NOTE: How's this for backwards thinking? A school district actually had a "corporal punishment" policy that did NOT include "willful infliction of physical pain on a student" and now the STATE SENATE is telling them they CANNOT HAVE A POLICY THAT'S MORE STRICT THAN THE STATE's.
While we understand that legally a school district's policies shouldn't be more restrictive than those of the state, we're talking about willfully inflicting PAIN on a child, and a school district who got in trouble with the State Senate for taking action against a teacher who admitted she deliberately hit a child on the head to get his attention. (If only all districts took this kind of zero tolerance policy against violence from teachers...)
Let me get this straight, if someone deliberately hit you on the head, and it hurt, wouldn't that be willful infliction of pain? But that "willful infliction of pain" clause is missing from district policy so the district is in trouble for disciplining a teacher who whacked a kid in the head?
Is the North Dakota Senate sanctioning Child Abuse in Schools? Curious...
February 16, 2009
Associated Press
http://www.kxmc.com/News/333348.asp
Bismarck, N.D. (AP) A West Fargo school teacher's firing has prompted the North Dakota Senate to support changing state law on corporal punishment.
Senators on Monday voted 47-0 to approve a bill that says local schools cannot adopt policies against corporal punishment that are stricter than the state's. The bill now moves to the state House.
The legislation was introduced in response to the November 2006 firing of West Fargo school music teacher Mavis Tjon. She said she was dismissed for tapping a third grader on the head to get his attention.
State law says corporal punishment is the "willful infliction of physical pain on a student." West Fargo school policy does not require any pain to be willfully inflicted.
The Senate bill also says school districts must have the same corporal punishment policies for their elementary, middle and high schools.
The bill is SB2289.
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
NJ: Police shoots a 15 year old mentally disabled kid
February 17, 2009
http://www.policebrutality.info/2009/01/police-abusing-and-shooting-ill-kid.html
A 15-year-old student at Garfield Park, a private school for children with emotional or behavioral disorders, was shot twice after he threatened the police with a pair of scissors. The incident happened in front of the school.
The boy was first threatening some school employees and also some students, before he ran out on the parking lot where he pointed two scissors at a police officer.
He was asked to put his weapon down, and a witness said that she heard how they yelled "put it down, put it down!" before the sound of two gunshots being fired. She said she went out to see what was going on and there she saw the victim lying on his side clutching his stomach.
The officer that shot the boy, William Smith, was not injured.
The shooting will be investigated according to the Burlington County Prosecutor's Office.
The boy was reported in critical but stable condition at Cooper University Hospital, Camden.
Carol Dunn had a similar incident with the police in New Jersey, where her son was shot by an officer outside a church because he refused to let go of the knife he was holding.
"I think police should take every necessary step to save lives. This should be included in their training," she said. "Are they interested in taking lives or is the state of New Jersey interested in saving lives?"
Monday, February 16, 2009
MI: Staff didn't file abuse allegations
Sunday, February 15, 2009
BY DAVID JESSE
The Ann Arbor News
http://www.mlive.com/news/annarbornews/index.ssf?/base/news-31/1234683631155840.xml&coll=2
No member of the Washtenaw Intermediate School District's staff reported allegations of child abuse by a teacher's aide to either the local police or the state's Department of Human Services, a district internal investigation found.
"Under the Child Protection Act school personnel have a duty to report all instances of suspected child abuse,'' the report said. "No report was filed by any of the staff who witnessed the conduct referenced in the police investigation.''
A spokeswoman with the Department of Human Services declined to comment on whether her department had any contact from the WISD about the allegations. She also would not comment on whether the WISD broke the law.
Any investigation into that question would come from the county's prosecutor's office, Zoe Lyons, the manager of the state's Child Protective Services program, said in a telephone interview.
WISD Superintendent Bill Miller said no one is investigating the district for any possible violations of the state law.
The law is clear about who has to report suspicions of child abuse and what they have to do, Lyons said.
The law requires all school personnel to report child abuse. People in certain other professions, including health-care workers, are also considered "mandatory reporters'' under the law.
Mandatory reporters have to immediately contact the state when they suspect child abuse. If the allegations concern school personnel, those allegations are turned over to the local police for investigation, Lyons said.
"A lot of times, people report things to both the state and the police,'' Lyons said.
Failing to report child abuse is a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for up to 93 days and a fine of $500.
Miller would not directly answer questions about whether WISD employees violated the act.
"District policies about reporting were not followed,'' he said.
BY DAVID JESSE
The Ann Arbor News
http://www.mlive.com/news/annarbornews/index.ssf?/base/news-31/1234683631155840.xml&coll=2
No member of the Washtenaw Intermediate School District's staff reported allegations of child abuse by a teacher's aide to either the local police or the state's Department of Human Services, a district internal investigation found.
"Under the Child Protection Act school personnel have a duty to report all instances of suspected child abuse,'' the report said. "No report was filed by any of the staff who witnessed the conduct referenced in the police investigation.''
A spokeswoman with the Department of Human Services declined to comment on whether her department had any contact from the WISD about the allegations. She also would not comment on whether the WISD broke the law.
Any investigation into that question would come from the county's prosecutor's office, Zoe Lyons, the manager of the state's Child Protective Services program, said in a telephone interview.
WISD Superintendent Bill Miller said no one is investigating the district for any possible violations of the state law.
The law is clear about who has to report suspicions of child abuse and what they have to do, Lyons said.
The law requires all school personnel to report child abuse. People in certain other professions, including health-care workers, are also considered "mandatory reporters'' under the law.
Mandatory reporters have to immediately contact the state when they suspect child abuse. If the allegations concern school personnel, those allegations are turned over to the local police for investigation, Lyons said.
"A lot of times, people report things to both the state and the police,'' Lyons said.
Failing to report child abuse is a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for up to 93 days and a fine of $500.
Miller would not directly answer questions about whether WISD employees violated the act.
"District policies about reporting were not followed,'' he said.
NY: NYPD okays Velcro handcuffs for use on unruly children
BY Alison Gendar
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER
Saturday, February 14th 2009, 11:02 AM
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ny_crime/2009/02/13/2009-02-13_nypd_okays_velcro_handcuffs_for_use_on_u.html
Nothing says tough love like Velcro handcuffs.
Cops trying to restrain children will have a softer alternative than metal handcuffs under a new program the NYPD is testing in nearly two dozen schools.
Starting next month, officers will use Velcro handcuffs instead of the tougher steel model to subdue disturbed or unruly children in 22 schools in northern Queens, according to a draft NYPD operations order obtained by the Daily News.
"We would prefer never to use restraints of any kind, but in those rare instances where it may become necessary, we want a softer alternative to conventional handcuffs," Deputy Police Commissioner Paul Browne said.
Cops are expected to use the cuffs no more than once or twice a year, Browne said, and only when a kid is at risk of hurting himself or others.One of the targeted schools is Public School 81 in Ridgewood, where a school safety agent handcuffed 5-year-old Dennis Rivera and brought him to a psych ward after what school sources called a violent tantrum in January 2008.
That child's father, Dennis Sr., said Friday police policy on cuffs was wrong. "They could be made of teddy bear material," he said, "but they still would be handcuffs. It is still police tactics on children who have committed no crime." In a separate instance, the family of a 10-year-old girl filed a federal lawsuit against the city last August, claiming police handcuffed her on a school bus because she wouldn't sit still.
Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly asked the department to look at alternatives to metal handcuffs, but Browne would not say what case triggered the review.
NYPD school safety officers in the schools are expected to receive the alternative handcuffs at the end of next week, and then get two weeks of training - not only on how to use the new cuffs, but when.
The new handcuffs would be used on youngsters under age 16. The restraints are 22-inch-long strips of cloth with Velcro fasteners that can be adjusted to fit a child's wrist.
"Handcuffing by any other name is still handcuffing, " said Donna Lieberman, executive director of the New York Civil Liberties Union.
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER
Saturday, February 14th 2009, 11:02 AM
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ny_crime/2009/02/13/2009-02-13_nypd_okays_velcro_handcuffs_for_use_on_u.html
Nothing says tough love like Velcro handcuffs.
Cops trying to restrain children will have a softer alternative than metal handcuffs under a new program the NYPD is testing in nearly two dozen schools.
