Not a Bad Idea: The Increasing Need to Clarify Free Appropriate Public Education Provisions under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act

By Beatty, Michele L. | Suffolk University Law Review, Spring 2013 | Go to article overview

Not a Bad Idea: The Increasing Need to Clarify Free Appropriate Public Education Provisions under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act


Beatty, Michele L., Suffolk University Law Review


"[I]t is doubtful that any child may reasonably be expected to succeed in life if he is denied the opportunity of an education." (1)

I. Introduction

The Supreme Court has long stressed the importance of providing equal education opportunities to children. (2) Additionally, the Court has emphasized that the Due Process Clause prohibits school personnel from removing a student for violating its code of conduct "absent fundamentally fair procedures to determine whether the misconduct has occurred." (3) The rights of disabled children to receive an equal education, including fundamental procedural-due-process rights, have developed considerably in the past three decades. (4)

Efforts to ensure disabled students receive the same opportunities as their nondisabled peers are reflected in both federal and state laws. (5) The first congressional breakthrough occurred with the passage of the Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975 (EHA). (6) Over time, amendments improving the EHA were made, and it is now better known as the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). (7)

The central tenet of the IDEA mandates a "free appropriate public education" (FAPE) for students with disabilities. (8) Under its provisions, the IDEA sets forth both procedural and substantive mandates regarding the rights of both children and parents to receive an individualized education program (IEP), as well as a process for challenging placement changes. (9) While the IDEA is intended to protect disabled students' rights not to be excluded or denied from the benefits of a public education, the litigious nature of its unclear provisions--and lack of Supreme Court guidance--has created continuous controversy. (10) The most notable and frequent disputes arise over two issues: the statute's procedural safeguards, and what constitutes an "appropriate" education. (11) Recently, the Supreme Court declined the opportunity to clarify and resolve both major issues by denying certiorari to Doe ex rel. Doe v. Todd County School District. (12)

This Note argues that in Todd County, the Eighth Circuit erred by holding that disabled students are limited to procedural-due-process rights under the IDEA when they are placed in an alternative setting during a disciplinary suspension. (13) Specifically, by limiting disabled students who seek to challenge a suspension that triggered an interim placement change to the safeguards under the IDEA, the result contradictorily affects their fundamental procedural-due-process rights and guaranteed right to a FAPE. (14) Part II.A of this Note explores the historical development of special education, focusing on the IDEA and its evolution. (15) Part II.B discusses FAPE, as well as the various standards that have been developed to attempt to determine what is an "appropriate" education. (16) Part II.C explores student due-process rights, primarily by looking at those contained in the IDEA and their connection to FAPE, and also provides an overview of the Eighth Circuit's decision in Todd County. (17)

Part III analyzes the potential underlying impact of the Eighth Circuit's decision, focusing on how inadequate procedural safeguards correlate to a negative impact on an "appropriate" education. (18) Part III.A analyzes the Eighth Circuit's decision--specifically, whether it incorrectly determined that Doe's procedural-due-process rights were limited to those under the IDEA. (19) Further, Part III.B analyzes the implications of that decision on FAPE. (20) Part III.C highlights the repercussions of the Eighth Circuit's holding, and exposes how the court could have used this case to provide more comprehensive, coherent procedural-due-process rights to students, while simultaneously setting forth a less ambiguous definition of what constitutes an "appropriate" education. (21) Lastly, Part IV concludes by urging the Supreme Court to intervene and resolve these recurring issues by correcting the Eighth Circuit's limitation on procedural-due-process rights and providing a heightened, unambiguous FAPE standard.

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.
One moment ...
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
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.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Not a Bad Idea: The Increasing Need to Clarify Free Appropriate Public Education Provisions under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
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?

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.

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

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.