Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Special Education Access topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Parent tells board her son lost services after years of delays; says family spent $34,000 to obtain support
Summary
At the March 11 meeting a Wethersfield parent described repeated delays in special-education evaluations and services for her 17-year-old son, saying the family spent about $5,000 on private services and $29,000 on legal fees to secure help.
Paula Sullo of 32 Hartford Ave. told the Wethersfield Board of Education on March 11 that her family endured repeated delays and denials of services for her 17-year-old son, Cole, and that she and her family paid for private services and legal representation to get the student support they believe he needed.
Sullo said her son was identified with a processing issue and received structured reading services in middle school; at the end of freshman year, she said, the district reported he read at a fifth-grade level even as it told the family his goals had been met. She said the district's special-education staff later proposed cuts to services during a PPT (planning and placement team) meeting.
"I had to personally transition his information from the elementary school to the middle school," Sullo said, describing delays in transferring services between schools. She told the board she spent roughly $5,000 on private services that provided a foundation for school programming and $29,000 in legal fees pursuing additional school services, for a total she gave as about $34,000.
Sullo urged the board to rethink the district's special-education approach, arguing that many district students would benefit from sustained programs and that not all families can afford private assistance and legal representation.
The remarks were made during the public-comment period; no formal action or response was taken on the record at that meeting. The parent named the district's special-education lead as "John" in her remarks when describing whom she held responsible for special-education program decisions.
The parent said the program that helped her son had a "profound impact" on his progress and that cuts to that program would be a disservice to other students with similar needs. She closed by saying families without the resources to buy outside services would be left without support if the district reduced services she believes were effective.
Because these comments were public testimony, they represent the parent's perspective and claims. The board did not record a formal policy response during the meeting; any staff or board follow-up would be separate from the public-comment record.