Starting next month, officers will use Velcro handcuffs instead of the tougher steel model to subdue disturbed or unruly children in 22 schools in northern Queens, according to a draft NYPD operations order obtained by the Daily News.
"We would prefer never to use restraints of any kind, but in those rare instances where it may become necessary, we want a softer alternative to conventional handcuffs," Deputy Police Commissioner Paul Browne said.
Cops are expected to use the cuffs no more than once or twice a year, Browne said, and only when a kid is at risk of hurting himself or others.One of the targeted schools is Public School 81 in Ridgewood, where a school safety agent handcuffed 5-year-old Dennis Rivera and brought him to a psych ward after what school sources called a violent tantrum in January 2008.
That child's father, Dennis Sr., said Friday police policy on cuffs was wrong. "They could be made of teddy bear material," he said, "but they still would be handcuffs. It is still police tactics on children who have committed no crime." In a separate instance, the family of a 10-year-old girl filed a federal lawsuit against the city last August, claiming police handcuffed her on a school bus because she wouldn't sit still.
Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly asked the department to look at alternatives to metal handcuffs, but Browne would not say what case triggered the review.
NYPD school safety officers in the schools are expected to receive the alternative handcuffs at the end of next week, and then get two weeks of training - not only on how to use the new cuffs, but when.
The new handcuffs would be used on youngsters under age 16. The restraints are 22-inch-long strips of cloth with Velcro fasteners that can be adjusted to fit a child's wrist.
"Handcuffing by any other name is still handcuffing, " said Donna Lieberman, executive director of the New York Civil Liberties Union.
FL: Ex-Venice Teacher Acquitted Of Abuse Charges
NOTE: Despite the fact that she admitted "that she sarcastically called the students names, including calling one child named Olivia "Oblivia," and another child "tons of fun" and that she also said that she sometimes "bopped" them on the head with water bottles, boards and objects to get their attention, despite the fact that all of these children are severely disabled and literally cannot speak..SHE WAS FOUND NOT GUILTY OF CHILD ABUSE.
One juror reportedly said, "Maybe that is what you need to do to teach those kids." Since when is "bopping a kid" on the head with BOARDS educational!?
Would they say the same things if it were a PARENT before them?
We hope the parents pursue civil charges...and that their attorneys find some additional "expert witnesses" who are not just classroom aides, but doctors and/or a certified school psychologists who can testify that hitting a disabled child in the head with a board is NOT a positive behavioral intervention and that NO RESEARCH exists to support it's "therapeutic" or "educational" value.
By Tiffany Lankes -- Sarasota Herald-Tribune
Tampa Bay Online
updated 7:16 p.m. ET, Sat., Feb. 14, 2009
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29198606/
SARASOTA - A well-spoken and assertive Diana O'Neill spent nearly four hours arguing her innocence Friday before a jury found her not guilty of four child abuse charges.
The six-person jury deliberated for about three hours before rendering its verdict.
The former Venice Elementary School special education teacher sat with her hands folded as the clerk read off each of the counts and the jury's not-guilty decision. After jurors left the room, O'Neill cried and hugged her husband.
"I'm glad that justice was served and the jury was able to see the truth," O'Neill, 46, said through tears as she left the courtroom.
The parents of the students she was accused of abusing sat on the other side of the courtroom Friday holding hands and hugging each other before the jury announced its verdict.
Some of them sobbed after the jury left the courtroom. One grandmother asked whether the verdict meant O'Neill could keep teaching. They all declined to comment.
O'Neill was accused of hitting, kicking and otherwise abusing four severely developmentally disabled students between October 2007 and January 2008. She had been a special education teacher at the school for 18 years before her arrest in February 2008.
Friday's verdict closes the criminal case against O'Neill, but not everything has been resolved.
The school district must decide whether to give O'Neill her old job back and the state could still revoke her teaching license.
Additionally, the parents of the children O'Neill was accused of abusing have hired attorneys and said they intend to sue the school district.
Four of those parents testified against O'Neill and sat through the trial, including when O'Neill took the stand Friday to defend herself.
O'Neill, the last witness to testify, described herself as a dedicated teacher who drinks six cups of coffee every morning and gets excited at even the most minor accomplishments of her students.
"I get all excited all over again," she said. "It's a new trick for my bag."
O'Neill maintained a calm and commanding demeanor as she explained the educational benefits of the techniques she was using with the children.
She raised her voice to add affirmation to certain responses, including when her attorney asked if she was getting burned out.
"Absolutely not," O'Neill said forcefully.
O'Neill did acknowledge that she sarcastically called the students names, including calling one child named Olivia "Oblivia," and another child "tons of fun." O'Neill also said that she sometimes "bopped" them on the head with water bottles, boards and objects to get their attention.
Both the prosecution and the defense called as witnesses educators from Venice Elementary School, who were split over whether the actions O'Neill was accused of taking were appropriate teaching methods.
The verdict followed a weeklong trial during which prosecutors attempted to prove that O'Neill's actions could have caused physical injury or mental harm to her students.
That standard was made more difficult to prove than in some other cases because all of the students involved are so severely disabled that they cannot speak.
They also have so many physical problems that there is no way to know whether she would have seriously injured them when aides say they saw her hit them on the head with objects, kick and push them.
Although prosecutors argued some of the children received bumps on the head, bruises and scratches in O'Neill's classroom, the defense said that those do not qualify as injuries.
The prosecution did not try to prove mental harm upon the children. Their mental capacity is unclear, and the prosecution would have had to prove that O'Neill's actions prevented them from acting in a "normal" manner.
"The standard itself is really hard," said prosecutor Dawn Buff after the verdict. "And this case was difficult."
The prosecution's case relied heavily on the testimony of classroom aides Tammy Cooke and Cindi Anderson, who spent three months keeping a detailed log of times they say O'Neill abused her students. There were also other school employees who say they saw O'Neill get too rough with her students over the years.
But defense attorneys argued that the aides mistook appropriate techniques for working with students with disabilities for abuse. They also repeatedly pointed out that no one came forward sooner to report that O'Neill was abusing her students.
An alternate juror who sat through the trial but did not participate in the decision said he was torn by the educators' testimony. Gerald Paquette said he could see how O'Neill's actions could be appropriate in a special education classroom, where students need a lot of physical interaction.
"Maybe that is what you need to do to teach those kids," Paquette said after the verdict.
The case drew the attention of child advocates, parents and court watchers, with the trial audience increasing every day.
On Friday the courtroom was filled nearly to capacity, including many people who said they were parents or former teachers.
Sarasota school union leaders sat in the courtroom behind O'Neill nearly every day. The union has supported O'Neill since she was arrested a year ago, including paying her attorneys fees early on. Union officials have declined to say whether they are still paying them, or how much the union has spent on O'Neill's defense.
School Board attorney Keith DuBose also watched the trial to gather information for the school district, which will now have to decide O'Neill's employment status.
While criminal courts must prove beyond a reasonable doubt a defendant's guilt, the standard is much lower for school districts or the state to revoke a teacher's license.
DuBose said he was also gathering information for possible civil lawsuits by the parents against the school district.
One juror reportedly said, "Maybe that is what you need to do to teach those kids." Since when is "bopping a kid" on the head with BOARDS educational!?
Would they say the same things if it were a PARENT before them?
We hope the parents pursue civil charges...and that their attorneys find some additional "expert witnesses" who are not just classroom aides, but doctors and/or a certified school psychologists who can testify that hitting a disabled child in the head with a board is NOT a positive behavioral intervention and that NO RESEARCH exists to support it's "therapeutic" or "educational" value.
By Tiffany Lankes -- Sarasota Herald-Tribune
Tampa Bay Online
updated 7:16 p.m. ET, Sat., Feb. 14, 2009
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29198606/
SARASOTA - A well-spoken and assertive Diana O'Neill spent nearly four hours arguing her innocence Friday before a jury found her not guilty of four child abuse charges.
The six-person jury deliberated for about three hours before rendering its verdict.
The former Venice Elementary School special education teacher sat with her hands folded as the clerk read off each of the counts and the jury's not-guilty decision. After jurors left the room, O'Neill cried and hugged her husband.
"I'm glad that justice was served and the jury was able to see the truth," O'Neill, 46, said through tears as she left the courtroom.
The parents of the students she was accused of abusing sat on the other side of the courtroom Friday holding hands and hugging each other before the jury announced its verdict.
