High Court Upholds Ruling School Programs Must Meet Needs of Children with Autism

Oct. 11, 2005 -- The United States Supreme Court today refused to hear the appeal of the Hamilton County (Tennessee) Department of Education in a landmark "autism" case that had been brought under the federal Individuals With Disabilities Education Act ("IDEA").

This decision will effect how children with autism, as well as those with other disabilities, receive educational services in public schools. The decision makes clear that parents must be meaningfully included at their child's IEP meetings, that educational decision must be personalized and individually tailored to meet the child's needs, that educational programs may not be "predetermined" or the result of an official or unofficial policy by the school district, and that cost cannot be the driving factor in deciding what kind of program a child should receive. The Sixth Circuit also held that educational programs must be "meaningful".

Hamilton County Schools had filed a petition for a writ of certiorari seeking permission from the Supreme Court to appeal a unanimous decision that the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals had rendered in favor of a Chattanooga boy diagnosed with autism, Zachary Deal.

Gary Mayerson, of Mayerson & Associates and a member of the Autism Speaks board of directors, represented the Deal family. "Hamilton county took the position that a 'meaningful benefit' standard was too much to expect from a school district," said Mayerson. "We disagreed and took the position that a meaningful benefit test is what is required pursuant to earlier Supreme Court precedent in order to individualize a child's IEP. As a results of this decision, parents across the country are able to invoke the Sixth Circuit decision for its important principles to secure appropriate intervention programs for their children."

Mayerson added that parents should not hesitate to bring a copy of the Sixth Circuit's decision to their IEP meetings if they believe that their school district is not upholding the letter and spirit of the IDEA statute. A copy of the decision is available at: http://www.mayerslaw.com/<http://www.mayerslaw.com/> .

Read full article at: http://www.autismspeaks.org/inthenews/supreme_court_hamilton.php
Wrightslaw website:
http://www.wrightslaw.com/law/caselaw/04/6th.deal.hamilton.tn.htm

For information and resources on autism, please visit:
www.AutismConcepts.com.