The President's
Corner
By Jim Jirak
Well, here we go again! Should a child who poses a threat to him and
other students be kept in school merely because the ADA says he or she has
to? And should the same child who
constantly disrupts the class, threatening the teacher be allowed to continue
to do so merely because the parents of the child threaten a lawsuit claiming he
is protected by the ADA? With the
exception of a school setting that can deal with these types of students,
should the principle and/or superintendent be so gravely concerned they not
only succeed in getting him expelled from the school where these incidents are
happening, but also go so far as to have the child expelled from the entire
public school system in the state? And
once more can we, and if we can, should governments legislate behavior?
While this may sound like the next box office
thriller, it isn't. These are actual
events that have happened earlier this year in Gulf Shores, Alabama. Not only was the 16-year old disruptive in
school, but also threatened to cause the school bus to become involved in an
accident. And why? After being examined by medical personnel,
it was discovered the child suffered from ADD, otherwise known as Attention
Deficit Disorder.
Should a child that suffers from such an
illness be covered under the ADA? Was
this the intent of the law when it was being drafted and signed into law? According to the 60-Minute interview with
the author of this law, the above-described scenario was the intent of the ADA
during its inception. The interview
further described that regardless of disability, developmental or otherwise,
all children, under the ADA, have a right to an education be it in a public
school or special school suited for their disability. And as the parents of the student involved refuse to place their
child in a special school, they have filed a lawsuit to get him back in the
public school system. It is the belief
of the parents that with the proper attention and understanding the public
school system best suits the child, as his behavior pattern does not fit the
requirements for special schooling.
Stay tuned! I have a feeling
this isn't over yet!
In another unrelated ADA scenario, closer
to home, the state is appealing a recent court decision that could impact the
disabled community.
STATE TO APPEAL RULING ON HANDICAPPED PERMITS
Taken from the Omaha World Harold - March 9, 2000
Lincoln - Advocates for the disabled on Wednesday hailed a
court ruling that said the state couldn’t charge for handicapped parking
permits.
"I don't think it's a money issue," said Pat
Enenbach, director of Omaha's handicapped parking patrol.
"There is a larger principle at stake. It's more of an issue of the right to be
independent without having to pay for it."
The issue is not settled, however, state officials said
Wednesday that they would appeal the ruling.
The state law regarding handicapped parking permits is in
conflict with the interpretation by those filing the lawsuit of the federal law
known as the Americans With Disabilities Act, said Deputy Attorney General
Steve Grasz.
The state will file a challenge with the Nebraska Court of
Appeals within the next few weeks, Grasz said.
"We want to do whatever the law requires," he
said.
Lawsuits similar to the one in Nebraska that brought this
recent ruling have been filed across the country.
Iowa does not appear to be vulnerable to this legal
challenge. That state does not charge
for handicapped parking permits, said an official in the Iowa Transportation
Department's Office of Vehicle Services.
The basis of Nebraska lawsuit was a provision in the federal
act that prohibits fees being charged for interpreters or other accommodations
provided for the disabled under the law, said Mike Schafer, chief executive
officer of the League of Human Dignity, and advocacy and assistance
organization for people with disabilities.
Schafer also said that the legal challenge was about more than
a $3 fee.
"It might be their fears that the ADA is slowly being
eroded," Schafer said.
It could become a serious problem if disabled people were required
to pay fees for many other accommodation services, he said. The
unemployment rate among the disabled is 70%, the highest rate of any group,
Schafer said. Many rely solely on
Supplemental Security Income, which provides about $6,000 a year, he said.
Stay tuned. We will
keep you posted on this as well.
Now imagine you were planning an anniversary party. You plan for months hoping the weather
cooperates and the caterer remembers to show.
Not only are you hoping for a good turn out but also you hope there are
enough refreshments for your guests.
Not only did the weather cooperate, but also the turn out happened to be
greater than anticipated.
Let me take this opportunity to congratulate Sally Giittinger,
her staff and all who worked on the 125 anniversary of the school in Nebraska
City. At last count 263 attended the
open house touring the facilities gaining a better understanding of the
school's history. And 210 attended the
banquet where the ceremonial accolades were given to those involved putting
together the monumental task of such a successful event. Given the direction Sally and her staff are
taking the school, lets shoot for another 125 years. Again, congratulations! And finally, concerning the 2000
convention, I would like to take this opportunity to thank your convention
committee -- Roger & Loretta Davis and Terry & Sharon
Brennfoerder. These individuals worked
tiredly to ensure the 2000 convention was a success. And judging by the turnout, this was the best-attended convention
in some time. Congratulations,
guys! Next years committee has their
work cut out for them. It's going to be
tough to top this year!
Until next time remember that a hand full of patience is worth
more than a bushel of brains.