Some of them sobbed after the jury left the courtroom. One grandmother asked whether the verdict meant O'Neill could keep teaching. They all declined to comment.
O'Neill was accused of hitting, kicking and otherwise abusing four severely developmentally disabled students between October 2007 and January 2008. She had been a special education teacher at the school for 18 years before her arrest in February 2008.
Friday's verdict closes the criminal case against O'Neill, but not everything has been resolved.
The school district must decide whether to give O'Neill her old job back and the state could still revoke her teaching license.
Additionally, the parents of the children O'Neill was accused of abusing have hired attorneys and said they intend to sue the school district.
Four of those parents testified against O'Neill and sat through the trial, including when O'Neill took the stand Friday to defend herself.
O'Neill, the last witness to testify, described herself as a dedicated teacher who drinks six cups of coffee every morning and gets excited at even the most minor accomplishments of her students.
"I get all excited all over again," she said. "It's a new trick for my bag."
O'Neill maintained a calm and commanding demeanor as she explained the educational benefits of the techniques she was using with the children.
She raised her voice to add affirmation to certain responses, including when her attorney asked if she was getting burned out.
"Absolutely not," O'Neill said forcefully.
O'Neill did acknowledge that she sarcastically called the students names, including calling one child named Olivia "Oblivia," and another child "tons of fun." O'Neill also said that she sometimes "bopped" them on the head with water bottles, boards and objects to get their attention.
Both the prosecution and the defense called as witnesses educators from Venice Elementary School, who were split over whether the actions O'Neill was accused of taking were appropriate teaching methods.
The verdict followed a weeklong trial during which prosecutors attempted to prove that O'Neill's actions could have caused physical injury or mental harm to her students.
That standard was made more difficult to prove than in some other cases because all of the students involved are so severely disabled that they cannot speak.
They also have so many physical problems that there is no way to know whether she would have seriously injured them when aides say they saw her hit them on the head with objects, kick and push them.
Although prosecutors argued some of the children received bumps on the head, bruises and scratches in O'Neill's classroom, the defense said that those do not qualify as injuries.
The prosecution did not try to prove mental harm upon the children. Their mental capacity is unclear, and the prosecution would have had to prove that O'Neill's actions prevented them from acting in a "normal" manner.
"The standard itself is really hard," said prosecutor Dawn Buff after the verdict. "And this case was difficult."
The prosecution's case relied heavily on the testimony of classroom aides Tammy Cooke and Cindi Anderson, who spent three months keeping a detailed log of times they say O'Neill abused her students. There were also other school employees who say they saw O'Neill get too rough with her students over the years.
But defense attorneys argued that the aides mistook appropriate techniques for working with students with disabilities for abuse. They also repeatedly pointed out that no one came forward sooner to report that O'Neill was abusing her students.
An alternate juror who sat through the trial but did not participate in the decision said he was torn by the educators' testimony. Gerald Paquette said he could see how O'Neill's actions could be appropriate in a special education classroom, where students need a lot of physical interaction.
"Maybe that is what you need to do to teach those kids," Paquette said after the verdict.
The case drew the attention of child advocates, parents and court watchers, with the trial audience increasing every day.
On Friday the courtroom was filled nearly to capacity, including many people who said they were parents or former teachers.
Sarasota school union leaders sat in the courtroom behind O'Neill nearly every day. The union has supported O'Neill since she was arrested a year ago, including paying her attorneys fees early on. Union officials have declined to say whether they are still paying them, or how much the union has spent on O'Neill's defense.
School Board attorney Keith DuBose also watched the trial to gather information for the school district, which will now have to decide O'Neill's employment status.
While criminal courts must prove beyond a reasonable doubt a defendant's guilt, the standard is much lower for school districts or the state to revoke a teacher's license.
DuBose said he was also gathering information for possible civil lawsuits by the parents against the school district.
GA: Boy bruised from paddling
By Taylor Seay (Contact) The Post-Searchlight
Published Friday, February 13, 2009
http://www.thepostsearchlight.com/news/2009/feb/13/boy-bruised-paddling/
The Decatur County School Board is investigating the use of corporal punishment (paddling) on a child attending Potter Street Elementary School that occurred on Feb. 6.
The 9-year-old student was paddled three times in one day by school administrator Janette Grimsley, according to the incident report filed by the child’s mother, Christina White. She told police she became aware of the bruising when her child got home from school and complained of having pain from being paddling.
Superintendent Ralph Jones said the Board of Education is investigating the matter, specifically the legality and policy matters surround the specific incident and the use of corporal punishment.
The parent did give consent for the child to be paddled, and bruising was apparent from the punishment, according to Jones.
The superintendent expressed the need for professional judgment when corporal punishment is used.
“The main issue is not the paddling, but the number of times the student was paddled. We have great concerns and will be addressing it as a school board,” said Jones. The next meeting of the Board of Education is scheduled Thursday, Feb. 19.
He elaborated saying the currently school board policy pertaining to paddling does not define the number of times a child can be paddled, although there is an underlying point when it is evident that the punishment is no longer beneficial.
“We do not condone paddling excessively,” Jones said. “Like any other policy, it must be used in good judgment.”
The superintendent said the student had prior disciplinary problems and other individual behavioral plan strategies were used prior to the paddling. He also noted that although the BOE does not condone excessive paddling, the possibility of bruising is always apparent when corporal punishment is used.
Jones said upon completion of the investigation, the case will be reviewed in executive session at the Board of Education’s Feb. 19 meeting. He expects a lengthy discussion on corporal punishment and a review of the current policy to see if there is a need for change.
At the request of the child’s mother, the Decatur County Sheriff’s Office is also conducting an investigation into the event. Investigator Brian Donalson has conducted interviews with the child, mother and has scheduled interviews with school officials, said Sheriff Griffin.
Griffin said the investigation is specifically to find out if there was intent to do harm to the child.
Pictures of the bruising that occurred from the paddling were provided to Sheriff’s investigators by the White.
Special Report: Disability Rights Network of North Carolina Refuses to Investigate Restraint and Abuse Allegations
UPDATE: NDRN claims they do not have authority to investigate complaints against state DRN's - that they are *only* a "voluntary membership organization."
PLEASE DISSEMINATE WIDELY
Special Report: Disability Rights Network of North Carolina Refuses to Investigate Restraint and Abuse Allegations
February 12, 2009
By Jennifer Searcy
Founder/Director of Public Policy & Affairs
The Coalition for Positive Behavioral Interventions & Supports
A client of ours has notified us that the North Carolina’s Disability Rights Network, the Protection & Advocacy of North Carolina – an agency that is mandated to investigate and receives grant funding to investigate abuse allegations in a variety of settings, including public schools - has twice refused her pleas to investigate documented physical restraints and allegations of abuse by a special education teacher in a public elementary school against an 8 year old boy.
At our client’s request, we are keeping her name, her son’s name, the names of the individuals involved, and the district involved confidential as the district has already twice threatened to retaliate against her.
Our client contacted the DRN last October to advise them her son, a child diagnosed with Asperger’s Syndrome and two specific learning disabilities, had been documented to have been physically restrained by a special education teacher at his Elementary School. Documentation from the teacher in her own handwriting also indicated that at times this teacher may have abused our client’s son. Some of the documented instances of alleged abuse are as follows:
Physically pulled the child away from a wall when he wouldn’t stop trailing his hand along it
Physically threw the child onto a rug and dragged him and the rug into the middle of the room
Took the child into the boy’s bathroom, stood immediately outside the stall the child had gone into, notified him that she was timing him, repeatedly kept yelling at him that he was taking too long, and, upon the child’s return to the classroom, the child yelled at his regular education teacher that “she wouldn’t let [him] go.” He then got in trouble and was disciplined for yelling at his teacher. As an additional note: The child has suspected body regulation issues thought to be due to known sensory issues and he needs to take frequent restroom breaks as he has difficulty assessing his “need to go.” His behavior plan also indicated that if he returns to the classroom after leaving to use the restroom within 2 minutes, he’d receive tickets as a reward, and oftentimes this would be used against him in the form of taking earned tickets away from him for “not following bathroom rules.”
The child was also documented to have been found two days’ prior to this incident in the boy’s bathroom by either a female teacher or aide (not sure of her position in the school) curled up on the floor of the bathroom minus his shoes, socks, underwear and pants, and to have urinated on himself.
This information was shared with the N.C. DRN.
