it can also be said that it allows other parents to shift responsibility onto professionals rather than deal with the situation themselves. This neglect of responsibility can be a sure source of dissension among family members and could eventually undermine the family system.

Running Head: FIA of Section 504 Another way that families could be undermined under Section 504 is the argument that the services are not easily accessible for all. One of the principles of a family-friendly policy

explains that not only should the location and hours make services readily available, but also that the forms used for application and intake be simple to complete. However, these forms are not always easy to complete in a timely manner or financially easy to come by (Zirkel, 2009, pg. 210). The stress placed on the family unit, both time-wise and money-wise, could definitely undermine a family that doesn't support each other well. Additionally, the family can be subverted by the way the children with disabilities are treated under Section 504. According to the principles of a family-friendly policy, family members should not feel embarrassed or singled out or have a diminished sense of self. Children with disabilities are labeled as such in schools, and this labeling can have detrimental effects on said children. In this way, family members could easily feel humiliated, and the school personnel is stigmatizing the children. While the teachers and administration may not try to single out the children, when they are receiving the accommodations afforded them by Section 504, they are effectively being labeled and the center of attention. These children and their families may feel humiliated, and that is not the intent of a family-friendly policy. This feeling of devaluation can undermine a family. Possible Overlooked Beneficial Effects without Family Impact Analysis Section 504's positive effects are well-documented, but there are a couple of benefits that might be overlooked without a Family Impact Analysis. One such benefit is that it can bring families much closer together. The scenario where a common goal, in this case the success of a child with a disability, is in sight usually brings about increased effort to reach the goal. This

Running Head: FIA of Section 504

effort is shared by all members of the family. Furthermore, the common goal encourages families to work together. Many people would just look at Section 504 in regards to children's performances in school. Therefore, the benefit Section 504 provides families in enabling them to work together toward a solution is often overlooked by many individuals. Just as most people see only the benefits to children and overlook the positives that affect the entire family, they also fail to notice the advantages it can afford to parents. The accommodations that are afforded to children with disabilities in the classroom can shed valuable light on ways to treat their child differently at home to help them succeed. Such modifications to behavior that can be used outside of the classroom setting include repeating directions, modeling things in a variety of ways, and allowing extra time for the children to complete tasks. Harmful Effects that Could Be Avoided with Family Impact Analysis Just as there are definite beneficial effects that one might not notice without a Family Impact Analysis, there are also some harmful effects of Section 504 that might not be readily apparent until one reads one such analysis. Perhaps the most disconcerting effect is the one that generally affects children first, but can also impact the rest of the family: the possible lack of confidentiality. Children with disabilities who have accommodations or modifications are, by very nature of the program, labeled and singled out in an attempt to make things easier on them (Cole, Christ, & Light, 1995, pg. 261). These accommodations are, in a sense, special to them, as most of their classmates do not receive the same benefits as students with disabilities. The school (faculty and administration) are effectively labeling the students as different, and this singling out extends to students' peers as well. School-aged children are emotional and prone to bullying; singling out a child on basis of a difference or disability seems to set up the child in a negative

Running Head: FIA of Section 504 way. Section 504, in addition to offering learning accommodations for children with disabilities, also promises to provide a safe school environment for them (Raskauskus & Modell, 2011, pg.

61). Special care must be taken be many people across a school's campus to ensure bullying does not happen, and this can be difficult to monitor. Another potentially negative effect is parental neglect. Section 504 is set up to get parents and professionals to work together for the benefit of the child. These professionals include the testers as well as the instructors who will work with the student on a daily basis. In an ideal scenario, parents and instructors maintain a constructive dialog so that both can monitor student behavior and educational progress. However, it is tempting for parents to abuse the system and put all of the weight on the educational system, assuming none of the responsibility for helping their child succeed in class. In these cases, the children with disabilities suffer because they do not receive the attention they need at home. In the absence of Section 504, there would be fewer of these guardian-instructor meetings, parents would be less likely to request special accommodations in class, and they would take additional responsibility at home. In addition to these negative effects is the added stress of getting children tested for disability and for application into the 504 program. Families have to go through multiple stages and obtain information from a variety of sources (doctors, current teachers, former teachers, etc.) in order to get their child with disabilities approved for accommodations (Smith, 2001, pg. 335). If the disability is not easily apparent, the family could spend significant time for a diagnosis alone. Even after a diagnosis, meetings with school officials on how to accommodate the child are another time-consuming obstacle before the family can begin to see any positive effects.

