Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!think.com!yale!bunker!hcap!hnews!278!632!Tzipporah.Benavraham
From: Tzipporah.Benavraham@f632.n278.z1.fidonet.org (Tzipporah Benavraham)
Newsgroups: misc.handicap
Subject: HANDICAPPED KID WINS COURT CASE
Message-ID: <19179@bunker.isc-br.com>
Date: 4 May 91 04:34:11 GMT
Sender: news@bunker.isc-br.com
Reply-To: Tzipporah.Benavraham@f632.n278.z1.fidonet.org
Organization: FidoNet node 1:278/632 - The Event Horizon, Staten Island NY
Lines: 41
Approved: wtm@bunker.hcap.fidonet.org

Index Number: 15391

04/29 14:36 EDT V0801
   WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court Monday refused to hear
an appeal by Oklahoma officials who challenged a handicapped
child's right to a special educational program, free of
charge, during the summer.
   The court, without comment, left intact a ruling that put
the burden on public school officials to prove the program
is not needed.
   Oklahoma officials, in seeking the high court's help, said
the issues in the case could affect educational programs
provided to millions of handicapped students nationwide.
   The case began in 1987 when the parents of Natalie Johnson
of Bixby, Okla., sought the additional educational help.
   Natalie, 11, is autistic, moderately retarded and suffers
from seizures.
   Her parents sought 40 days of structured education for her
during the summer, contending she would regress from the
improvement she was making during the regular 180-day school
year without the extra help.
   Tulsa County public school officials said there was no
evidence the child had regressed in the past without the
additional schoolee public education.
   A federal judge threw out the parents suit, whdered
together with the amount of time required to recoup those
lost skills when schools resumes in the fall, is an important
consideration in assessing an individual child's need."
   The predictions of professionals on the likely impact
of discontinuing education during the summer is appropriate
to consider, the appeals court said.
   The burden is on the state to show that the additional
help is not needed, the appeals court added.
   The case is Independent School District vs. Natalie
Johnson, 90-1421.

DISABILITY RIGHTS NOW!!! EVEN DISABLED KIDS HAVE RIGHTS!!!!!!

--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!278!632!Tzipporah.Benavraham
Internet: Tzipporah.Benavraham@f632.n278.z1.fidonet.org