One thing which I have seen and heard about from other parents (repeatedly and from vastly differing sources) is that there is actually a fairly subversive method of 'encouraging' special ed students to 'go away.'
One of the hallmarks of this strategy is the one that shrugs and says "Well, what can we do?? This is what we do here... maybe {school} isn't a good fit for {child}..."
rather than, (as federal law MANDATES, by the way) either;
a) determining the interventions necessary to allow the child educational benefit from the program,
or, under section 504, the less stringent of the two laws,
b) determining and then implementing accommodations so that the disabled student has the same access to the educational program as unaffected peers, regardless of inconvenience or expense.
In the case of both, what I've seen is a sense of "here's the menu, and what you need isn't on it. Go to another restaurant if you don't like it." That assumes that you can even GET your child properly classified to start with... and even if you can and you can get the district/school to agree to particular services, good luck getting them moving on actually implementing anything. I know of a profoundly DEAF child who waited for SIX WEEKS to get an aide and a classroom ASL interpreter was another three weeks coming.
In the case of A, there is foot-dragging about implementation. Because that's where the loopholes are, see. The rest is specified under law.
In the case of B, there is foot dragging all through the process, and often parents are told that what the child needs is "not reasonable," evidently with the (mistaken) understanding that this means that while it might be what the child NEEDS, it certainly can't happen. (This is wrong, by the way, and the Office of Civil Rights has said so in no uncertain terms-- but most parents don't know that.)
Call me cynical, but I see far, far fewer parents milking the system for special ed services than I do those who give up and choose to leave because they know that their child needs help NOW, not in 18 months or four years.
Charters are very, very, very guilty of point B. The other thing that I've seen with my own two eyes is that EMO's that act as private contractors with LEA's will occasionally give with one hand what the law obligates them to do.... but take away with the other, so as to preserve their own bottom line. So sure, your child might qualify for OT... ohhhhhh, but the only TIME available is when {elective} is being offered. Guess you have to choose which you want your child to have. Heheheh.
