Lyddy, School Board, Local Mom Urge Special Ed Parents To Contact State

By John Voket

State Representative Christopher Lyddy is leading a chorus of voices, including the parent of a former student and members of the Board of Education, urging other parents or caregivers to contact a newly appointed liaison at the Connecticut Department of Education to candidly discuss any concerns or complaints about how Newtown district administrators have handled or are handling matters related to receiving or seeking special education services.

After discussion by multiple board members and Superintendent of Schools Janet Robinson at a meeting June 6 (see story on Page 1), the board concluded that without specific cases being brought before it by either the state representatives or parents, it could make no decision to move forward. At that meeting, school board Chairman William Hart requested Dr Robinson direct Special Education Director Michael Regan to prepare an in-depth report on the district’s Special Education Department for review at some future date.

Rep Lyddy and Representative DebraLee Hovey filed a formal request for a state audit of the district’s Special Education Department after hearing concerns from dozens of parents. The request for a state audit was filed at the end of May following meetings between at least one or both of the state representatives, and either Dr Robinson or Mr Hart and parents.

“Both Rep Hovey and I want to be sure that in addition to hearing parents’ complaints that they also utilize an already established system to hear their concerns,” Rep Lyddy told The Bee before the school board meeting.

He said parents who feel they have legitimate concerns about the provisions of services should know they have options to share those concerns with both local and state officials.

“I encourage parents to contact the state Department of Education should they feel their child has not received the free and appropriate education that our laws specifically require,” the lawmaker said. “Newtown parents may contact the Newtown liaison from the Bureau of Special Education at 860-713-6925 to share their concerns.”

Rep Lyddy rejected the notion he was soliciting complaints, but rather informing and ensuring that “parents understand there is an already established system to hear their concerns.”

“I just want children to receive what they need and ensure that the school to be able to support all children and their unique needs and abilities,” he said. “Our focus should always be on achieving that goal.”

More than a dozen parents approached The Bee with complaints about how they were intimidated by district officials; how PPT documents were altered following verbal agreements made during team meetings; how they were told the district could not afford or would not consider providing services requested or recommended; that the district would not accept diagnoses that were required to be considered by law; and that if services were provided to them, it would mean taking services away from children, in some cases with more severe disabilities.

But nearly every parent or caregiver refused to go on the record with the newspaper, stating they were fearful of retaliation against the children in question either directly, or by the district then targeting the child by reducing, altering, or restricting the services the child was already receiving.

Parent Speaks Out

One local parent said she would step up and tell her story publicly in the hope that other parents would then register their complaints with the state. Laura Miller said she and her son spent nine years fighting for services for his special education needs.

Ms Miller said she has thousands of pages of documentation — PPTs, e-mails, letters, evaluations, forms and notes — that show Newtown Special Education Department:

1) Did not submit her son’s complete file to her upon request on three separate occasions.

2) Files that were copied from their office and submitted to her and her son’s therapist did not match previous versions submitted (dozens of pages were missing).

3) Told her that the middle school could not provide the accommodations requested “because it is too expensive” to allow him several periods a day in a resource room that already existed.

4) Criminalized his behavior and treated him to numerous unnecessary tests, evaluations, and interviews.

5) Did not provide one single page of documentation showing any in-class behavioral analysis even after Ms Miller specifically requested an FBA (functional behavioral analysis) on numerous occasions.

6) No one from the Newtown Special Education Department nor Newtown High School observed her son in any academic, social, or therapeutic context – ever – and that only one person from the team had met her son prior to his high school PPT.

7) The PPT notes are doctored by simply not including information or using blanket statements like “the PPT team disagreed” yet, in her case Ms Miller contends that not one teacher or other PPT member objected to her requests except the board’s own special education representative.

8) Did not acknowledge or accept numerous independent evaluations diagnosing her son with autism including a court-appointed evaluation team which had no prior interaction with her, her son or the school system, as well as rejecting an evaluation from a Yale psychiatrist and her therapy team.

“I did not request or pay for either of those evaluations — they were paid for by the court. The board’s appointed psychologist did not rule out autism and provided no diagnosis, yet her evaluation was the only one accepted,” Ms Miller said.

Referencing a comment made by Dr Robinson who told The Bee that parents who are upset are “just bitter because they lost at the state level,” Ms Miller said, “I, too, lost at the state level. But let’s explain what that really means.”

Ms Miller, a former teacher, explained that the state Board of Education is in charge of oversight for the local special education departments. When families end up in “special education court,” the hearing officer acts as judge and jury.

“This hearing officer is appointed by the state Department of Education, is an employee of the state Department of Education and is a lawyer,” Ms Miller said. “The school district brings a lawyer. Most parents do not. Why? The lawyer costs for preparing and attending a special education hearing quoted to me were between $80,000 and $100,000. Needless to say, most parents cannot afford that expense and neither could I.”

Ms Miller said losing at the state level “when all the cards are stacked with the dealer does make parents bitter.”

“So does attending PPTs, evaluations, therapy, and court when you know that your child has a right to services,” she added. “I became more outraged when I finally did receive my son’s complete file before our court hearing and pages upon pages differed from my other copies.”

‘Secret File’ Released

Ms Miller said her outrage was further inflamed when she found out that a second secret file was being kept at the special education office, which she finally received a copy of after making three formal written requests.

“I finally saw the e-mails in that secret file where the special education office and NHS personnel were discussing letting my son attend classes at NHS as discussed when he successfully completed an outplacement,” she said. “I was not included on those e-mails and that is specifically against the law. So bringing your local case in front of the state Department of Education’s hearing officer is akin to asking a warden to pardon an innocent prisoner because of his own administrative mistakes. It just doesn’t happen very often because parents don’t start the special education process with their child as if they will one day have to go to court. The district does.”

Ms Miller said that while the district does follow the law, she believes many parents or caregivers are subject to “subtle manipulation of case files and the system.” And she said at one point several years ago, Director of Pupil Services Michael Regan threatened that he would have her son, then 11 years old, arrested for his classroom outbursts if she did not sign an agreement authorizing the Newtown district to place her son in an alternative program in Danbury.

“I believe the Special Education Department cherry picks from among the diagnoses offered by their own or outside consultants, labeling the child in a way that is most advantageous to the district so they can then seek to deny services,” Ms Miller said. “And I know I’m just one of 50 or 60 parents out there subject to this type of treatment. I hope by speaking out, it will give others the courage to stand together and come forward asking the state to intervene and put a stop to this once and for all.”

Ms Miller said that while many parents cannot afford to pay for legal council to fight the district, school officials can tap a $70 million school budget to pay for attorneys who, in turn, fight to protect the reputation of district administrators.

“They protect their own professional reputation using taxpayers’ money,” Ms Miller said. “It appears they are highly motivated to use legal action against parents because they face no financial risk or loss themselves, while the system forces parents hire attorneys to protect their children out of pocket.”