DUPED PROCESS FOR FAMILIES
Comments from NAPTA: Most citizens analyze the denial of services for Special Education students from the perspective that it was done in good faith, a fatal mistake in Education since it creates significant prejudice against special students. It is correct that parents cannot expect services beyond the capacity of our schools. However, when our White Chalk Crime infiltrated schools are causing the social problems, not addressing these problems means allowing EducRAT$ to get away with horrific abuse against students, including the discarding of the teachers that these children need. The break down here is that outsiders, unaware of White Chalk Crime, blame the social problems on the children, while they blame teachers’ issues on the teachers, when the blame for much of this needs to lie squarely on EducRAT$. However, this cannot happen when the public is ignorant about White Chalk Crime. Cathy Cannivet’s chronicling of her son’s nightmare help explain this further. However, first I am going to include what her son Brendan bravely wrote for his school board after reading a news article labeling parents’ legal cases on behalf of their children as “frivolous:”
My name is Brennan Cannivet and I am 15 years old. I read the article in yesterday’s newspaper and I am here today because I don’t think that you know what the district is doing to kids like me. You should find out, because it is horrible and you don’t know how bad kids like me feel. What happened to me is not frivolous like it said in the newspaper, it was a horrible experience. If you don’t know what happened to me maybe you should try and find out. If people here won’t tell you, why don’t you just ask me or my parents? You spend money on lawsuits when you could be spending that money on giving education and helping kids like me learn. You should spend that money on kids and their education and then you wouldn’t have to hire lawyers.
My school experience has been horrible since I got here in 4th grade and the people don’t care about me or other kids or what happens to them. While you were working in a brand new nice building, I was sitting in classrooms at Oakridge getting sick from mold. You are able to come to work everyday and not worry about getting bullied or pushed or called names. But I was getting bullied at school and no-one stopped it. Even though I kept getting sick and told everyone what was happening, it only got worse because no-one cared except my parents. When I couldn’t go to school anymore my parents were told they could go to jail and that is how we ended up in a lawsuit.
I should not have to go through this. You wouldn’t give me an education last year for months even though my parents gave you a form from my doctor. And we gave you a form two months ago from a doctor and you won’t give me any education. I keep asking my mom what is going to happen and every day she keeps telling me we have to wait and that there isn’t anything she can do. My parents keep trying to get a teacher for me but it doesn’t work.
I did everything I was supposed to do. I kept going to doctors and I took all the tests everyone asked me to take. I keep trying to tell people how I feel and that I am worried about my education. I am not earning credits and I could have got credits this year. I am worried that I won’t graduate with a regular diploma. I am not in school right now because I get sick every time I try to go. My parents did everything you told them to do but you won’t let them have a meeting. School is almost over and I didn’t learn anything and I didn’t earn credits. I can’t take this anymore and my parents and I don’t know what else to do. I keep telling them to move me back to Illinois but my mom gets upset because she doesn’t want to be away from my Dad and I don’t either. I would miss my dog and my brother, and my fish tank.
HE IS MISSING HIS DAD, DOG, BROTHER, FISH TANK, AND HIS FAITH IN OUR COUNTRY BECAUSE HE IS NOW IN ILLINOIS. BEFORE I INCLUDED HIS HEARTFELT WORDS, I CHECKED WITH HIS MOM, SINCE IT IS BAD ENOUGH THAT THESE CHILDREN ARE ABUSED. I WANTED TO BE SURE INCLUDING HIS PRESENTATION WAS OKAY WITH BRENDAN. SHE ASSURED ME THAT HE WANTED THIS KNOWN SO IT WOULDN’T HAPPEN TO ANOTHER PERSON. WE ARE GRATEFUL FOR HIS COURAGE! BELOW ARE EXCERPTS FROM A COMPLAINT THAT FLORIDA PARENT CATHY CANNIVET HAD TO FILE TO COUNTER THE ABUSE IMPOSED ON HER SON AND THEIR FAMILY. NAPTA
STAY TUNED FOR MORE. THIS IS A PARENT WHO WILL NOT GIVE UP! NAPTA
- Brendan Cannivet (B.C.) first began to exhibit anxiety related to school as a result of his experience with the abusive teacher at OMS and the bullying incidents he was constantly subjected to from a particular student. As a result, at the end of the school year the Plaintiffs arranged for an out-of-zone transfer to another school so that B.C. would not be subjected to bullying incidents from this particular boy.