N.C. DRN advocate Diana Burch spoke to our client and offered to attend the next IEP meeting with her since things had become tenuous with the district. Ms. Burch attended an IEP meeting with our client on November 3, 2008. Afterward, Ms. Burch consulted with N.C. DRN’s attorneys and contacted our client to advise her that the attorney’s had deemed her son’s case as “unwinnable,” and that she should sign and agree to everything the district recommended in her son’s IEP, even though the mom disagreed with the appropriateness of the IEP, because, as Ms. Burch told her, “It could be worse.”
Things did progressively get worse with the district. Since then, he’s been transferred into a BED program at another elementary school within the district - a placement which our client and the district both disputes; the district had refused transportation, and, after a battle over this issue, is now transporting him along with all the other disabled children in the elementary & middle schools on a dedicated bus that stops at multiple schools, with children on the bus as long as close to two hours one way; the district offered and my client agreed to a crisis intervention plan during mediation to stop the physical restraints after the district refused to honor her “No Restraint Letter,” but the crisis plan has been implemented for non-emergencies and has resulted in multiple altercations with School Resource Officers and suspensions.
Our client’s son has also been suffering from nightmares, upset stomach, nosebleeds, and anxiety, and has relayed he feels like a “bad kid” who is stupid. After a day at school, he once came home and asked his mother why he is “so misguided.” This child is only 8 years old.
We advised our client to again contact the N.C. DRN and specifically ask for an investigation into allegations of abuse, including physical restraints, since we and our client were concerned that possibly the N.C. DRN didn’t realize the extent of allegations weighed against the district. She contacted them again by email, forwarding a timeline documenting the alleged abuse, and was advised via email that they would re-open her case.
She recently received word that the N.C. DRN would not be assisting her as she cannot verify if her son has been suspended for 10 or more days. He has received in-school suspensions, has been suspended multiple times for single days and multiple days, and has been sent home early for “behavioral reasons,” like yelling at a teacher or another student, but it is unclear whether the “10 days” requirement N.C. DRN inexplicably set forth has been met as we have not received written incident reports to indicate whether these “early releases” were considered suspensions, though we have asked for via FERPA request, and been denied access to these records. A formal FERPA complaint has been filed.
Our client was also physically assaulted by a secretary who kept pulling the sign in book away from our client when she attempted to sign in as a visitor and yelling at our client she “couldn’t sign there” when our client made a surprise visit to the school this past Monday, FERPA letters previously sent to the district and legal requirements of FERPA in hand.
We are disappointed and dismayed that the DRN of North Carolina is refusing to help this child, especially in light of the recently released NDRN report documenting similar cases of abuse.
We have filed a formal complaint with the National Disability Rights Network on our client’s behalf and will keep you informed if and when the NDRN responds.
PLEASE DISSEMINATE WIDELY
Special Report: Disability Rights Network of North Carolina Refuses to Investigate Restraint and Abuse Allegations
February 12, 2009
By Jennifer Searcy
Founder/Director of Public Policy & Affairs
The Coalition for Positive Behavioral Interventions & Supports
A client of ours has notified us that the North Carolina’s Disability Rights Network, the Protection & Advocacy of North Carolina – an agency that is mandated to investigate and receives grant funding to investigate abuse allegations in a variety of settings, including public schools - has twice refused her pleas to investigate documented physical restraints and allegations of abuse by a special education teacher in a public elementary school against an 8 year old boy.
At our client’s request, we are keeping her name, her son’s name, the names of the individuals involved, and the district involved confidential as the district has already twice threatened to retaliate against her.
Our client contacted the DRN last October to advise them her son, a child diagnosed with Asperger’s Syndrome and two specific learning disabilities, had been documented to have been physically restrained by a special education teacher at his Elementary School. Documentation from the teacher in her own handwriting also indicated that at times this teacher may have abused our client’s son. Some of the documented instances of alleged abuse are as follows:
Physically pulled the child away from a wall when he wouldn’t stop trailing his hand along it
Physically threw the child onto a rug and dragged him and the rug into the middle of the room
Took the child into the boy’s bathroom, stood immediately outside the stall the child had gone into, notified him that she was timing him, repeatedly kept yelling at him that he was taking too long, and, upon the child’s return to the classroom, the child yelled at his regular education teacher that “she wouldn’t let [him] go.” He then got in trouble and was disciplined for yelling at his teacher. As an additional note: The child has suspected body regulation issues thought to be due to known sensory issues and he needs to take frequent restroom breaks as he has difficulty assessing his “need to go.” His behavior plan also indicated that if he returns to the classroom after leaving to use the restroom within 2 minutes, he’d receive tickets as a reward, and oftentimes this would be used against him in the form of taking earned tickets away from him for “not following bathroom rules.”
The child was also documented to have been found two days’ prior to this incident in the boy’s bathroom by either a female teacher or aide (not sure of her position in the school) curled up on the floor of the bathroom minus his shoes, socks, underwear and pants, and to have urinated on himself.
This information was shared with the N.C. DRN.
N.C. DRN advocate Diana Burch spoke to our client and offered to attend the next IEP meeting with her since things had become tenuous with the district. Ms. Burch attended an IEP meeting with our client on November 3, 2008. Afterward, Ms. Burch consulted with N.C. DRN’s attorneys and contacted our client to advise her that the attorney’s had deemed her son’s case as “unwinnable,” and that she should sign and agree to everything the district recommended in her son’s IEP, even though the mom disagreed with the appropriateness of the IEP, because, as Ms. Burch told her, “It could be worse.”
Things did progressively get worse with the district. Since then, he’s been transferred into a BED program at another elementary school within the district - a placement which our client and the district both disputes; the district had refused transportation, and, after a battle over this issue, is now transporting him along with all the other disabled children in the elementary & middle schools on a dedicated bus that stops at multiple schools, with children on the bus as long as close to two hours one way; the district offered and my client agreed to a crisis intervention plan during mediation to stop the physical restraints after the district refused to honor her “No Restraint Letter,” but the crisis plan has been implemented for non-emergencies and has resulted in multiple altercations with School Resource Officers and suspensions.
Our client’s son has also been suffering from nightmares, upset stomach, nosebleeds, and anxiety, and has relayed he feels like a “bad kid” who is stupid. After a day at school, he once came home and asked his mother why he is “so misguided.” This child is only 8 years old.
We advised our client to again contact the N.C. DRN and specifically ask for an investigation into allegations of abuse, including physical restraints, since we and our client were concerned that possibly the N.C. DRN didn’t realize the extent of allegations weighed against the district. She contacted them again by email, forwarding a timeline documenting the alleged abuse, and was advised via email that they would re-open her case.
She recently received word that the N.C. DRN would not be assisting her as she cannot verify if her son has been suspended for 10 or more days. He has received in-school suspensions, has been suspended multiple times for single days and multiple days, and has been sent home early for “behavioral reasons,” like yelling at a teacher or another student, but it is unclear whether the “10 days” requirement N.C. DRN inexplicably set forth has been met as we have not received written incident reports to indicate whether these “early releases” were considered suspensions, though we have asked for via FERPA request, and been denied access to these records. A formal FERPA complaint has been filed.
Our client was also physically assaulted by a secretary who kept pulling the sign in book away from our client when she attempted to sign in as a visitor and yelling at our client she “couldn’t sign there” when our client made a surprise visit to the school this past Monday, FERPA letters previously sent to the district and legal requirements of FERPA in hand.
We are disappointed and dismayed that the DRN of North Carolina is refusing to help this child, especially in light of the recently released NDRN report documenting similar cases of abuse.
We have filed a formal complaint with the National Disability Rights Network on our client’s behalf and will keep you informed if and when the NDRN responds.
VIDEO: Restraint and Seclusion Behind Closed Doors
This is a fantastic, highly emotional, video my former partner, Phyllis from Families Against Restraint and Seclusion, created to help spread the word that these types of abusive practices must stop!
