Washington education officials have told public districts in the state not to send new students to Shrub Oak International School in New York, citing ProPublica’s reporting and a visit to the campus.
Actually, the public school is named in the lawsuit, which means they probably funded it. Typically, RTFs would not be private pay.
Also, there’s nothing in the article about it being a two-week bike trip, nor that he’d even be with the family without support overnight (since the article claims he needs awake overnight staff to stop from SIBs).
There’s no shame in families relying on whatever help they can qualify for imo. Oftentimes you don’t get what you want, so you settle for what you think will help your child
Michael Roy and D’Arcy Forbes, who had driven about 2,900 miles from their home near Seattle to New York in August 2022 with plans to mountain bike with their son, decided instead to take him home to try to save his eyesight.
…
His parents knew that their son’s left eye had been injured. But when they visited again in August for the two-week break they’d planned to spend mountain biking, his right eye was red and it, too, was damaged, according to the lawsuit. They decided to take him home to try to save the eyesight in his right eye.
The article also only mentions his public school in that they were ignoring his needs. They said nothing about the school sending him there. Since he would have been 18 at the time, I find it hard to buy that they would.
Public school must be funded until 21 for anyone with a need for that. If a school can’t meet the kid’s needs, they must fund a least restrictive alternative (IDEA and similar laws). Within that funding, it’s incumbent upon the school district to ensure the placement is not going to cause harm/be unsafe.
In terms of the break, I don’t see anything that says they wouldn’t just take a couple short bike trips in that time span. Given the level of disability, it seems unlikely he’d go on a long bike trip. More likely they’d just take some day trips. This second paragraph is subjective and based on my work experience with similar families in the disability world.
Actually, the public school is named in the lawsuit, which means they probably funded it. Typically, RTFs would not be private pay.
Also, there’s nothing in the article about it being a two-week bike trip, nor that he’d even be with the family without support overnight (since the article claims he needs awake overnight staff to stop from SIBs).
There’s no shame in families relying on whatever help they can qualify for imo. Oftentimes you don’t get what you want, so you settle for what you think will help your child
Are you sure you read the article?
…
The article also only mentions his public school in that they were ignoring his needs. They said nothing about the school sending him there. Since he would have been 18 at the time, I find it hard to buy that they would.
Public school must be funded until 21 for anyone with a need for that. If a school can’t meet the kid’s needs, they must fund a least restrictive alternative (IDEA and similar laws). Within that funding, it’s incumbent upon the school district to ensure the placement is not going to cause harm/be unsafe.
In terms of the break, I don’t see anything that says they wouldn’t just take a couple short bike trips in that time span. Given the level of disability, it seems unlikely he’d go on a long bike trip. More likely they’d just take some day trips. This second paragraph is subjective and based on my work experience with similar families in the disability world.
What you said:
What the article said:
You were just incorrect.