Ramifications of ED as Secondary Eligibility

[LL22]

The school recently completed my 8th grade sons triennial and would like to add ED as the secondary eligibility category (maintain Autism as primary).  Previously, his eligibility has been under Autism (primary) and either SLD (dyslexia / dysgraphia) or OHI (ADHD) as secondary.  We are still awaiting a placement offer from the high school district and are concerned how this will factor into their decision.  We're also unclear of any future ramifications this could have for our son.   He has been in a counseling enriched classroom throughout middle school.   The school team has changed completely each year which has made it difficult for him to build relationships and trust.  The first year, the team had a good handle on how to best work with our son and he connected with them well.  Last year and this year, they are struggling to understand him and find ways to work with him.  We feel this has led to many of the behavioral concerns and avoidance our son is now displaying at school.  Do we have to accept ED as the secondary eligibility?  What are the ramifications for him now and in high school with ED as the secondary eligibility?  And what options do we have if we believe actions by the school contributed to why he is now qualifying under ED?

[JSD24]

The way I see this (because I've seen this with other students), his ED is coming from the CPTSD he experienced due to the IEP team not understanding ASD (and his other diagnoses) & not being able to meet his needs.  Unfortunately, you do not have the credentials to dispute their diagnosis.  In your shoes, I would disagree with the eval and request an IEE at school expense.  IMO, he needs a team that better understands ASD & can better meet his needs.  You can ask for teacher training in ASD if you feel this is what's going on.  You can start by writing a parent concerns letter stating that the appearance of ED is due to the school team not understanding him & how ASD affects him.  Without the support like he had in 6th grade when the team did a better job meeting his needs, the lack of support is coming out as behavior which looks like ED.

Is the school also saying that he no longer has ASD?  The way ASD is defined includes this: "Autism does not apply if the child's educational performance is adversely affected primarily because the child has an EMOTIONAL DISTURBANCE."  If they remove the ASD diagnosis, then he won't get the support he needs at school for the ASD issues.

[LL22]

They are not disputing ASD - autism will still be the primary eligibility criteria.  He has a history of school refusal that was dismissed for a very long time.  Outside assessments diagnosed ASD in 2nd grade; the school disagreed.  It took multiple years and an IEE for the school to accept the ASD diagnosis.  From his IEE in the 5th grade, neuropsychologist diagnosed his SLDs (dyslexia and dysgraphia), his ASD profile as PDA, along with high giftedness (prior ADHD diagnosis was never disputed).  Up until 4th grade, he was holding it together during the day so hard and completely melting down at home - school felt he was fine once he was there.   An IEP was agreed to once he started falling a grade-level+ behind in writing and refusing to do work.  He has always - even in kindergarten - claimed to hate school, largely because he's never felt understood or that he trusts anyone there.

When he feels no one is listening to him or he's being misunderstood at school, he will elope.  He does this safely, calls me each time it happens, and I talk him back to the campus or come to meet him.  Our perspective, the school is not working to understand the 'why' behind his behavior (elopement and work refusal) or the role they are playing in causing the behavior to happen.  He did not elope in 6th grade when the team was working well with and better understood him.

[Carolyn Rowlett]

Perhaps you need to request a Functional Behavioral Analysis and then a Behavioral Intervention Plan?  So that the underlying causes/triggers of his behavior can be fleshed out, a plan can be put in place to address the behavior, and teachers can receive training to implement the plan.  Instead of just sticking the label of ED on him to explain the changes in his behavior.

[LL22]

Thank you - I like the idea of requesting the FBA!  And appreciate the information on ED in relation to ASD from JSD24 as well.  We always include a paragraph in the parents concern section and will address it there.  But we're finding that most people/educators look at the first page of the IEP for eligibility criteria and largely skip the rest until accommodations, services.  

Can you help me understand the ramifications of having Emotional Disturbance on his IEP?  The school wants this as his secondary eligibility.  We plan to ask for the FBA and push for this not to be included.  That said, I want to make sure I understand the effects of having ED listed in high school if it comes to that.

[JSD24]

An FBA will look at what can be seen.  If there is something else going on that can't be seen (my guess is the frustration because of the discrepancy between giftedness + dysgraphia w/o proper technology to accommodate), the FBA isn't going to be all that helpful.  Ross Greene's CPS works well with PDA.  It can take a while to learn which is a drawback.  

 

[Carolyn Rowlett]

I would not want the category of ED on my child's IEP (even if not primary), unless the child truly does have an emotional disturbance.  There is a big difference between seeing "ED" on an IEP and writing off behavior as something that is inherent in the child and instead working to address the issues that are causing the behavior (failure on the part of his team to understand him/relate to him, frustrations with dyslexia/dysgraphia and lack of instruction/support, etc.).  ED may give the IEP team and his gen ed teachers an excuse not to address the behavior properly.  Request an IEE.  When the results come back and an eligibility meeting is scheduled, make sure you have read and understand your state's criteria for ED and use the specific criteria and the results of the IEE to strenuously argue that he does not fall under that category.