- B.C. was enrolled in the seventh grade ESE program at North Naples Middle School (NNMS) in Collier County, FL for the 2004/2005 school term. Plaintiffs soon discovered – to their horror – that the student primarily responsible for B.C.’s torture had also transferred to NNMS during the summer, and was assigned to B.C.’s classroom. … In no time at all, the bullying began anew and with a vengeance, and B.C. again became excessively absent from school and required increased visits to the school clinic. B.C.’s fear of these attacks at school overwhelmed him each and every day. The Plaintiffs’ had been diligent in notifying the appropriate District personnel about the torture B.C. experienced at OMS, and continued their efforts when B.C. transferred to NNMS and the bullying continued. The effects of incessant bullying, harassment, threats, physical attacks, and humiliation in front of his peers, combined with the inaction of administrators were devastating and traumatic to B.C. On 12/16/04, at NNMS, B.C. filed a police report against the bully for battery.
- By the end of the school term, B.C.’s anxiety over attending school progressed to the point where he developed a debilitating phobia of attending NNMS. The phobia immediately surfaced again upon the commencement of the 2005/2006 school term, (eighth grade). Although the bully had moved on to high school and was no longer present at NNMS, the specific phobia of the school location had become a condition in and of itself, even though the precipitating factors and traumatic events that caused the phobia were absent.
- On September 28, 2005, B.C.’s parents had no choice but to remove B.C. from NNMS due to extreme physical and psychological complications from his phobia that were endangering his health. …School clinic and attendance records substantiate an increase in gastrointestinal complaints, bathroom visits, absences, and tardiness. B.C. and C.C. reported the bleeding episodes to the school nurses and other District personnel.
- On October 7, 2005, at Plaintiffs’ expense, B.C. was evaluated by Dr. Diana Martinez (D.M.), Pediatric Neurologist, Miami Children’s Hospital, Dan Marino Center. Dr. D.M. completed a Hospital/Homebound (H/H) authorization for B.C. to receive educational instruction at home pending further medical and psychological workups. B.C.’s school phobia was recognized by members of the IEP team, who determined that he should be placed on H/H in order for B.C. to receive educational benefit. Dr. D.M. recommended that B.C. receive follow-up medical and psychological services at a location closer to the parents’ residence, as the Dan Marino Center was located approximately two hours distance from B.C.’s home. The authorization for H/H instruction would expire at the end of February, 2006. Dr. D.M.’s recommendations for follow up evaluations and services were ignored by the District and had not been completed by the time the H/H expired at the end of February.
- B.C. received educational benefit and made progress while in the H/H setting, as his anxiety symptoms were absent while in the home environment.
- In December 2005, the parents complied with the District’s request to conduct a psychiatric evaluation of their own by the District’s contracted psychiatric service provider, Dr. Frank Lehninger (F.L.). Dr. F.L. performed this initial evaluation on December 15, 2005, at which time both B.C. and C.C. informed him of the rectal bleeding episodes. Dr. F.L. issued a report acknowledging being informed of the bullying, severe anxiety, and gastrointestinal problems. Among his many recommendations, Dr. F.L. stated: “It is recommended B.C. begin individual psychotherapy focused on an evidence based cognitive-behavioral approach; this will allow for development of improved coping and adaptivity.” Dr. F.L. also listed several recommendations for additional screenings and evaluations, … Dr. F.L.’s recommendations were ignored by the District, and had not been completed by the time the H/H expired at the end of February.
- On several occasions, C.C. had requested from C.B., ESE case manager, an explanation of an erroneous diagnosis of ADD that had suddenly and mysteriously been recorded in B.C.’s IEP at NNMS. C.C. first noticed this at the beginning of October, 2005. C.B. informed C.C. that an “Other Health Impaired” diagnosis was not sufficient in an IEP, and that another diagnosis was also needed for eligibility and ADD would qualify B.C. for ESE services. C.C. inquired as to how, when, and by what qualified person was B.C. diagnosed with ADD, and why was this diagnosis not brought to her attention. C.C. requested that the matter be looked into, and the diagnosis be removed if it was not accurate or substantiated by a qualified evaluation or report.
- On December 16, 2005, Candice Sanderson, School Psychologist NNMS, conducted a Behavioral Assessment System (BASC-2) evaluation of B.C. She concluded and reported to C.C. that B.C. did not have ADD.