Please take a few moments to watch this YouTube Video...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fkhhv2fUwDg
Please take a few moments to watch this YouTube Video...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fkhhv2fUwDg
VIDEO: Restraint and Seclusion: Who Will Stand up for Our Children
Here is another heartbreaking video of restraint and seclusion and the devastating effects this can have on our children. Created by Anna Moore...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z8RlcIRkBkw&eurl=http://nomoseclusion.blogspot.com/2009/01/restraint-seclusion-video.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z8RlcIRkBkw&eurl=http://nomoseclusion.blogspot.com/2009/01/restraint-seclusion-video.html
Seven Basic Supports for the Asperger Student
This document by Annette Wilkes, a parent of a child diagnosed with Asperger's Syndrome, is a must read for every parent of a child diagnosed with Asperger's Syndrome!
http://www.apn.150m.com/Original%20APN%20Website/7support.pdf
Her 7 Basic Supports include:
1. A carefully thought out and implemented IEP
2. Help in developing social skills
3. Protection from bullying and teasing
4. Trained teachers and paraprofessionals
5. Positive Behavior Interventions (always a favorite around here :) )
6. Respect for his coping limitations and a "safe place"
7. A modified curriculum (including homework modifications)
http://www.apn.150m.com/Original%20APN%20Website/7support.pdf
Her 7 Basic Supports include:
1. A carefully thought out and implemented IEP
2. Help in developing social skills
3. Protection from bullying and teasing
4. Trained teachers and paraprofessionals
5. Positive Behavior Interventions (always a favorite around here :) )
6. Respect for his coping limitations and a "safe place"
7. A modified curriculum (including homework modifications)
"Conducting a Meaningful Functional Behavioral Assessment"
Rebekah Heinrichs, MSN, Ms Ed
Asperger Information
http://www.aspergerinformation.org
"Conducting a Meaningful Functional Behavioral Assessment"
Many times students with Asperger Syndrome and related disorders
exhibit behaviors in the school environment that challenge teachers
and limit learning. Since behavior does not occur in a vacuum, it is
important to conduct a Functional Behavioral Assessment (FBA) before
developing an individualized Behavioral Intervention Plan (BIP). The
FBA will help identify factors in the environment that contribute to
the behaviors in question. The primary focus during this process
should be assessment of the reason or "function" of the behaviors
Regrettably, the process of conducting an appropriate FBA and then
developing an individualized BIP are concepts that are often
misunderstood and mismanaged in educational practice.
Many times when behavior becomes an issue, an incomplete assessment is
performed that merely documents behaviors without taking into
consideration why the behaviors are occurring and what environmental
factors are present before, during, and after the behaviors occur.
Also, the assessment may not meet standards of objectivity, which is
absolutely critical to the successful creation of a meaningful FBA.
Further complicating matters, interventions are often fashioned with
an intense focus on extinguishing unwanted behaviors. When this is the
case, the BIP typically will not contain appropriate positive
behavioral supports due to a subsequent lack of understanding of the
real function or reason for the observed behaviors. As a result, the
BIP will most likely fail to contribute much in the way of positive
results.
By definition, a true FBA requires an evaluation of what antecedents
are present in the environment before the behavior occurs and the
consequences of the behavior. In other words, it is important to
consider what happens before, during and after these behaviors occur.
This assessment must be objective and use a variety of different
methods or tools of assessment. Information can and should be obtained
by a review of all pertinent records, interviews, and of course
observations across a variety of different environments and time frames.
There are many resources and tested tools that can help provide
information. People who are familiar with the student in a variety of
different capacities can potentially contribute pertinent insights and
details. These contributions must never be disregarded or ignored
based on preconceived beliefs and prejudices. Information gathered
from the completed assessment will then be used to establish credible
hypotheses related to the possible function of identified behaviors.
Only then, can the process of developing the positive BIP begin in
earnest.
Before designing a BIP, it is wise to keep in mind a few common
pitfalls associated with behaviorism. Paula Kluth (2004), an
educational consultant and expert in autism spectrum disorders,
recommends the following cautions when designing behavior plans. She
advises that educators "recognize the limits of behaviorism, avoid
removing students from the classroom and not make compliance the
goal." These recommendations take into consideration that the use of
reinforcements and rewards as well as punishments has the potential to
be used in ways that "harm, hurt, or humiliate learners." When an
appropriate FBA is completed and the information is then applied to
the development of an individualized BIP, the results are often
dramatic and positive.
Asperger Information
http://www.aspergerinformation.org
"Conducting a Meaningful Functional Behavioral Assessment"
Many times students with Asperger Syndrome and related disorders
exhibit behaviors in the school environment that challenge teachers
and limit learning. Since behavior does not occur in a vacuum, it is
important to conduct a Functional Behavioral Assessment (FBA) before
developing an individualized Behavioral Intervention Plan (BIP). The
FBA will help identify factors in the environment that contribute to
the behaviors in question. The primary focus during this process
should be assessment of the reason or "function" of the behaviors
Regrettably, the process of conducting an appropriate FBA and then
developing an individualized BIP are concepts that are often
misunderstood and mismanaged in educational practice.
Many times when behavior becomes an issue, an incomplete assessment is
performed that merely documents behaviors without taking into
consideration why the behaviors are occurring and what environmental
factors are present before, during, and after the behaviors occur.
Also, the assessment may not meet standards of objectivity, which is
absolutely critical to the successful creation of a meaningful FBA.
Further complicating matters, interventions are often fashioned with
an intense focus on extinguishing unwanted behaviors. When this is the
case, the BIP typically will not contain appropriate positive
behavioral supports due to a subsequent lack of understanding of the
real function or reason for the observed behaviors. As a result, the
BIP will most likely fail to contribute much in the way of positive
results.
By definition, a true FBA requires an evaluation of what antecedents
are present in the environment before the behavior occurs and the
consequences of the behavior. In other words, it is important to
consider what happens before, during and after these behaviors occur.
This assessment must be objective and use a variety of different
methods or tools of assessment. Information can and should be obtained
by a review of all pertinent records, interviews, and of course
observations across a variety of different environments and time frames.
There are many resources and tested tools that can help provide
information. People who are familiar with the student in a variety of
different capacities can potentially contribute pertinent insights and
details. These contributions must never be disregarded or ignored
based on preconceived beliefs and prejudices. Information gathered
from the completed assessment will then be used to establish credible
hypotheses related to the possible function of identified behaviors.
Only then, can the process of developing the positive BIP begin in
earnest.
Before designing a BIP, it is wise to keep in mind a few common
pitfalls associated with behaviorism. Paula Kluth (2004), an
educational consultant and expert in autism spectrum disorders,
recommends the following cautions when designing behavior plans. She
advises that educators "recognize the limits of behaviorism, avoid
removing students from the classroom and not make compliance the
goal." These recommendations take into consideration that the use of
reinforcements and rewards as well as punishments has the potential to
be used in ways that "harm, hurt, or humiliate learners." When an
appropriate FBA is completed and the information is then applied to
the development of an individualized BIP, the results are often
dramatic and positive.
FL: Help teachers, help students
Palm Beach Post Editorial
Saturday, February 14, 2009
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/opinion/content/opinion/epaper/2009/02/14/a22a_leadedit_portillo_0214.html
At this point, everybody agrees that Alex Barton never should have been voted out of his kindergarten class at Morningside Elementary in Port St. Lucie. Even Wendy Portillo, the teacher who imposed that bizarre punishment, agrees that she was out of line: "If I could take that morning back, I would."
Ms. Portillo herself is out of the classroom now. She has appealed the yearlong suspension imposed by the St. Lucie County School Board on the recommendation of Superintendent Michael Lannon. Though the suspension is appropriate, students such as Alex pose problems for teachers, and districts don't always provide the level of training and support teachers need.
The Palm Beach County School District also has been confronting its shortcomings - though not strictly voluntarily. The school board last week settled a lawsuit that will change how the district teaches and disciplines special education students. Ms. Portillo's mishandling of Alex Barton, and the resulting controversy, can help the public to better understand what teachers face.
When he came to the class, Alex had not been diagnosed with Asperger's syndrome. That process stretched out over months. The teacher's options for dealing with constant disruption were limited. She could take away tokens, or she could send him out of the room.
Tellingly, on the day Ms. Portillo made her cruel mistake, the volunteer and alternate teacher who often looked after Alex when he was sent out of the classroom were not available. The principal's office, to which Alex was sent, returned him to the classroom after a short time. More effective support might have saved Ms. Portillo from her mistake.
To help teachers, a spokesperson for the St. Lucie School District said, "We have offered an array of training over the years and continue to make that training available." The district is dealing with "exponential growth in children identified with the autism spectrum. Based on the sensitivity associated with this issue this school year, we have offered (training) for all teachers on Autism Spectrum Disorder." She said that the district also is working closely with the Center for Autism and Related Disabilities at FAU.
