Suspended

The IEP ... not Cam.

The meeting went ... *sigh* ... as expected. We got through the IEP in about an hour, removing language that was clearly written into the IEP to sway placement. Things like:

• Cameron was suspended and arrested on 12/13/12 for battery and disorderly conduct when he pushed another student and the student fell to the floor. This caused the other student to retaliate and ended in a fight. (Cam was TICKETED for battery and disorderly conduct. The second sentence in this passage was removed from the IEP as Cam is not responsible for the actions of others)
• Due to Cameron's diagnosis noted in the 2002 report by Dr. Barrett, Cam displays behaviors that negatively impact his educational performance. (In an informal meeting, I shared an OLD diagnostic report with two people on the IEP team, prefacing the sharing with "I am working under the assumption that this meeting is off the record," to which they both agreed, yet they continue to attempt to include this "off-the-record" information in the IEP when Cam has a diagnosis from 2009 that indicated his first diagnosis was incorrect)
• Cameron has expressed that it would be difficult for him to graduate from high school in a traditional setting. (Cam has expressed that he believes he has been singled out - that staff is just waiting for him to do something wrong so they can send him back to the Dean's office. Cam's observations have been confirmed by both students AND staff)

I felt good about those changes. They more clearly reflect Cam's disability, struggles in school, and consequences of those struggles.

We then came to the issue of placement.

As I shared with you Monday, I was told four placement options would be considered, none of those placement options were Cam's home high school. When I asked whether placement at Cam's home high school was an option, I was told, "We have given Cam an exhaustive amount of accommodations and he has made no progress towards graduation." For the record, his only accommodations are extended testing time, credit for partial work turned in, and preferential seating. Not by any means an exhaustive amount.

There were also statements that Cam requires a therapeutic component to his education. Although I do believe Cam could benefit from a therapeutic component to his education, I know that component can be acquired outside of the educational environment, and at my expense. I articulated that I was willing to make that a provision of keeping his placement at his home high school.

Although it became clear that the team's focus was going to be on that therapeutic component (and the lack of that therapeutic component at his home high school), three of the four placement options they said they would consider do not contain any therapeutic component.

Hmmmmm ... that smells an awful lot like saying one thing, but only giving options for something completely different.

After letting the team know that I was not willing to agree to any placement without first visiting the programs, and having an opportunity to ask questions of those who run the programs, I was told that the "team" was going to change Cameron's placement on the IEP anyway - that my agreement was not necessary for them to do that. I suggested that the IEP be suspended until I was given a reasonable amount of time to explore the other placement options - 10 calendar days. They reluctantly agreed to give me 8 days.

The meeting will reconvene on Tuesday afternoon with a "modified" IEP team - just the LEA, the Education Services Generalist for Teaching and Learning (the meeting is scheduled for 3PM - teaching staff is not required to extend their day past 3:30 so they will not attend), Mike (hopefully), my advocate (hopefully), and me.

I don't foresee agreeing to any of the team's placement recommendations as none of them meet Cam's needs any better than his current placement, none of them are individualized, and none of them meet the requirement of Least Restrictive Environment that Federal Law guarantees.

This isn't going to be pretty ...