Running Head: FIA of Section 504 Suggestions for Future Policy One of the major roadblocks currently in place for children with disabilities is the difficulty of obtaining Section 504 services. If the process were more streamlined, a large amount of time and money would be saved, benefiting the family and especially the child, who would be able to receive accommodations more quickly under a more efficient system. The problem could be remedied by simply passing an addendum to the act that demands a harsher deadline to those providing background information on the child afflicted with the disability. This alone would speed up the process. Another, more daring (and probably costly) approach, would be to mandate that schools provide information in a shared database with professionals who do screening for 504 accommodations. This brings up some touchy confidentiality issues and would require quite a bit more thought and work to accomplish successfully. In fact, there may be enough red tape surrounding the issue to make it impossible to execute. A suggestion that would partially combat the potential problem of parental neglect is to increase the number of meetings between families and professionals. Families would be able to be more involved if instead of an annual mandatory meeting with teachers and professionals to

discuss what accommodations will be provided with, this meeting was conducted every semester at a minimum. If parents were required to stay more involved with their children's educational successes and failures, the teachers would ultimately be more convinced to accommodate the students more, especially since not all of the responsibility will be on the teaching professionals. Conclusion The services of Section 504 have many obvious pros that overshadow most of the negatives one could conjecture about the program. Section 504 ensures that children with

Running Head: FIA of Section 504 disabilities receive proper accommodations for educational success in public schools, increases family support and partnership, promotes parental involvement in children's education, and provides resources for affected families without discrimination based on race or socioeconomic status. These pros outweigh the cons of parents possibly pushing responsibilities onto professionals rather than taking responsibility themselves and the lack of confidentiality which can lead to students being labeled. One way those cons could be combated by increasing the number of parent-faculty meetings required each year. Another suggestion to improve the program is to make the screening process more streamlined. This is important as, in the future,

the paperwork and evaluation process will be more specific and the number of people attempting to obtain accommodations will increase. Because of this, the actual accommodations may change slightly, most notably in the area of confidentiality. Section 504 has not changed a significant amount over the course of its forty year history, and any changes in the future will likely be slight as well.

Running Head: FIA of Section 504 References Cole, B., Christ, C., & Light, T. R. (1995). SOCIAL WORK EDUCATION AND STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES: IMPLICATIONS OF SECTION 504 AND ADA. Journal Of Social Work Education, 31(2), 261-268. deBettencourt, L. U. (2002). Understanding the Differences Between IDEA and Section 504. Teaching Exceptional Children, 34(3), 16.

10

Gross, E., Bogenschneider, K., & Johnson, C. (n.d.). Family impact checklist. In How to conduct a family impact analysis. Retrieved December 2, 2011, from Policy Institute for Family Impact Seminars website: http://www.familyimpactseminars.org/fi_howtocondfia.pdf, 1-7. Raskauskas, J., & Modell, S. (2011). Modifying Anti-Bullying Programs to Include Students With Disabilities. Teaching Exceptional Children, 44(1), 60-67. The rehabilitation act of 1973 [Fact sheet]. (n.d.). Retrieved from Boston University website: http://www.bu.edu/cpr/reasaccom/whatlaws-rehaba.html Smith, T. C. (2001). Section 504, the ADA, and Public Schools. Remedial & Special Education, 22(6), 335. Smith, T. C. (2002). Section 504: What Teachers Need to Know. Intervention In School & Clinic, 37(5), 259. Zirkel, P. A. (2009). Section 504: Student Eligibility Update. Clearing House, 82(5), 209-211.