Palm Beach County has not had an episode that caused public outrage on the scale of the Portillo/Barton case. But parents and groups that advocate for special-education students sued the district for using harmful discipline techniques that unnecessarily took students out of regular classes and programs.
The settlement requires the district to spend up to $100,000 for a consultant to develop a better system. The scope is striking. The settlement says that training "shall include all principals, assistant principals, teachers (general and special education), student support services staff, paraprofessionals, disciplinarians, other school administrators, and other educational service providers working at all schools in the district and shall also include school resource officers, bus drivers and cafeteria workers."
Schools are struggling to keep special education students in regular classrooms - which should be the goal - without disrupting the education of other students. Without proper training, the result can be kindergartners being shunned by classmates. New and continuing training for staff will make life better for everyone in the classroom.
Saturday, February 14, 2009
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/opinion/content/opinion/epaper/2009/02/14/a22a_leadedit_portillo_0214.html
At this point, everybody agrees that Alex Barton never should have been voted out of his kindergarten class at Morningside Elementary in Port St. Lucie. Even Wendy Portillo, the teacher who imposed that bizarre punishment, agrees that she was out of line: "If I could take that morning back, I would."
Ms. Portillo herself is out of the classroom now. She has appealed the yearlong suspension imposed by the St. Lucie County School Board on the recommendation of Superintendent Michael Lannon. Though the suspension is appropriate, students such as Alex pose problems for teachers, and districts don't always provide the level of training and support teachers need.
The Palm Beach County School District also has been confronting its shortcomings - though not strictly voluntarily. The school board last week settled a lawsuit that will change how the district teaches and disciplines special education students. Ms. Portillo's mishandling of Alex Barton, and the resulting controversy, can help the public to better understand what teachers face.
When he came to the class, Alex had not been diagnosed with Asperger's syndrome. That process stretched out over months. The teacher's options for dealing with constant disruption were limited. She could take away tokens, or she could send him out of the room.
Tellingly, on the day Ms. Portillo made her cruel mistake, the volunteer and alternate teacher who often looked after Alex when he was sent out of the classroom were not available. The principal's office, to which Alex was sent, returned him to the classroom after a short time. More effective support might have saved Ms. Portillo from her mistake.
To help teachers, a spokesperson for the St. Lucie School District said, "We have offered an array of training over the years and continue to make that training available." The district is dealing with "exponential growth in children identified with the autism spectrum. Based on the sensitivity associated with this issue this school year, we have offered (training) for all teachers on Autism Spectrum Disorder." She said that the district also is working closely with the Center for Autism and Related Disabilities at FAU.
Palm Beach County has not had an episode that caused public outrage on the scale of the Portillo/Barton case. But parents and groups that advocate for special-education students sued the district for using harmful discipline techniques that unnecessarily took students out of regular classes and programs.
The settlement requires the district to spend up to $100,000 for a consultant to develop a better system. The scope is striking. The settlement says that training "shall include all principals, assistant principals, teachers (general and special education), student support services staff, paraprofessionals, disciplinarians, other school administrators, and other educational service providers working at all schools in the district and shall also include school resource officers, bus drivers and cafeteria workers."
Schools are struggling to keep special education students in regular classrooms - which should be the goal - without disrupting the education of other students. Without proper training, the result can be kindergartners being shunned by classmates. New and continuing training for staff will make life better for everyone in the classroom.
PA: 2 Pa. judges sued in $2.6M kickback scheme
02/14/2009
Updated 02/14/2009 12:46:17 AM EST
http://www.heraldstandard.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=20262334&BRD=2280&PAG=461&dept_id=480247&rfi=6
ALLENTOWN, Pa. (AP) - Two lawsuits have been filed against two Pennsylvania judges accused of taking more than $2 million in kickbacks to send youth offenders to privately run detention centers.
The suits name Luzerne County Judges Mark Ciavarella and Michael Conahan as well as the individuals who allegedly paid the kickbacks and other defendants. They were filed in federal court late Thursday and Friday on behalf of hundreds of children and their families who were alleged victims of the corruption.
"At the hands of two grossly corrupt judges and several conspirators, hundreds of Pennsylvania children, their families and loved ones, were victimized and their civil rights violated," plaintiffs' attorney Michael Cefalo said in a statement Friday.
Prosecutors allege Ciavarella and Conahan took $2.6 million in payoffs to put juvenile offenders in lockups run by PA Child Care LLC and a sister company, possibly tainting the convictions of thousands of juvenile offenders.
The judges pleaded guilty to fraud in federal court in Scranton on Thursday. Their plea agreements call for sentences of more than seven years in prison.
For years, youth advocacy groups complained that Ciavarella, who presided over juvenile court, was overly harsh and trampled on kids' constitutional rights. Ciavarella sent a quarter of his juvenile defendants to detention centers from 2002 to 2006, compared with a statewide rate of one in 10.
"Ciavarella, in the most cynical fashion, assured that there would be ample juveniles adjudicated delinquent and placed in PA Child Care," one of the suits said. "As juvenile judge, he ignored law, ignored the constitution, and ignored basic human decency. He provided quick 'justice,' adjudicated children delinquent and ripped them from their parents in record time and in astonishing numbers."
The suits ask for monetary damages.
An attorney for Conahan declined to comment. Ciavarella's lawyer didn't immediately return a phone message.
The lead plaintiff in one lawsuit is Florence Wallace, whose 14-year-old daughter Bernadine was charged with terroristic threats after getting into an argument on MySpace. The lawsuit said the teenager was not advised of her right to an attorney and was pressured to plead guilty. She was taken from Ciavarella's courtroom in shackles and spent time in PA Child Care and at a youth wilderness camp.
As a result of the judges' corruption, parents were forced to pay for the "wrongful incarceration" of their children, the suit said. Some parents had their wages garnished, public assistance benefits taken and social security benefits seized.
In addition to the judges, plaintiffs in both suits are suing two individuals who allegedly paid the kickbacks: attorney Robert Powell, who co-owned PA Child Care LLC and Western PA Child Care LLC until last June; and Robert Mericle, who owns one of the largest commercial construction firms in northeastern Pennsylvania and built the detention centers.
Through an attorney, Powell has said he was the victim of extortion. A spokesman for Mericle has denied making payments "to influence a decision to secure a contract to build any PA Child Care facility."
Mericle's company was also named as a defendant.
Through a spokesman, PA Child Care and Western PA Child Care, which are also named as defendants, declined to comment. The detention centers' current owner, Gregory Zappala - another defendant - has said through an attorney that he had no knowledge of the payoffs.
U.S. Attorney Martin Carlson has notified lawyers for PA Child Care and Western PA Child Care that the facilities are not being targeted in the ongoing corruption probe and do not face indictment.
Both lawsuits seek class-action status in the case.
Both judges have been removed from the bench by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. On Friday, the high court, which had suspended Ciavarella with pay, terminated his pay and benefits. He had been making about $157,000 a year.
Conahan, who was semi-retired but still heard cases as a senior judge, has been stripped of his certification and may no longer receive per-diem pay.
Updated 02/14/2009 12:46:17 AM EST
http://www.heraldstandard.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=20262334&BRD=2280&PAG=461&dept_id=480247&rfi=6
ALLENTOWN, Pa. (AP) - Two lawsuits have been filed against two Pennsylvania judges accused of taking more than $2 million in kickbacks to send youth offenders to privately run detention centers.
The suits name Luzerne County Judges Mark Ciavarella and Michael Conahan as well as the individuals who allegedly paid the kickbacks and other defendants. They were filed in federal court late Thursday and Friday on behalf of hundreds of children and their families who were alleged victims of the corruption.
"At the hands of two grossly corrupt judges and several conspirators, hundreds of Pennsylvania children, their families and loved ones, were victimized and their civil rights violated," plaintiffs' attorney Michael Cefalo said in a statement Friday.
Prosecutors allege Ciavarella and Conahan took $2.6 million in payoffs to put juvenile offenders in lockups run by PA Child Care LLC and a sister company, possibly tainting the convictions of thousands of juvenile offenders.
The judges pleaded guilty to fraud in federal court in Scranton on Thursday. Their plea agreements call for sentences of more than seven years in prison.