- On January 17, 2006 an IEP meeting was held at NNMS. At the opening of the meeting, C.B. stated that B.C. was receiving services under an ADD diagnosis. C.C. again questioned and disputed the diagnosis as not being substantiated or explained, and requested that it be removed pending additional testing or qualified diagnosis. C.B. abruptly ended the IEP meeting stating that B.C. did not qualify for services without the ADD diagnosis, and technically was not even qualified for the meeting if the diagnosis was removed. The IEP meeting was halted despite C.C.’s protest, and the next IEP meeting would not take place for another month. The District had refused to continue the meeting as requested by C.C., thereby delaying and denying parent participation and FAPE. By limiting the meeting to a single topic (ADD), in violation of the IDEA’s requirement for Consolidation of IEP Team Meetings, the District was effectively denying Parent Participation on all educational matters. C.C. requested that testing be done in order to accurately determined B.C.’s IEP eligibility diagnosis, his needs, and his placement.
- Requiring B.C. to return to NNMS caused B.C. physical distress, emotional distress, and was likely to cause him additional and significant emotional distress and harm, which meets the definition of child abuse.
- The staff who were making decisions regarding B.C.’s educational placement were not trained or qualified to address the medical, psychiatric, psychological conditions, or needs of the child, and failed to seek vital information to determine if it was safe or in B.C.’s best interest to be forced back into school on March 1, 2006.
Due to the Defendant’s actions and threats of criminal prosecution and jail, the Defendant’s inappropriate response to the concerns raised through Parent Participation, and the refusal of the District of the continuation of services to B.C., Plaintiffs’ had no choice but to hire legal representation and file a request for a IDEA Due Process hearing in order to prevent being arrested (as was threatened) for violation of compulsory education laws, and to protect B.C.’s rights to FAPE- The Defendant conspires and has a history of using due process and stay put as a trap, to delay and therefore deny, FAPE and parent participation up to or beyond a year. The Defendant also has a history of engaging in conduct, during due process proceedings, that creates, or intends to create, a hostile environment by substantially interfering with a student’s educational benefits, opportunities, or performance, or with a student’s physical or psychological well-being, and that is threatening and seriously intimidating. This conduct creates a situation that requires for additional due process complaints to be filed, creating an endless revolving door for parents, and is intended to punish and to keep them trapped at a state administrative level, further exhausting their resolve and financial resources. This renders due process to be a futile procedure in Collier County, instead of an adequate process for administrative remedies.
- The Defendant conspires and has a history of engaging in retaliation, punishment, and coercion, meant to harm and penalize, parents who challenge them to comply with state or federal laws. Due process is meant to be expeditious for benefit of the child, and not to be utilized by a District to engage in acts of coercion, or behavior intended to punish, intimidate, or retaliate against parents who file for a due process hearing. The Defendants, using their authority, acted affirmatively to create an opportunity for harm to the Plaintiffs, and to increase and create a danger to B.C. in retaliation for filing due process.
- Defendant failed to adequately address the ongoing bullying and harassment of B.C., a disabled child, despite their personal knowledge of the situation and Plaintiff’s complaints. The bullying, harassment and assaults against B.C. were more pervasive and severe because of his disability, and created an abusive educational environment that the Defendant contributed to through their acts and omissions.
The Defendant failed to properly address, prevent, and remedy the verbal and physical bullying and harassment B.C. endured for two years, at two separate schools, resulting in a debilitating psychiatric injury and lost opportunities for B.C. Collier County Public School District officials with the authority to rectify the situation of the severe and pervasive bullying, as well as the psychological and physical effects on B.C. from the bullying, had actual notice of, and were deliberately indifferent to the harassment and subsequent injury to which B.C. suffered.- Due to the intentional delay of the DOAH proceedings, the parents and B.C. being endlessly trapped in due process, the District refusing to acknowledge B.C.’s medical diagnoses, and the failure to allow B.C. to participate in Extended School Year, B.C.’s parents had no choice but to relocate B.C. and his mother to the State of Illinois on May 27, 2007, for the services the District refused to provide B.C.
- On June 1, 2007, the Administrative Law Judge rendered the decision on B.C.’s due process complaint. The ALJ determined that B.C. had received a free appropriate education from Collier County Public School District.
Top
PARENT STORIES