United States Supreme Court Confronts Two Special Education Controversies

Developments in Mental Health Law, July-December 1984 | Go to article overview
Save to active project

United States Supreme Court Confronts Two Special Education Controversies


On July 5, 1984, the United States Supreme Court announced two decisions applying the Education For All 1975 Handicapped Children Act [PL 94-142] Parents of children with mental disability will find one of these decisions more encouraging than the other. The first of these decisions was Irving Independence School District v. Tatro, 52 U.S. Law Week 5151. In that decision the court ruled that under the Education For All Handicapped Children Act an eight-year-old with spina bifida was entitled to clean intermittent catheterization (CIC) during school hours to allow the child to attend school and receive the benefits of public education. In the other decision, Smith v. Robinson, 52 U.S. Law Week 5179, a court held that school systems which violate the rights of a handicapped child under the Education For All Handicapped Children Act, the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, or the Civil Rights Act of 1871 are not liable for plaintiff's attorney fees. The first case firmly established the role of the federal courts in protecting the substantive rights of handicapped children under the Education For All Handicapped Children Act The second, however, made it more unlikely than ever that claims of a denial of those rights will be presented in federal courts.

Irving Independence School District v, Tatro

The Education For All Handicapped Children Act of 1975 assures all handicapped children of a free and appropriate education. Where it is necessary that the school district provide "related services" to enable the child to avail himself of a public education, the school district must provide those services at no cost to the child or his parents. Among the most controversial and expensive "related services" are those provided by physicians. The Education For All Handicapped Children Act specifically exempts the school system from providing related services that must be performed by a physician, except for those services that are necessary for diagnosis and evaluation.

In Tatro the school system claimed that catheterization of the handicapped child was just such a medical service. The parents of the child, with whom the District Court, the Court of Appeals, and eventually the Supreme Court agreed, maintained that catheterization was a service which could be as a practical matter provided by a nurse or even a trained lay person. Texas law appeared to permit a nurse to provide the service. Thus, if the service was necessary for free and appropriate education the school system was responsible for providing it.

Apart from settling the question of liability for catheterization of a handicapped pupil, the Tatro case clarified the Supreme Court's decision two years ago in Board of Education of Hendrick Hudson Central School District v. Rowley, 458 U.S. 176 (1982). The school system, relying on language in that case had claimed that the federal court's role in Tatro was restricted to determining whether the school district had complied with the state plan for educating handicapped children and had followed the proceduralments of the Education For All Handicapped Children Act. The Texas school district had argued that federal courts are not entitled to second guess state officials on whether the state had provided a free and appropriate public education including "related services."

The Supreme Court rejected that view. Speaking through Chief Justice Burger, the court found that "[j]udicial review is equally appropriate in this case which presents the legal question of a school's substantive obligation under the 'related services' requirement of Section 1401(17).

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
Loading One moment ...
Project items
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited article

United States Supreme Court Confronts Two Special Education Controversies
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.
Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?