For years, youth advocacy groups complained that Ciavarella, who presided over juvenile court, was overly harsh and trampled on kids' constitutional rights. Ciavarella sent a quarter of his juvenile defendants to detention centers from 2002 to 2006, compared with a statewide rate of one in 10.
"Ciavarella, in the most cynical fashion, assured that there would be ample juveniles adjudicated delinquent and placed in PA Child Care," one of the suits said. "As juvenile judge, he ignored law, ignored the constitution, and ignored basic human decency. He provided quick 'justice,' adjudicated children delinquent and ripped them from their parents in record time and in astonishing numbers."
The suits ask for monetary damages.
An attorney for Conahan declined to comment. Ciavarella's lawyer didn't immediately return a phone message.
The lead plaintiff in one lawsuit is Florence Wallace, whose 14-year-old daughter Bernadine was charged with terroristic threats after getting into an argument on MySpace. The lawsuit said the teenager was not advised of her right to an attorney and was pressured to plead guilty. She was taken from Ciavarella's courtroom in shackles and spent time in PA Child Care and at a youth wilderness camp.
As a result of the judges' corruption, parents were forced to pay for the "wrongful incarceration" of their children, the suit said. Some parents had their wages garnished, public assistance benefits taken and social security benefits seized.
In addition to the judges, plaintiffs in both suits are suing two individuals who allegedly paid the kickbacks: attorney Robert Powell, who co-owned PA Child Care LLC and Western PA Child Care LLC until last June; and Robert Mericle, who owns one of the largest commercial construction firms in northeastern Pennsylvania and built the detention centers.
Through an attorney, Powell has said he was the victim of extortion. A spokesman for Mericle has denied making payments "to influence a decision to secure a contract to build any PA Child Care facility."
Mericle's company was also named as a defendant.
Through a spokesman, PA Child Care and Western PA Child Care, which are also named as defendants, declined to comment. The detention centers' current owner, Gregory Zappala - another defendant - has said through an attorney that he had no knowledge of the payoffs.
U.S. Attorney Martin Carlson has notified lawyers for PA Child Care and Western PA Child Care that the facilities are not being targeted in the ongoing corruption probe and do not face indictment.
Both lawsuits seek class-action status in the case.
Both judges have been removed from the bench by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. On Friday, the high court, which had suspended Ciavarella with pay, terminated his pay and benefits. He had been making about $157,000 a year.
Conahan, who was semi-retired but still heard cases as a senior judge, has been stripped of his certification and may no longer receive per-diem pay.
FL: Largo police hospitalize 7-year-old under Baker Act
NOTE: "Pinellas schools' police report they have been involved in 83 Baker Acts from the beginning of the school year to the start of this week," and admitted to several other "Baker Acts that day," yet they play it off as no big deal because there are over 105,000 kids in the entire district.
How many of those children who were Baker Acted receive special education versus those that didn't? And of those that weren't officially eligible for special education yet, obviously if the district has to resort to Baker Acting a child, there's a good indication of an emotional problem that should have been picked up a whole lot sooner and could have qualified the child for special education services. If that's the case, then why weren't those children identified under Child Find?
In this case, a 7 yr old disabled boy was put into a psychiatrict hospital and kept overnight for observation....because he stepped on his teacher's foot and "tore up a classroom." Since when is stepping on someone's foot or throwing things around a room an act of "serious bodily injury?"
Nope, they're not Baker Acting kids unnecessarily...
Jonathan Abel St. Petersburg Times
Originally published 09:20 a.m., February 14, 2009
Updated 09:20 a.m., February 14, 2009
http://www.tcpalm.com/news/2009/feb/14/largo-police-hospitalize-7-year-old-under-baker-ac/?feedback=1#comments
LARGO, Fla. — Police this week removed an unruly 7-year-old from his classroom and forced him to be hospitalized under the state's Baker Act — against the wishes of his outraged parents.
The boy spent the night alone at Morton Plant Hospital before he was seen by a child psychologist the next day and discharged.
"This is a total abuse of police power," said the boy's father, Richard Smith, 41. "My son has no mental health problems. He's never hurt himself. He's never hurt anyone else."
Smith and his wife, Barbara, said they want to consult a lawyer.
But Largo deputy police Chief John Carroll said his officers did the right thing.
By all accounts, the second-grader threw a tantrum at Mildred Helms Elementary on Wednesday. Carroll said the boy tore up the room during his fit. In the process, he stepped on a teacher's foot and "battered" a school administrator.
Carroll said the tantrum was so bad that school officials had to evacuate students from the classroom.
School officials called the parents and police. When officers arrived, they decided the boy needed a mental health examination.
This was not the first time the boy had acted up, Carroll said, and the lead officer, Michael Kirkpatrick, decided the boy couldn't just go home again with his mother.
"He just felt that this young man needed some mental health service he wasn't getting," Carroll explained. "The Baker Act is a kind of a Band-Aid that allows us to have somebody introduced to the service providers that can actually do something for him."
Barbara Smith said she could have defused the situation had officers let her see her son. Instead, they kept her from him as they conducted their investigation, she said.
When police decided to take him to a hospital, she agreed to ride with the boy in a police car to comfort him.
The incident was terrifying for the boy, whose name is not being used by the St. Petersburg Times. Barbara Smith is keeping the boy and his 9-year-old sister out of school because they are "scared to death" to go back, she said.
The Baker Act allows people to be taken for mental health examination against their will. But it requires a person show a substantial likelihood of causing serious injury to himself or others.
Absent that, police cannot use the Baker Act to take someone into custody against their will, even if they think the person needs help, said Raine Johns, who handles Baker Act cases for the Pinellas-Pasco Public Defender's Office.
"That's not the purpose of the Baker Act at all," said Johns, who is not involved in the case. "Stepping on somebody's foot doesn't rise to the level of substantial bodily harm."
Martha Lenderman, a Pinellas-based Baker Act expert, said a child can be taken against parents' wishes, but only if he meets all the criteria.
Johns said she has seen children as young as 7 taken into custody under the Baker Act before, but usually it's voluntary.
Pinellas schools police report they have been involved in 83 Baker Acts from the beginning of the school year to the start of this week. That does not include any handled by other police agencies.
School Board member Peggy O'Shea said she didn't think that sounded like a large number given the 105,000 students in Pinellas schools.
School board member Janet Clark noted there were several other Baker Acts in Pinellas schools that day. She plans to raise the issue with the superintendent.
School officials said a region superintendent has agreed to meet with the Smiths and the principal.
Carroll said the it's not as if police officers enjoy taking kids into custody.
"We look like the big tough cops with the tiny kid," he said.
But in the case of this boy, it was justified.
"The child got interviewed by mental health professionals," he said. "He didn't get arrested. There's no criminal charges against him."
Richard Smith and his wife are not sure of their next step.
"We can't just sweep this under the carpet," she said. "We do want to talk to a lawyer. … Our main goal is to make sure this does not happen to another family."
Jonathan Abel can be reached at jabel@sptimes.com or (727) 445-4157.
How many of those children who were Baker Acted receive special education versus those that didn't? And of those that weren't officially eligible for special education yet, obviously if the district has to resort to Baker Acting a child, there's a good indication of an emotional problem that should have been picked up a whole lot sooner and could have qualified the child for special education services. If that's the case, then why weren't those children identified under Child Find?
In this case, a 7 yr old disabled boy was put into a psychiatrict hospital and kept overnight for observation....because he stepped on his teacher's foot and "tore up a classroom." Since when is stepping on someone's foot or throwing things around a room an act of "serious bodily injury?"
Nope, they're not Baker Acting kids unnecessarily...
Jonathan Abel St. Petersburg Times
Originally published 09:20 a.m., February 14, 2009
Updated 09:20 a.m., February 14, 2009
http://www.tcpalm.com/news/2009/feb/14/largo-police-hospitalize-7-year-old-under-baker-ac/?feedback=1#comments
LARGO, Fla. — Police this week removed an unruly 7-year-old from his classroom and forced him to be hospitalized under the state's Baker Act — against the wishes of his outraged parents.
The boy spent the night alone at Morton Plant Hospital before he was seen by a child psychologist the next day and discharged.
"This is a total abuse of police power," said the boy's father, Richard Smith, 41. "My son has no mental health problems. He's never hurt himself. He's never hurt anyone else."
Smith and his wife, Barbara, said they want to consult a lawyer.
But Largo deputy police Chief John Carroll said his officers did the right thing.
By all accounts, the second-grader threw a tantrum at Mildred Helms Elementary on Wednesday. Carroll said the boy tore up the room during his fit. In the process, he stepped on a teacher's foot and "battered" a school administrator.
Carroll said the tantrum was so bad that school officials had to evacuate students from the classroom.
School officials called the parents and police. When officers arrived, they decided the boy needed a mental health examination.
This was not the first time the boy had acted up, Carroll said, and the lead officer, Michael Kirkpatrick, decided the boy couldn't just go home again with his mother.
"He just felt that this young man needed some mental health service he wasn't getting," Carroll explained. "The Baker Act is a kind of a Band-Aid that allows us to have somebody introduced to the service providers that can actually do something for him."
Barbara Smith said she could have defused the situation had officers let her see her son. Instead, they kept her from him as they conducted their investigation, she said.
When police decided to take him to a hospital, she agreed to ride with the boy in a police car to comfort him.
The incident was terrifying for the boy, whose name is not being used by the St. Petersburg Times. Barbara Smith is keeping the boy and his 9-year-old sister out of school because they are "scared to death" to go back, she said.
The Baker Act allows people to be taken for mental health examination against their will. But it requires a person show a substantial likelihood of causing serious injury to himself or others.
Absent that, police cannot use the Baker Act to take someone into custody against their will, even if they think the person needs help, said Raine Johns, who handles Baker Act cases for the Pinellas-Pasco Public Defender's Office.
"That's not the purpose of the Baker Act at all," said Johns, who is not involved in the case. "Stepping on somebody's foot doesn't rise to the level of substantial bodily harm."
Martha Lenderman, a Pinellas-based Baker Act expert, said a child can be taken against parents' wishes, but only if he meets all the criteria.
Johns said she has seen children as young as 7 taken into custody under the Baker Act before, but usually it's voluntary.
Pinellas schools police report they have been involved in 83 Baker Acts from the beginning of the school year to the start of this week. That does not include any handled by other police agencies.
School Board member Peggy O'Shea said she didn't think that sounded like a large number given the 105,000 students in Pinellas schools.
School board member Janet Clark noted there were several other Baker Acts in Pinellas schools that day. She plans to raise the issue with the superintendent.
School officials said a region superintendent has agreed to meet with the Smiths and the principal.
Carroll said the it's not as if police officers enjoy taking kids into custody.
"We look like the big tough cops with the tiny kid," he said.
But in the case of this boy, it was justified.
"The child got interviewed by mental health professionals," he said. "He didn't get arrested. There's no criminal charges against him."
Richard Smith and his wife are not sure of their next step.
"We can't just sweep this under the carpet," she said. "We do want to talk to a lawyer. … Our main goal is to make sure this does not happen to another family."
Jonathan Abel can be reached at jabel@sptimes.com or (727) 445-4157.
Friday, February 13, 2009
TX: SFA Closes Down Controversial Punishment Area On Campus
What Brown saw was a storage space in the school workshop that is used for a timeout location for students. The elevated area is more than 10 feet off the shop's concrete floor and is only accessible by ladders. Chairs are available for students to sit in, but the space also contains material used by shop students.
Posted: 11:06 PM Feb 3, 2009 Last Updated: 9:44 AM
Feb 4, 2009
Reporter: Joe Brown & KBTX Staff
Email Address: brown@kbtx.com
284 comments
http://www.kbtx.com/home/headlines/38985304.html
Bryan Independent School District Superintendent, Mike Cargill is putting a stop to SFA Middle School students being sent to "The Attic" as a form of punishment. The decision comes the day after a report ran on News 3.
On Wednesday Cargill said, " the loft storage area in the SFA industrial technology shop will no longer be used as a time-out area."
News 3 first learned about "The Attic" after Bryan resident Tammy Brown became upset when her son Clay told her he had been disciplined in his SFA Middle School shop class by being sent to the "Attic." When she checked out the place herself, she was horrified.
"I actually went up on top of the platform and it was pretty dangerous to get up there," she said. "At the top of one set of ladders that I went up on, it looked like it had been cut with a cutting torch. It was ragged."
What Brown saw was a storage space in the school workshop that is used for a timeout location for students. The elevated area is more than 10 feet off the shop's concrete floor and is only accessible by ladders. Chairs are available for students to sit in, but the space also contains material used by shop students.
When Brown saw where her 13-year old son had been placed, she objected. "I told the principal and shop teacher that absolutely no way should a child be put up in that attic or into that crawl space because it's way too dangerous not to mention the filth and the clutter that was up there."
The school listened to Brown's argument, but didn't agree with her point. "In this case, this is an Industrial Arts shop and so the logical area is, what's called, just a storage area," said Bryan ISD Communications Director Sandy Farris. "It's an area where the teacher can keep an eye on the student and have some visibility that way."
District officials say school policy allows for parents to choose a different location for their child's timeout. "If the parent objects to this particular timeout area, they are certainly welcomed to use the office as an alternative location," Farris said.
But Brown said the offer made to her was accompanied by a not-so-veiled threat. "She said, 'You do realize that will mean that your son will get a permanent mark on his permanent disciplinary mark on his school record which will affect him for college.' And I feel that is truly unfair."
Bryan ISD officials said they've never had any past complaints about the crawl space. They say even the Bryan Fire Marshal's Office gave its approval.
But that does little to aleve Brown's outrage. "I'm surprised they put a kid in a crawl space," Brown said. "I mean that's something you might expect in a juvenile facility at the turn of the century, not in a school today."
As for Clay, although he's endured some teasing from friends, he's confident he's doing the right thing. "Ever since I knew what could happen, I've felt very good about taking a stand on this because I don't want anyone to get hurt because I will feel bad for it for the rest of my life."
Posted: 11:06 PM Feb 3, 2009 Last Updated: 9:44 AM
Feb 4, 2009
Reporter: Joe Brown & KBTX Staff
Email Address: brown@kbtx.com
284 comments
http://www.kbtx.com/home/headlines/38985304.html
Bryan Independent School District Superintendent, Mike Cargill is putting a stop to SFA Middle School students being sent to "The Attic" as a form of punishment. The decision comes the day after a report ran on News 3.
On Wednesday Cargill said, " the loft storage area in the SFA industrial technology shop will no longer be used as a time-out area."
News 3 first learned about "The Attic" after Bryan resident Tammy Brown became upset when her son Clay told her he had been disciplined in his SFA Middle School shop class by being sent to the "Attic." When she checked out the place herself, she was horrified.
"I actually went up on top of the platform and it was pretty dangerous to get up there," she said. "At the top of one set of ladders that I went up on, it looked like it had been cut with a cutting torch. It was ragged."
What Brown saw was a storage space in the school workshop that is used for a timeout location for students. The elevated area is more than 10 feet off the shop's concrete floor and is only accessible by ladders. Chairs are available for students to sit in, but the space also contains material used by shop students.
When Brown saw where her 13-year old son had been placed, she objected. "I told the principal and shop teacher that absolutely no way should a child be put up in that attic or into that crawl space because it's way too dangerous not to mention the filth and the clutter that was up there."
The school listened to Brown's argument, but didn't agree with her point. "In this case, this is an Industrial Arts shop and so the logical area is, what's called, just a storage area," said Bryan ISD Communications Director Sandy Farris. "It's an area where the teacher can keep an eye on the student and have some visibility that way."
District officials say school policy allows for parents to choose a different location for their child's timeout. "If the parent objects to this particular timeout area, they are certainly welcomed to use the office as an alternative location," Farris said.
But Brown said the offer made to her was accompanied by a not-so-veiled threat. "She said, 'You do realize that will mean that your son will get a permanent mark on his permanent disciplinary mark on his school record which will affect him for college.' And I feel that is truly unfair."
Bryan ISD officials said they've never had any past complaints about the crawl space. They say even the Bryan Fire Marshal's Office gave its approval.
But that does little to aleve Brown's outrage. "I'm surprised they put a kid in a crawl space," Brown said. "I mean that's something you might expect in a juvenile facility at the turn of the century, not in a school today."
As for Clay, although he's endured some teasing from friends, he's confident he's doing the right thing. "Ever since I knew what could happen, I've felt very good about taking a stand on this because I don't want anyone to get hurt because I will feel bad for it for the rest of my life."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
